Post a reply

How a set format could work

Postby Tubberlad

It's an idea I've spoken of quite a lot, but over the last two few weeks (when I really should have been studying) I've been preparing a draft of how it could work whenever I've gotten the chance.

I propose two seperate formats. The first is outlined for one of the textbook ranking events (Welsh Open, Shanghai Masters, China Open, one of the new rankers, or more than one of the above).

The second is one that could potentially work for the UK Championship. To be fair, the UK's main problem is where it is held, and if they got that sorted out it would probably work with the format it has. But I think a set format would work quite well as it's a tournament than is need of a bit of revamping. That said, I accept that few people would want to mess with one of the majors. Therfore, I won't be pushing that one as much, but feel free to give your thoughts.

The main reasons I put such formats forward is that it gives variety. In darts you have legs formats and sets formats, and both work very well.

A sets format is not interfering with the actual play of the game, it does not significantly alter the length of matches and is can satisfy both modern thinking fans and more traditional ones.

Each set would be best-of-3 frames.

I feel Format One is a definite runner. It means matches with a minimum of four frames, and a possibility for nine. The final would have a minimum of eight frames, and a possibility for 21 (though it is very unlikely that all seven sets would go the distance, it means we have the potential for a longer format). It offers two seperate quarter-final options, one giving us a super Friday and the other sticking with a traditional two table format.

The UK format drops the present four table set up. It would mean three extra days, and a midweek start for a Sunday, though I don't think that would be a problem as many events now kick off midweek. Matches for the opening three rounds would be best-of-5 sets, a minimum of six frames and a maximum of 15. I can accept that a potential race to six frames UK match would not go down well with traditionalist fans, nor would a maximum of just 15 rather than 17, but I feel the UK wouldn't be served too badly with shorter earlier rounds and longer later ones. The semi-finals would be best-of-7 sets, a minimum of eight and a maximum of 21.

I have two options for a final. Both are held over two days. The first is best of 9 sets, with no afternoon session on day one. I feel this would be beneficial to the finalist who played a potential twelve frame session in their semi-final the night before the game. There would be three sessions of 3 sets. The second option would be best-of-11 sets, with a two set afternoon session on day one. It would have a later 15.30 start as you have the potential for a very short four frame session, and a maximum six frame one. I accept that this would not be ideal in many people's opinions.


Format One

Day One: 1st round matches, best of 3 sets, three tables
14.00: Matches 1, 2 & 3
19.00: Matches 4, 5 & 6

---

Day Two
14.00: Matches 7, 8 & 9
19.00: Matches 10, 11 & 12

---

Day Three: evening session sees second round commence, two tables
10.00 Matches 13 & 14
14.30 Matches 15 & 16
19.00 Matches 17 & 18

---

Day Four: 2nd round matches, best of 3 sets
10.00 Matches 19 & 20
14.30: Matches 21 & 22
19.00: Matches 23 & 24

---

Day Five: Quarter-final matches, best of 3 sets, one table
10.00: Match 25
13.00: Match 26
16.00: Match 27
19.00: Match 28

Or

Two tables
14.00: Matches 25 & 26
19.00: Matches 27 & 28

---

Day Six: Semi-finals, best of 3 sets, one table
14.00: Match 29
19.00: Match 30

---

Day Seven: Final, Best of 7 sets
15.00: 3 sets
19.00: 4 sets



Format Two (UK Format)

Day One: 1st round matches, best of 5 sets, two tables
11.00: Matches 1 & 2 (2 sets)
13.30: Matches 3 & 4 (2 sets)
16.00: Matches 1 & 2 (to a finish)
19.00: Matches 3 & 4(to a finish)

---

Day Two
11.00: Matches 5 & 6 (2 sets)
13.30: Matches 7 & 8 (2 sets)
16.00: Matches 5 & 6 (to a finish)
19.00: Matches 7 & 8(to a finish)

---

Day Three
11.00: Matches 9 & 10 (2 sets)
13.30: Matches 11 & 12 (2 sets)
16.00: Matches 9 & 10 (to a finish)
19.00: Matches 11 & 12 (to a finish)

