Coral Snooker Shoot Out!!!

SnookerFan wrote:Rubbish tournament, even before Barry Hearn's spasticated decision.

Won't be watching, bring on Gibraltar.

eraserhead wrote:

SnookerFan wrote:Rubbish tournament, even before Barry Hearn's spasticated decision.

Won't be watching, bring on Gibraltar.

Wildey wrote:
Thursday 23rd ~ Sunday 26th of February at the Watford Colosseum

The Snooker Shootout carries Ranking points this year (Very wrongly i might add) but it cant and should not be refered to as a Ranking Tournament because its not a snooker tournament to start off.

However its played so to the format 10 minute shot clock and who ever is leading when the clock stops wins the match.

Robin Hull will defend the title with a lot of top players missing 7 of the top 16 will not be there including world Champion Mark Selby and Masters Champion Ronnie O'Sullivan.

Who will win?

DRAW

ORDER OF PLAY

SnookerFan wrote:Personally, I don't think either Shootout or Grand Prix should be ranking.

SnookerFan wrote:As above. I think it's double rewards. It's offering additional ranking points for 32 form players, and not others.

But just my personal opinion.

Wildey wrote:

SnookerFan wrote:As above. I think it's double rewards. It's offering additional ranking points for 32 form players, and not others.

But just my personal opinion.

i do agree with that but at the end of the day that event is snooker this event is a cue sport of sorts

Wildey wrote:

SnookerFan wrote:As above. I think it's double rewards. It's offering additional ranking points for 32 form players, and not others.

But just my personal opinion.

i do agree with that but at the end of the day that event is snooker this event is a cue sport of sorts

SnookerFan wrote:As above. I think it's double rewards. It's offering additional ranking points for 32 form players, and not others.

But just my personal opinion.

PLtheRef wrote:

SnookerFan wrote:As above. I think it's double rewards. It's offering additional ranking points for 32 form players, and not others.

But just my personal opinion.

My point. It only widens the gap between the higher ranked players.

I think the Players Championship is the same - only with 16 players.

Anything not open to the full tour shouldn't be a ranking event (although people might claim that all 128 could earn the money to qualify for these events)

Cloud Strife wrote:

PLtheRef wrote:

SnookerFan wrote:As above. I think it's double rewards. It's offering additional ranking points for 32 form players, and not others.

But just my personal opinion.

My point. It only widens the gap between the higher ranked players.

I think the Players Championship is the same - only with 16 players.

Anything not open to the full tour shouldn't be a ranking event (although people might claim that all 128 could earn the money to qualify for these events)

How is it not open to the whole tour though? Is there something barring a player from qualifying for this?

PLtheRef wrote:

Cloud Strife wrote:

PLtheRef wrote:

SnookerFan wrote:As above. I think it's double rewards. It's offering additional ranking points for 32 form players, and not others.

But just my personal opinion.

My point. It only widens the gap between the higher ranked players.

I think the Players Championship is the same - only with 16 players.

Anything not open to the full tour shouldn't be a ranking event (although people might claim that all 128 could earn the money to qualify for these events)

How is it not open to the whole tour though? Is there something barring a player from qualifying for this?

The Grand Prix? Granted like I said anyone on tour could earn the ranking money to qualify but the entry is restricted to the top 32 invited players giving them a chance to further enhance their rankings on top of their success in reaching the event in the first place.

Cloud Strife wrote:

PLtheRef wrote:

Cloud Strife wrote:

PLtheRef wrote:

SnookerFan wrote:As above. I think it's double rewards. It's offering additional ranking points for 32 form players, and not others.

But just my personal opinion.

My point. It only widens the gap between the higher ranked players.

I think the Players Championship is the same - only with 16 players.

Anything not open to the full tour shouldn't be a ranking event (although people might claim that all 128 could earn the money to qualify for these events)

How is it not open to the whole tour though? Is there something barring a player from qualifying for this?

The Grand Prix? Granted like I said anyone on tour could earn the ranking money to qualify but the entry is restricted to the top 32 invited players giving them a chance to further enhance their rankings on top of their success in reaching the event in the first place.

Playing devils advocate, you could say the same thing about a tournament like the World Championship. Players who win matches in the qualifiers get ranking points and then they get another opportunity to win more ranking points in the main tournament itself. Is that not double rewarding players?

And BTW for this event it's not top 32 invited, its top 32 that qualified.

PLtheRef wrote:Yes they qualify for eligibility to receive an invitation ;) (sorry, couldn't resist that)

The worlds are different, there are no double rewards as it's the same event - you don't win a prize for winning the final qualifying round and then win a second prize dependent on where you go out at the Crucible. Plus for players who are seeded through to the venue only earn a ranking point if they win their first match.

PLtheRef wrote:

Wildey wrote:

SnookerFan wrote:As above. I think it's double rewards. It's offering additional ranking points for 32 form players, and not others.

But just my personal opinion.

i do agree with that but at the end of the day that event is snooker this event is a cue sport of sorts

It's not really a new cuesport though is it - the table's the same, scoring system's the same - the only thing that's different is that there's a couple of variations on the rules and that a clock is ticking down throughout the course of the frame.

Like I said, I'm really being devils advocate. I don't think that it's right that it's a ranking event - 10 minutes is too random. - The spirit of the event is that it's supposed to be more relaxed, more informal hence the crowd participation. With ranking points at stake, are we going to see the same spirit of the event - or are players going to be less receptive to comments however well intended they may be.

Andy Spark wrote:World Snooker refer to it as a "ranking tournament"; therefore it is! I would tentatively suggest that the issue here is the reverence that people have for the status of rank and ranking events. For me the status of events is about prize money, strength of opposition, length of history and number of frames the matches are played over. It doesn't matter what the authorities actually call an event.

E JONES
‏@wildey_1

Shoot out this bucking aboput twiddling each other off on a snooker table that.....never been closer to deleting bucking twitter and facebook

KrazeeEyezKilla wrote:Best tweet I've seen about this.

E JONES
‏@wildey_1

Shoot out this bucking aboput twiddling each other off on a snooker table that.....never been closer to deleting bucking twitter and facebook