Should the World Championship Format be Reduced?

case_master wrote:Put another way, how 'tired' would any of use have to get to earn £250k. Something to think about players.

jesus to earn £250k in 2 weeks you would have to sell your body to very rich women to not be tired

the only thing ned in 1969 the WC was a season long event with matches lasting a week for TV that was unrealistic but the format they got now has worked brilliantly for 30 years.

NedB-H wrote:Actually, thinking about it, the "exhaustion argument" gets used in a similar way by players wanting to play less in cricket, too. Like wild says, there was far more snooker played over the course of the year in the 1990s than in the past 5 years, and the WC format was the same, but the players seemed to cope without collapsing from overwork. And in cricket, the players complain about how much they have to play during the season, but they actually play far less than their predecessors in the 50s and 60s. The exhaustion argument only stands up if they're having to do more than previous generations who coped ok, and they're not. Robbo only played 87 frames this year to win; in 1969 John Spencer played 153 to win the first knockout WC.

Yes but her didn't play them in 17 consecutive days.

They don't play seventeen consecutive days now either, there are long gaps between some of the rounds and that should be more than enough. I can't believe this is even an area of contention to be honest, the players should have it hard this is the biggest event in the sport.

No one plays 17 consecutive days Monique. Some go the best part of a week between round 1 and 2, others don't start until day 5 and still get days off between.

Monique wrote:

NedB-H wrote:Actually, thinking about it, the "exhaustion argument" gets used in a similar way by players wanting to play less in cricket, too. Like wild says, there was far more snooker played over the course of the year in the 1990s than in the past 5 years, and the WC format was the same, but the players seemed to cope without collapsing from overwork. And in cricket, the players complain about how much they have to play during the season, but they actually play far less than their predecessors in the 50s and 60s. The exhaustion argument only stands up if they're having to do more than previous generations who coped ok, and they're not. Robbo only played 87 frames this year to win; in 1969 John Spencer played 153 to win the first knockout WC.

Yes but her didn't play them in 17 consecutive days.

Which is why I said, if they want to go along with the players' complaints, schedule the snooker better, don't shorten the format Nothing wrong with having a three week tournament with one table for most of the time. Except maybe the Crucible's booking fees...

I prefer it to Christmas, genuinely. We had a poor run of finals during the mid to late nineties, followed by a littany of classics. The finals have gone on too long in recent years, but only because they've been started too late. Players feel tired? Never heard Hendry making that gripe. They made a mess of the UK, they make a mess of the Worlds and my interest will diminish significantly. Even my friends with only a passing interest in the game follow the Worlds. Barry: you've done great so far, but please... Don't

Sonny wrote:No one plays 17 consecutive days Monique. Some go the best part of a week between round 1 and 2, others don't start until day 5 and still get days off between.

I know that and you know what I meant. For whatever reason I have seen the players close-up this year and they were exhausted, that's a fact. You want to see tired snooker. Your choice, not mine. That's all.
If Mark Selby had been fresher he could have won his match against Dott. He suggested so himself in his post match. I would be interesting to see how often the player with the late finish in the semis won it ...

thetubberlad wrote:I prefer it to Christmas, genuinely. We had a poor run of finals during the mid to late nineties, followed by a littany of classics. The finals have gone on too long in recent years, but only because they've been started too late. Players feel tired? Never heard Hendry making that gripe. They made a mess of the UK, they make a mess of the Worlds and my interest will diminish significantly. Even my friends with only a passing interest in the game follow the Worlds. Barry: you've done great so far, but please... Don't

I love it too but my birthday is the 2nd of May so next year will be finals night. PLEASE RONNIE PLEASE!

Did you not enjoy 97,98, 99 finals Tubs. I really liked them especially the Doherty win because I dont think many saw that coming.

Monique wrote:

Sonny wrote:No one plays 17 consecutive days Monique. Some go the best part of a week between round 1 and 2, others don't start until day 5 and still get days off between.

I know that and you know what I meant. For whatever reason I have seen the players close-up this year and they were exhausted, that's a fact. You want to see tired snooker. Your choice, not mine. That's all.
If Mark Selby had been fresher he could have won his match against Dott. He suggested so himself in his post match. I would be interesting to see how often the player with the late finish in the semis won it ...

I still think the problem is the congestion of matches, not the length.

Yes, I agree with that but being realistic I don't think the Beep would cover more days. They are looking to reduce the coverage actually.
So it's basically a choice between shorter matches or dropping at least part of round one on telly. I know where my choice is.

