Hearn suggests tour card idea and no bottom wiping

wildJONESEYE wrote:look at the amount of yoyo journeymen we have on tour Peter Lines,Simon Bedford ,patrick wallace,mathew couch,they all go up they all go down and they get back up

yeh its a vicious circle with this band of similar type journeymen, as some go up some go down and vice versa, but the common denominator is that none of them threaten to reach the top end of the sport, hence they are the medicocrity that Hearn talks of.

ive always known barry interested in the elite its what he does tgntg has always been a fan of the 48 man tour me personally would go for 64 with players rank 49-64 having to play one match in the summer to maintain their card against players on a secandary tour,international tours or pios call it what you want....but forget wild cards and do it on merit.but it will not stop the likes of campbell,burnett or whoever winning their summer match and stay on tour and younger more fluent players losing.

i think 48 is to few and the tour could lose out on some potential great matches by culling it that low.

wildJONESEYE wrote:ive always known barry interested in the elite its what he does tgntg has always been a fan of the 48 man tour me personally would go for 64 with players rank 49-64 having to play one match in the summer to maintain their card against players on a secandary tour,international tours or pios call it what you want....but forget wild cards and do it on merit.but it will not stop the likes of campbell,burnett or whoever winning their summer match and stay on tour and younger more fluent players losing.

i think 48 is to few and the tour could lose out on some potential great matches by culling it that low.

a 64 man tour may work, and everyone could enter the tournament in round 1 on a seeded basis, 1st in the rolling rankings would play 64th, 2nd v 63rd and so on. The tournaments would take longer and it may be that round 1 wouldnt be on tv?

Another option may be an 80 man tour, the top 16 in the rolling rankings after a tournament gaining entry into the next torunament and the remaining 64 players (ranked 17-80) entering a seeded qualifying process in round 1 (64 players 32 winners) then round 2 (32 players and the 16 winners joining the top 16 at the event)

Come the end of the season, the non top 32 players would all drop off and go to qualifying school with the PIOS equivalent players, amteurs etc.

Looking at this 80 man tour im talking about, its perhaps not a million miles away from the current set up but qualifying for tournaments is fairer plus rolling rankings would be a great boost to the sport. This would be my very minimum change to how things are currently run. It sounds like Hearn is going to be ruthless and cut to the chase with his plans though.

ive never had a problem in last 64 entering at the same stage apart from the worlds maybe....

what i will say less players =less matches=better chance to make a rolling ranking work because you can take everyone to a venue and play it through in one go not having china qualifiers 2 months before the event

darts has already gone down this route under hearns.

Hi,
Just finally got round to reading this article. Hearn is certainly shaking things up in his new job.
I think this new proposal of his is a good idea. you qualify for a year at a time, great! helps players who have good years to have a shot at big events. current ranking system can force some middle form players to take years to rise up ranks, this new system means you play good you get a years pass, you play bad you dont get a pass but another chance next year.

I think its worth a go at, never say never and all that

Sonny wrote:http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/other_sports/snooker/8564190.stm


Snooker chief Barry Hearn says annual qualifying for a tour card would help prevent a "circuit for mediocrity". With a seventh ranking tournament due in Berlin next year, the new chairman wants a pro tour of up to 20 events and has warned players not to be "lazy".

"We need a qualifying school like golf. One chance a year. You bring a cue and win your card," Hearn told BBC Sport.

"It's a bit cruel but if you can't aim to be in the top 16 then get another job. There is no room for journeymen."

