PTCs reward

Bourne wrote:The current UK format might work and i'm prepared to give it a chance this winter for sure, but it's certainly lost a lot of it's prestige with this move.

why cant they play 2 weeks best of 17 on 2 tables but show one week on streaming then BBC Coming in for the last 16 onwards.

I'm unashamedly one of BHs biggest fans but I'm not so blind as to think he's made no mistakes.
The PTCs though is very much not one of them. Monique talks about some of the players not being able to survive financially, but these have only given them more earning opportunities. Ask Marcus Campbell, (former never has been), Mark Davis, (never was), Andrew Higginson etc etc. More chances to win matches and make money that is. Perhaps the Euro PTCs could be better rewarded or the weight is not quite right, but hey being a critic is the easiest job in the world in ANY profession. The man has had the balls to put his plan into action and it'll always need tweaking, which I'm sure he's capable of doing. It's like saying that Barack Obama is a crap president, but tehn look at the absolute mess it was left to him in. Not sure what was in a worse state, The US or snooker.
I think Hearn has made two mistakes alone. A little too much emphasis on the shot clock and a lack of hands on in Brazil. Brazil was not a disaster as GJ insists in every single post he makes (get a life GJ), but it was held in the wrong place as I warned way before the tourney. I'm sure Hearn won't let it happen again. If we get snooker out here next year again, it'll be in São Paulo and then you'll se that there is much more interest in the game.

Wild wrote:yes but you cant judge events based on atendancies and rank them based on that because you could get more people in fuirth than you can get in to the crucible.

PTC are the lowest events persanally i dont rank winning a PTC as a tournament win its a means to an end of getting in to the finals.

Wild it's high time for you to move your ass and attend one of the PTCs and actually see by yourself what it takes to win one. Preferably in Europe, so that you also see by yourself what it is like and what it costs to travel. I tell you, it's harder than winning the Welsh Open by a wide margin. No seeding protection. Playing as much as 21 and 28 possible frames in a single day (as compared to only 17, if you reach the final in the Welsh, otherwise it's at most 9 or 11 depending on the round). Playing very late in the night and be there again to play at 10 on the next day... And in addition the players are expected to mix with the crowd to an extend, pose for pictures and sign autographs. No hiding there.

Wild wrote:

Bourne wrote:The current UK format might work and i'm prepared to give it a chance this winter for sure, but it's certainly lost a lot of it's prestige with this move.

why cant they play 2 weeks best of 17 on 2 tables but show one week on streaming then BBC Coming in for the last 16 onwards.

Probably one of the most sensible suggestions i've seen you come up with in months. Make sure the final is BO25+ as well.

As GJ said earlier Hearn is being seen as snooker's saviour to a lot of fans, but I say he is damaging it.

The best thing he has done is put on the event in Berlin. Other than that he has done nothing but 'rape the sport and send it home naked'.

1) The Premier League was already rubbish, but believe it or not, he has made it worse, with some aburd rule changes.

2) Snooker Shoot Out: Snooker's equivalent of a snake hiss up in a brewery.

3)Power Snooker: Something to watch after taking magic mushrooms.

4) Championship League: A complete waste of time. Hundreds and hundreds of frames played in front of no audience, just to get one player to qualify for the aforementioned 'piece of garbage' Premier League(and the winner may have been chosen anyway as a wildcard anyway).

5) PTC's: Instantly forgettable nonentity events played for no reason at all, other than to keep players out of the pub on a Friday and Saturday night. Will anyone even remember who won any these PTC's, come the season end?!!

Hearn is raping the sport.

vodkadiet wrote:As GJ said earlier Hearn is being seen as snooker's saviour to a lot of fans, but I say he is damaging it.

The best thing he has done is put on the event in Berlin. Other than that he has done nothing but 'rape the sport and send it home naked'.

1) The Premier League was already rubbish, but believe it or not, he has made it worse, with some aburd rule changes.

2) Snooker Shoot Out: Snooker's equivalent of a snake hiss up in a brewery.

3)Power Snooker: Something to watch after taking magic mushrooms.

4) Championship League: A complete waste of time. Hundreds and hundreds of frames played in front of no audience, just to get one player to qualify for the aforementioned 'piece of garbage' Premier League(and the winner may have been chosen anyway as a wildcard anyway).

5) PTC's: Instantly forgettable nonentity events played for no reason at all, other than to keep players out of the pub on a Friday and Saturday night. Will anyone even remember who won any these PTC's, come the season end?!!

Hearn is raping the sport.

