Post a reply

Re: Snooker: Changes You’d Like To See

Postby Iranu

Badsnookerplayer wrote:
Iranu wrote:Really. It made the game look classy compared to other sports where people are wearing a t-shirt and shorts. It’s one of the things that led me to keep watching as a 13 year old.


You should start watching as an adult now. You must look ridiculous.


My school uniform still mostly fits so I’m still wearing it. I’m not made of money ffs.

Re: Snooker: Changes You’d Like To See

Postby SnookerFan

Iranu wrote:Really. It made the game look classy compared to other sports where people are wearing a t-shirt and shorts. It’s one of the things that led me to keep watching as a 13 year old.

I can understand why you might think it’s uncomfortable but surely if it were that bad something would have happened in the last 40+ years to change it, players would be complaining. But I don’t think I’ve ever heard them do so.


To be fair, I don't care that much.

I just never understood why people were so besotted with the idea of it.

Re: Snooker: Changes You’d Like To See

Postby Iranu

SnookerFan wrote:
Iranu wrote:Really. It made the game look classy compared to other sports where people are wearing a t-shirt and shorts. It’s one of the things that led me to keep watching as a 13 year old.

I can understand why you might think it’s uncomfortable but surely if it were that bad something would have happened in the last 40+ years to change it, players would be complaining. But I don’t think I’ve ever heard them do so.


To be fair, I don't care that much.

I just never understood why people were so besotted with the idea of it.

I just like it, that’s all.

I think there’s an argument to get rid of bowties but I’d leave everything else.

Re: Snooker: Changes You’d Like To See

Postby The Jester from Leicester

Iranu wrote:
SnookerFan wrote:
Iranu wrote:Really. It made the game look classy compared to other sports where people are wearing a t-shirt and shorts. It’s one of the things that led me to keep watching as a 13 year old.

I can understand why you might think it’s uncomfortable but surely if it were that bad something would have happened in the last 40+ years to change it, players would be complaining. But I don’t think I’ve ever heard them do so.


To be fair, I don't care that much.

I just never understood why people were so besotted with the idea of it.

I just like it, that’s all.

I think there’s an argument to get rid of bowties but I’d leave everything else.


Agree with this. I think the Home Nations is the most 'casual' that I'd like to see the players dress. Shirt and waistcoat with no bowtie would be fine.

Re: Snooker: Changes You’d Like To See

Postby SnookerFan

The Jester from Leicester wrote:
Iranu wrote:
SnookerFan wrote:
Iranu wrote:Really. It made the game look classy compared to other sports where people are wearing a t-shirt and shorts. It’s one of the things that led me to keep watching as a 13 year old.

I can understand why you might think it’s uncomfortable but surely if it were that bad something would have happened in the last 40+ years to change it, players would be complaining. But I don’t think I’ve ever heard them do so.


To be fair, I don't care that much.

I just never understood why people were so besotted with the idea of it.

I just like it, that’s all.

I think there’s an argument to get rid of bowties but I’d leave everything else.


Agree with this. I think the Home Nations is the most 'casual' that I'd like to see the players dress. Shirt and waistcoat with no bowtie would be fine.


That was the sort of thing I was imagining.

Re: Snooker: Changes You’d Like To See

Postby HappyCamper

more variety and colour in the payer's attire would be good. still with waistcoats and ties obviously but it would be nice to see shirts other than black and white more regularly.

Re: Snooker: Changes You’d Like To See

Postby Iranu

HappyCamper wrote:more variety and colour in the payer's attire would be good. still with waistcoats and ties obviously but it would be nice to see shirts other than black and white more regularly.

Definitely agree with this.

Dale often wears different colour shirts doesn’t he? So it must be allowed. Wish other players did it more.

Re: Snooker: Changes You’d Like To See

Postby HustleKing

HappyCamper wrote:more variety and colour in the payer's attire would be good. still with waistcoats and ties obviously but it would be nice to see shirts other than black and white more regularly.


The problem with that is, that if a player loses whilst wearing a different colour shirt, there will inevitably be haters of that player unfairly using it as a reason they lost (i.e. their more concerned with their apperance than their performance). Which is a cheap shot, but many people love cheap shots :roll:

Re: Snooker: Changes You’d Like To See

Postby D4P

Sickpotter wrote:
D4P wrote:4. There should be a meaningful prize for making a 147.

4. They can't get insurance against someone making a max so any increased prize for a max would come from the tournament prize money which I fully disagree with. 147s are nice but increasing the prize for one can tempt players into chasing it at the cost of their match.


This is a big part of why I think there should be prize money for making a 147. The prize money isn't just a reward for having made a 147, but it's also an incentive to go for a 147 when doing so might otherwise reduce the probability of winning the frame (and match). Going for 147s sometimes requires the player to play a risky shot that might cost them the frame, which is why there should be an financial incentive to help offset that risk.

147s are arguably the single most exciting thing a player can do, and World Snooker should arguably incentive players to do that exciting thing. Otherwise, players will be less likely to try for 147s because of the risk involved.

Re: Snooker: Changes You’d Like To See

Postby Iranu

Perhaps there could be a pot of money over the season that is the overall prize for a 147.

