Austrian Open 2012 - Trump, Higgins, Williams Live Stream

roy142857 wrote:ANYBODY ACTUALLY WANT TO HEAR THE RESULT ????

Mark Williams 6 - 5 Matthew Couch

re above comments, just one from me, and that's that this tournament has a bit of 'end of season party' feel about it, what with the players party, the music concert etc so I suspect a lot more fun to be at than a PTC

Exactly Roy. And that's what the Paul Hunter Classic used to be as well. A kind of fun, festive opening of the season. Turning it into a EPTC has "spoilt" it in many ways despite that particular EPTC being a huge success.

Wild WC wrote:buck me monique his kids was not in bucking school saturday or sunday family time also means weekend and instead of home playing happy families as you seem to think players should do instead they were away playing for peanuts in austria.

you really cant have it both ways so you suport playing in events that mean rubbish for peanuts as long as Barry Hearn has nothing to do with it.

I don't "support" it, or "not support" it. It's the players choice and as long as it's not clashing with other duties I don't see why some here think it's wrong, especially as the players who said they want family time aren't in it, except for Higgins.

Monique wrote:

Alpha wrote:

Jewell wrote:Well, it's easy for you to sit there and say "enter or don't enter, it's up to you", but what happens when they are blackmailed into having to compete by a stagnant ranking system that overly rewards mickey mouse tournaments? Or when they have Barry Hearn whinging in their earholes everytime they don't want to play in a tournement?

That's fine in the case of the pointless Brazil and meaningless Sheffield PTC events. That doesn't explain why players moan about the schedule and lack of family time and then when they do get some family time, they run off to play in real mickey mouse events like these.

They don't. Those players who were in Austria have always played in similar events and are not the ones "moaning" (*) about lack of family time. The only exception being John Higgins to an extend. He said that he won't be in Wuxi nor Australia, because he wants to devote the summer break to his family. But as I explained previously, his kids are currently at school, so he can't take hols with them right now anyway. There isn't an actual contradiction in his attitude.

I put "moaning" under quotes because to me most of their complaints are perfectly justified. To Hearn's own admission the ranking system is a blackmail one that forces players to play into all events knowing full well that they will most probably make a loss in many of them. Players are self-employed and no self-employed person in their right mind would do such a thing unless they are forced into it. When you are self-employed and sane you look at opportunities - and Hearn is giving opportunities all right - and you will take the job if you can reasonably expect to make a profit. That's where the current system isn't right. and no rant, insults or whatever will make me change my opinion that is very simply based on common sense and the knowledge that none of the ones who "rant" would be happy to be put in such a situation. Once again, I'm not asking for players to earn fortunes, or to be paid if they don't win. But if they win, they should be paid an amount decent enough to cover reasonable expenses. In most EPTCs you have to reach the last 16 to do that, the quarters sometimes. In some ranking events lower ranked players have to win 2 or 3 matches before getting anything. And Australia, with a very expensive travel, extremely high taxes and poor prize money is a complete joke. That's simply not right.

Hearn didn't promise anyone would make fortunes. All he promised were opportunities, and the opportunity to make fortunes for those who would go out and grab those opportunities.
I feel sorry for guys like Eden Sharav, Igor Figueireido and the Craigies, players who can justifiably feel shafted by Hearn.
But Hearn didn't promise anyone anything except opportunity. It was the players that said they wanted to play more snooker.

Is it official that Higgins isn't playing in the Wuxi or Australia?

Any other high profile names withdrawn? Apart from Ronnie.

roy142857 wrote:ANYBODY ACTUALLY WANT TO HEAR THE RESULT ????

Mark Williams 6 - 5 Matthew Couch

re above comments, just one from me, and that's that this tournament has a bit of 'end of season party' feel about it, what with the players party, the music concert etc so I suspect a lot more fun to be at than a PTC

doesent matter what type of party feel it is theres flights to be payed for and hotels to be booked in to if they can afford doing it for a Party well they can afford it Full Stop..

and @monique im sorry for swearing but this is infuriating the way you go on about PTC and yet doing a expensive party is seem ok as long as the event was not organised by World Snooker.....and why does family time only crop up when its a Barry Hearn run Tournament.

im not the one going on about Flights arent Cheap and Traveling expenses please explain how traveling expenses is cheaper when no pressure involved.