I doubt that Shaun Murphy will let anyone forget about the PTCs first year... ;)

And, just to get the facts right, Barry Hearn had nothing to do with the conception of Power Snooker. It wasn't his idea, and it wasn't his event neither. Players now have to get WSA endorsement for any event/exhibition played on television. Endorsement was all Hearn gave to it.

Monique wrote:

vodkadiet wrote:As GJ said earlier Hearn is being seen as snooker's saviour to a lot of fans, but I say he is damaging it.

The best thing he has done is put on the event in Berlin. Other than that he has done nothing but 'rape the sport and send it home naked'.

1) The Premier League was already rubbish, but believe it or not, he has made it worse, with some aburd rule changes.

2) Snooker Shoot Out: Snooker's equivalent of a snake hiss up in a brewery.

3)Power Snooker: Something to watch after taking magic mushrooms.

4) Championship League: A complete waste of time. Hundreds and hundreds of frames played in front of no audience, just to get one player to qualify for the aforementioned 'piece of garbage' Premier League(and the winner may have been chosen anyway as a wildcard anyway).

5) PTC's: Instantly forgettable nonentity events played for no reason at all, other than to keep players out of the pub on a Friday and Saturday night. Will anyone even remember who won any these PTC's, come the season end?!!

Hearn is raping the sport.

I doubt that Shaun Murphy will let anyone forget about the PTCs first year... ;)

And, just to get the facts right, Barry Hearn had nothing to do with the conception of Power Snooker. It wasn't his idea, and it wasn't his event neither. Players now have to get WSA endorsement for any event/exhibition played on television. Endorsement was all Hearn gave to it.

Mon do you agree or disagree that brazil was as big a disaster as bahrain so seen to be ?

What are your thoughts on new uk format and the fact hearn has got off lighlty despite ruining the 2nd biggest event IMO

to be perfectly honest i couldn't give a buck about moniques opinion on brazil shes sees it from a biased view and hardly watched it.

i did watch it and after a poor start crowd wise it grew and grew and for a first year it ended up a successful first outing.

i for one am glad it happened and it shows the interest in snooker is there ok by the end they actually gave tickets away but if the interest wasn't there they couldn't have done that.

theres lessons to be learned as gallant pointed out but thats the point of these events.

theres no comparison with Bahrain that was a Ranking Event this was a Experimental Exhibition of Snooker that 90% Worked.

I think that Brazil was a pointless tournament mainly because I'm unconvinced that there is a market in Brazil. The fact that it was scheduled on the back of Shanghai, with difficult connections and about 12 hours time difference was bad enough. But to put it in a posh resort, away from any big city and selling tickets at a price that would have been ridiculously high in UK but was actually scandalously high in a country where so many are poor made it even worse. The players were not at fault and displayed some good snooker of course, but the same was true for Bahrain.

About the UK format itself, I'm in two minds. The best of 17 throughout up to semis, was the trademark of the tournament. On the other hand it was a shame, and unfair to some players, that some matches in round 1 were played in side rooms. You must know that the sponsoring money that a player gets is higher when they play on telly because, from the sponsors point of view, it's better exposure. Ideally the tournament should have been played over a week and a half with all matches on telly, but I reckon that BBC wouldn't have it. They are certainly not keen to extend snooker broadcasting time. So I can see the rationale behind the change. However Barry Hearn had promised not to touch the majors and he has not been true to his word. That is a breach of the trust people have put in him and a worry for the future.

Monique wrote:I think that Brazil was a pointless tournament mainly because I'm unconvinced that there is a market in Brazil. The fact that it was scheduled on the back of Shanghai, with difficult connections and about 12 hours time difference was bad enough. But to put it in a posh resort, away from any big city and selling tickets at a price that would have been ridiculously high in UK but was actually scandalously high in a country where so many are poor made it even worse. The players were not at fault and displayed some good snooker of course, but the same was true for Bahrain.

About the UK format itself, I'm in two minds. The best of 17 throughout up to semis, was the trademark of the tournament. On the other hand it was a shame, and unfair to some players, that some matches in round 1 were played in side rooms. You must know that the sponsoring money that a player gets is higher when they play on telly because, from the sponsors point of view, it's better exposure. Ideally the tournament should have been played over a week and a half with all matches on telly, but I reckon that BBC wouldn't have it. They are certainly not keen to extend snooker broadcasting time. So I can see the rationale behind the change. However Barry Hearn had promised not to touch the majors and he has not been true to his word. That is a breach of the trust people have put in him and a worry for the future.