I think what Hearn is actually saying is there's no MONEY for journeymen

Can't think how he'll be able to change this

Its all bull, no matter what they do, the better players will rise to the top. All this crap about journeymen etc., they aren't journeymen, they are tough matchplay snooker players, the new generation can out pot them, but they can neither out play them nor out think them, hence they hang around. Whatever the ranking system, they will turn up and fight and grind to the death, and the young hotshots will wilt under the pressure. Its simple evolution, survival of the fittest. And if and when a true superstar turns up, whatever the ranking system they will fight their way through it and achieve what they DESERVE out of the game

Lucky balls wrote:Its all rubbish, no matter what they do, the better players will rise to the top. All this crap about journeymen etc., they aren't journeymen, they are tough matchplay snooker players, the new generation can out pot them, but they can neither out play them nor out think them, hence they hang around. Whatever the ranking system, they will turn up and fight and grind to the death, and the young hotshots will wilt under the pressure. Its simple evolution, survival of the fittest. And if and when a true superstar turns up, whatever the ranking system they will fight their way through it and achieve what they DESERVE out of the game

very well put lucky, your 100% right there will always be jouneymen as experience always prevails

Lucky balls wrote:Its all bull, no matter what they do, the better players will rise to the top. All this crap about journeymen etc., they aren't journeymen, they are tough matchplay snooker players, the new generation can out pot them, but they can neither out play them nor out think them, hence they hang around. Whatever the ranking system, they will turn up and fight and grind to the death, and the young hotshots will wilt under the pressure. Its simple evolution, survival of the fittest. And if and when a true superstar turns up, whatever the ranking system they will fight their way through it and achieve what they DESERVE out of the game

so you agree with me then.

I think it's going to make for an interesting shake up.

Those who want it will get a spot, those who're indifferent won't. It certainly would make everyone work for their spot but that might not mean the best are the ones making up the tour on a given year.

Before saying I'm for it I'd like to see exactly what form qualifying will take. IMO it should be a vigorous test to ensure the quality of players is the best possible.

I wouldn't want the whole affair to be some round robin of 8 man groups, best of 9's.

Well I'm not quite sure Mr Ashenden got it right...

From snookerscene this is what I understood:

The tour would still be 96 men (and women). The top 64 would retain their spot, so 32 would be relegated. However they would get a chance to immediately regain their MT spot. How?
PIOS and other qualification channels as we know them today would disappear. Instead four qualification tournaments would be held in EIS in Sheffield in May and June, probably round-robin, and each would deliver 8 spots. The 32 players just relegated as well as players able to prove a good enough recent competitive record would be allowed to take part.
Exactly what "good enough recent competitive record" means was not explained but clearly those coming on top of EBSA, Asian and some high profile national competitions would be eligible.
I see several advantages to this approach in addition to "valorising" the investments made in EISS which is an excellent venue with good facilities.
1. Players relegated would have immediate opportunity to regain their spot: this should benefit to the young players who might find it hard to adjust to pro life and often narrowly fail to retain their spot after a slow start in the season.
2. Players from abroad will find it easier to come to UK for a month rather than traveling up and down to participate in PIOS or to have to stay in UK for the whole season without much to do (and to make a living for) between the PIOS
3. EISS is a good venue and Sheffield is a nice city with reasonably good connections which means that it should be possible to raise interest and have a good audience for those events.
4. By end of June everyone would know where they stand and able to organise their lives consequently.

Monique wrote:Well I'm not quite sure Mr Ashenden got it right...

From snookerscene this is what I understood:

The tour would still be 96 men (and women). The top 64 would retain their spot, so 32 would be relegated. However they would get a chance to immediately regain their MT spot. How?
PIOS and other qualification channels as we know them today would disappear. Instead four qualification tournaments would be held in EIS in Sheffield in May and June, probably round-robin, and each would deliver 8 spots. The 32 players just relegated as well as players able to prove a good enough recent competitive record would be allowed to take part.
Exactly what "good enough recent competitive record" means was not explained but clearly those coming on top of EBSA, Asian and some high profile national competitions would be eligible.
I see several advantages to this approach in addition to "valorising" the investments made in EISS which is an excellent venue with good facilities.
1. Players relegated would have immediate opportunity to regain their spot: this should benefit to the young players who might find it hard to adjust to pro life and often narrowly fail to retain their spot after a slow start in the season.
2. Players from abroad will find it easier to come to UK for a month rather than traveling up and down to participate in PIOS or to have to stay in UK for the whole season without much to do (and to make a living for) between the PIOS
3. EISS is a good venue and Sheffield is a nice city with reasonably good connections which means that it should be possible to raise interest and have a good audience for those events.
4. By end of June everyone would know where they stand and able to organise their lives consequently.

