by Cloud Strife » 27 Oct 2014 Read
Lines already did his job by beating Selby.
-
Cloud Strife
- Posts: 18566
- Joined: 28 January 2014
- Location: Antarctica
- Snooker Idol: Roger Federer
- Highest Break: 155
- Walk-On: Don Vedda - buck You
-
by Wildey » 27 Oct 2014 Read
Cloud Strife wrote:Lines already did his job by beating Selby.
Ronnie fans are mega scared of Selby
-
Wildey
- Posts: 64451
- Joined: 02 October 2009
- Location: North Wales
- Snooker Idol: Mark Selby
- Highest Break: 25
- Walk-On: the one and only
by Andre147 » 27 Oct 2014 Read
Wildey wrote:Andre im stating bucking facts when i was a kid there was no talk of triple crown or Majors each tournament was treated as almost equal with the World Championship a touch above.
all this Majors crap has come in the last 10 to 15 years
Even if it was the BBC ideia to label them as "Majors" to promote the events they broadcast, the fact is BBCs ideia or not it makes Perfect sense to label them that way because after all the Worlds, UK and Masters tournaments are still the ones which offer most prize and ranking money. The very same happens in Tennis and Golf, tournaments which have the most prize and ranking points, so they are indeed more important than the regular rankers.
Hendry or Ronnie wouldn't have the greatness they have if they had won 7 Welsh Opens and just 1 Masters or UK Crown. All tournaments are important, every win is nice, but having a UK or Masters title on your CV is way better than having just 1 or of the other regular regular rankers on your CV.
This International Championship, having almost the same prize money as the UK, is for many the still unofficial "4th Major", and it makes perfect sense.
-
Andre147
- Posts: 41812
- Joined: 09 October 2011
- Snooker Idol: Ronnie and Luca
- Highest Break: 27
- Walk-On: Spies - Coldplay
by Andre147 » 27 Oct 2014 Read
Wildey wrote:Cloud Strife wrote:Lines already did his job by beating Selby.
Ronnie fans are mega scared of Selby
Maybe some, not me and a few others around here, I want Ronnie to have more important matches against Selby. And if it were Lines beating Ronnie instead of Selby, you would have been happy, the same way CS and many others were when he beat Selby.
A shame he couldnt beat Lawler, but no one can take anything away from his amazing win against Selby, especially from 4 nil down in a Best of 11 match.
-
Andre147
- Posts: 41812
- Joined: 09 October 2011
- Snooker Idol: Ronnie and Luca
- Highest Break: 27
- Walk-On: Spies - Coldplay
by Skullman » 27 Oct 2014 Read
Snooker Overdrive wrote:Andre147 wrote:A shame Ollie Lines lost his match, never easy to beat Rod the Plod.
It had to happen after Skullman posted this:
Skullman wrote:Liens wins 6-4. I barely saw any of it, but Lines must've played well to win six in a row. He'd better do well in Chengdu, no point beating Selby and ending up losing to Lawler in the last 64.
What can I say? I'm a natural pessimist.
Losing to Rod doesn't overshadow his win over Selby, but it terms of the tournament, it means instead of the World Champion, who would bring in the crowds, or a chance for a young prospect, we'll have a Lawler v Fergal last 32 match and one of them will be guaranteed a place in the last 16 at least.
-
Skullman
- Posts: 27634
- Joined: 14 February 2012
- Location: Fighting crime
- Snooker Idol: Selby and Robbo
by Cloud Strife » 27 Oct 2014 Read
Wildey wrote:Cloud Strife wrote:Lines already did his job by beating Selby.
Ronnie fans are mega scared of Selby
You always have to mention Ronnie at every available opportunity, don't you?
-
Cloud Strife
- Posts: 18566
- Joined: 28 January 2014
- Location: Antarctica
- Snooker Idol: Roger Federer
- Highest Break: 155
- Walk-On: Don Vedda - buck You
-
by Wildey » 27 Oct 2014 Read
Andre147 wrote:Wildey wrote:Andre im stating bucking facts when i was a kid there was no talk of triple crown or Majors each tournament was treated as almost equal with the World Championship a touch above.
all this Majors crap has come in the last 10 to 15 years
Even if it was the BBC ideia to label them as "Majors" to promote the events they broadcast, the fact is BBCs ideia or not it makes Perfect sense to label them that way because after all the Worlds, UK and Masters tournaments are still the ones which offer most prize and ranking money. The very same happens in Tennis and Golf, tournaments which have the most prize and ranking points, so they are indeed more important than the regular rankers.