Thanks mon nice to know im not the only one who thinks there is no market for snooker in brazil

Uk format i agree its a shame that good matches end up in cubicles so its a plus all matches on tv tables shame the matches are shortened but masters is short format till final and ist still prestigeous so hopefully uk will still be good.

vodkadiet wrote:As GJ said earlier Hearn is being seen as snooker's saviour to a lot of fans, but I say he is damaging it.

The best thing he has done is put on the event in Berlin. Other than that he has done nothing but 'rape the sport and send it home naked'.

1) The Premier League was already rubbish, but believe it or not, he has made it worse, with some aburd rule changes.

2) Snooker Shoot Out: Snooker's equivalent of a snake hiss up in a brewery.

3)Power Snooker: Something to watch after taking magic mushrooms.

4) Championship League: A complete waste of time. Hundreds and hundreds of frames played in front of no audience, just to get one player to qualify for the aforementioned 'piece of garbage' Premier League(and the winner may have been chosen anyway as a wildcard anyway).

5) PTC's: Instantly forgettable nonentity events played for no reason at all, other than to keep players out of the pub on a Friday and Saturday night. Will anyone even remember who won any these PTC's, come the season end?!!

Hearn is raping the sport.

Points 1, 3 & 4 I actually agree with, but on the subject of point 3, Hearn was not the brains behind Power Snooker.

You are probably correct on point two aswell, but I don't necessarily think of it as a bad thing. It seemed like a bloody good night out and if that can draw a few fans in, I'm not against it. I really liked the shootout personally.

Tubberlad wrote:

vodkadiet wrote:As GJ said earlier Hearn is being seen as snooker's saviour to a lot of fans, but I say he is damaging it.

The best thing he has done is put on the event in Berlin. Other than that he has done nothing but 'rape the sport and send it home naked'.

1) The Premier League was already rubbish, but believe it or not, he has made it worse, with some aburd rule changes.

2) Snooker Shoot Out: Snooker's equivalent of a snake hiss up in a brewery.

3)Power Snooker: Something to watch after taking magic mushrooms.

4) Championship League: A complete waste of time. Hundreds and hundreds of frames played in front of no audience, just to get one player to qualify for the aforementioned 'piece of garbage' Premier League(and the winner may have been chosen anyway as a wildcard anyway).

5) PTC's: Instantly forgettable nonentity events played for no reason at all, other than to keep players out of the pub on a Friday and Saturday night. Will anyone even remember who won any these PTC's, come the season end?!!

Hearn is raping the sport.

Points 1, 3 & 4 I actually agree with, but on the subject of point 3, Hearn was not the brains behind Power Snooker.

You are probably correct on point two aswell, but I don't necessarily think of it as a bad thing. It seemed like a bloody good night out and if that can draw a few fans in, I'm not against it. I really liked the shootout personally.

I actually liked the shootout surprisingly

power snooker was BS though

GJ wrote:

Monique wrote:I think that Brazil was a pointless tournament mainly because I'm unconvinced that there is a market in Brazil. The fact that it was scheduled on the back of Shanghai, with difficult connections and about 12 hours time difference was bad enough. But to put it in a posh resort, away from any big city and selling tickets at a price that would have been ridiculously high in UK but was actually scandalously high in a country where so many are poor made it even worse. The players were not at fault and displayed some good snooker of course, but the same was true for Bahrain.

About the UK format itself, I'm in two minds. The best of 17 throughout up to semis, was the trademark of the tournament. On the other hand it was a shame, and unfair to some players, that some matches in round 1 were played in side rooms. You must know that the sponsoring money that a player gets is higher when they play on telly because, from the sponsors point of view, it's better exposure. Ideally the tournament should have been played over a week and a half with all matches on telly, but I reckon that BBC wouldn't have it. They are certainly not keen to extend snooker broadcasting time. So I can see the rationale behind the change. However Barry Hearn had promised not to touch the majors and he has not been true to his word. That is a breach of the trust people have put in him and a worry for the future.

Thanks mon nice to know im not the only one who thinks there is no market for snooker in brazil

Uk format i agree its a shame that good matches end up in cubicles so its a plus all matches on tv tables shame the matches are shortened but masters is short format till final and ist still prestigeous so hopefully uk will still be good.

