fridge46 wrote:I follow a lot of sports, and I hate these type of "draws", because more often than not the same matchups appear over and over - so I really hope this isnt true
When I first got into snooker, it was just the WC. With that being the system in place since before the Crucible era started, I was ok with it - being tradition and all.
Then they introduced it to the UK Championships. Wasnt exactly thrilled with the idea, but the UK is the second most important ranker, that with the new rolling rankings and being 6 months from the WC - I made my peace with it.
But now.... what hope will anyone new joining the tour have? Knowing that are going to be drawn against a top-32 player at every ranking event?! This will make PTC's more important than ever (as these draws are done using a different rankings list), but those are going to be gone in a one/two season/s. They will be lucky to make £10,000/season - regardless of how good they are.
It is tough enough already - look at Scott Donaldson and Michael Wasley. Both talented players who just missed out of getting Top 64 places at the end of 2013/14. Starting 14/15, they had to start again with 0 ranking points/money. As it stands, they have ~£15,000 - in all likely hood they will not make the Top-64 again and will have to go through the cycle again...
All this does is give a huge amount of protection to the Top..... I would go as far and say the Top 48! I wish World Snooker would just say - moving a flat-128 system was a mistake, we are moving back to the tiered system. Ok, that system wasnt perfect, but it allowed the top players to be at the venue and enabled lower ranked players the chance to face similar ranked opposition and win matches, then progress to play those 10-15 places higher, etc...
I really like what Barry Hearn has done since he has taken control, but for all the good he has done for snooker, he is really starting to balls all that up by messing with the ranking and seeding system.
This is the problem. I've had more than a few grumbles at some of the things that Hearn has done, e.g. reducing the format of the UK Championships but the ranking list and I'll admit it the format of having the 128 man field starting from the first round has worked and the balance has kept an importance to the ranking system. There remains an incentive within it. - Higher up the list the greater the prospects of a Crucible spot and an easier draw for the World and UK Championships
The real problem is that it has never been on this scale before. A draw for a tournament which has a power of 17 e.g. 1-16 8-9 isn't as bad as a power of 65 which this will be. Like I said last night, the only way I see this working is if they bring something back like a seeded loser scenario where players are credited with half money in the same way they are if they lose matches in tiered events.
Part of me, like SB suspects that this could see a return to tiered structure which would be a shame because for all its faults (and I do think it was rushed) 128 has had, it's become a good structure.