---

Day Four
11.00: Matches 13 & 14 (2 sets)
13.30: Matches 15 & 16 (2 sets)
16.00: Matches 13 & 14 (to a finish)
19.00: Matches 15 & 16 (to a finish)

---

Day Five: 2nd round matches, best of 5 sets)
11.00: Matches 17 & 18 (2 sets)
13.30: Matches 19 & 20 (2 sets)
16.00: Matches 17 & 18 (to a finish)
19.00: Matches 19 & 20(to a finish)

---

Day Six
11.00: Matches 21 & 22 (2 sets)
13.30: Matches 23 & 24 (2 sets)
16.00: Matches 21 & 22 (to a finish)
19.00: Matches 23 & 24 (to a finish)

---

Day Seven: Quarter-finals, best of 5 sets, one table
11.00: Match 25 (2 sets)
13.30: Match 26 (2 sets)
16.00: Match 25 (to a finish)
19.00: Match 26 (to a finish)

---

Day Eight
11.00: Match 27 (2 sets)
13.30: Matches 28 (2 sets)
16.00: Match 27 (to a finish)
19.00: Match 28 (to a finish)

---

Day Nine: Semi-finals, best of 7 sets
14.00: Match 29 (3 sets)
19.00: Match 30 (3 sets)

---

Day Ten
14.00: Match 29 (4 sets)
19.00: Match 30 (4 sets)

---

Day Eleven: Final, best of 9 sets
19.00: 3 sets

Day Twelve
14.00: 3 sets
19.00: 3 sets

Or

Day Eleven: Final, best of 11 sets
15.30: 2 sets
19.00: 3 sets

Day Twelve
14.00: 3 sets
19.00: 3 sets

Re: How a set format could work

Postby Wildey

im a great believer in this idea not sure about the UK though but definitely to one or two smaller Rankers and this is what WS Should be looking at to mix up formats of Ranking Events as tubber said its not interfering with the game on the table but changing how matches could be won or lost.

in a best of 3 set match the score could be 4-4 in frames but one player out.

Re: How a set format could work

Postby Monique

Well I don't believe in this idea at all.
Just imagine a tournament played over first to 3 sets each set being best of 3. It means that a match could be anything between 6 and 15 frames. Not only is 15 frames really a lot for a single session - the longest we have today is 13 in the PL final and possibly in the best of 25 matches third session - but it also means that organisers have to foresee enough time for those possible 15 frames to be played. As a consequence events will be "longer", with possibly big gaps between some matches, OR a lot of matches must be played in parallel. Both are unpractical for TV broadcasting and TV broadcasting is the basic condition for sponsors to be interested. You don't have many venues like the Tempodrom that can accomodate 5 tables in the main arena. Not to mention that for broadcasters it will be very difficult to come up with a sensible "program" a match possibly being less than a hour (ROS vs Dale in the semis of the NIT 2006 - 54 minutes) or as long as about 7.5 hours if it goes the distance.
And besides I don't see what it brings ...

Re: How a set format could work

Postby Wildey

Monique wrote:And besides I don't see what it brings ...


SNAP

Because i honestly dont see what shot clock brings to the party.

This idea would mix it up better as a spectacle and make each tournament format different.

WHY ? Does every new idea that brings something difference to the sport have to focus on Reducing everything.

Difference can mean Extending as well so what they play 15 frames in a session they could Play 2 Sets then Mid session Interval and play the next 3 Sets.
Last edited by Wildey on 13 Feb 2011, edited 2 times in total.

Re: How a set format could work

Postby Monique

Wild wrote:
Monique wrote:And besides I don't see what it brings ...


SNAP

Because i honestly dont see what shot clock brings to the party.

This idea would mix it up better as a spectacle and make each tournament format different.

WHY ? Does every new idea that brings something difference to the sport have to focus on Reducing everything.

Difference can mean Extending as well so what they play 15 frames in a session they could Play 2 Sets then Mid session Interval and play the next 3 Sets.


