Topic locked

The Premier League revamp

Postby Tubberlad

I've had a read of Dave Hendon's blog today, and tried to get some sort of understanding of this year's Premier League... basically, the format will consist of a series of mini-tournaments with four players contesting each. Each of the ten men partaking in the event will play four of these mini-tournaments each, with points being allocated on the basis of how they perform.

The matches themselves will see a best-of-5 format, with a 20 second shot clock. The deciding frame will be run on shootout rules, with a maximum duration of ten minutes, and the shot clock declining from 20 to 15 seconds for the later stages.

I've never been a massive fan of the Premier League. I think it's a missed opportunity, and could be so much better than what it has been and will be. These changes however, though I may be wrong on this, will be a failure in my opinion. I think it's all a bit muddled, I think the quality will be severely diluted by the reduced shot clock.

Also, this is not a League in the true sense of the word. I think it's been overcomplicated, and should have stuck to it's original play everybody once set up.

The Premier League changed this format to combat the perception of it being a series of exhibitions. I don't see how the hell these changes will alter this perception in any way. I think it's positive to have a set entry criteria that's easy to follow (each mainstream tournament winner now participates), but they blew this by giving a slot to the 'World Seniors Champion' (and world number 55, though you probably won't be told that bit) rather than the World Number Three.

If I had my way, you'd have eight places to be shared out between each ranking event winner, and in the event of being less places than the amount of ranking event winners, decide who loses out based on the rankings.

What is your opinion on these changes? Is the 'Premier' League about to shoot itself in the foot rather than becoming a vehicle to bring new fans in as it should be, or will it indeed bring snooker to new audiences? I know it's an event that the players WANT to play in, and if it brings in new fans then I'm all for it, whether I like it or not. But the jury is out in my opinion.

Re: The Premier League revamp

Postby Monique

I don't think that the revamp goal is to combat the perception that it's a glorified set of exhibitions. IMO the main reason for this is to answer the criticisms about the selection of players by taking all major events winners on board. I'm not sure that's a good plan and I'm certainly not convinced that Jimmy should be there.
I totally disagree with the idea that the shot clock = low quality. The shot-clock simply asks for a different set of qualities, including fast thinking and a different tactical approach. Nothing wrong with that. Different does not mean worse - or better. It's different and variety is salt of life.
@sonny ... your dear Selby would thrive at it, would he have qualified. BTW I think he should be there instead of Jimmy, being the highest ranked player not automatically included. BTW I'm sure he's peeved not to be there!

Re: The Premier League revamp

Postby Roland

Yes I know Selby would enjoy it but I'm not bothered that he's not there because it's not as if he isn't going to risk burning himself out anyway by playing in everything next season. Mind you, it's only 4 Thursdays per player so it's not too gruelling. As for him not being there, fair enough because he didn't win a tournament.

Re: The Premier League revamp

Postby mediter

I think Premier League is great the way it is. I like it a lot. Always great athmosphere, players who are involved love playing there. Good money and my guess is that playing with shot clock there is what players like. Because it´s variaton. Players who feel they "should" be there but were not selected are gutted, because it´s such a great tournament. Like Selby last season. And it´s always a one night thing, which I think players like also.

Long live Premier League the way it is.

Re: The Premier League revamp

Postby Tubberlad

Monique, by the sound of it that IS what Hearn thinks, and I know quite a few posters here feel it is little more than a series of exhibitions, myself included.

On the subject of a shotclock, I'm not a fan, but I'm also not against it if it does something for the game. I just feel that a lot of fans don't take the event seriously because of it having a shot clock, and this is a pity as it has potential to be a very good event. The shot clock is not something that appeals to me unless it's for minor events, while I feel the Premier League has potential to be a lot more thatn what itis currently.

Witz, I'm a big fan of Hearn's, but I've always maintained that he never got the Premier League right. Then again, what do I know <laugh>

Re: The Premier League revamp

Postby Witz78

basically the main reason for doing this i think is that the present format, along with the similar one on the darts has become rather stale and predictable.

the draw option in the best of 6 almost saw players happy to settle for a draw in the early league games safe in the knowledge theyd be in contention for the top 4 in the last few weeks of the league.

At least this way now theres something to play for every week of the tournament.

Re: The Premier League revamp

Postby Wildey

Witz78 wrote:basically the main reason for doing this i think is that the present format, along with the similar one on the darts has become rather stale and predictable.

the draw option in the best of 6 almost saw players happy to settle for a draw in the early league games safe in the knowledge theyd be in contention for the top 4 in the last few weeks of the league.