GOOD

It offers another chance to the vast majoity of tour newcomers (younger players) who usually get relegated


BAD

This 96 man tour doesnt really sound too different from what we already have

QUERY

Will rolling rankings be adopted to ensure form is rewarded sooner and things are more up to date

Will the current system of tiered qualifying be done away with and everyone having to qualify start in round 1 but with seedings used.

Whatever i think of your ideas whatever i think of barry hearn whatever happens in the administration of the sport in my opinion the 2 priorities Hearn and the WSA has is firstly more Ranking tournaments and in europe, secondly a Rolling Ranking system so everyone will be playing throughout the season for seeded spots at the crucible.

then think of playing around with formats etc when those 2 things is firmly in place.

theres talk of shot clocks ,six reds whatever. those are not priorities those should be luxuries on a firm footing as a sport.

neither those things will encourage people to watch snooker if they don't like snooker its like scrapping the offside rule in football its not going to make people who don't like football to go is it.

so get the sport solid first.

Lucky balls wrote:Its all bull, no matter what they do, the better players will rise to the top. All this crap about journeymen etc., they aren't journeymen, they are tough matchplay snooker players, the new generation can out pot them, but they can neither out play them nor out think them, hence they hang around. Whatever the ranking system, they will turn up and fight and grind to the death, and the young hotshots will wilt under the pressure. Its simple evolution, survival of the fittest. And if and when a true superstar turns up, whatever the ranking system they will fight their way through it and achieve what they DESERVE out of the game

Well said

You have to have at least 48, preferably 64, players who keep their "card" or whatever you want to call it. The likes of Dott, Doherty etc have shown what can happen with 1-2 bad seasons, and you ain't gonna get fans involved in the game if they're watching a guy they like in the "elite" one year, and then a year or two later he's off the tour. Same with the lower ranked players. You've got to have them at the tournaments and so people are gonna be following them. At the moment, most fans will see familiar names in most of the qualifiers, but if everyone below the top 16 changes every year, no one will have a clue who half the players are most of the time. And that ain't gonna stoke up interest.

Having a qualifying tournament for the tour isn't a bad idea, but not at the expense of the PIOS. What do you expect the players who don't make it one year to do with their season, if there's no development tour for them? A year of potting balls down their club will set their development back miles, and you'll just end up with the same players qualifying every year cos they've had the practice. Hearn wants to follow the golf example - well golf has a qualifying tournament AND a development tour.

NedB-H wrote:

Lucky balls wrote:Its all rubbish, no matter what they do, the better players will rise to the top. All this crap about journeymen etc., they aren't journeymen, they are tough matchplay snooker players, the new generation can out pot them, but they can neither out play them nor out think them, hence they hang around. Whatever the ranking system, they will turn up and fight and grind to the death, and the young hotshots will wilt under the pressure. Its simple evolution, survival of the fittest. And if and when a true superstar turns up, whatever the ranking system they will fight their way through it and achieve what they DESERVE out of the game

Well said

You have to have at least 48, preferably 64, players who keep their "card" or whatever you want to call it. The likes of Dott, Doherty etc have shown what can happen with 1-2 bad seasons, and you ain't gonna get fans involved in the game if they're watching a guy they like in the "elite" one year, and then a year or two later he's off the tour. Same with the lower ranked players. You've got to have them at the tournaments and so people are gonna be following them. At the moment, most fans will see familiar names in most of the qualifiers, but if everyone below the top 16 changes every year, no one will have a clue who half the players are most of the time. And that ain't gonna stoke up interest.

Having a qualifying tournament for the tour isn't a bad idea, but not at the expense of the PIOS. What do you expect the players who don't make it one year to do with their season, if there's no development tour for them? A year of potting balls down their club will set their development back miles, and you'll just end up with the same players qualifying every year cos they've had the practice. Hearn wants to follow the golf example - well golf has a qualifying tournament AND a development tour.

Like anyones really seriously interested in the likes of journeymen like Burnett, Michie etc clogging up the mid rankings like they have for the last few decades.