Yaaaaaawwwwwnnn

gallantrabbit wrote:

GJ wrote:

Monique wrote:I think that Brazil was a pointless tournament mainly because I'm unconvinced that there is a market in Brazil. The fact that it was scheduled on the back of Shanghai, with difficult connections and about 12 hours time difference was bad enough. But to put it in a posh resort, away from any big city and selling tickets at a price that would have been ridiculously high in UK but was actually scandalously high in a country where so many are poor made it even worse. The players were not at fault and displayed some good snooker of course, but the same was true for Bahrain.

About the UK format itself, I'm in two minds. The best of 17 throughout up to semis, was the trademark of the tournament. On the other hand it was a shame, and unfair to some players, that some matches in round 1 were played in side rooms. You must know that the sponsoring money that a player gets is higher when they play on telly because, from the sponsors point of view, it's better exposure. Ideally the tournament should have been played over a week and a half with all matches on telly, but I reckon that BBC wouldn't have it. They are certainly not keen to extend snooker broadcasting time. So I can see the rationale behind the change. However Barry Hearn had promised not to touch the majors and he has not been true to his word. That is a breach of the trust people have put in him and a worry for the future.

Thanks mon nice to know im not the only one who thinks there is no market for snooker in brazil

Uk format i agree its a shame that good matches end up in cubicles so its a plus all matches on tv tables shame the matches are shortened but masters is short format till final and ist still prestigeous so hopefully uk will still be good.

Yaaaaaawwwwwnnn

as mature as wilds earlier rant

gallantrabbit wrote:

GJ wrote:

Monique wrote:I think that Brazil was a pointless tournament mainly because I'm unconvinced that there is a market in Brazil. The fact that it was scheduled on the back of Shanghai, with difficult connections and about 12 hours time difference was bad enough. But to put it in a posh resort, away from any big city and selling tickets at a price that would have been ridiculously high in UK but was actually scandalously high in a country where so many are poor made it even worse. The players were not at fault and displayed some good snooker of course, but the same was true for Bahrain.

About the UK format itself, I'm in two minds. The best of 17 throughout up to semis, was the trademark of the tournament. On the other hand it was a shame, and unfair to some players, that some matches in round 1 were played in side rooms. You must know that the sponsoring money that a player gets is higher when they play on telly because, from the sponsors point of view, it's better exposure. Ideally the tournament should have been played over a week and a half with all matches on telly, but I reckon that BBC wouldn't have it. They are certainly not keen to extend snooker broadcasting time. So I can see the rationale behind the change. However Barry Hearn had promised not to touch the majors and he has not been true to his word. That is a breach of the trust people have put in him and a worry for the future.

Thanks mon nice to know im not the only one who thinks there is no market for snooker in brazil

Uk format i agree its a shame that good matches end up in cubicles so its a plus all matches on tv tables shame the matches are shortened but masters is short format till final and ist still prestigeous so hopefully uk will still be good.

Yaaaaaawwwwwnnn

this guy was there

Wild wrote:to be perfectly honest i couldn't give a little kitten about moniques opinion on brazil shes sees it from a biased view and hardly watched it.

i did watch it and after a poor start crowd wise it grew and grew and for a first year it ended up a successful first outing.

i for one am glad it happened and it shows the interest in snooker is there ok by the end they actually gave tickets away but if the interest wasn't there they couldn't have done that.

theres lessons to be learned as gallant pointed out but thats the point of these events.

theres no comparison with Bahrain that was a Ranking Event this was a Experimental Exhibition of Snooker that 90% Worked.

I watched every match Wild. Don't speak for others when you don't know a thing . As I said the snooker was OK and the players were not at fault. But, in my opinion, the event was held in the wrong place, at the wrong time and was a waste of resources that could have been better used elsewhere although someone I'm sure made money out of it.
And I'm asking for the right to express my opinion without being insulted or abused.

Monique wrote:

Wild wrote:to be perfectly honest i couldn't give a little kitten about moniques opinion on brazil shes sees it from a biased view and hardly watched it.

i did watch it and after a poor start crowd wise it grew and grew and for a first year it ended up a successful first outing.

i for one am glad it happened and it shows the interest in snooker is there ok by the end they actually gave tickets away but if the interest wasn't there they couldn't have done that.

theres lessons to be learned as gallant pointed out but thats the point of these events.

theres no comparison with Bahrain that was a Ranking Event this was a Experimental Exhibition of Snooker that 90% Worked.

I watched every match Wild. Don't speak for others when you don't know a thing . As I said the snooker was OK and the players were not at fault. But, in my opinion, the event was held in the wrong place, at the wrong time and was a waste of resources that could have been better used elsewhere although someone I'm sure made money out of it.
And I'm asking for the right to express my opinion without being insulted or abused.

