World Championship 2019 countdown

It looks almost inevitable that Ronnie and Selby will be on the same side of the draw as the #2 and #3 seeds (in some order), which would mean (of course) that they might face each other in the semi-finals.

Were that to happen, it's hard to imagine Ronnie beating Selby and then still having enough energy to win the final...

D4P wrote:It looks almost inevitable that Ronnie and Selby will be on the same side of the draw as the #2 and #3 seeds (in some order), which would mean (of course) that they might face each other in the semi-finals.

Were that to happen, it's hard to imagine Ronnie beating Selby and then still having enough energy to win the final...

Maybe ROS surpasses Willo by then. Or maybe Selbo slides down to 2nd place.

By the way, is your avatar picture small enough to fit the specifications on this forum or did you resize it ?

Johnny Bravo wrote:

D4P wrote:It looks almost inevitable that Ronnie and Selby will be on the same side of the draw as the #2 and #3 seeds (in some order), which would mean (of course) that they might face each other in the semi-finals.

Were that to happen, it's hard to imagine Ronnie beating Selby and then still having enough energy to win the final...

Maybe ROS surpasses Willo by then. Or maybe Selbo slides down to 2nd place.

By the way, is your avatar picture small enough to fit the specifications on this forum or did you resize it ?

I think Willo gets the automatic #1 seed by virtue of being defending champion, doesn't he? If so, then Ronnie and Selby are pretty much locked into 2 and 3.

I had to resize my picture to fit the specifications...

D4P wrote:

Johnny Bravo wrote:

D4P wrote:It looks almost inevitable that Ronnie and Selby will be on the same side of the draw as the #2 and #3 seeds (in some order), which would mean (of course) that they might face each other in the semi-finals.

Were that to happen, it's hard to imagine Ronnie beating Selby and then still having enough energy to win the final...

Maybe ROS surpasses Willo by then. Or maybe Selbo slides down to 2nd place.

By the way, is your avatar picture small enough to fit the specifications on this forum or did you resize it ?

I think Willo gets the automatic #1 seed by virtue of being defending champion, doesn't he? If so, then Ronnie and Selby are pretty much locked into 2 and 3.

I had to resize my picture to fit the specifications...

Not impossible with the big cash tourneys to come a potential £500,000 on offer before the WC that Mark Allen could get to no 2 but highly unlikely so Ronnie and Selby are set for 2 and 3 seed at the crucible

SnookerFan wrote:Prize money is a stupid way to decide 'ranking points', because that's at least partially determined by sponsorship.

D4P wrote: I had to resize my picture to fit the specifications...

Ok, thanks.

Wildey wrote:Not impossible with the big cash tourneys to come a potential £500,000 on offer before the WC that Mark Allen could get to no 2 but highly unlikely so Ronnie and Selby are set for 2 and 3 seed at the crucible

If ROS wins this event and the next one that he's gonna participate in, maybe he can become WN1.

D4P wrote: I think Willo gets the automatic #1 seed by virtue of being defending champion, doesn't he? If so, then Ronnie and Selby are pretty much locked into 2 and 3.

I've just checked the rankings. ROS is only 27.500 pounds behind Willo. If he reaches the final or wins here, he'll surpass him an take second place.
So in case they maintain their current position and if Willo will automatically be seeded no.1 as the defending champ, that means that Selbo will be seeded 2nd and ROS 3rd, so ROS will be on the same side of the draw as Willo, not as Selbo.

Johnny Bravo wrote:I've just checked the rankings. ROS is only 27.500 pounds behind Willo. If he reaches the final or wins here, he'll surpass him an take second place.
So in case they maintain their current position and if Willo will automatically be seeded no.1 as the defending champ, that means that Selbo will be seeded 2nd and ROS 3rd, so ROS will be on the same side of the draw as Willo, not as Selbo.

1 and 4 are on the same side as each other, and 2 and 3 are on the same side as each other. It's very unlikely at this point that either Ronnie or Selby ends up being lower than 3rd...

