Rolling Rankings a year on !!!!!

by **Wildey** » 24 May 2011 Read

Re: Rolling Rankings a year on !!!!!

by Wildey » 24 May 2011 Read

WITZ

PTC Tariff your thoughts ?

personally i think thats perfect... sort of winning a PTC is equal to last 32 of a ranker.

by **Tubberlad** » 24 May 2011 Read

Re: Rolling Rankings a year on !!!!!

by Tubberlad » 24 May 2011 Read

Wild wrote:WITZ

PTC Tariff your thoughts ?

personally i think thats perfect... sort of winning a PTC is equal to last 32 of a ranker.

i think it's perfect too Wild, but the other events are undervalued. 7000 should be the tally for winning a ranking tournament, 10000 for the Uk and 12500 for the Worlds.

by **Wildey** » 24 May 2011 Read

Re: Rolling Rankings a year on !!!!!

by Wildey » 24 May 2011 Read

Tubberlad wrote:
Wild wrote:WITZ

PTC Tariff your thoughts ?

personally i think thats perfect... sort of winning a PTC is equal to last 32 of a ranker.

i think it's perfect too Wild, but the other events are undervalued. 7000 should be the tally for winning a ranking tournament, 10000 for the Uk and 12500 for the Worlds.

yes i think Tariff should be different for the World and UK and then Higgins would have been the WN 1.

by **Witz78** » 24 May 2011 Read

Re: Rolling Rankings a year on !!!!!

by Witz78 » 24 May 2011 Read

yes the PTC is fine

the German and Welsh at 5000 the now is fine too as these dont have the money or prestige of the other smaller rankers

the World Open had 100k prize money compared to 30k for the Welsh winner so the 2,000 ranking diff here was more than justifiable.

the UK and Worlds are low though, i agree with Tubbers points 10,000 and 12,500

by **Wildey** » 24 May 2011 Read

Re: Rolling Rankings a year on !!!!!

by Wildey » 24 May 2011 Read

Witz78 wrote:yes the PTC is fine

the German and Welsh at 5000 the now is fine too as these dont have the money or prestige of the other smaller rankers

the World Open had 100k prize money compared to 30k for the Welsh winner so the 2,000 ranking diff here was more than justifiable.

the UK and Worlds are low though, i agree with Tubbers points 10,000 and 12,500

i think there should be equality in all rankers bellow the World and UK its just stupidity that winning a tournament is based on cash the sponsors fork out ....prestige should never equal cash.

by **Witz78** » 24 May 2011 Read

Re: Rolling Rankings a year on !!!!!

by Witz78 » 24 May 2011 Read

Wild wrote:
Witz78 wrote:yes the PTC is fine

the German and Welsh at 5000 the now is fine too as these dont have the money or prestige of the other smaller rankers

the World Open had 100k prize money compared to 30k for the Welsh winner so the 2,000 ranking diff here was more than justifiable.

the UK and Worlds are low though, i agree with Tubbers points 10,000 and 12,500

i think there should be equality in all rankers bellow the World and UK its just stupidity that winning a tournament is based on cash the sponsors fork out ....prestige should never equal cash.

well i absolutely disagree with that

other sports have orders of merits based on earnings, im not entirely sure i agree with that but i think the prestige of a tournament is based on a number of things such as history, venue, format, exposure, AND prize money

by **Wildey** » 24 May 2011 Read

Re: Rolling Rankings a year on !!!!!

by Wildey » 24 May 2011 Read

well i totally disagree millon percent with that rubbish money is not prestige not by a long way I CANT BELIEVE ANYONE WITH A BRAIN ACTUALLY THINKS THAT <doh>

by **Tubberlad** » 24 May 2011 Read

Re: Rolling Rankings a year on !!!!!

by Tubberlad » 24 May 2011 Read

To be fair, if any tournament does not deserve to be on a level footing, it's the Welsh. It's my least favourite by a country mile and I feel watching that the players have a similar enough attitude.

