Post a reply

Would a 155 be classed as a maximum?

Postby Dan-cat

Hey,

This puzzles me. If a player got a free ball on the first red, and then potted a colour as the free ball followed by the black, and all 15 remaining reds and blacks and the colours for a 155 break, would he receive the 147 maximum prize?

Because technically what he did is actually harder than a 147, because it's two extra pots. But it's not actually a 147.

I know that Steve James had a 16 red clearance in 1990 (against Alex Higgins) but he took a couple of lower valued colours so it came in at 142 (video here - I was a huge Steve James fan I loved the way he played https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s7mNXD5hddk)

Would it class as a maximum if the player took a blue or whatever and then 15 reds and blacks? It would still be more points than a 147, but it involved a blue.

I wonder if there is provision for this happening in the rules and if it's tournament/sponsor specific - i.e. would the prize be paid out?

Re: Would a 155 be classed as a maximum?

Postby Sickpotter

I think it should count because you didn't deviate from the black....maybe need a new classification like the "max max" ;-)

That said I could see scenarios with it not counting. Is a 147 still a maximum if it was done with 16 reds 14 blacks 2 greens? IMO no, you deviated from the max value ball.

I liked Steve James game as well, a very fast/fluent player. I think hard living killed his career. Certainly should've been in the top 16 for longer than he was.

Re: Would a 155 be classed as a maximum?

Postby PoolBoy

It's a good question.
Jamie Burnett is, to my knowledge, the only player to achieve a break in excess of 147 in professional play.
A 148!
But it's not 'counted' as 'perfect' (and not included in the 'official' maximum-break stats) as he 'only' potted 12 blacks; plus 2 pinks, a blue and a brown with his 16 reds!

Re: Would a 155 be classed as a maximum?

Postby Dan-cat

...but if it was 15 reds and 15 blacks, and one 'free ball' red and a blue, he would have achieved the max, and a few extra points!

...and would it make a difference if the blue had been half way through the break? I'm guessing as Poolboy said it would need to be 16 blacks...

Re: Would a 155 be classed as a maximum?

Postby PLtheRef

A 16 red 147 break isn't a maximum break - as the maximum break under those circumstances.

I'm fairly sure that Eirian Williams covered this in a Q and A from one of the World Championship programmes from the year he refereed the final - (2007 I think) - but I think to receive a maximum break prize you have to make a 155 break from the freeball.

Re: Would a 155 be classed as a maximum?

Postby Andre147

PLtheRef wrote:A 16 red 147 break isn't a maximum break - as the maximum break under those circumstances.

I'm fairly sure that Eirian Williams covered this in a Q and A from one of the World Championship programmes from the year he refereed the final - (2007 I think) - but I think to receive a maximum break prize you have to make a 155 break from the freeball.


So just to make it clear, a 16 red 147 break wouldn't be "good enough" to receive the maximum break prize?

Only a 147 under normal circumstances or a 155 break with free ball receive the prize?

Re: Would a 155 be classed as a maximum?

Postby Dan-cat

'A 16 red 147 break isn't a maximum break - as the maximum break under those circumstances.'

Thanks PL I think this is cleared up!

Re: Would a 155 be classed as a maximum?

Postby elnino

Reading Snooker World Records entries suggests that breaks of only 147 are classified as a Maximums.

Scores greater than 147 are recorded as 16 red ball clearances and simply called highest breaks.

Re: Would a 155 be classed as a maximum?

Postby Andre147

elnino wrote:Reading Snooker World Records entries suggests that breaks of only 147 are classified as a Maximums.

Scores greater than 147 are recorded as 16 red ball clearances and simply called highest breaks.


Yes but wouldn't a 155 break be classed as a maximum too?

What if two players, A makes 147, B makes 155, both receive the prize? Or only the 147 one?

Re: Would a 155 be classed as a maximum?

Postby acesinc

Andre147 wrote:
elnino wrote:Reading Snooker World Records entries suggests that breaks of only 147 are classified as a Maximums.

Scores greater than 147 are recorded as 16 red ball clearances and simply called highest breaks.


Yes but wouldn't a 155 break be classed as a maximum too?