D4P wrote:

Johnny Bravo wrote:I've just checked the rankings. ROS is only 27.500 pounds behind Willo. If he reaches the final or wins here, he'll surpass him an take second place.
So in case they maintain their current position and if Willo will automatically be seeded no.1 as the defending champ, that means that Selbo will be seeded 2nd and ROS 3rd, so ROS will be on the same side of the draw as Willo, not as Selbo.

1 and 4 are on the same side as each other, and 2 and 3 are on the same side as each other. It's very unlikely at this point that either Ronnie or Selby ends up being lower than 3rd...

Where't 1 and 3 suppose to be on the same side, and 2 and 4 on the other ?

Top marks for d4p and Johnny’s new avatars

Johnny Bravo wrote:

D4P wrote:

Johnny Bravo wrote:I've just checked the rankings. ROS is only 27.500 pounds behind Willo. If he reaches the final or wins here, he'll surpass him an take second place.
So in case they maintain their current position and if Willo will automatically be seeded no.1 as the defending champ, that means that Selbo will be seeded 2nd and ROS 3rd, so ROS will be on the same side of the draw as Willo, not as Selbo.

1 and 4 are on the same side as each other, and 2 and 3 are on the same side as each other. It's very unlikely at this point that either Ronnie or Selby ends up being lower than 3rd...

Where't 1 and 3 suppose to be on the same side, and 2 and 4 on the other ?

That would be an advantage to the 2 seed

Dan-cat wrote:Top marks for d4p and Johnny’s new avatars

Thanks Dan

Deewee wrote:

Johnny Bravo wrote: Where't 1 and 3 suppose to be on the same side, and 2 and 4 on the other ?

That would be an advantage to the 2 seed

Why would it ? The no.1 seed plays a guy that's ranked 2 places behind him and the no.2 seed also plays a guy that's ranked 2 places behind him.
The current scenario favors the no. 1 seed.

It should always favour the number 1 seed

I want ROS to play Trump in the quarters, Selby in the semis and Higgins in the final. A great player shouldnt care who he plays. He should beat all of them. Anywhere. Anytime.

And if you win with a draw like that it makes that win and World title very special.

Johnny Bravo wrote:

Wildey wrote:Not impossible with the big cash tourneys to come a potential £500,000 on offer before the WC that Mark Allen could get to no 2 but highly unlikely so Ronnie and Selby are set for 2 and 3 seed at the crucible

If ROS wins this event and the next one that he's gonna participate in, maybe he can become WN1.

That wont make much difference for the seedings in the World Though

SnookerFan wrote:Prize money is a stupid way to decide 'ranking points', because that's at least partially determined by sponsorship.

The ranking points system does needs to be re-evaluated. The money for the Worlds is just so heavy compared to other events. Someone could lost every game all season and just reach the last 32 here and they'd possibly have more ranking points than someone who has won a dozen games.

Godot wrote:

SnookerFan wrote:Prize money is a stupid way to decide 'ranking points', because that's at least partially determined by sponsorship.

The ranking points system does needs to be re-evaluated. The money for the Worlds is just so heavy compared to other events. Someone could lost every game all season and just reach the last 32 here and they'd possibly have more ranking points than someone who has won a dozen games.

Because the Worlds is the most important event. It pisses over every other event

Alex0paul wrote:

Godot wrote:

SnookerFan wrote:Prize money is a stupid way to decide 'ranking points', because that's at least partially determined by sponsorship.

The ranking points system does needs to be re-evaluated. The money for the Worlds is just so heavy compared to other events. Someone could lost every game all season and just reach the last 32 here and they'd possibly have more ranking points than someone who has won a dozen games.

Because the Worlds is the most important event. It pisses over every other event

And this why O'Sullivan is never going to be the greatest player ever.

vodkadiet wrote:

Alex0paul wrote:

Godot wrote:

SnookerFan wrote:Prize money is a stupid way to decide 'ranking points', because that's at least partially determined by sponsorship.

The ranking points system does needs to be re-evaluated. The money for the Worlds is just so heavy compared to other events. Someone could lost every game all season and just reach the last 32 here and they'd possibly have more ranking points than someone who has won a dozen games.