Yes, you certainly do have that right

Monique wrote:

Wild wrote:to be perfectly honest i couldn't give a little kitten about moniques opinion on brazil shes sees it from a biased view and hardly watched it.

i did watch it and after a poor start crowd wise it grew and grew and for a first year it ended up a successful first outing.

i for one am glad it happened and it shows the interest in snooker is there ok by the end they actually gave tickets away but if the interest wasn't there they couldn't have done that.

theres lessons to be learned as gallant pointed out but thats the point of these events.

theres no comparison with Bahrain that was a Ranking Event this was a Experimental Exhibition of Snooker that 90% Worked.

I watched every match Wild. Don't speak for others when you don't know a thing . As I said the snooker was OK and the players were not at fault. But, in my opinion, the event was held in the wrong place, at the wrong time and was a waste of resources that could have been better used elsewhere although someone I'm sure made money out of it.
And I'm asking for the right to express my opinion without being insulted or abused.

Wild needs to learn to let people air their own views and if they happen to disagree with him there is no need for him to resort to pathetic insults

thanks

Wild, mate, what is the matter with you?. As I see it people are having a reasoned debate and a good one at that about a subject that we all have a view on. You have up until now contributed more than most to this type of debate so why fly off the handle so easily?.

As for the PTC's debate. I have been in the position of booking hotels and flights for players in the past. I know how expensive it was then and can only imagine how much extra it is now. Also, dont underestimate the exertion taken out of the players over the days they play. As Monique says, they are not used to playing so many frames in such a short time span but do not make the mistake of thinking that means they should be mollycoddled because they shouldn't. They are there to make points and prize money and have accepted the conditions in which they play so they will get on with it, even although they are in essence being blackmailed into attending them vis a vie the points situation.

Some of the venues I have heard rumours of PTC's being played in are just stupid. China for example and Israel. How many pro's do you think would travel to Israel for a £10000 PTC?, whether it was for the good of the game or not?. It's all very well saying the game is in danger if the top stars dont cooperate but again, not to the point that they lose money out of it. Brazil was not a futile tournament by any means but it needed more hands on at the planning stage to keep it out of that ridiculous resort. I have more to say but I need my dinner.

You've got every right Monique.
I know the venue was wrong and said it 2 months before. But do you just want to discard Brazil and forget this side of the world. You say you're not sure Brazil has a market. OK let's make sure in the big city before we forget it. I'm the last one who wants WSs resources wasted. We've seen an eternity of that before BH. BH will make sure it doesn't happen again you can be sure.
GJ grow up. Repetition and desperately seeking a single person to support your stolen 'opinions' doesn't make you a decent poster

gallantrabbit wrote:You've got every right Monique.
I know the venue was wrong and said it 2 months before. But do you just want to discard Brazil and forget this side of the world. You say you're not sure Brazil has a market. OK let's make sure in the big city before we forget it. I'm the last one who wants WSs resources wasted. We've seen an eternity of that before BH. BH will make sure it doesn't happen again you can be sure.
GJ grow up. Repetition and desperately seeking a single person to support your stolen 'opinions' doesn't make you a decent poster

If i want to give my own views on brazil farce and the new uk format i will



GJ

i want to apolagise for my behaviour im ashamed

sorry Monique

Sorry GJ

Sorry sonny

Wild wrote:i want to apolagise for my behaviour im ashamed

sorry Monique

Sorry GJ

Sorry sonny

takes a big man to apologise


wild

Barry Hearn will achieve only one thing.

He will be the 'richest man in the graveyard'.

Wild wrote:i want to apolagise for my behaviour im ashamed

sorry Monique

Sorry GJ

Sorry sonny

It's OK Wild. We all know that you are passionate so to speak ...
No hard feelings.

@snooky147 I'm very interested to hear what you have to say about Brazil.
@gallantrabbit I don't want any part of the world to be left out, but with limited resources I'm not convinced that Brazil should have been a priority, especially considering the schedule constraints and the venue on offer.

So Hearn has set about destroying the UK. How long before he turns the World Championship into best of 11 shot clock rubbish?

I'm with snooky on this

With such a radical sweeping change you have to speculate to accumulate. There will be a few misses, but BH has had many more hits than misses. I don't think the PTCs are misses in any way. But of course they need a lot of tweaking, with Sheffield and some of the foreign venues.
I've written about Brazil too till I'm blue in the face and think BH needed a stronger input there.
But overall Barry.