Let’s say the overall fund is £200,000. If one player makes one, they’re on for receiving the £200K. If a second player makes it, they split it 50/50 etc. If anyone makes two, they get two splits-worth of the overall pot.

It wouldn’t have to be a huge amount like the £1M bonus, so it’s not a huge outlay for WST in the grand scheme of things, but there would still be the incentive to go for the max that many players have said is lacking with the current prize format.

Re: Snooker: Changes You’d Like To See

Postby eraserhead

Iranu wrote:Perhaps there could be a pot of money over the season that is the overall prize for a 147.

Let’s say the overall fund is £200,000. If one player makes one, they’re on for receiving the £200K. If a second player makes it, they split it 50/50 etc. If anyone makes two, they get two splits-worth of the overall pot.

It wouldn’t have to be a huge amount like the £1M bonus, so it’s not a huge outlay for WST in the grand scheme of things, but there would still be the incentive to go for the max that many players have said is lacking with the current prize format.

I don't see what was wrong with the rolling prize. It rarely got above 40k.

Re: Snooker: Changes You’d Like To See

Postby Iranu

eraserhead wrote:
Iranu wrote:Perhaps there could be a pot of money over the season that is the overall prize for a 147.

Let’s say the overall fund is £200,000. If one player makes one, they’re on for receiving the £200K. If a second player makes it, they split it 50/50 etc. If anyone makes two, they get two splits-worth of the overall pot.

It wouldn’t have to be a huge amount like the £1M bonus, so it’s not a huge outlay for WST in the grand scheme of things, but there would still be the incentive to go for the max that many players have said is lacking with the current prize format.

I don't see what was wrong with the rolling prize. It rarely got above 40k.

I think the problem with that is you were effectively ‘punished’ for making a 147 soon after another player did, when really it shouldn’t make a difference. It’s still the same achievement.

Re: Snooker: Changes You’d Like To See

Postby SnookerFan

eraserhead wrote:
Iranu wrote:Perhaps there could be a pot of money over the season that is the overall prize for a 147.

Let’s say the overall fund is £200,000. If one player makes one, they’re on for receiving the £200K. If a second player makes it, they split it 50/50 etc. If anyone makes two, they get two splits-worth of the overall pot.

It wouldn’t have to be a huge amount like the £1M bonus, so it’s not a huge outlay for WST in the grand scheme of things, but there would still be the incentive to go for the max that many players have said is lacking with the current prize format.

I don't see what was wrong with the rolling prize. It rarely got above 40k.


Agreed.

I thought the £147,000 at The Crucible was too much in modern times. Rolling prize money seemed okay.

Re: Snooker: Changes You’d Like To See

Postby Cloud Strife

HustleKing wrote:2. Masters get played outside the UK at least once a decade.


At least once every millennium sounds like more than enough. Perhaps once a century, at a push.

Re: Snooker: Changes You’d Like To See

Postby HustleKing

Cloud Strife wrote:
HustleKing wrote:2. Masters get played outside the UK at least once a decade.


At least once every millennium sounds like more than enough. Perhaps once a century, at a push.


So are you against the idea of the Masters being played outside the UK at least once a decade, or are you just highlighting the BBC's and Eurosport's extreme reluctance to cover the Masters in a different country/allow a TC to take place in another country while they keep their British-centrist asses in the UK

Re: Snooker: Changes You’d Like To See

Postby Cloud Strife

HustleKing wrote:
Cloud Strife wrote:
HustleKing wrote:2. Masters get played outside the UK at least once a decade.


At least once every millennium sounds like more than enough. Perhaps once a century, at a push.


So are you against the idea of the Masters being played outside the UK at least once a decade, or are you just highlighting the BBC's and Eurosport's extreme reluctance to cover the Masters in a different country/allow a TC to take place in another country while they keep their British-centrist asses in the UK


British-centrist asses? Christ mate, you sound like you're absolutely seething with jealousy.

If another country wants an event that is of a similar standing and prestige as the triple crown events, they should build one up themselves. It's as simple as that.

The Chinese organisers, to be fair to them, seem to have realised the need to create something themselves intead of having it handed to them on a silver platter. This is the correct attitude IMO.

Regarding the Masters - that should always be in the UK, or London, to be more specific.

Re: Snooker: Changes You’d Like To See

Postby HustleKing

Cloud Strife wrote:
HustleKing wrote:
Cloud Strife wrote:
HustleKing wrote:2. Masters get played outside the UK at least once a decade.


At least once every millennium sounds like more than enough. Perhaps once a century, at a push.


So are you against the idea of the Masters being played outside the UK at least once a decade, or are you just highlighting the BBC's and Eurosport's extreme reluctance to cover the Masters in a different country/allow a TC to take place in another country while they keep their British-centrist asses in the UK


British-centrist asses? Christ mate, you sound like you're absolutely seething with jealousy.

If another country wants an event that is of a similar standing and prestige as the triple crown events, they should build one up themselves. It's as simple as that.

The Chinese organisers, to be fair to them, seem to have realised the need to create something themselves intead of having it handed to them on a silver platter. This is the correct attitude IMO.

