Post a reply

Patrick Wallace retires from snooker (1994 - 2011)

Postby Bourne

Matt from PSB wrote:One moment I forgot to mention that struck me yesterday, I was sat watching the McManus match with Drago and Patrick Wallace came over to...
..say goodbye after he had lost as he was off the tour and Q School was not for him
Really quite sad to see a player's career end just like that, especially one who is still a very good player
Brought the reality home of players dropping off the tour etc, it's easy to be a bit blasé about it as a fan sometimes
said it's him finished.


http://twitter.com/#!/ProSnookerBlog

Re: Patrick Wallace retires

Postby GJ

a shame for paddy i never saw it but on wikepdia i looked up results and he hammered a few players 1 year at the worlds and reached the quarters niot sure what year though

a shame he is retiring

Re: Patrick Wallace retires

Postby Roland

Sad news, brings home the harsh reality of being a professional sportsman.

Re: Patrick Wallace retires

Postby Bourne

Just to think how close he was to winning that match against Selt last night, 8-4 up, 9-7 up, 43-0 up in the decider, took a gutsy clearance from Selt to win but it just proves how close winning and losing really is in sport, you can look absolutely fearless and unbeatable one minute but then the next you're in your dressing room thinking what the hell just happened there.

Re: Patrick Wallace retires

Postby Roland

It also shows how much pressure is out there if you're playing for your livelihood

Re: Patrick Wallace retires

Postby Monique

Stuart Pettmann is retiring also or at the very least taking a break from the game. He neither will go to the Q-School come May.
It's hard on those guys and the contempt some show for them angers me.
Wishing them the best for the future whatever they chose to do after snooker.

Re: Patrick Wallace retires

Postby Wildey

they are journeymen players now but back in the day they were the brash young players hoping for a great Future and be World Champion. for Every Jack Lisowski,Michael White or Anthony McGill that Ends up a Hendry or a Davis there a lot that ends up like Pettman and Wallace not Making it.

every Potential Great is a potential Journeyman.

they all can play the game to a very high standard or they would not be there in the first place the key is how you kick it on to the next level and theres a hell of a lot that cant manage it.

they have earned their place there its up to others to knock them out.....maybe They see Q SChool now as something for the kids but who knows in 12 months time when the dusk has settled on their demise they will enter Q School 2012 and be back on tour because they are good enough of that there is no doubt.

Re: Patrick Wallace retires

Postby SnookerFan

I'll be honest, when I was at Telford and saw he was playing Shaun Murphy, I didn't really know anything about him. I couldn't even visualise what he looked like. I enjoyed watching him play, even though he was comprehensively outplayed by one of the top players in the world. I was going to try for his autograph. I think I got it actually, I'll check my book when I get home.

You never know, Martin Gould retired and came back. But, if not I'd like to wish Parick Wallace and Stuart Pettman all the best in their future endeavours, whatever they may be. <ok>

Re: Patrick Wallace retires

Postby Wildey

i am one of these people that would like young players making their mark BUT i want them to earn it the hard way..

journeymen retiring does nothing for the sport just gives younger players a free pass.

Re: Patrick Wallace retires

Postby PLtheRef

paddy and Stuart are part of the unlucky band of players the new revision was always going to affect. And its shame hes decided to retire. not many played like he did @ the crucible in 2001 hammering McManus and King with such ease before going 6-2 up on swail, amazing to think that he never played there again.

Re: Patrick Wallace retires

Postby Bourne

Yeh and he was so close to being there again this week, a few balls no less from playing Campbell which was more than winnable the way he was playing, made 4 centuries this week and generally scored heavy when he was in. But as they say, one man's pain is another man's pleasure and I hope Selt can take his opportunity on the weekend <ok>

Re: Patrick Wallace retires

Postby Witz78

PLtheRef wrote:paddy and Stuart are part of the unlucky band of players the new revision was always going to affect.


Theres no such thing as unlucky players under the new ranking system, its a fair system and the best players will stay on tour.

Some may say they were part of the lucky band of journeymen who were virtually guaranteed their place on the tour forever under the old flawed rankings system and half empty calendar every season.

Re: Patrick Wallace retires

Postby Witz78

Wild wrote:i am one of these people that would like young players making their mark BUT i want them to earn it the hard way..

journeymen retiring does nothing for the sport just gives younger players a free pass.


Youve fairly changed your tune about Davis from last night then :john:

Re: Patrick Wallace retires

Postby PLtheRef

Witz78 wrote:
PLtheRef wrote:paddy and Stuart are part of the unlucky band of players the new revision was always going to affect.


Theres no such thing as unlucky players under the new ranking system, its a fair system and the best players will stay on tour.

Some may say they were part of the lucky band of journeymen who were virtually guaranteed their place on the tour forever under the old flawed rankings system and half empty calendar every season.


I'm not saying that its unique, the rules apply for all 96 players but whoever was going to get caught out under the system was going to find it tough

Re: Patrick Wallace retires

Postby Wildey

Witz78 wrote:
PLtheRef wrote:paddy and Stuart are part of the unlucky band of players the new revision was always going to affect.