What if two players, A makes 147, B makes 155, both receive the prize? Or only the 147 one?


I thought that PLtheRef's answer was concise and cleared up the matter, but I will go ahead and add my tuppence to the conversation...

"Maximum" is not defined within the Rules of Snooker; instead, it is simply a dictionary definition. As I see it, there are two possible "Maximums" in Snooker, at least as far as scoring points in a break are concerned. For instance, there is no "Maximum" possible score for any individual frame.....players may continue to foul and award penalty points ad infinitum. I once played in a frame in which nearly 200 points were scored by the end.

A "Maximum" in standard circumstances, as we all know, is 147. And that leaves only a "Maximum" in special circumstances, which, as I think we all also know is 155. There are no other possible "maximums".

I think the primary question here seems to be, "How is the prize money to be divvied up?" and that is not really a question for the Rules. Instead, it is a question for either the governing body and/or the tournament officials. I have no documentation so this is only my opinion, but I believe that a High Break prize and/or a Maximum prize used to be awarded by the sponsor of any given tournament however they saw fit (but probably within WPBSA guidelines or recommendations). The quality of the players became so good that the Maximum prize became an expensive proposition so the sponsors dispensed with it or made it a fairly low value...essentially, just the high break prize. We all probably also know of Ronnie famously refusing to pot black as a protest to the low or no Maximum prize, at least temporarily. The cooler mind of the referee (I believe it was Jan) prevailed, saying, in essence, "Ronnie, do it for the fans." So, I believe, at that point the WPBSA stepped in to say that the sponsors of each tournament would contribute to a running fund, whether or not the Maximum Break prize was awarded in any given tournament. Thus, the jackpot would build larger and larger until someone won it, and at that point, the prize fund would presumably return to its starting nominal value, I assume that being contributed by the WPBSA.

So to finally bring this around to the point at hand, per my assumptions above, I believe if within a tournament TWO Maximums are achieved, whether they be 147 or 155 in any order, the first Maximum would receive the larger value, built up prize fund. Unfortunately, the second Maximum would also receive a prize, but it would only be whatever the nominal starting value of the new fund. I have no idea what that starting value may be, if anyone may care to enlighten us on that detail.

In theory at least, the "Race to the Maximum" could literally be like a horse race...when the venue is set in multiple table mode and there are matches going on everywhere, imagine two tables right next to each other and two of the players get into position for a possible maximum! Who will be the first to pot the final black? It may be the difference between a £100,000 prize or a mere £10,000 (or whatever).

To repeat, all of the above is only my opinion, not backed up with actual documentation or evidence. It is also possible that the WPBSA has not even considered the possibility of two Maximums within a tournament, or the precedence of a 155 or any other possible related conundrum, so Dan, you may have inadvertently forced some people to put on their thinking caps and consider how to handle the possible situations before they actually do occur.

Re: Would a 155 be classed as a maximum?

Postby Andre147

Actually, two maxis have been made same tournament.

2008 World Champs, Ronnie and Carter made them, and they simply divided the prize money between.

My simple question was what if Carter for instance had made a 155 instead of 147?

Would they divide the prize money like you suggested?

If I were in charge I think the fairest way is to divide the prize money equal parts, both are maximum breaks after all.

Re: Would a 155 be classed as a maximum?

Postby acesinc

Andre147 wrote:Actually, two maxis have been made same tournament.

2008 World Champs, Ronnie and Carter made them, and they simply divided the prize money between.

My simple question was what if Carter for instance had made a 155 instead of 147?

Would they divide the prize money like you suggested?

If I were in charge I think the fairest way is to divide the prize money equal parts, both are maximum breaks after all.



I wasn't aware of that one. I really can't follow the tournaments too closely here in the USA. Do you know, was that before or after the incident with Ronnie initially asking about the Maximum prize, then refusing to pot black?

The only thing I know for sure is that they changed the way the prize is handled after that incident.