New names and faces would stoke up more interest surely than these old journeymen who we all know are cannon fodder.

This is the "tour of mediocrity" Hearn is referring to. These guys have proved over the years that they are miles short of the quality of the top players.

Would thee be any point in keeping the PIOS though if its order of merit counts for nothing?

pass

PIOS could still serve as one of the channels to gain eligibility for the qualifying school, along with EBSA and national competitions.

Monique wrote:PIOS could still serve as one of the channels to gain eligibility for the qualifying school, along with EBSA and national competitions.

good thinking

well there will have to be somewhere all the non tour players go to whittle the numbers down to the 20 or 30 players needed for the qualifying school.

theres 113 players on that this season alone http://www.worldsnooker.com/PIOS_tour.htm

wildJONESEYE wrote:well there will have to be somewhere all the non tour players go to whittle the numbers down to the 20 or 30 players needed for the qualifying school.

theres 113 players on that this season alone http://www.worldsnooker.com/PIOS_tour.htm

13 Robbie Williams

rocket_ron wrote:

wildJONESEYE wrote:well there will have to be somewhere all the non tour players go to whittle the numbers down to the 20 or 30 players needed for the qualifying school.

theres 113 players on that this season alone http://www.worldsnooker.com/PIOS_tour.htm

13 Robbie Williams

He Could be the face of the new Administration

"LET ME ENTERTAIN YOU"

wildJONESEYE wrote:

rocket_ron wrote:

wildJONESEYE wrote:well there will have to be somewhere all the non tour players go to whittle the numbers down to the 20 or 30 players needed for the qualifying school.

theres 113 players on that this season alone http://www.worldsnooker.com/PIOS_tour.htm

13 Robbie Williams

He Could be the face of the new Administration

"LET ME ENTERTAIN YOU"

im glad you saw the funny side there wild, we all need some entertainment on here, instead of fall outs

rocket_ron wrote:

wildJONESEYE wrote:

rocket_ron wrote:

wildJONESEYE wrote:well there will have to be somewhere all the non tour players go to whittle the numbers down to the 20 or 30 players needed for the qualifying school.

theres 113 players on that this season alone http://www.worldsnooker.com/PIOS_tour.htm

13 Robbie Williams

He Could be the face of the new Administration

"LET ME ENTERTAIN YOU"

im glad you saw the funny side there wild, we all need some entertainment on here, instead of fall outs

YOU HAVING A GO AT ME

wildJONESEYE wrote:YOU HAVING A GO AT ME

Not having a go mate, just stating an observation that their has been alot of hot words last few days

Well as we all can see Wild is doing the right thing there ... having a cooling shower

dont worry i was joking and yes things got a bit heated but that is debating and sometimes it boils over but so everyone knows only in the moment its soon forgotten and i move on to next thing

Monique wrote:Well as we all can see Wild is doing the right thing there ... having a cooling shower

yes this weekend im getting pneumonia ive had cool showers so often

Witz78 wrote:Like anyones really seriously interested in the likes of journeymen like Burnett, Michie etc clogging up the mid rankings like they have for the last few decades.

New names and faces would stoke up more interest surely than these old journeymen who we all know are cannon fodder.

This is the "tour of mediocrity" Hearn is referring to. These guys have proved over the years that they are miles short of the quality of the top players.

Would thee be any point in keeping the PIOS though if its order of merit counts for nothing?

You get more interest from people seeing Burnett 5 years running than you do from them seeing some wannabe one year, before he drops off and is never heard from again, to be replaced by another 1-year wonder, who is replaced the following year by some journeyman who had a good week at the qualifying tourney... except that this journeyman won't have played on the tour for 5 years, so he'll be even less recognised and popular than guys like Michie are now, who at least are there year after year so fans who want to get to know the players, can.

Monique wrote:PIOS could still serve as one of the channels to gain eligibility for the qualifying school, along with EBSA and national competitions.

Say, 8 spots from PIOS, 8 from qualifying tourney, and some others from the big amateur events like they do now.