It's not about reducing anything. It's about being manageable from a broadcasting point of view and being profitable for the venues managers. Stop living in cookoo land Wild. Our sport of choice isn't played by blokes who live on fresh air and a drop of water.
If a match is best of 15 it will have at least 8 frames played and will be scheduled over 2 sessions because 15 is too much for the players and for the audience. BTW the reason why best of 15 is (almost) never played is because the risk of a too short second session while it's obviously too long for a single one.
In this case you could have 6 frames as well as 15. How do you manage that? How do you "fill" the gap to the next match if it's over in 6 frames? How does the broadcaster prepare their program? Cut the match if it becomes too long? Schedule it so that they have a good chance to show the conclusion at the risk of miss it completely?
And where did I bring the shot clock in the discussion? As far as I know I haven't.

I can't see what this format brings except organisational nightmares. The problem with this format is the too big difference between the shortest possible duration and the full distance.
Last edited by Monique on 13 Feb 2011, edited 3 times in total.

Re: How a set format could work

Postby GJ

sets idea is BS IMO

Re: How a set format could work

Postby Wildey

Play it over 2 Sessions then christ Life doesn't revolve around everything being Finished in a afternoon.

Qualifiers through to Quarters Best of 3 Sets= 9 Frames wow theres a novelty 9 Frames in a session then 2 Sessions Semis and Final god How Novel an idea that is players will die of exhaustion and end up in the Priory.

Re: How a set format could work

Postby Monique

Wild wrote:Play it over 2 Sessions then christ Life doesn't revolve around everything being Finished in a afternoon.

Qualifiers through to Quarters Best of 3 Sets= 9 Frames wow theres a novelty 9 Frames in a session then 2 Sessions Semis and Final god How Novel an idea that is players will die of exhaustion and end up in the Priory.


Wild I'm afraid that you don't read properly. Best of 3 sets, if dead frames are not played, means that the match could be as short as 6 frames, leaving an "empty" second session. That's something every organiser will try to avoid. People will be wary to buy tickets and they have to foresee a replacement, exhibition or other. Not to mention that the broadcasters will be reluctant to program that also. It's not the lenghts the problem, it's the difference between possibly only 6 and possibly as much as 15.

Re: How a set format could work

Postby Wildey

it is workable it just needs trying

You really dont know how anything will Work Out until you try it even if you have to start the Final at 10am and play the best of 7 Sets with 3 Sessions over 1 Day..

in the PTC They play 4 Session of 7 Frames on the final day Maximum of 28 Frames Minimum of 16 Frames at least a Best of 7 Set Match would be Minimum of 8 Frames and Maximum of 21.

Re: How a set format could work

Postby Monique

Wild PLEASE READ properly. The problem is not the lenght, nor the number of frames to be played. The problem is how to reasonably "plan" the schedule when matches can be so different in duration.
As for the PTC ... there was no public and no television there. Some of the matches scheduled at 9 pm were played about 4 hours later than expected because you can't control the lenght of a match and there was an accumulation factor. That's just unpracticable if the event is to be on television.
You don't need to try this to know it can't work, at least no for an event on television, it's enough to use your loaf for a minute.
I can only work in a setup like the OneForSeven when then public can move around and follow several matches at a time. And then yes, it could be interesting.

PS: you can't move around cameras that easily neither ...

Re: How a set format could work

Postby GJ

its complicated BS

the snooker product is fine barry is trying different formats which are good for variety this sets idea is just complicated BS

nothing personal tubbs <ok>

Re: How a set format could work

Postby GJ

Wild wrote:it is workable it just needs trying

You really dont know how anything will Work Out until you try it even if you have to start the Final at 10am and play the best of 7 Sets with 3 Sessions over 1 Day..

in the PTC They play 4 Session of 7 Frames on the final day Maximum of 28 Frames Minimum of 16 Frames at least a Best of 7 Set Match would be Minimum of 8 Frames and Maximum of 21.