Edit: I just Googled it...looks like the Ronnie incident was in 2010.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MlJp0c3Pp1Y


Edit: A little more Googling...looks like Neil Robertson picked up £44,000 (the then current jackpot prize) in early December, and Marco Fu only received £3,500 for his maximum less than a week later. But with this "jackpot" formula, it doesn't really matter if the next maximum comes a week later or five minutes later.

I think the answer to that question is whether the WPBSA initiates the prize fund with the first contribution or if a new fund is not initiated until the sponsor of the NEXT tournament puts the money in. If the WPBSA starts the fund, then the first player to the Maximum (either type) gets the big prize and the second Maximum gets the small prize. On the other hand, if there is no prize fund at all until it is started by the sponsor of the following tournament, then of course, the Maximum players (again, either type) should split the prize. My opinion.

Re: Would a 155 be classed as a maximum?

Postby PLtheRef

acesinc wrote:
Andre147 wrote:Actually, two maxis have been made same tournament.

2008 World Champs, Ronnie and Carter made them, and they simply divided the prize money between.

My simple question was what if Carter for instance had made a 155 instead of 147?

Would they divide the prize money like you suggested?

If I were in charge I think the fairest way is to divide the prize money equal parts, both are maximum breaks after all.



I wasn't aware of that one. I really can't follow the tournaments too closely here in the USA. Do you know, was that before or after the incident with Ronnie initially asking about the Maximum prize, then refusing to pot black?

The only thing I know for sure is that they changed the way the prize is handled after that incident.



Edit: I just Googled it...looks like the Ronnie incident was in 2010.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MlJp0c3Pp1Y


Edit: A little more Googling...looks like Neil Robertson picked up £44,000 (the then current jackpot prize) in early December, and Marco Fu only received £3,500 for his maximum less than a week later. But with this "jackpot" formula, it doesn't really matter if the next maximum comes a week later or five minutes later.

I think the answer to that question is whether the WPBSA initiates the prize fund with the first contribution or if a new fund is not initiated until the sponsor of the NEXT tournament puts the money in. If the WPBSA starts the fund, then the first player to the Maximum (either type) gets the big prize and the second Maximum gets the small prize. On the other hand, if there is no prize fund at all until it is started by the sponsor of the following tournament, then of course, the Maximum players (again, either type) should split the prize. My opinion.


With the exception of the odd PTC (it may well just be a single one) - there's only been a single main tournament with multiple maximums in the televised stages - with the prize money including the high-break prize being split between the two players as well.

I'm fairly sure that there is a set of separate maximum break prize pools in operation - one for the main ranking tournaments, a second for the PTC and European Tour events and a third for the qualifying events which explains why you've got a disparity between the payouts for the two maximums.

I think the way to go is to split the - maximum prize equally in the event of more than a single maximum in an event - with players shares only increasing in the event that a player makes multiple maximums as in the case of a nine-dart finish in the darts.

That said, a race to the maximum would make interesting viewing, if it reset itself during an event.

Re: Would a 155 be classed as a maximum?

Postby TheSaviour

I don´t know, but I would always argue that if there´s no evidence then it is not a truth. That´s more wise and practically the only really good approach one can take on things. Then there is more power and force behind an argument.A variety of different sciences are backing you if taking an approach like that. Just bring the facts on, and if there´s no evidence forget about the whole thing and think something else.

Re: Would a 155 be classed as a maximum?

Postby elnino

Can a 155 break be achieved with the balls set in accordance with the rules of snooker at the start of a snooker frame.

The answer clearly is no.

That may be the reason why a break of 155 is not classified as a maximum break.

Re: Would a 155 be classed as a maximum?

Postby Dan-cat

elnino wrote:Can a 155 break be achieved with the balls set in accordance with the rules of snooker at the start of a snooker frame.

The answer clearly is no.

That may be the reason why a break of 155 is not classified as a maximum break.


Well according to PL above 155 would pay out as the maximum prize.

Re: Would a 155 be classed as a maximum?

Postby Andre147

I agree, how the balls are placed at the start of each frame has nothing to do with what a maximum break is.

If a maximum break of 155 can achieved with a free ball, thus counting as an extra red, then both the 147 and 155 breaks are indeed maximum breaks.

Would love to see a 155 one day in a pro match, but the chances are so slim.