Because the Worlds is the most important event. It pisses over every other event

And this why O'Sullivan is never going to be the greatest player ever.

If he wins 2 more WC's, will u consider him the greatest ?!

Johnny Bravo wrote:

Deewee wrote:

Johnny Bravo wrote: Where't 1 and 3 suppose to be on the same side, and 2 and 4 on the other ?

That would be an advantage to the 2 seed

Why would it ? The no.1 seed plays a guy that's ranked 2 places behind him and the no.2 seed also plays a guy that's ranked 2 places behind him.
The current scenario favors the no. 1 seed.

I know most people probably think that as a new member I should try and be nice to everybody, but when you see stuff like this...

Seriously, that is awful. It's almost as if you're trying to come up with the most illogical nonsense you can possibly imagine. Maybe you get a kick out of that, I don't know.

Koninkaulus wrote:

Johnny Bravo wrote:

Deewee wrote:

Johnny Bravo wrote: Where't 1 and 3 suppose to be on the same side, and 2 and 4 on the other ?

That would be an advantage to the 2 seed

Why would it ? The no.1 seed plays a guy that's ranked 2 places behind him and the no.2 seed also plays a guy that's ranked 2 places behind him.
The current scenario favors the no. 1 seed.

I know most people probably think that as a new member I should try and be nice to everybody, but when you see stuff like this...

Seriously, that is awful. It's almost as if you're trying to come up with the most illogical nonsense you can possibly imagine. Maybe you get a kick out of that, I don't know.

I don't think you should have to be nice to everybody because you are a new poster. I think Johnny was probably making a valid point as he sees it though, so maybe would be better to explain why you disagree.

I know very little about seedings and so am not qualified to comment.

Badsnookerplayer wrote:

Koninkaulus wrote:

Johnny Bravo wrote:

Deewee wrote:

Johnny Bravo wrote: Where't 1 and 3 suppose to be on the same side, and 2 and 4 on the other ?

That would be an advantage to the 2 seed

Why would it ? The no.1 seed plays a guy that's ranked 2 places behind him and the no.2 seed also plays a guy that's ranked 2 places behind him.
The current scenario favors the no. 1 seed.

I know most people probably think that as a new member I should try and be nice to everybody, but when you see stuff like this...

Seriously, that is awful. It's almost as if you're trying to come up with the most illogical nonsense you can possibly imagine. Maybe you get a kick out of that, I don't know.

I don't think you should have to be nice to everybody because you are a new poster. I think Johnny was probably making a valid point as he sees it though, so maybe would be better to explain why you disagree.

I know very little about seedings and so am not qualified to comment.

He was suggesting the #2 seed should have an easier draw on paper than the #1 seed. That is just ridiculous.

Random draws or random elements in draws are one thing, but for crying out loud #1 meets #4 and #2 meets #3 in the semi-finals since seeded knockout draws have existed in sports.

Koninkaulus wrote:He was suggesting the #2 seed should have an easier draw on paper than the #1 seed. That is just ridiculous.

No, I was suggesting both should have the same difficulty. The no.1 seed shouldn't have an advantage over the no.2 seed or the other way around.

Johnny Bravo wrote:

Koninkaulus wrote:He was suggesting the #2 seed should have an easier draw on paper than the #1 seed. That is just ridiculous.

No, I was suggesting both should have the same difficulty. The no.1 seed shouldn't have an advantage over the no.2 seed or the other way around.

that would be impossible unless they both play the same player.

Johnny Bravo wrote:

Koninkaulus wrote:He was suggesting the #2 seed should have an easier draw on paper than the #1 seed. That is just ridiculous.

No, I was suggesting both should have the same difficulty. The no.1 seed shouldn't have an advantage over the no.2 seed or the other way around.

If you don't get why it's an advantage on paper to face the #4 seed over the #3 seed, you don't understand how seedings work in the first place.

And of course the #1 seed should have an advantage over #2. The higher your seeding, the "easier" draw you get on paper. That is the whole point.

So many players seem in decent form that this really could be a classic World Championship like the late 90s early 00s