At least this way now theres something to play for every week of the tournament.

buck me there we go then WC Longer format going for 30 years without a shot clock in sight still has mass apeal Shot clock once a week bang bang thank you mam is stale after 5 years says it all really.

Re: The Premier League revamp

Postby Wildey

Persanally i dont really care about these changes once the shot clock element was added this tournament lost it in my book as a serious event but with these changes its defied it as A JOKE....if they want to add Clowns in to the Mix Do it its a exibition event nothing more nothing less these changes just Rubber Stamped that.

Re: The Premier League revamp

Postby Monique

Quite a few posters indeed think it's nothing more than a set of exhibitions, but that's not how the players see it, I can assure you.
And I'll stick by what I wrote: the main reason is to include all ranking event winners (+Masters). There have been a lot of criticisms in the past - rightly - when Jimmy and Steve Davis were still kept in there while the on-form players who were actually winning titles , were kept out of it. This has changed over the last 3 seasons. However with an increased number of ranking tournaments it would always lead to difficult choices and hard feelings if the field was kept at 7 men.
Another consequence of this new format is that in the "league" phase (which isn't a league anymore) every player will appear only 4 times, not 6. Last season the players who were involved in PL were facing a very difficult schedule if they wanted to play in at least 3 EPTCs, with the PL on Thursday's late night, sometimes in rather remote UK places, and the EPTCs starting the next morning somewhere in mainland Europe and not necessarily close to an airport. There have been criticisms about that, including from players. This makes it slightly easier.

Re: The Premier League revamp

Postby SnookerFan

As Tubber said, not a big fan of this tournament, so I won't be watching much anyway. The changes do sound a bit weird, but Premier League is a night out to me, not a serious snooker event. So, I can't see it matters much.

Re: The Premier League revamp

Postby GJ

shot clock = rubbish clock

Re: The Premier League revamp

Postby Roland

I'm afraid it is just a set of exhibitions Monique! As I said before I've nothing against it and it acts like a roadshow bringing top players to towns otherwise unvisited by snooker but it is a glorified set of exhibitions. The fact players have it high priority is because they play in front of big crowds and are on television and have decent prize money to play for but that doesn't mean it's a proper snooker event on a par with any ranking event because it's not.

It's been quite funny reading different comments on different sites. I see on the Snookerscene blog there have been some strong opinions on it. In the initial article I think Dave H has got it about right.

I think the new expansion isn't too much of a leap and it'll probably work. I'll watch it and enjoy it for what it is but I won't care if I miss it and I certainly won't take it seriously or care who wins. The thing which does make me laugh is the justification for including Jimmy White - as pointed out by others surely Nigel Bond should get the nod as Shootout champion! Why not say "Jimmy gets a spot because he'll sell tickets"?

Re: The Premier League revamp

Postby Wildey

heres a thought had Selby won in China and Trump reached the WC Final playing how he was would Jimmy White be in the PL ???

Re: The Premier League revamp

Postby Bourne

Wild wrote:heres a thought had Selby won in China and Trump reached the WC Final playing how he was would Jimmy White be in the PL ???

If me auntie had bullocks she'd be a biological phenomenon <ok>

Re: The Premier League revamp

Postby Witz78

it smells of sour grapes that Jimmys the Peoples Champions and can put bums on seats, whereas Hendry just a washed up old misery guts.

Re: The Premier League revamp

Postby Wildey

Witz78 wrote:it smells of sour grapes that Jimmys the Peoples Champions and can put bums on seats, whereas Hendry just a washed up old misery guts.

Seriously you know rubbish about me mate.

i wouldn't want hendry within a million miles of the PL or any other wild card playing rubbish snooker.

Re: The Premier League revamp

Postby Monique

Sonny wrote:I'm afraid it is just a set of exhibitions Monique! As I said before I've nothing against it and it acts like a roadshow bringing top players to towns otherwise unvisited by snooker but it is a glorified set of exhibitions. The fact players have it high priority is because they play in front of big crowds and are on television and have decent prize money to play for but that doesn't mean it's a proper snooker event on a par with any ranking event because it's not.

It's been quite funny reading different comments on different sites. I see on the Snookerscene blog there have been some strong opinions on it. In the initial article I think Dave H has got it about right.

I think the new expansion isn't too much of a leap and it'll probably work. I'll watch it and enjoy it for what it is but I won't care if I miss it and I certainly won't take it seriously or care who wins. The thing which does make me laugh is the justification for including Jimmy White - as pointed out by others surely Nigel Bond should get the nod as Shootout champion! Why not say "Jimmy gets a spot because he'll sell tickets"?