Theres no such thing as unlucky players under the new ranking system, its a fair system and the best players will stay on tour.

Some may say they were part of the lucky band of journeymen who were virtually guaranteed their place on the tour forever under the old flawed rankings system and half empty calendar every season.

dont talk daft <doh>

Patrick Wallace lost his place under the old system 3 or 4 years ago and got it back

Re: Patrick Wallace retires

Postby Witz78

PLtheRef wrote:
Witz78 wrote:
PLtheRef wrote:paddy and Stuart are part of the unlucky band of players the new revision was always going to affect.


Theres no such thing as unlucky players under the new ranking system, its a fair system and the best players will stay on tour.

Some may say they were part of the lucky band of journeymen who were virtually guaranteed their place on the tour forever under the old flawed rankings system and half empty calendar every season.


I'm not saying that its unique, the rules apply for all 96 players but whoever was going to get caught out under the system was going to find it tough


What exactly do you mean by caught out by the new system?

as far as i can see its the same for all the players and whether under the old system or the new system if you drop off you deserve to. The only people who had cause for a gripe under the old system were tour newcomers whod about 6 events to try and scramble some points to get into the top 64 but by bashing each other up in the first qualifying round, you were lucky if 2 or 3 actually ended up in the actual top 64 at the end of the season.

Re: Patrick Wallace retires

Postby Witz78

Wild wrote:
Witz78 wrote:
PLtheRef wrote:paddy and Stuart are part of the unlucky band of players the new revision was always going to affect.


Theres no such thing as unlucky players under the new ranking system, its a fair system and the best players will stay on tour.

Some may say they were part of the lucky band of journeymen who were virtually guaranteed their place on the tour forever under the old flawed rankings system and half empty calendar every season.

dont talk daft <doh>

Patrick Wallace lost his place under the old system 3 or 4 years ago and got it back


Ill be honest, back then i didnt pay as much attention to all the lower ranked players as i do now <ok>

did he get a WC or did he go through the PIOS. Surely the new set up is better though, i mean Patrick is obviously feeling the tide is changing in terms of the demographics of the tour and that his time was up, but had he wanted to the Q School option was there to get straight back on, whereas under the old one unless he got a WC he had to stay off tour for a year which was surely worse.

Re: Patrick Wallace retires

Postby Wildey

Witz78 wrote:
Wild wrote:
Witz78 wrote:
PLtheRef wrote:paddy and Stuart are part of the unlucky band of players the new revision was always going to affect.


Theres no such thing as unlucky players under the new ranking system, its a fair system and the best players will stay on tour.

Some may say they were part of the lucky band of journeymen who were virtually guaranteed their place on the tour forever under the old flawed rankings system and half empty calendar every season.

dont talk daft <doh>

Patrick Wallace lost his place under the old system 3 or 4 years ago and got it back


Ill be honest, back then i didnt pay as much attention to all the lower ranked players as i do now <ok>

did he get a WC or did he go through the PIOS. Surely the new set up is better though, i mean Patrick is obviously feeling the tide is changing in terms of the demographics of the tour and that his time was up, but had he wanted to the Q School option was there to get straight back on, whereas under the old one unless he got a WC he had to stay off tour for a year which was surely worse.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patrick_Wallace

Wallace dropped off the Main Tour after the 2005/2006 season. He returned to the tour for 2007/2008 after winning the Northern Ireland Championship, and kept his place for the next four seasons. Following his 10-9 defeat at the hands of Matthew Selt in the penultimate round of qualifying for the 2011 World Snooker Championship, he announced his retirement from the game.

Re: Patrick Wallace retires from snooker (1994 - 2011)

Postby Wildey

Witz78 wrote:cheers.

anyway regarding Wallace and other journeymen types im going to do a post in the Journeyman thread regarding them and what i think should happen going forward to improve snooker and also make it fairer.

ohhhh god do i dare look... :huh2:

Re: Patrick Wallace retires from snooker (1994 - 2011)

Postby Roland

I remember Patrick Wallace in 2001 reaching the quarter-finals. The story was that he and Joe Swail were best friends on the circuit which gave their encounter that extra bit of significance. Joe Swail beat my favourite Mark Williams 13-12 in round 2 after Williams pulled off one of the best clearances of his life to level at 12-12 (way behind on points, balls safe, constantly out of position yet cleared the board) so I was cheering on Patrick in that quarter-final :redneck:

I just looked back and he beat Mark King 13-5 in round 2 and Fergal O'Brien 10-8 in round 1 and that was the year Fergal reached the final of the Masters so shows Wallace could play.

Aside from that tournament (which at the time you felt was one of those stories which captured the public knowing he wouldn't replicate it in future) I don't really know that much about him apart from seeing his name on qualifying drawsheets and not being surprised when he won matches.

Looking at his wikipedia profile it says he has an accountancy degree which suggests he may have an alternative career path in mind which earns him more money which is why he's not going to try in the Q School. It also says this:

His percentage of points scored to points conceded at the Crucible is the third-highest of all time, behind only Stephen Hendry and John Higgins, albeit based on a single year.