Monique wrote:Yes, I agree with that but being realistic I don't think the Beep would cover more days. They are looking to reduce the coverage actually.
So it's basically a choice between shorter matches or dropping at least part of round one on telly. I know where my choice is.

For me the length of the matches is sacrosanct. The choice is either to stick with the status quo and tell them all to get on with it, or to stretch out the tournament and see what happens - either the BBC'll make room, with the first round on interactive perhaps, or the early stages'll go to Eurosport only.

Eurosport only broadcast what the Beep records for the BBC tournaments. They don't have their own cameramen on the site. So that's not an option.

Monique wrote:Eurosport only broadcast what the Beep records for the BBC tournaments. They don't have their own cameramen on the site. So that's not an option.

But the Beeb doesn't record from Shanghai etc, the Eurosport only tournaments, does it? If the Beeb only wanted a fortnight or whatever, couldn't the Eurosport guys turn up for a week, then knock off and let their commentators use the Beeb's coverage?

Hearn is a shrewd operator anyway, I'd back him to reach some sort of TV deal, he's got connections with the BBC, ITV, Sky and Eurosport, and C4 and C5 to negotiate with too if necessary, he'd find a way to get everything covered one way or another. Which is more than could be said for Walker.

no shortening matches under no circumstance id rather the tournament was not televised than that happening.

we got to find the right world champion not a contrived TV Version.

In China, it's chinese Television broadcasting and Eurosport relays it. To my knowledge Eurosport doesn't cover any snooker by themselves right now. They might do the German Masters.

wildJONESEYE wrote:no shortening matches under no circumstance id rather the tournament was not televised than that happening.

we got to find the right world champion not a contrived TV Version.

Wild if the matches were best of 25 you would still have the right World Champion. If the event isn't on television that's snooker going down for sure.

NedB-H wrote:

Monique wrote:Eurosport only broadcast what the Beep records for the BBC tournaments. They don't have their own cameramen on the site. So that's not an option.

But the Beeb doesn't record from Shanghai etc, the Eurosport only tournaments, does it? If the Beeb only wanted a fortnight or whatever, couldn't the Eurosport guys turn up for a week, then knock off and let their commentators use the Beeb's coverage?

Hearn is a shrewd operator anyway, I'd back him to reach some sort of TV deal, he's got connections with the BBC, ITV, Sky and Eurosport, and C4 and C5 to negotiate with too if necessary, he'd find a way to get everything covered one way or another. Which is more than could be said for Walker.

if he cant hes failed on his promise and part of that deal means handling back the sport.

if this guy cant sell the world championship in it current format then i got it wrong everyone got it wrong he is not worth rubbish for this sport.

the ball is in his court you deliver bozo or go to hell

Monique wrote:

wildJONESEYE wrote:no shortening matches under no circumstance id rather the tournament was not televised than that happening.

we got to find the right world champion not a contrived TV Version.

Wild if the matches were best of 25 you would still have the right World Champion. If the event isn't on television that's snooker going down for sure.

monique i would not recognise him as world champion its even laughable to suggest that

sorry but that will never be a world champion and id rather the sport dies than that because i will be washing my hands of the whole sorry rubbish anyway.

Like I say, the World Championship is not broken, it doesn't need fixing. Look at the UK Championship to see how a tournament can suffer through a reduction.

thetubberlad wrote:Like I say, the World Championship is not broken, it doesn't need fixing. Look at the UK Championship to see how a tournament can suffer through a reduction.

I think it suffered more from moving than from reduction TBH.

Why exactly do you want it changed Monique? The only fault I can see with the World Championship is that the final sessions don't start early enough! My friends become experts during the Worlds, even they love it, and they don't complain about it being too long.

Would hate to see it shortened, hate it.

thetubberlad wrote:Like I say, the World Championship is not broken, it doesn't need fixing. Look at the UK Championship to see how a tournament can suffer through a reduction.

i agree 2 things harmed the UK

Moving from Preston then continue moving and reduction in the final...

its become part of the pack when i was a kid that tournament meant so much more than it is today.

during the 90s Hendry won 3 and played in 5 finals on the trott the 3 finals he played in 88,89 and 90 means so more to me and has a higher prestige.

ask Jimmy White how he felt winning the UK in 1992 the last with a 2 day final that was the biggest thing he won i doubt he would have had the same satisfaction had that been a 1 day final.