Hendry or Ronnie wouldn't have the greatness they have if they had won 7 Welsh Opens and just 1 Masters or UK Crown. All tournaments are important, every win is nice, but having a UK or Masters title on your CV is way better than having just 1 or of the other regular regular rankers on your CV.
This International Championship, having almost the same prize money as the UK, is for many the still unofficial "4th Major", and it makes perfect sense.
it just bores me sensless on here when people constantly talk about Majors as if winning anything else doesn't count.
-
Wildey
- Posts: 64451
- Joined: 02 October 2009
- Location: North Wales
- Snooker Idol: Mark Selby
- Highest Break: 25
- Walk-On: the one and only
by Andre147 » 27 Oct 2014 Read
Wildey wrote:Andre147 wrote:Wildey wrote:Andre im stating bucking facts when i was a kid there was no talk of triple crown or Majors each tournament was treated as almost equal with the World Championship a touch above.
all this Majors crap has come in the last 10 to 15 years
Even if it was the BBC ideia to label them as "Majors" to promote the events they broadcast, the fact is BBCs ideia or not it makes Perfect sense to label them that way because after all the Worlds, UK and Masters tournaments are still the ones which offer most prize and ranking money. The very same happens in Tennis and Golf, tournaments which have the most prize and ranking points, so they are indeed more important than the regular rankers.
Hendry or Ronnie wouldn't have the greatness they have if they had won 7 Welsh Opens and just 1 Masters or UK Crown. All tournaments are important, every win is nice, but having a UK or Masters title on your CV is way better than having just 1 or of the other regular regular rankers on your CV.
This International Championship, having almost the same prize money as the UK, is for many the still unofficial "4th Major", and it makes perfect sense.
it just bores me sensless on here when people constantly talk about Majors as if winning anything else doesn't count.
On that regard you're right, every win counts, ok some tournaments may be more important in terms of ranking money, but as you say it's all about winning. I for one would love if Ronnie won this, this tournament is getting bigger and bigger.
-
Andre147
- Posts: 41812
- Joined: 09 October 2011
- Snooker Idol: Ronnie and Luca
- Highest Break: 27
- Walk-On: Spies - Coldplay
by vodkadiet » 27 Oct 2014 Read
In tennis there are 4 majors, which pretty much count equally in terms of importance. You cannot say that for snooker. The World Championship stands head and shoulders above the rest. The Masters is the next most important. The UK has been tarnished in recent years, and while I would place it third in terms of importance, it has lost credibility.
The International Championship is gaining in prestige, and isn't far behind The UK now, and could well become more important than The UK in a few years time. The Champion of Champions is an interesting addition to the circuit, but it still feels somewhat gimmicky. It is just like a 'poor man's Masters at present. If they only had winners of The Masters or full ranking events participating it would have more credibility. Inviting players who have won nothing or winners of PTC's defeats its object.
-
vodkadiet
- Posts: 9421
- Joined: 05 September 2010
- Location: Zanzibar
- Snooker Idol: Gino Rigitano
- Highest Break: 48
- Walk-On: Broken Wings
by Clara8633 » 27 Oct 2014 Read
Skullman wrote:Snooker Overdrive wrote:Andre147 wrote:A shame Ollie Lines lost his match, never easy to beat Rod the Plod.
It had to happen after Skullman posted this:
Skullman wrote:Liens wins 6-4. I barely saw any of it, but Lines must've played well to win six in a row. He'd better do well in Chengdu, no point beating Selby and ending up losing to Lawler in the last 64.
What can I say? I'm a natural pessimist.
Losing to Rod doesn't overshadow his win over Selby, but it terms of the tournament, it means instead of the World Champion, who would bring in the crowds, or a chance for a young prospect, we'll have a Lawler v Fergal last 32 match and one of them will be guaranteed a place in the last 16 at least.
I'd prefer to see the World Champion here than Lawler. Such a pity he lost from 4-0 in front, he was fantastic during those first four frames. He's recently been throwing away his lead very often (eg, the Shanghai Masters & ET3) and wouldn't have lost that qualifier if his form wasn't like that.
-
Clara8633
- Posts: 2164
- Joined: 25 September 2014
- Snooker Idol: Mark Anthony Selby
- Walk-On: Furtado - All Good Things