Post a reply

Re: Snooker is getting faster

Postby Wildey

No


Shots is getting faster doesn't mean the Game is


you can always play negatively extremely fast

Re: Snooker is getting faster

Postby GeF

There is a correlation "Good" ↔ "Fast".
(That doesn't mean all fast players are good and all slow are bad)

Just have a look at current season (I don't have data for previous one).
With a bit more of 1000 matchs played by the 128 main tour players.

AST range % of Wins
15-20 55,91%
20-25 58,33%
25-30 40,85%
30-35 26,67%

Re: Snooker is getting faster

Postby Badsnookerplayer

GeF wrote:There is a correlation "Good" ↔ "Fast".
(That doesn't mean all fast players are good and all slow are bad)

Just have a look at current season (I don't have data for previous one).
With a bit more of 1000 matchs played by the 128 main tour players.

AST range % of Wins
15-20 55,91%
20-25 58,33%
25-30 40,85%
30-35 26,67%

That is really interesting data Gef.

Where did you find it?

Re: Snooker is getting faster

Postby GeF

Badsnookerplayer wrote:
GeF wrote:There is a correlation "Good" ↔ "Fast".
(That doesn't mean all fast players are good and all slow are bad)

Just have a look at current season (I don't have data for previous one).
With a bit more of 1000 matchs played by the 128 main tour players.

AST range % of Wins
15-20 55,91%
20-25 58,33%
25-30 40,85%
30-35 26,67%

That is really interesting data Gef.

Where did you find it?

I calculate with live data here : http://livescores.worldsnookerdata.com/ ... ndex/14089
With AST there is matchs played Win/Loss.
I add the number of wins of all players with AST >15 and <20, the number of MP and calculate the ratio.
Doing then the same for other ranges.

Re: Snooker is getting faster

Postby Badsnookerplayer

I see Gef.

I did not know that table existed.

Very interesting stats but the conclusion to draw is not as obvious as it may look.

1. Playing fast makes you better?
2. Better players keep good position so they do't need as much thinking time?
3. Weaker safety players end up in bad situations and need more thinking time?
4. Successful players are more confident and so play quicker?

Sure there are other considerations.

Good work sir.

Re: Snooker is getting faster

Postby Badsnookerplayer

Pink Ball wrote:
Badsnookerplayer wrote:
Cloud Strife wrote:Snooker is also getting older and fatter, which is a bigger problem IMO.

I bet the average weight of snooker players has reduced over the years

The average plummeted after September 2013 for some reason.

Bit harsh - Lee was only overweight because of a problem with his hands that he had suffered with since childhood.

Re: Snooker is getting faster

Postby Iranu

Badsnookerplayer wrote:
Pink Ball wrote:
Badsnookerplayer wrote:
Cloud Strife wrote:Snooker is also getting older and fatter, which is a bigger problem IMO.

I bet the average weight of snooker players has reduced over the years

The average plummeted after September 2013 for some reason.

Bit harsh - Lee was only overweight because of a problem with his hands that he had suffered with since childhood.

Was the problem that they were always holding cake?

Re: Snooker is getting faster

Postby Badsnookerplayer

Iranu wrote:
Badsnookerplayer wrote:
Pink Ball wrote:
Badsnookerplayer wrote:
Cloud Strife wrote:Snooker is also getting older and fatter, which is a bigger problem IMO.

I bet the average weight of snooker players has reduced over the years

The average plummeted after September 2013 for some reason.

Bit harsh - Lee was only overweight because of a problem with his hands that he had suffered with since childhood.

Was the problem that they were always holding cake?

:drums: Kerching

Re: Snooker is getting faster

Postby LDS

I don't believe this is a good thing & I'm not a supporter of timing people.

I don't believe shot time has anything to do with entertainment value in and of itself.

I believe that quick players used to be made to look good because they were playing slower players, it was the contrast which highlighted it as a positive.

When two fast players play each other it has the potential to be as tedious as when two slow players play each other, because there's no contrast. We can't rationalise to ourselves why we want A or B to win.

