Post a reply

Re: Rankings

Postby Dan-cat

This is what happened to Ivan Lendle. I think he was world number 1 for 2 or 3 seasons before he won a tournament. Gloryless, as you say.

Re: Rankings

Postby carayip

I think overall ROS had a better year than MJW. But if I were a snooker player, I would still want MJW’s year more. Does it sound weird?

Re: Rankings

Postby HappyCamper

carayip wrote:I think overall ROS had a better year than MJW. But if I were a snooker player, I would still want MJW’s year more. Does it sound weird?


I'd rather spend the second half of the year on a massive snake hiss up too tbqh.

Re: Rankings

Postby Alex0paul

Badsnookerplayer wrote:Has Mark Selby been No 1 for a record time or does somebody else hold that record?


Hendry for 8 years

Re: Rankings

Postby Andre147

Badsnookerplayer wrote:Cheers Alex.

Presumably it is Hendry followed by Selby then Steve Davis?


Might be Hendry, Selby, Davis and then Ronnie.

Selby's been the more impressive of the lot, as the rankings can change many times in the season, whilst in the past you were garanteed WN1 for the whole of it.

Re: Rankings

Postby HappyCamper

Under the old system it's Hendry first, then Reardon and Davis equal.
Then it would be Selby fourth if you convert number of days into years.
Then O'Sullivan.

Edit - For completeness after that is
John Higgins
Mark Williams
Neil Robertson
Thorburn
Trump
Ding

Re: Rankings

Postby KrazeeEyezKilla

Andre147 wrote:
Selby's been the more impressive of the lot, as the rankings can change many times in the season, whilst in the past you were garanteed WN1 for the whole of it.


I checked a couple of years ago and from the results Davis would have been No.1 for the same seven years in a rolling system. Hendry would have lost the No.1 spot to Jimmy White after the 1992 UK Championship with John Parrott possibly reaching No.2. Hendry would have been back on top after the 1993 World Championship and stay there for the next five years.

Re: Rankings

Postby Badsnookerplayer

KrazeeEyezKilla wrote:
Andre147 wrote:
Selby's been the more impressive of the lot, as the rankings can change many times in the season, whilst in the past you were garanteed WN1 for the whole of it.


I checked a couple of years ago and from the results Davis would have been No.1 for the same seven years in a rolling system. Hendry would have lost the No.1 spot to Jimmy White after the 1992 UK Championship with John Parrott possibly reaching No.2. Hendry would have been back on top after the 1993 World Championship and stay there for the next five years.

Where do I locate these stats?

Re: Rankings

Postby KrazeeEyezKilla

Badsnookerplayer wrote:
KrazeeEyezKilla wrote:
Andre147 wrote:
Selby's been the more impressive of the lot, as the rankings can change many times in the season, whilst in the past you were garanteed WN1 for the whole of it.


I checked a couple of years ago and from the results Davis would have been No.1 for the same seven years in a rolling system. Hendry would have lost the No.1 spot to Jimmy White after the 1992 UK Championship with John Parrott possibly reaching No.2. Hendry would have been back on top after the 1993 World Championship and stay there for the next five years.

Where do I locate these stats?


I just based it on the results the players were having in 1991 & 1992. Hendry would have had a huge lead at the end of 1990 having won five ranking titles in a row. In 1991 he won two ranking titles (British Open & Grand Prix) while John Parrott won three including the two biggest of the year. White won one title but reached the final of both World & UK. In 1992 White won four ranking titles, the European & British Opens in the spring and the GP & UK at the start of the next season. He also made the final of the World Championship. Hendry won that but his only other title was the Welsh Open. Over two years White won five titles compared to four won by Hendry and Parrott and did better in both UK Championships and one World Championship than Hendry. In the later part of 1992 Hendry would have lost a huge amount of points from two years earlier.

Re: Rankings

Postby Johnny Bravo

Selbo's poor form continues. IMO he's gonna loose the WN1 spot very soon.

Re: Rankings

Postby Johnny Bravo

The Welsh Open has now concluded and Selbo's still on top. How can that be ?
He hasn't won anything in a very long time. :hmmm: :?

Re: Rankings

Postby HappyCamper

He won two China opens, an International, and China championship in the last two years. Those are three of the biggest events on the calendar outside the worlds. And he won one of those as well.

Re: Rankings

Postby Johnny Bravo

HappyCamper wrote:He won two China opens, an International, and China championship in the last two years. Those are three of the biggest events on the calendar outside the worlds. And he won one of those as well.


But nothing in the past year. As 4 the events u mentioned, aren't the points from them supposed to be eliminated ?

Re: Rankings

Postby HappyCamper

Johnny Bravo wrote:
HappyCamper wrote:He won two China opens, an International, and China championship in the last two years. Those are three of the biggest events on the calendar outside the worlds. And he won one of those as well.


But nothing in the past year. As 4 the events u mentioned, aren't the points from them supposed to be eliminated ?



China Champ was in September and China open last April. So both in the last year.