by **Wildey** » 24 May 2011 Read

Re: Rolling Rankings a year on !!!!!

by Wildey » 24 May 2011 Read

What if china comes up with a sponsor that gives the china open winner £150,000 and they only managing £100,000 for the UK would that give the china open more prestige ?

by **Wildey** » 24 May 2011 Read

Re: Rolling Rankings a year on !!!!!

by Wildey » 24 May 2011 Read

Tubberlad wrote:To be fair, if any tournament does not deserve to be on a level footing, it's the Welsh. It's my least favourite by a country mile and I feel watching that the players have a similar enough attitude.

doesn't matter what the players think of an event the way some been twiddling the PL is second only to the World which is bullocks.

by **Tubberlad** » 24 May 2011 Read

Re: Rolling Rankings a year on !!!!!

by Tubberlad » 24 May 2011 Read

Wild wrote:What if china comes up with a sponsor that gives the china open winner £150,000 and they only managing £100,000 for the UK would that give the china open more prestige ?

If I were a player, I'd much prefer to win the UK than the Masters, although the Masters carries far more cash...

by **Wildey** » 24 May 2011 Read

Re: Rolling Rankings a year on !!!!!

by Wildey » 24 May 2011 Read

Tubberlad wrote:
Wild wrote:What if china comes up with a sponsor that gives the china open winner £150,000 and they only managing £100,000 for the UK would that give the china open more prestige ?

If I were a player, I'd much prefer to win the UK than the Masters, although the Masters carries far more cash...

exactly

lets not forget here Paul Hunter had 3 Ranking events on his CV 2 of them was the Welsh Open lets right off 2 of them because they were only the welsh lets say Paul had only 1 win <doh>

its a Ranking win on a CV same as Trump in china or Dom Dale in shanghai.

by **Witz78** » 24 May 2011 Read

Re: Rolling Rankings a year on !!!!!

by Witz78 » 24 May 2011 Read

Tubberlad wrote:To be fair, if any tournament does not deserve to be on a level footing, it's the Welsh. It's my least favourite by a country mile and I feel watching that the players have a similar enough attitude.

yeh and a lot of that is down to the paltry prize money.

if it had far bigger money at stake then the players would actually look like they gave a f*ck

by **Witz78** » 24 May 2011 Read

Re: Rolling Rankings a year on !!!!!

by Witz78 » 24 May 2011 Read

Wild wrote:
Tubberlad wrote:
Wild wrote:What if china comes up with a sponsor that gives the china open winner £150,000 and they only managing £100,000 for the UK would that give the china open more prestige ?

If I were a player, I'd much prefer to win the UK than the Masters, although the Masters carries far more cash...

exactly

lets not forget here Paul Hunter had 3 Ranking events on his CV 2 of them was the Welsh Open lets right off 2 of them because they were only the welsh lets say Paul had only 1 win

its a Ranking win on a CV same as Trump in china or Dom Dale in shanghai.

on that theory since you dont discriminate against ranking events based on prize money do you then class the PTCs as ranking wins.

by **Wildey** » 24 May 2011 Read

Re: Rolling Rankings a year on !!!!!

by Wildey » 24 May 2011 Read

Witz78 wrote:
Wild wrote:
Tubberlad wrote:
Wild wrote:What if china comes up with a sponsor that gives the china open winner £150,000 and they only managing £100,000 for the UK would that give the china open more prestige ?