Next thing we know darts and tennis will start doing matches in frames

rofl <laugh> :bs:

Re: How a set format could work

Postby Bourne

GJ wrote:its complicated BS

the snooker product is fine barry is trying different formats which are good for variety this sets idea is just complicated BS

nothing personal tubbs <ok>

So your only gripe with this is that it's too complicated :huh: What's difficult to understand ?

Re: How a set format could work

Postby GJ

Bourne wrote:
GJ wrote:its complicated BS

the snooker product is fine barry is trying different formats which are good for variety this sets idea is just complicated BS

nothing personal tubbs <ok>

So your only gripe with this is that it's too complicated :huh: What's difficult to understand ?



snooker has always been in frames and bary is trying differing formats with this

why bother trying such a big change in format other than its a sign snooker is desperate :?

Re: How a set format could work

Postby Monique

It's not complicate and trying various things is not a sign that a sport is desperate, it's a sign that it is dynamic.
However this particular format would be unsuitable for television and not easy to set up even at the venue for the reasons I have exposed. That makes it also unattractive for sponsors a luxury snooker can't afford right now.
Last edited by Monique on 13 Feb 2011, edited 1 time in total.

Re: How a set format could work

Postby Bourne

GJ wrote:
Bourne wrote:
GJ wrote:its complicated BS

the snooker product is fine barry is trying different formats which are good for variety this sets idea is just complicated BS

nothing personal tubbs <ok>

So your only gripe with this is that it's too complicated :huh: What's difficult to understand ?



snooker has always been in frames and bary is trying differing formats with this

why bother trying such a big change in format other than its a sign snooker is desperate :?

It's worth a try in a smaller event imo.

Re: How a set format could work

Postby GJ

Bourne wrote:
GJ wrote:
Bourne wrote:
GJ wrote:its complicated BS

the snooker product is fine barry is trying different formats which are good for variety this sets idea is just complicated BS

nothing personal tubbs <ok>

So your only gripe with this is that it's too complicated :huh: What's difficult to understand ?



snooker has always been in frames and bary is trying differing formats with this

why bother trying such a big change in format other than its a sign snooker is desperate :?

It's worth a try in a smaller event imo.



good idea but tubbs menioning the uk in the same article gets me worried

:mood:

The welsh opEN could be viable for it as it seems the least poular event currently

Re: How a set format could work

Postby Wildey

YES

forget the UK i just think in something like the Welsh Open it needs to look outside the Box.

its not caughting the imagination of the public like it should.

it has a history that goes back to when Jack Lisowski who plays there this year was Born. Thats something that Needs hanging on to and Build on.....you can throw how much money you want at any tournament but you cant put a price on History.

Re: How a set format could work

Postby GJ

caughting

rofl <laugh> :wild2:

Re: How a set format could work

Postby Tubberlad

Monique wrote:Well I don't believe in this idea at all.
Just imagine a tournament played over first to 3 sets each set being best of 3. It means that a match could be anything between 6 and 15 frames. Not only is 15 frames really a lot for a single session - the longest we have today is 13 in the PL final and possibly in the best of 25 matches third session - but it also means that organisers have to foresee enough time for those possible 15 frames to be played. As a consequence events will be "longer", with possibly big gaps between some matches, OR a lot of matches must be played in parallel. Both are unpractical for TV broadcasting and TV broadcasting is the basic condition for sponsors to be interested. You don't have many venues like the Tempodrom that can accomodate 5 tables in the main arena. Not to mention that for broadcasters it will be very difficult to come up with a sensible "program" a match possibly being less than a hour (ROS vs Dale in the semis of the NIT 2006 - 54 minutes) or as long as about 7.5 hours if it goes the distance.
And besides I don't see what it brings ...


Monique

While I have no problem with people criticising this, I do wonder why you are pointing to my UK Format without acknowledging the first format.

I admit the second option leaves a lot to be desired structure wise and is a bit messy. I'm not particularly keen on changing the UK myself.