It's no more or less "exhibitions" than other invitational events, and it's better than most because of the field on display, the television exposure and the money at stake. A couple of seasons ago the quality had dipped because the players were selected more on perceived "commercial value" basis than on form. Last season certainly this wasn't the case and - shot-clock or not - the quality of snooker on display was far better than what I've seen in the PTCs certainly and in many ranking event matches in general.

How the new format will work is to be seen. I'm not entirely convinced about it and I'm not sure that bringing the shot-clock to 20 seconds is a good idea; 25 seconds is plenty of time and nobody needs more in at least 95% of cases, the time-outs being there to care for the more difficult situations; 20 seconds is too short as soon as an implement like the long rest of spider is needed. IMO the "3 attempts to make contact, then ball in hand" is a good initiative. On the other hand changing the rules for the 5th and deciding frame leaves me a bit baffled and may confuse the players.

Regarding Jimmy's inclusion, I totally agree with you. It's nonsense. Why indeed not Nigel Bond, the shoot-out winner? Or Mark Selby, the highest ranked player who hasn't won a tournament? It's not as if Jimmy had shown any sort of form when he has played on television last season or fared well in the shoot-out. This is a purely commercial decision and I'm afraid it will do Jimmy no good. I expect him to finish well bottom of the table.

Re: The Premier League revamp

Postby Roland

Yes you're right on the last paragraph, agree entirely. Disagree with this though:

I'm not sure that bringing the shot-clock to 20 seconds is a good idea; 25 seconds is plenty of time and nobody needs more in at least 95% of cases, the time-outs being there to care for the more difficult situations; 20 seconds is too short as soon as an implement like the long rest of spider is needed. IMO the "3 attempts to make contact, then ball in hand" is a good initiative.


A shot clock is a feature and it's there to add entertainment value as players have to rush to make a decision. 20 seconds will make it more entertaining in my opinion. 25 seconds isn't plenty of time - it is when you're in the balls and the shots are straight forward but it's not when the balls are awkward or if it gets tense.

The Shootout frame at 2-2 is just using the new invention (probably dreamt up by Hearn) to greater effect and to get it established. I think it's a good idea, my initial reaction after the Shootout was that the Premier League should be more based around it than just a 25 second clock with normal snooker rules.

I think the new Premier League will do just as well as previous ones. I'm sure they will open the pockets up a few millimeters like they usually do as well just to add to that entertainment quick fire nature of the event.

Re: The Premier League revamp

Postby Bourne

20 seconds makes it more of a circus than 25 seconds which is the right decision since it is just a silly exho at the end of the day, but I hope no-one expects the quality to improve because of it <ok>

Re: The Premier League revamp

Postby Wildey

is the time out scrapped ?

when this event started in 2005 i was looking forward to something fun and different with players running around like headless chickens making mugs of themselves so the Time Outs sort of ruined what it was meant to be i think.

it was trying to be a major but really did not make it and the shot clock with Time Outs got predictable and boring...

lets just treat it as it is without some dressing it up to be bigger than it actually is then it will be a better event. i dont mind the changes they have made because its never been serious to me if you add shot clock you go all the way with it not half way..

Re: The Premier League revamp

Postby Witz78

wheelsofsteel wrote:anything is better than watching two 3-3 draws.

Wrestling got a bad name for that!


at least a double count out was a 10-10 draw though :D

Re: The Premier League revamp

Postby Monique

I'm not sure that the pockets were any different in the PL than they were in ranking events, actually I'm pretty certain they weren't and that's why the centuries made in PL were counted as official competitive centuries. Now with the new rules and in particular the shoot-out format in the deciding frames, will this still be the case? Remember centuries made in the shoot-out weren't counted as official competitive ones.

Re: The Premier League revamp

Postby Roland

They were clever - the pockets were the same size but the cushions were cut in a more friendly way around the jaws making them more accepting. I've never seen hard evidence for it but I'm not stupid and have eyes. It's been going on for years.

Re: The Premier League revamp

Postby Monique

The pockets templates used in PL were the official templates. Of that I'm certain. One factor that influences the "receptivity" of the pockets is how "new" the cloth is and all PL legs were played on newly reclothed tables.
But the problem with the new format is not about the pockets, it's about the "ball in hand" situation. Does a century that starts with a ball in hand count as an official one? Should it? I remember that Phil Yates raised the point in the shoot-out and opinions were divided.