If I were a player, I'd much prefer to win the UK than the Masters, although the Masters carries far more cash...

exactly

lets not forget here Paul Hunter had 3 Ranking events on his CV 2 of them was the Welsh Open lets right off 2 of them because they were only the welsh lets say Paul had only 1 win

its a Ranking win on a CV same as Trump in china or Dom Dale in shanghai.

on that theory since you dont discriminate against ranking events based on prize money do you then class the PTCs as ranking wins.

ffs no they not Ranking Events they are qualifying events for the grand final.

like a tour de France stage.

by **Wildey** » 24 May 2011 Read

Re: Rolling Rankings a year on !!!!!

by Wildey » 24 May 2011 Read

it is quite simple really

WORLD=12,000
UK=10,000
RANKERS=7,000
PTC FINAL=5,000
PTC=2,000

id increase the points in the PTC finals so every player will be busting his balls to get in it

by **Wildey** » 24 May 2011 Read

Re: Rolling Rankings a year on !!!!!

by Wildey » 24 May 2011 Read

what id like to see happen AFTER the lasy ones are either weeded out or started to show willing is get to a position where not every event counts towards their ranking but in my opinion that can only happen after players gets discipline in what professional sportsmen should behave like.

at the moment i need to see these players busting a gut or get out.

by **Witz78** » 24 May 2011 Read

Re: Rolling Rankings a year on !!!!!

by Witz78 » 24 May 2011 Read

Wild wrote:
Witz78 wrote:
Wild wrote:
Tubberlad wrote:If I were a player, I'd much prefer to win the UK than the Masters, although the Masters carries far more cash...

exactly

lets not forget here Paul Hunter had 3 Ranking events on his CV 2 of them was the Welsh Open lets right off 2 of them because they were only the welsh lets say Paul had only 1 win

its a Ranking win on a CV same as Trump in china or Dom Dale in shanghai.

on that theory since you dont discriminate against ranking events based on prize money do you then class the PTCs as ranking wins.

ffs no they not Ranking Events they are qualifying events for the grand final.

like a tour de France stage.

No they aint

the tour de france is based on the cumulitive of all the stages.

the PTC Grand Finals isnt

you could win all 12 PTC events gaining 120,000 in prize money and 24,000 ranking points and bomb out in the PTC Grand Finals early, but i know what id rather have.

the 12 PTCs are far more than just qualifying events.

by **Wildey** » 24 May 2011 Read

Re: Rolling Rankings a year on !!!!!

by Wildey » 24 May 2011 Read

they aren't Ranking event and neither they should be ....they should be looking to grow in to the prestige of the Welsh Open. <ok>

by **SnookerFan** » 31 May 2011 Read

Re: Rolling Rankings a year on !!!!!

by SnookerFan » 31 May 2011 Read

Wild wrote:after one full season with Rankings Changing after each Tournament and 3 Seeding Cut off points during the season what are peoples opinion of it ?

Personally like Witz id like to see it go further and even change more often as well as closer to the Actual Events Qualifying or in the Masters Case Closer to the Masters but whats other Peoples Opinions of the new look Rankings/Seeding's.

I've always been mixed on it as an issue. There are pros and cons, I feel. But they are the same pros and cons that could've outlined before the rolling rankings even happened. We don't need to have trialled them, because by and large they are obvious.

I can see why they have it, but it's a bit of a pain in the bottom when it comes to ticket booking. I tend to buy tickets for first rounds, and I know there were people buying tickets for first round Crucible matches completely blind this year. That's fine if you don't care monkeys who you watch, but it's not going to encourage more casual fans to go, and caters only to more hardcore fans. Which is the opposite of what we should be trying to achieve. When it comes to something like the UK, where get sit where you like tickets for a Roll On Roll Off session, buying tickets blind is less of a pain.

Also, I think changing it for every tournament would be a nightmare to administrate. Especially if you're ranked 15th one tournament and 17th the next. It would be difficult planning travel and stuff if you didn't know if you were an automatic qualifier or not from one tournament to the next. And also, the people that were waiting to see who were playing in each tournaments before purchasing tickets might be waiting until the event was almost upon them. This may affect people that travel and purchase accomodation, though the other side of that is you'd probably only travel and pay for hotels if you truly loved snooker, so you may not be the sort of person who cared who you saw. Or at least not as much. More tournaments give you a better indication of form, obviously. But it also makes rolling rankings a bit more difficult to run. I'd rather see more tournaments, and rolling rankings change every few months personally.

