Over your dead body? I doubt you or anyone of us will have a say in this if it comes to that.
And once again people seem to react to others posts without reading properly what was written.
@Wild: all I'm asking for is to revert to the format that was in place when Hendry won his first 6 titles: it was "shorter" - the semis were played over 31 frames, not 33. If you think he's less of a champion because of this ...
Other than that, I'm asking for tweaks in the schedule, not the format. The rationale behind my proposal is double:
- to make it easier for European viewers and young viewers to watch the final stages by putting evening sessions earlier and starting the tournament on Friday so that it can end on Sunday. We are one or two hours ahead of you and for us that Monday is a normal working day. Parents will be more amenable to let their kids watch it if it starts earlier and also if the next day's isn't a school day (for Brits kids)
- to make it fairer to both finalists and possibly provide a bit more quality into the final. To this aim, my proposal is to start the semis with morning session and having the sessions scheduled as 3,3,2. So no evening session in the last day of semis. That slot could be used for instance for the Ladies final. Also with 31 frames to play my preference would be to spread them as 8,8,8,7. With this both player would have at least a chance for a good rest and that hopefully could help to avoid the type of anti-climax final we only had too often over the last years. It's not just the late finish that is hard for the "second semi" winner, it's also that if you finish around midnight, high on adrenaline you are unlikely to have some good sleep before 3 am...
Other that that, what I have said is that IF the format HAS to be shorten for reasons that can't be avoided (for instance dictated by the media needs - as was the change that lead to the current format, don't forget that) then - and only then - I would rather haver the latter stages shortened slightly than the first round reduced to best of 9 or the like. Best of 19 is indeed the minimum required to test all aspects of the game. It is in my view more important that all rounds are played over a sufficient number of frames and all players tested thoroughly than sticking to the best of 35 in the final where after all the two guys competing have already proved their value by reaching that stage.
As for the players opinion, I think that they are entitled to voice it and that they should be listened to. That does not mean that everything they come out with should be adopted. But when several top players come about with complains and suggestions about something, then it means there is a malaise. It is the duty of the authorities to listen, to try to identify what exactly the problem is and to address it. The solution might not be what the players had in mind initially actually. But denial is never a solution. It is only to easy for fans sitting on their bums to brand them "lazy", "whims", "clowns". They are the ones who make this game, who devoted thousand of hours of practice to hone their skills from a tender age on. It's their future and earnings that are at stake. The minimum they deserve is to be acknowledged when they feel something isn't quite right.