However, when there's a contrast we can say "I want the quick player to win because the other guy is tedious" and we can conversely say "I want the slow player to win because the quick player doesn't give a hoot & is embarrassingly careless".

And there's nothing uglier than when a quick player misses a shot, like everyone will scream at the telly "Dude! Why didn't you just take you time and make SURE of that POT, you IDIOT!"

However, when a slow player misses a shot it doesn't look ugly because they've made the shot appear hard by allowing the viewer to believe its a hard shot, it must have been, he spent that long thinking about it.

There's a hierarchy here, not a black and white:

Most entertaining to least:

Slow, deliberate player vs Quick, impulsive player neither missing
Slow player missing vs quick player not missing
Slow player not missing vs quick player missing
Quick player vs quick player neither missing anything
Slow player vs slow player neither missing anything
Slow player missing vs slow player missing
Quick player missing vs quick player missing

And the important part of the story is the character. I feel sure that snooker fans are not singularly watching snooker in order to watch 2 robots pass round the table hitting balls in a uniform way.

I feel sure that Ebdon vs O'Sullivan or Thorburn vs White will provide much more televisual excitement than Yan Bing Tao vs Jack Lisowski or Steven Maguire vs Barry Hawkins.

I agree with the whole thing about preventing a repeat of the whole Griffiths VS Thorburn or Thorburn vs Charlton type experiences, but I'm not sure pressuring shot-time is the way to go about that.

The 'best' match from the last WC was Wilson vs McGill afterall, and the best frame of that match was the longest frame of the tournament... [mic drop]

Re: Snooker is getting faster

Postby SnookerFan

Pink Ball wrote:
Badsnookerplayer wrote:
Cloud Strife wrote:Snooker is also getting older and fatter, which is a bigger problem IMO.

I bet the average weight of snooker players has reduced over the years

The average plummeted after September 2013 for some reason.


rofl rofl rofl

Re: Snooker is getting faster

Postby SnookerFan

I like the way that I laugh at a joke, then realise that this is an old thread that I have previously commented on.

Re: Snooker is getting faster

Postby chengdufan

LDS wrote:I don't believe this is a good thing & I'm not a supporter of timing people.

I don't believe shot time has anything to do with entertainment value in and of itself.

I believe that quick players used to be made to look good because they were playing slower players, it was the contrast which highlighted it as a positive.

When two fast players play each other it has the potential to be as tedious as when two slow players play each other, because there's no contrast. We can't rationalise to ourselves why we want A or B to win.

However, when there's a contrast we can say "I want the quick player to win because the other guy is tedious" and we can conversely say "I want the slow player to win because the quick player doesn't give a hoot & is embarrassingly careless".

And there's nothing uglier than when a quick player misses a shot, like everyone will scream at the telly "Dude! Why didn't you just take you time and make SURE of that POT, you IDIOT!"

However, when a slow player misses a shot it doesn't look ugly because they've made the shot appear hard by allowing the viewer to believe its a hard shot, it must have been, he spent that long thinking about it.

There's a hierarchy here, not a black and white:

Most entertaining to least:

Slow, deliberate player vs Quick, impulsive player neither missing
Slow player missing vs quick player not missing
Slow player not missing vs quick player missing
Quick player vs quick player neither missing anything
Slow player vs slow player neither missing anything
Slow player missing vs slow player missing
Quick player missing vs quick player missing

And the important part of the story is the character. I feel sure that snooker fans are not singularly watching snooker in order to watch 2 robots pass round the table hitting balls in a uniform way.

I feel sure that Ebdon vs O'Sullivan or Thorburn vs White will provide much more televisual excitement than Yan Bing Tao vs Jack Lisowski or Steven Maguire vs Barry Hawkins.

I agree with the whole thing about preventing a repeat of the whole Griffiths VS Thorburn or Thorburn vs Charlton type experiences, but I'm not sure pressuring shot-time is the way to go about that.

The 'best' match from the last WC was Wilson vs McGill afterall, and the best frame of that match was the longest frame of the tournament... [mic drop]

:goodpost:

Re: Snooker is getting faster

Postby Juddernaut88

Ronnie O'Sullivan did once say Snooker is better than sex during a win in the UK championship in 2003.