Though, the advantages are obvious. If you're purely a televisual fan, then it works better. Because you get the form players being at the top the whole time which increases the matches chances of being high quality. (That and the fact people are playing more, of course.) Also, you don't get the situations you had before where somebody barely wins a match all season, and manages to scrape staying in the top-16 with a decent tournament run. I think there's a definite reason for doing it, and if you can get round the problems administrating it (which they obviously have) then yes, there is definitely a reason for doing it.

The ticket allocation issues are more my issues then anything, because I buy lots of tickets, and think we do more to fill the massive amounts of empty seats I sometimes see around me. But I'd put up with that if it leads a greater good.

by **Wildey** » 31 May 2011 Read

Re: Rolling Rankings a year on !!!!!

by Wildey » 31 May 2011 Read

yes but isnt getting tickets for the quarter finals or semi finals also blind whats the difference ?

by **Witz78** » 31 May 2011 Read

Re: Rolling Rankings a year on !!!!!

by Witz78 » 31 May 2011 Read

exactly the tickets argument is a nonsense.

people buy tickets for days at the tennis well in advance unsure who they will see.

you pretty much know in advance who 13 or 14 of the top 16 players will be at the next cut off for the tourny so your guaranteed to see some top names regardless.

individual sports are not like team sports in the sense that getting tickets to see your favourite player cannot be accomodated as easy, but snooker fans will have to accept that.

For the WC for instance i bought up tickets blind not knowing who id see but that added to the fun.

Anyway Snookerfan the bulk of tickets for all the tournaments go on sale well before the cut off points which currently exist so your still buying them blind anyway so updating the cut offs to just before the event wont make any odds. If anything it will stop the touts which has to be a good thing as they have less time to flog tickets for attractive games plus with not knowing the games in advance they cant buy tickets up in bulk.

The pros of rolling rankings outweigh the cons by a hundred times and snooker will benefit even further from going to a fully running up to date rolling ranking system.

The current one seems a compromise / stop-gap and i think they should cut to the chase and get it sorted out once and for all as its inevitably going to happen eventually anyway.

Its not complicated.

Qualifying tournament A
Tournament A
-------------------------
update rankings
---------------------------
Qualifying tournament B
Tournament B
--------------------------
update rankings
-----------------------
and so on..........

by **SnookerFan** » 31 May 2011 Read

Re: Rolling Rankings a year on !!!!!

by SnookerFan » 31 May 2011 Read

Wild wrote:yes but isnt getting tickets for the quarter finals or semi finals also blind whats the difference ?

Yes, of course it is. It aint going to make any difference for the people who buy tickets late. But part of the appeal of buying tickets for the early rounds are it's cheap, and you can choose who you see. Obviously it's not the worst thing in the world by any stretch of the imagination. Just if you made a list of pros and cons, that would be a con. Not a reason to not do it or anything.

by **Wildey** » 31 May 2011 Read

Re: Rolling Rankings a year on !!!!!

by Wildey » 31 May 2011 Read

i think there needs to be a different way of doing it Tickets Going on sale before the draws being made seems stupid.

tickets for the UK Goes on sale 3 months,5 PTC and 2 Ranking titles before the seeding cut off point.

by **Witz78** » 31 May 2011 Read

Re: Rolling Rankings a year on !!!!!

by Witz78 » 31 May 2011 Read

Wild wrote:i think there needs to be a different way of doing it Tickets Going on sale before the draws being made seems stupid.

tickets for the UK Goes on sale 3 months,5 PTC and 2 Ranking titles before the seeding cut off point.

better them going on sale early than just before the event though :shrug:

by **SnookerFan** » 31 May 2011 Read

Re: Rolling Rankings a year on !!!!!

by SnookerFan » 31 May 2011 Read

Wild wrote:i think there needs to be a different way of doing it Tickets Going on sale before the draws being made seems stupid.

tickets for the UK Goes on sale 3 months,5 PTC and 2 Ranking titles before the seeding cut off point.

