Post a reply

Re: Seeding system

Postby Wildey

Witz78 wrote:
Wild wrote:i think with the previous ranking system getting rid of Rankings 17 to 96 as such would have been ok however now having it stagnated where players go in to PTC Tournament and to cut off points with definite goals is the best.

65-96 trying to get in top 64
49-64 trying to get in top 48

etc etc


yeh but thats whats wrong for me, players should aspire to get higher than just getting into a top 48 or 64 and stagnating there.

the system i propose would give equal opportunties to all (bar the elite 16) and it would be up to them all to win qualifying games to justify their position in the rankings. at the moment everythings still slightly stagnant despite the "partial rolling" rankings system in place.

Look at the top 64 presently, who have we got, Jogia, McGill, Lisowski and Burden of all the tour newcomers who are gonna survive on tour. Still too much protection to the existing players and hard for the new players to make an impact as there still beating each other up in the first qualifying rounds.


yes but you cant as a WN 70 Look to play well in PTC to climb up to no 16 so they would just go through the motions in thoes events like dare i say it top 16 players been doing this season.

they all want to get to the top nobody starting out wanting to stay rubbish lol

but when i go up to bed i go up step by step i don't jump up

you got to give players a ladder to climb during the season .......before the only real goal players down the rankings had was to stay on tour at no 64 for another season now you got a ladder to climb up just like Anthony Mcgill has done.

with a good german masters and Welsh Open Anthony could get in top 48 and escape 2 WC Qualifying matches in his first season.

Re: Seeding system

Postby Wildey

and on the flip side of that Dave Harold started the Shanghai Masters having to play 1 Qualifying Match by the WC He might have to win 3 to get to the Crucible