That's something to tell your friends down the pub :redneck:


Good luck to him in the future whatever he chooses and the same goes to Stuart Pettman.

Re: Patrick Wallace retires from snooker (1994 - 2011)

Postby PLtheRef

Sonny wrote:I remember Patrick Wallace in 2001 reaching the quarter-finals. The story was that he and Joe Swail were best friends on the circuit which gave their encounter that extra bit of significance. Joe Swail beat my favourite Mark Williams 13-12 in round 2 after Williams pulled off one of the best clearances of his life to level at 12-12 (way behind on points, balls safe, constantly out of position yet cleared the board) so I was cheering on Patrick in that quarter-final :redneck:

I just looked back and he beat Mark King 13-5 in round 2 and Fergal O'Brien 10-8 in round 1 and that was the year Fergal reached the final of the Masters so shows Wallace could play.

Aside from that tournament (which at the time you felt was one of those stories which captured the public knowing he wouldn't replicate it in future) I don't really know that much about him apart from seeing his name on qualifying drawsheets and not being surprised when he won matches.

Looking at his wikipedia profile it says he has an accountancy degree which suggests he may have an alternative career path in mind which earns him more money which is why he's not going to try in the Q School. It also says this:

His percentage of points scored to points conceded at the Crucible is the third-highest of all time, behind only Stephen Hendry and John Higgins, albeit based on a single year.


That's something to tell your friends down the pub :redneck:


Good luck to him in the future whatever he chooses and the same goes to Stuart Pettman.



Wallace beat McManus 10-2 in the first round, - King beat O'Brien 10-8 (I was there - the second ever match I watched at the Crucible)

Re: Patrick Wallace retires

Postby Sarah Mount

Witz78 wrote:
Wild wrote:
Witz78 wrote:
PLtheRef wrote:paddy and Stuart are part of the unlucky band of players the new revision was always going to affect.


Theres no such thing as unlucky players under the new ranking system, its a fair system and the best players will stay on tour.

Some may say they were part of the lucky band of journeymen who were virtually guaranteed their place on the tour forever under the old flawed rankings system and half empty calendar every season.

dont talk daft <doh>

Patrick Wallace lost his place under the old system 3 or 4 years ago and got it back


Ill be honest, back then i didnt pay as much attention to all the lower ranked players as i do now <ok>

did he get a WC or did he go through the PIOS. Surely the new set up is better though, i mean Patrick is obviously feeling the tide is changing in terms of the demographics of the tour and that his time was up, but had he wanted to the Q School option was there to get straight back on, whereas under the old one unless he got a WC he had to stay off tour for a year which was surely worse.


The new set up for relegated Pros getting straight back on to the tour through Q School is much better for them than the PIOS was and having to wait a year to return. I don't think that this is the factor that will make players minds up when choosing whether or not to try to return to the main tour, I think the biggest factor is money. By that, I don't mean the cost of Q School but the cost of competing on the main tour. Each player, having played in a busier calendar this season, now has to decide if they feel they can earn enough money from snooker to justify attempting to get back on the tour.

This season, there has been the tournament fees, travel and accommodation to five EPTCs outside of the UK and travel and accommodation to PTCs and Qualifiers in Sheffield. For a lot of those, if not all of those, dropping off the tour, they will have spent out more money on playing on the tour than they won. For some substantially more! With a busier calendar they are now unable to work part-time jobs and dedicate the time needed to their snooker so they have to make a decision.

I'd like to point out that I am no way complaining about the situation. The opportunity to win good sums of prize money are there and it is up to the players to earn that prize money. I guess it comes down to players having to be realistic on their chances of earning money on the tour.

I'd also like to point out that this is in no way linked to Patrick and is merely me putting across another factor that will effect the number of relegated Pros retiring from the tour for good, despite having a great chance to get back on quickly.

I don't know Patrick very well but he has always come across as a genuinely nice man on the occasions I did speak to him and I wish him all the best for the future.

Re: Patrick Wallace retires from snooker (1994 - 2011)

Postby Witz78

Sonny wrote:There's no point beating around the bush. If you're good enough you'll make money and if you're not you won't and will have to find another career.


<ok>

yeh the excuse now that theres too much snooker and the "professionals" cant earn enough money from part time jobs to fund their careers is lame. Snooker is going full time round the calendar and becoming a proper sport after years of being run like a joke, and its going to be survival of the fittest and only those who can cut the mustard will be worthy of a place on tour. <ok>

Re: Patrick Wallace retires from snooker (1994 - 2011)

Postby Monique

No it is NOT lame. If the majority of the pros - and there are on 96 of them - can't make a decent living out of the sport, while playing full time, then there IS a problem. And I think this is the case now. No sport can survive on only the very top. Young players can still be supported by their family but older ones can't. In other sports, even the 500th still live confortably. In snooker I'm not sure even the 50th can do that now.


   

cron