However, your concerns do not apply AT ALL to the first format option. My matches would last a minimum of four, and a maximum of nine. It is first to two sets. There is nothing remotely challenging for organisers or television, it is logistically viable.

GJ: don't worry mate, no offence taken, but I don't see how sets would be complicated. Do tennis fans find six games to win a set complicated? Do darts fans find three legs to win a set complicated. This is the same, except it's first to two frames.

As for what this would bring, I point to variety. In darts, you have two distinct formats, legs or sets, and both work really well.

I feel it's a really viable option for the Welsh Open.

Re: How a set format could work

Postby PLtheRef

Bourne wrote:
GJ wrote:its complicated BS

the snooker product is fine barry is trying different formats which are good for variety this sets idea is just complicated BS

nothing personal tubbs <ok>

So your only gripe with this is that it's too complicated :huh: What's difficult to understand ?


Plus we have systems in Tennis that runs on a similar vein to Tubs idea - obviously best of 3 sets works the best because it makes the guarantee that whoever wins will not have lost more frames than won, which becomes the risk in a best of five or 7 set contest.

The World team cup was played over the best of 6 sets (or rubbers back then) if the match went 3-3 then a single frame shootout was played, would this be a better compromise in the multi session matches? Playing two sessions of three sets and if 3-3 playing a decider? As noted, it works better in shorter formats - the bigger events will need leaving alone.

Re: How a set format could work

Postby Tubberlad

PLtheRef wrote:
Bourne wrote:
GJ wrote:its complicated BS

the snooker product is fine barry is trying different formats which are good for variety this sets idea is just complicated BS

nothing personal tubbs <ok>

So your only gripe with this is that it's too complicated :huh: What's difficult to understand ?


Plus we have systems in Tennis that runs on a similar vein to Tubs idea - obviously best of 3 sets works the best because it makes the guarantee that whoever wins will not have lost more frames than won, which becomes the risk in a best of five or 7 set contest.

The World team cup was played over the best of 6 sets (or rubbers back then) if the match went 3-3 then a single frame shootout was played, would this be a better compromise in the multi session matches? Playing two sessions of three sets and if 3-3 playing a decider? As noted, it works better in shorter formats - the bigger events will need leaving alone.

I accept that entirely, and thanks for taking BOTH options into account.

There is absoutely nothing complicated about option A, and it is far from an organisational nightmare. Its a match of between four frames and nine frames... no problem.

Re: How a set format could work

Postby Monique

Tubberlad wrote:
Monique wrote:Well I don't believe in this idea at all.
Just imagine a tournament played over first to 3 sets each set being best of 3. It means that a match could be anything between 6 and 15 frames. Not only is 15 frames really a lot for a single session - the longest we have today is 13 in the PL final and possibly in the best of 25 matches third session - but it also means that organisers have to foresee enough time for those possible 15 frames to be played. As a consequence events will be "longer", with possibly big gaps between some matches, OR a lot of matches must be played in parallel. Both are unpractical for TV broadcasting and TV broadcasting is the basic condition for sponsors to be interested. You don't have many venues like the Tempodrom that can accomodate 5 tables in the main arena. Not to mention that for broadcasters it will be very difficult to come up with a sensible "program" a match possibly being less than a hour (ROS vs Dale in the semis of the NIT 2006 - 54 minutes) or as long as about 7.5 hours if it goes the distance.
And besides I don't see what it brings ...


Monique

While I have no problem with people criticising this, I do wonder why you are pointing to my UK Format without acknowledging the first format.

I admit the second option leaves a lot to be desired structure wise and is a bit messy. I'm not particularly keen on changing the UK myself.

However, your concerns do not apply AT ALL to the first format option. My matches would last a minimum of four, and a maximum of nine. It is first to two sets. There is nothing remotely challenging for organisers or television, it is logistically viable.

GJ: don't worry mate, no offence taken, but I don't see how sets would be complicated. Do tennis fans find six games to win a set complicated? Do darts fans find three legs to win a set complicated. This is the same, except it's first to two frames.