Regarding the Masters - that should always be in the UK, or London, to be more specific.


Ok, I can kinda accept your difference of opinion on the build up themselves, although I disagree. However, I'm certainly not jealous as I don't mind the Republic of Ireland not having any big snooker events or any snooker event period. Also, I get the opinion of the Masters staying in the UK, but why London every single year? Do the likes of Belfast, Edinburgh and Cardiff not deserve an occasional TC? Or even the likes of Birmingham, Bristol or Manchester?

Re: Snooker: Changes You’d Like To See

Postby TheSaviour

It still is a very much anyone´s sport. Ronnie O´Sullivan is the only player who can bring some light with some of his shots. But the other top-players are there for the anyone to take. Obviously almost all of those shots they play are a very difficult to handle and even to learn. But the brain works-wise it is close to a gone case. They always "lost the space". I really mean this. It is a really easy to "prove" how much poor it is from their part. Any given amateur never does lost the space. Obviously just lacking many other important attitudes and suchs, which makes it looking quite silly. But we all are the real kings and queens of the game! It really has been a great work from the current and past pro-player, in order to make the game such an ordinary! Ronnie is the only player who really can take just an odd ball from the distance and leave a nice angle to actually to do something really usefull. Stuart Bingham is an another player who when he´s at the top of his game, like currently, who also can do something close to that. He´s at times "quite right". Fair play to him.

Accidentally or not from the current or past top-players, but it nevertheless is a great situation. Ronnie O`Sullivan is a major "shareholder" of the modern snooker.

All the big shots needs to know what the major players are possible thinking. That´s why they always looks so important. They think out of their own roots and are trying to make the planet great. But they just need to know…. They all have their own spaces lol.

The trouble just is that while perhaps thinking before typing something it comes down to fear that otherwise it might be typed something what thinking. (??) Highly controversial, but that´s how it just is. AND that´s why it actually always is typing just that what was tried to avoid. Highly controversial.

But confidence is everything.

Quite right.

Now, the shoesbusiness´ PERFECTLY okay, they all NOW FOR SURE do understand the importance of a great shoes. Put on some plastics as well…. Who typed that?? Was it Richie? So, that´s why I won´t be seeing any great shoes anymore, they all just need to try to be soooooo so sooooo special. On an any given minute. But I can forgive that. I can forgive as I have some trouble with the memory. I am always like that hey, now I need to do three different things on the trot, and these days always lose the last thought, just can´t remember it. I was supposed to try to usual maximum, listen to some great music and try to yellow maximum. Hey, it still is a maximum and some kind of a great standard!

So the shoes are now gone. The trousers are now gone. Too usual standards to score of people´s. I just need to figure out that shirt and jacket-business, and then alles gut.

Come On KYREN!! Certainly at least a mental shareholder of the working class heroe-business, as the sport of a snooker these days so strongly is!!

COME ON KYREN !!!!!!! Do something we at least some know you are a very, very well capable of! Shock the scores of people and fans now!

Re: Snooker: Changes You’d Like To See

Postby Cloud Strife

HustleKing wrote:
Cloud Strife wrote:
HustleKing wrote:
Cloud Strife wrote:
HustleKing wrote:2. Masters get played outside the UK at least once a decade.


So are you against the idea of the Masters being played outside the UK at least once a decade, or are you just highlighting the BBC's and Eurosport's extreme reluctance to cover the Masters in a different country/allow a TC to take place in another country while they keep their British-centrist asses in the UK


British-centrist asses? Christ mate, you sound like you're absolutely seething with jealousy.

If another country wants an event that is of a similar standing and prestige as the triple crown events, they should build one up themselves. It's as simple as that.

The Chinese organisers, to be fair to them, seem to have realised the need to create something themselves intead of having it handed to them on a silver platter. This is the correct attitude IMO.

Regarding the Masters - that should always be in the UK, or London, to be more specific.


Ok, I can kinda accept your difference of opinion on the build up themselves, although I disagree. However, I'm certainly not jealous as I don't mind the Republic of Ireland not having any big snooker events or any snooker event period. Also, I get the opinion of the Masters staying in the UK, but why London every single year? Do the likes of Belfast, Edinburgh and Cardiff not deserve an occasional TC? Or even the likes of Birmingham, Bristol or Manchester?


I have no problems with it being moved around to other cities if that is what the public and organisers want.

It's just a personal preference of mine. The same way I wouldn't want the tennis at Wimbledon get moved to Manchester or The Masters golf from Augusta to New York, to give you a couple of examples.

Re: Snooker: Changes You’d Like To See

Postby Cloud Strife

Iranu wrote:Isn’t the Masters also known as the London Masters?


Is it?

I know in the past it was unofficially referred to as the Wembley Masters.

Re: Snooker: Changes You’d Like To See

Postby Iranu

Cloud Strife wrote:
Iranu wrote:Isn’t the Masters also known as the London Masters?


Is it?

I know in the past it was unofficially referred to as the Wembley Masters.

I’ve definitely heard it referred to as the London Masters, more so in the wake of the German Masters and Shanghai Masters being a thing. Not in any official capacity, though.