Making 128 work

The number of professional players on tour doesn't have to be 128. Regardless, 128 is WST's number. so shouldn't it work better than now?

At the outset of any given season each of the 128 players should be recognised as falling into one of three distinct groups:
64 players being the top 64 on the two-year rankings at the end of the preceding season;
32 players outside that top 64 about to begin the second year of a two-year tour card;
32 players embarking on the first year of a two-year tour card.

A consistent configuration which puts an end to the farcical situation where there are scheduled to be 37 two-year cards issued this summer but possibly only 27 in a year's time. Shouldn't professionals players have an equal chance of retaining a tour place via the one-year rankings every season rather than 8 tickets this year compared to only 4 last year? Shouldn't the number of QSchool tickets be constant year after year? Shouldn't the paths to tour membership be known well in advance each season?

The current position is that 2021-22 there will be:
The top 64 on the two-year rankings at the end 2020-21 (one-year card);
27 players outside that top 64 about to begin the second year of a two-year tour card;
37 players embarking on the first year of a two-year tour card.

Let's fix this.

The solution is to switch five of the 37 players from first year to second year of a two-year card. The five should be those that had the most successful 2020-21 seasons. Let me explain. Chang Bingyu (39000), Igor Figueiredo (33000), Xu Si (31000), Louis Heathcote (29000) and Chen Zifan (29000) should begin 2021-22 keeping uniquely those ranking points won during 2020-21 and be treated as if 2020-21 had been their first year of a two-year card.

Thus, at a stroke, 64 32 32 (or if you prefer 64 27+5 32), the seasonal imbalance eliminated.

Of course, in future seasons, there will be another Zhao Xintong or Jordan Brown to challenge the numbers, asserting their right to belong to the top 64 without need of second-year ranking points. So even once the system is modified there will be a potential need to use the same correcting mechanism on a smaller scale each season.

There you have it. A fair, equitable, solution.

Very disappointed in my fellow Islanders, new member goes to a great deal of research and none of you stats minded people not of 83 views can respond. I feel uncomfortable to partake with asking mr korna his shoe size .

personally i hate the current system i would open the tour up to everyone all this players having to restart on zero because they dropped to 65 or lower is a joke i do the rankings on the forum and i get confused with who is on their first or second year as my rankings include money/points earned over the two years by everyone who has earnt points.i have also started doing my own rankings which include bonus points for beating top500 players commencing with q school that is ongoing at the moment and welcome to the forum gninnur.

I think the number of wildcards doesn't help either. I understand the Fu card but the Jimmy card is getting ridiculous. I support Reanne and On Yee being on the tour but how long do you give them before they need another wild card?
Hendry? Don't get me started.

Q-School is almost becoming just a top up event. There are so many players that could do better than Jimmy who will be unemployed soon.

Yes, the title is ominous: 'Making 128 Work'. It's an inadequate and inflexible system really, yet again another hangover from the 1980's which people can't seem to see past.

If WST really are serious about globalisation, then there are always going to be players who won't travel to some overseas tournaments, and some overseas players who don't want to spend the majority of the year living in England. There will be players who get sick, or need a rest. Some players (e.g. Matt Selt) have already come out and said they plan to reduce their schedule, although it's very dangerous for someone outside the top-40 to do that. There have been players resigning their tour cards, and players who almost never competed. The rigid 128-player system is a bit of a lie really.

Also, with a rigid 128-player system and 2-year 'ranking point' cycle, this poses constraints on the type and participation of tournaments. You have to have flat draws, or odd rules such as 'certain prizemoney isn't counted for ranking purposes'. The Cazoo Series and the World Championship fudges this. Elsewhere, you get massive tournaments like the Masters and Champion of Champions not counting at all. There's a huge demand for invitational events, and a huge need for Pro-Am 'open' tournaments. The rigid 128-player system can't incorporate them at all.

To address Gninnur Karona's point, the inbalance in the 2-year cycle which has developed can probably only be solved by the introduction of a 1-year card. It baffles me why they haven't ever considered 1-year cards before. If some places are available on the 1-year list, there is a qualification route (as well as the new 'Crucible Rule'). And 2-years is a long time to have an unproven 'wildcard' player.

Depending on what happens, there is always the possibility we start a season with only 127 or even fewer signed-up professionals, in which case whoever is top Q School Order of Merit effectively gets a 1-year card. Formalising this would help everyone, for example the player might be able to attract sponsorship for himself, or charge a higher coaching rate, etc. if he had 'professional' status.

The 1 year card is a good idea

The whole Money List, Tour Card and Q School model comes from Golf. But the difference there is there isn't a World Tour (yet!) and there are regional tours all over the World. Each tour has a money list but it's only for one year with the main two year World Rankings based on points.

KrazeeEyezKilla wrote:The whole Money List, Tour Card and Q School model comes from Golf. But the difference there is there isn't a World Tour (yet!) and there are regional tours all over the World. Each tour has a money list but it's only for one year with the main two year World Rankings based on points.

the pga and european tours switched to a points system the pga tour uses the fedex cup as their points system