At the UKs, it's not too bad if you're buying for the first round, because you aren't buying tickets for named seats. You can sit where you like, so at any point you will have a choice for the first round matches. This is more likely a problem, if you can call it that, for people buying tickets for quarters or later. As you won't know who is in what quarter.

It's probably a trivial thing to most people, other then those who regularly buy tickets. But comparing it to tennis doesn't work, tennis has a massive global following. Snooker doesn't. It needs to do whatever it can to maximise ticket sales. On the flip side, this also means you can book tickets late for matches, after the draw has been announced. So the ticket thing I mentioned isn't the end of the world. Nor did I mean it to be such. More a consideration when discussing how much we like the new rolling ranking system. Which is what we were discussing.

by **Witz78** » 31 May 2011 Read

Re: Rolling Rankings a year on !!!!!

by Witz78 » 31 May 2011 Read

SnookerFan wrote:
Wild wrote:i think there needs to be a different way of doing it Tickets Going on sale before the draws being made seems stupid.

tickets for the UK Goes on sale 3 months,5 PTC and 2 Ranking titles before the seeding cut off point.

At the UKs, it's not too bad if you're buying for the first round, because you aren't buying tickets for named seats. You can sit where you like, so at any point you will have a choice for the first round matches. This is more likely a problem, if you can call it that, for people buying tickets for quarters or later. As you won't know who is in what quarter.

It's probably a trivial thing to most people, other then those who regularly buy tickets. But comparing it to tennis doesn't work, tennis has a massive global following. Snooker doesn't. It needs to do whatever it can to maximise ticket sales. On the flip side, this also means you can book tickets late for matches, after the draw has been announced. So the ticket thing I mentioned isn't the end of the world. Nor did I mean it to be such. More a consideration when discussing how much we like the new rolling ranking system. Which is what we were discussing.

At the end of the day the tickets sales for the Crucible were a record high this year according to records yet this was the first year fans bought the tickets in advance unaware of what match they would be watching.

by **Wildey** » 31 May 2011 Read

Re: Rolling Rankings a year on !!!!!

by Wildey » 31 May 2011 Read

Witz78 wrote:
Wild wrote:i think there needs to be a different way of doing it Tickets Going on sale before the draws being made seems stupid.

tickets for the UK Goes on sale 3 months,5 PTC and 2 Ranking titles before the seeding cut off point.

better them going on sale early than just before the event though

no get them on sale as soon as the draw is made and publish then people can have a mad rush for seats....

simples.

by **Witz78** » 31 May 2011 Read

Re: Rolling Rankings a year on !!!!!

by Witz78 » 31 May 2011 Read

Wild wrote:
Witz78 wrote:
Wild wrote:i think there needs to be a different way of doing it Tickets Going on sale before the draws being made seems stupid.

tickets for the UK Goes on sale 3 months,5 PTC and 2 Ranking titles before the seeding cut off point.

better them going on sale early than just before the event though

no get them on sale as soon as the draw is made and publish then people can have a mad rush for seats....

simples.

the longer they are on sale the more likely they are to sell out

when they first go on sale theres always gonna be a lot of people buying them up straight away.

then once the draws made the remaining ones will be snapped up.

If they werent to go on sale till after the qualifying and draws made, then they could potentially only go on sale a week before the event which never happens these days, concerts, sports events, flights. hotels etc are all available to be bought up long in advance.

Why do you think Hearns brought the WC tickets sale period forward? :chuckle:

by **Wildey** » 31 May 2011 Read

Re: Rolling Rankings a year on !!!!!

by Wildey » 31 May 2011 Read

but would it ?

person A Makes a decision im going to york for the snooker ohhhhhh tickets not on sale yet i know ill get them on the day they going on sale.

you don't have to get the tickets the day you decide to go.

Rolling Rankings is it