Alpha wrote:
Hearn didn't promise anyone would make fortunes. All he promised were opportunities, and the opportunity to make fortunes for those who would go out and grab those opportunities.
I feel sorry for guys like Eden Sharav, Igor Figueireido and the Craigies, players who can justifiably feel shafted by Hearn.
But Hearn didn't promise anyone anything except opportunity. It was the players that said they wanted to play more snooker.

Exactly

he owes nobody a living its up to them to go out and grab what they can.

Martin O'Donnell did just that and while most payed £1000 to ented Q School he payed £50 by entering and win the Snookerbacker classic "WHO DARES WINS"

Fair play to Couch for getting to the final and pushing Mark the whole way. This could be a confidence boost for him prior to the new season.

Will Matthew Couch be on tour next season?
I thought he was too far down the list.

janddk wrote:Will Matthew Couch be on tour next season?
I thought he was too far down the list.

No he wont be on Tour next season hes finished.

Alpha wrote:

Monique wrote:

Alpha wrote:

Jewell wrote:Well, it's easy for you to sit there and say "enter or don't enter, it's up to you", but what happens when they are blackmailed into having to compete by a stagnant ranking system that overly rewards mickey mouse tournaments? Or when they have Barry Hearn whinging in their earholes everytime they don't want to play in a tournement?

That's fine in the case of the pointless Brazil and meaningless Sheffield PTC events. That doesn't explain why players moan about the schedule and lack of family time and then when they do get some family time, they run off to play in real mickey mouse events like these.

They don't. Those players who were in Austria have always played in similar events and are not the ones "moaning" (*) about lack of family time. The only exception being John Higgins to an extend. He said that he won't be in Wuxi nor Australia, because he wants to devote the summer break to his family. But as I explained previously, his kids are currently at school, so he can't take hols with them right now anyway. There isn't an actual contradiction in his attitude.

I put "moaning" under quotes because to me most of their complaints are perfectly justified. To Hearn's own admission the ranking system is a blackmail one that forces players to play into all events knowing full well that they will most probably make a loss in many of them. Players are self-employed and no self-employed person in their right mind would do such a thing unless they are forced into it. When you are self-employed and sane you look at opportunities - and Hearn is giving opportunities all right - and you will take the job if you can reasonably expect to make a profit. That's where the current system isn't right. and no rant, insults or whatever will make me change my opinion that is very simply based on common sense and the knowledge that none of the ones who "rant" would be happy to be put in such a situation. Once again, I'm not asking for players to earn fortunes, or to be paid if they don't win. But if they win, they should be paid an amount decent enough to cover reasonable expenses. In most EPTCs you have to reach the last 16 to do that, the quarters sometimes. In some ranking events lower ranked players have to win 2 or 3 matches before getting anything. And Australia, with a very expensive travel, extremely high taxes and poor prize money is a complete joke. That's simply not right.

Hearn didn't promise anyone would make fortunes. All he promised were opportunities, and the opportunity to make fortunes for those who would go out and grab those opportunities.
I feel sorry for guys like Eden Sharav, Igor Figueireido and the Craigies, players who can justifiably feel shafted by Hearn.
But Hearn didn't promise anyone anything except opportunity. It was the players that said they wanted to play more snooker.

My problem is not with Hearn opportunities, my problem is with the fact that he has put a system into place that compels the players to play in events when they know they will be out of their pockets. If they had a real choice, I would have no problem whatsoever with it. But it's a blackmail system and Hearn himself admits to that. THAT is what's not right. As I said, as a self-employed person, in any trade, you only get opportunities. But it should be your choice and decision whether you take them or not, depending on your chances and ability to make money out of them. You should not forget that those guys have to make a living out of their sport. Ok, if you're not good enough, you shouldn't stay. My problem is that the current system does not allow players, in particular young players who are newcomers on the tour, to support themselves because they don't earn enough money to make a decent living - nothing more, no luxury - even if they win. Actually most of them don't even cover their expenses. It takes some time to settle on the MT and climb the rankings. Just look at Trump or Selby's careers. The flat structure if/when put in place will help, provided that winning one match means that they at least basically cover their expenses. It isn't the case currently.

If the resources aren't there to organise 30+ tournaments with decent prize money, cut it to 20. In any enterprise the management has to align the investments with the resources and find the right balance between opening new markets - which always costs at the start - and managing the assets and established markets correctly. There is no reason for it to be different in snooker and it's not for the players to finance it. Their bit is to play and provide quality sport and entertainment while earning a living.