Hmmm, I dont think any extension of the tournament is going to work. 17 days is as long as the Olympic Games and tbh I think its long enough. We're all fans of the tournament and we all enjoy it very much but its very tiring for the people involved, the officials and the referees, media etc are working all throughout the tournament and I think some folk are actually exhausted. We as fans are able to pick and choose what games we watch and whether we follow each match - for those who work at the event, they dont have any choice. I do enjoy the current format as even when you get to the nitty gritty there is still a huge amount of work to be done, 8 sessions in five days.


If we were to try and reduce the format but keep the spirit which has made the tournament as strong as it has been over the past 30 years then this is a format which could work. It means a reduction to winning 64 frames compared to 71, not an overly dramatic format reduction. Having the shorter sessions wouldnt be so bad, there used to be 7 frame sessions before for the Semi-finals and the Final. - The first round used to have some 6/6/7 matches - and the final 9/9/8/9.

First Round - 7/10 - best of 17 frames

Second Round - 7/8/8 - best of 23 frames

Quarter-Finals - 7/8/8 - best of 23 frames

Semi-Finals - 7/7/7/8 - best of 29 frames

Final - 7/7/7/10 - best of 31 frames

It keeps the uniqueness of the World Championships in the terms of the long matches and also means that we have less overruns and players are less wrecked as some seem to suggest.

if its tiring let them go and clean toilets out or down the mines or double shifts in factories.

they sportsmen for crying out loud get on with it.

Better again Paddy, how about....
First round - 9/10 - best of 19 frames
Second round - 8/8/9 - best of 25 frames
Quarter finals - 8/8/9 - best of 25 frames
Semi finals - 8/8/8/9 - best of 33 frames
Final - 8/8/8/11 - best of 35 frames

That sounds pretty perfect to me

thetubberlad wrote:Better again Paddy, how about....
First round - 9/10 - best of 19 frames
Second round - 8/8/9 - best of 25 frames
Quarter finals - 8/8/9 - best of 25 frames
Semi finals - 8/8/8/9 - best of 33 frames
Final - 8/8/8/11 - best of 35 frames

That sounds pretty perfect to me

i wander where ive seen that before .

UK CHAMPIONSHIP NEEDS IT IDENTITY BACK THIS IS THE WAY WE GIVE IT

First Round - 7/10 - best of 17 frames
Second Round - 7/10 - best of 17 frames
Quarter-Finals - 7/10 - best of 17 frames
Semi-Finals - 9/10 - best of 19 frames
Final - 7/7/7/10 - best of 31 frames

How about moving the China Open so the players are not travelling to the other side of the world 3 week before the tournament. They first played there in 05 and we have seen 3 late finals since then...........

case_master wrote:How about moving the China Open so the players are not travelling to the other side of the world 3 week before the tournament. They first played there in 05 and we have seen 3 late finals since then...........

good thinking case..never thought of that

PLtheRef wrote:Hmmm, I dont think any extension of the tournament is going to work. 17 days is as long as the Olympic Games and tbh I think its long enough. We're all fans of the tournament and we all enjoy it very much but its very tiring for the people involved, the officials and the referees, media etc are working all throughout the tournament and I think some folk are actually exhausted. We as fans are able to pick and choose what games we watch and whether we follow each match - for those who work at the event, they dont have any choice. I do enjoy the current format as even when you get to the nitty gritty there is still a huge amount of work to be done, 8 sessions in five days.


If we were to try and reduce the format but keep the spirit which has made the tournament as strong as it has been over the past 30 years then this is a format which could work. It means a reduction to winning 64 frames compared to 71, not an overly dramatic format reduction. Having the shorter sessions wouldnt be so bad, there used to be 7 frame sessions before for the Semi-finals and the Final. - The first round used to have some 6/6/7 matches - and the final 9/9/8/9.

First Round - 7/10 - best of 17 frames

Second Round - 7/8/8 - best of 23 frames

Quarter-Finals - 7/8/8 - best of 23 frames

Semi-Finals - 7/7/7/8 - best of 29 frames

Final - 7/7/7/10 - best of 31 frames

It keeps the uniqueness of the World Championships in the terms of the long matches and also means that we have less overruns and players are less wrecked as some seem to suggest.

I think the key word there is "working", the media, refs etc are the employees, the fans are the customers and the product has to be what the customers want, not what the employees want. It's a bit different with the players because how keen they are to perform affects the product too, but it shouldn't be impossible to get a format where the players are able to keep playing well, but the fans still get the full long matches.