Events drop of after two years. So if Selby doesn't do well in the China Open/WC this year he'll lose top spot.

The ponts should really taper off, if the system were sensible. Say, 25% after 12 months, and another 25% after 18. Then nought after 24. But it's not.
Last edited by HappyCamper on 19 Feb 2019, edited 1 time in total.

Re: Rankings

Postby D4P

Snooker has a surprisingly outdated and unsophisticated ranking system that is very much out of touch with systems in other sports (e.g. golf and tennis).

Re: Rankings

Postby Iranu

HappyCamper wrote:
Johnny Bravo wrote:
HappyCamper wrote:He won two China opens, an International, and China championship in the last two years. Those are three of the biggest events on the calendar outside the worlds. And he won one of those as well.


But nothing in the past year. As 4 the events u mentioned, aren't the points from them supposed to be eliminated ?



China Champ was in September and China open last April. So both in the last year.


Events drop of after two years. So if Selby do well in the China Open/WC this year he'll lose top spot.

The ponts should really taper off, if the system were sensible. Say, 25% after 12 months, and another 25% after 18. Then nought after 24. But it's not.

Or just make it a 1 year ranking system.

Re: Rankings

Postby Badsnookerplayer

Does it not need to be two year to give first year pros a chance to accrue enough prize money to stay on tour?

Re: Rankings

Postby HappyCamper

Iranu wrote:
HappyCamper wrote:
Johnny Bravo wrote:
HappyCamper wrote:He won two China opens, an International, and China championship in the last two years. Those are three of the biggest events on the calendar outside the worlds. And he won one of those as well.


But nothing in the past year. As 4 the events u mentioned, aren't the points from them supposed to be eliminated ?



China Champ was in September and China open last April. So both in the last year.


Events drop of after two years. So if Selby do well in the China Open/WC this year he'll lose top spot.

The ponts should really taper off, if the system were sensible. Say, 25% after 12 months, and another 25% after 18. Then nought after 24. But it's not.

Or just make it a 1 year ranking system.


That would go too far the other way in terms of recency bias. Two years seems better for judging a consistency of performance.

Also it wouldn't solve the problems caused of players loosing amounts of ranking points overnight when old tournaments drop off. Which leads to nonsensical volatility in the rankings.

Re: Rankings

Postby Iranu

How about a 1 year list plus your best five results from the previous year?

Re: Rankings

Postby HappyCamper

That might go someway to achieving a similar effect.

Re: Rankings

Postby Johnny Bravo

ROS's idea of taking into account a player's top 10 best results is the best.

Re: Rankings

Postby KrazeeEyezKilla

In the last two years O'Sullivan won more prize money then any other player, it's just that a lot of this has come in events that aren't counting. He has £390,000 won this season from three invitational events. I think these three should count with some way of preventing top players getting an advantage out of them. Maybe only count them for a year and have a set number of events that each player has on their total.

Re: Rankings

Postby Truth

KrazeeEyezKilla wrote:
Andre147 wrote:
Selby's been the more impressive of the lot, as the rankings can change many times in the season, whilst in the past you were garanteed WN1 for the whole of it.


I checked a couple of years ago and from the results Davis would have been No.1 for the same seven years in a rolling system. Hendry would have lost the No.1 spot to Jimmy White after the 1992 UK Championship with John Parrott possibly reaching No.2. Hendry would have been back on top after the 1993 World Championship and stay there for the next five years.


Not quite. In a rolling system Hendry would have lost the #1 spot to Davis in 1994. Davis was provisionally #1 until Hendry beat him in the 94 World semi-final.

Re: Rankings

Postby KrazeeEyezKilla

Truth wrote:
KrazeeEyezKilla wrote:Not quite. In a rolling system Hendry would have lost the #1 spot to Davis in 1994. Davis was provisionally #1 until Hendry beat him in the 94 World semi-final.


Provisional rankings are slightly different. It's a preview of what the rankings will look like after the next update and doesn't cover a full two years unlike rolling rankings. When Davis was provisional no.1 it was like being top of the league late in the season. Rolling rankings would still be counting the 1992 World Championship which would have kept Hendry in front.

Re: Rankings

Postby Truth

KrazeeEyezKilla wrote:
Truth wrote:
KrazeeEyezKilla wrote:Not quite. In a rolling system Hendry would have lost the #1 spot to Davis in 1994. Davis was provisionally #1 until Hendry beat him in the 94 World semi-final.


Provisional rankings are slightly different. It's a preview of what the rankings will look like after the next update and doesn't cover a full two years unlike rolling rankings. When Davis was provisional no.1 it was like being top of the league late in the season. Rolling rankings would still be counting the 1992 World Championship which would have kept Hendry in front.


I see, good point. May I ask what resources you used to check these results? I've not been able to locate any concise sources online that show the ranking points available for each round in historic tournaments. Or did you use the modern system of applying prize money for each round as ranking points? Also, how did you calculate rolling rankings in the 80s? Many open tournaments weren't rankers in the 80s, especially in the earlier part of the decade.

Thanks


   

cron