Re: The Premier League revamp

Postby SnookerFan

Witz78 wrote:at least a double count out was a 10-10 draw though :D


What were your feelings on a heel using a chair to knock his opponent unconcious, when the referee wasn't looking?

Re: The Premier League revamp

Postby Monique

http://www.worldsnooker.com/page/NewsAr ... 25,00.html?

Premier League Line Up Announced
16th May 2011

WITH A dynamic new format in place for the 2011 PartyCasino.com Premier League Snooker, Matchroom Sport can announce the ten players scheduled to appear in this year's event.


With the tournament kicking off on Thursday 18th August, the field has been increased from the traditional seven players to ten to accommodate the winners of every major event in the snooker calendar.

The players have been seeded from 2 to 10 based on their end of season World Ranking, with the reigning champion assuming the No 1 seeding.

#1 Ronnie O'Sullivan (Defending Champion)
#2 Mark Williams (German Masters Champion)
#3 John Higgins (World, UK & Welsh Open Champion)
#4 Ding Junhui (Masters Champion)
#5 Neil Robertson (World Open Champion)
#6 Ali Carter (Shanghai Masters Champion)
#7 Shaun Murphy (PTC Champion)
#8 Judd Trump (China Open Champion)
#9 Matthew Stevens (Championship League Champion)
#10 Jimmy White (World Seniors Champion)

*All players appear subject to contract.

Each player will play on four of the ten nights of play in what will be a mini-tournament consisting of two semis and a final. Each match will be the best of five frames with the decider played to Sky Sport's Shoot-Out rules.

Players will receive points for frames won and at the conclusion of the league section, the top four will advance to the play-offs which take place at Potters Leisure Resort over the 26th and 27th November.

Commented Matchroom Sport Chairman Barry Hearn; "Last season was a watershed year for snooker and one of the consequences has been the incredible standard of play, and the number of players now operating at the very highest level of the sport.

"With the Premier League moving forward with an expanded field, it seemed only right to invite the winners of every major championship last season. With Ronnie attempting to win his tenth League title, he will be facing stiff competition from the likes of Higgins, Williams, Trump, Ding, Robertson and Murphy.

"We've even managed to include the World Seniors Champion in the qualifying line-up and I'm sure over the quick fire format, Jimmy will cause a few surprises. I think though, that any one of the ten players is in with a chance which is what makes it such an exciting event."

Now entering its record-breaking 26th season, Premier League Snooker is the world's only major snooker tournament played to a league format. There are ten nights of play, each one featuring a mini-tournament featuring four of the ten players. The two semi-finals and final are over the best of five frames with any decider played to quick fire 'Shoot-Out' rules.

Players are awarded points for frames and following the round robin section of play, the top four players move forward to the big money play-offs in November. The total prize fund is £210,000, broken down as follows:

Winner £60,000
Runner-Up £30,000
Semi Final Losers £20,000 (x2)
5th Place £17,500
6th Place £15,000
7th Place £12,500
8th Place £10,000
9th Place £8,000
10th Place £6,000

In addition, there is a highest break prize of £1,000 for each night of the League and a similar high break prize at the Play-Offs.


so that's indeed the reason and they had to change the format because with the old format a ten men's league would require 45 matches, which means 22 weeks, not counting the play-offs. That clearly doesn't fit into the already very full calendar (there is no PL when a ranking event is under way, or the Masters)

Re: The Premier League revamp

Postby Witz78

SnookerFan wrote:
Witz78 wrote:at least a double count out was a 10-10 draw though :D


What were your feelings on a heel using a chair to knock his opponent unconcious, when the referee wasn't looking?


Be it a steel chair, the bell, Classy Freddy Blassie or Mr.Fujis cane, Macho Kings septor or The Mounties cattle prod, i loved the win at all costs cheating and gamemanship the heels adopted.

Prob come as no surprise for you to learn that ive always supported the heels, they were always far funnier than the faces.

Re: The Premier League revamp

Postby Witz78

#1 Ronnie O'Sullivan (Defending Champion)
#2 Mark Williams (German Masters Champion)
#3 John Higgins (World, UK & Welsh Open Champion)
#4 Ding Junhui (Masters Champion)
#5 Neil Robertson (World Open Champion)
#6 Ali Carter (Shanghai Masters Champion)
#7 Shaun Murphy (PTC Champion)
#8 Judd Trump (China Open Champion)
#9 Matthew Stevens (Championship League Champion)
#10 Jimmy White (World Seniors Champion)

Wonder what would have happened has say Maguire won the UK and Selby won the Welsh.

who would have been the tournament winners not to get a PL place?

Jimmy obviously and A.N.Other?