As for what this would bring, I point to variety. In darts, you have two distinct formats, legs or sets, and both work really well.

I feel it's a really viable option for the Welsh Open.


I mainly focused on the second one indeed. Not necessarily in the context of the UK BTW.

Re: How a set format could work

Postby Tubberlad

Monique wrote:
Tubberlad wrote:
Monique wrote:Well I don't believe in this idea at all.
Just imagine a tournament played over first to 3 sets each set being best of 3. It means that a match could be anything between 6 and 15 frames. Not only is 15 frames really a lot for a single session - the longest we have today is 13 in the PL final and possibly in the best of 25 matches third session - but it also means that organisers have to foresee enough time for those possible 15 frames to be played. As a consequence events will be "longer", with possibly big gaps between some matches, OR a lot of matches must be played in parallel. Both are unpractical for TV broadcasting and TV broadcasting is the basic condition for sponsors to be interested. You don't have many venues like the Tempodrom that can accomodate 5 tables in the main arena. Not to mention that for broadcasters it will be very difficult to come up with a sensible "program" a match possibly being less than a hour (ROS vs Dale in the semis of the NIT 2006 - 54 minutes) or as long as about 7.5 hours if it goes the distance.
And besides I don't see what it brings ...


Monique

While I have no problem with people criticising this, I do wonder why you are pointing to my UK Format without acknowledging the first format.

I admit the second option leaves a lot to be desired structure wise and is a bit messy. I'm not particularly keen on changing the UK myself.

However, your concerns do not apply AT ALL to the first format option. My matches would last a minimum of four, and a maximum of nine. It is first to two sets. There is nothing remotely challenging for organisers or television, it is logistically viable.

GJ: don't worry mate, no offence taken, but I don't see how sets would be complicated. Do tennis fans find six games to win a set complicated? Do darts fans find three legs to win a set complicated. This is the same, except it's first to two frames.

As for what this would bring, I point to variety. In darts, you have two distinct formats, legs or sets, and both work really well.

I feel it's a really viable option for the Welsh Open.


I mainly focused on the second one indeed. Not necessarily in the context of the UK BTW.

Okay, just wanted to clear that one up.

The second option is clearly messy, but the first poses little or no problem for organisation. It's not complicated, and would work perfect for one ranking event.

Re: How a set format could work

Postby Witz78

Best of 3 sets, 3 frames per set is fine.

Big deal if someone only wins 4 out of 8 frames but has won 2 sets.

thats the nature of set play, the tension and drama builds up to a climax at the end of each set and its effectively like 3 mini matches so whoever wins 2 out of the 3 matches deserves to go through.

Re: How a set format could work

Postby Tubberlad

Witz78 wrote:Best of 3 sets, 3 frames per set is fine.

Big deal if someone only wins 4 out of 8 frames but has won 2 sets.

thats the nature of set play, the tension and drama builds up to a climax at the end of each set and its effectively like 3 mini matches so whoever wins 2 out of the 3 matches deserves to go through.

If a player wins less games but more sets in a tennis match, nobody bats an eyelid. It happens quite often.

This would be a test of bottle. How do you recover from losing a potential match winning frame and face playing another two or maybe three frames? It's a different challenge.

Re: How a set format could work

Postby Wildey

Tubberlad wrote:
Witz78 wrote:Best of 3 sets, 3 frames per set is fine.

Big deal if someone only wins 4 out of 8 frames but has won 2 sets.

thats the nature of set play, the tension and drama builds up to a climax at the end of each set and its effectively like 3 mini matches so whoever wins 2 out of the 3 matches deserves to go through.

If a player wins less games but more sets in a tennis match, nobody bats an eyelid. It happens quite often.

This would be a test of bottle. How do you recover from losing a potential match winning frame and face playing another two or maybe three frames? It's a different challenge.

yes 1 -0 in sets 1-1 in legs you got a clear cut chance to win the decider in that set and you blob the other player comes back nicks the set its 1 set all you now need another 2 frames to win the Match after Blobbing a clear cut chance.