Post a reply

Rolling Rankings is it

Brilliant
2
13%
Good
11
73%
Just OK
1
7%
Don't Like it
1
7%
 
Total votes : 15

Rolling Rankings a year on !!!!!

Postby Wildey

after one full season with Rankings Changing after each Tournament and 3 Seeding Cut off points during the season what are peoples opinion of it ?

Personally like Witz id like to see it go further and even change more often as well as closer to the Actual Events Qualifying or in the Masters Case Closer to the Masters but whats other Peoples Opinions of the new look Rankings/Seeding's.

Re: Rolling Rankings a year on !!!!!

Postby Bourne

It absolutely should be changed after every ranking event but i'm still in favour of a bit of an overhaul in regards to the timing of qualifiers in regards to the main event, I think the way they have some of them now it just looks a bit random and rushed. Have the qualifying event the week/2 weeks before the main tournament, cut-off points the Monday after every tournament, simple. I vote GOOD <ok>

Re: Rolling Rankings a year on !!!!!

Postby Wildey

i vote good aswell room for improvement but i much prefer it to how it was.

Re: Rolling Rankings a year on !!!!!

Postby Matt_2745

Work to do, but it's much better than it was.

Will be very interesting to see the full ranking list at the end of next season because only then will we have a true ranking list in my opinion. At the moment it is very distorted with having the six tournament 2009/10 season still there.

Once we have two full seasons incorporating the PTC then it should reflect the overall pecking order more accurately.

Re: Rolling Rankings a year on !!!!!

Postby Wildey

Matt_2745 wrote:Work to do, but it's much better than it was.

Will be very interesting to see the full ranking list at the end of next season because only then will we have a true ranking list in my opinion. At the moment it is very distorted with having the six tournament 2009/10 season still there.

Once we have two full seasons incorporating the PTC then it should reflect the overall pecking order more accurately.


24 PTC Events

2 PTC Finals

2 World Championships

2 UK Championships

11 other Ranking Tournaments

YES that would show whats what.

Re: Rolling Rankings a year on !!!!!

Postby gallantrabbit

Problem with very updated rankings is for events like invitationals. Out here in Brazil there will be 12 participants from the rankings. You can't buy tickets the week before, it's not reasonable.
One thing Hearn should do is make more of a build up before the Masters and other invitationals. Like the Ryder cup where the bottom few of the cut off are fretting about their places until the last minute :clap:

Re: Rolling Rankings a year on !!!!!

Postby Snooker Overdrive

The big advantage:
it's a lot better if you want the best players for the big tournaments seeded

The disadvantage:
becoming the world no. 1 isn't as desirable as it was before because it is changing so often it isn't a landmark as it was before.

Re: Rolling Rankings a year on !!!!!

Postby Wildey

Snooker Overdrive wrote:The big advantage:
it's a lot better if you want the best players for the big tournaments seeded

The disadvantage:
becoming the world no. 1 isn't as desirable as it was before because it is changing so often it isn't a landmark as it was before.

if you take the End of season Ranking ie Mark Williams now thats the same as John Higgins at the end of the 2010 World Championship.

Re: Rolling Rankings a year on !!!!!

Postby Bourne

Snooker Overdrive wrote:The big advantage:
it's a lot better if you want the best players for the big tournaments seeded

The disadvantage:
becoming the world no. 1 isn't as desirable as it was before because it is changing so often it isn't a landmark as it was before.

I don't see that as a disadvantage, it's the same for all players only it's better that they're all getting tested more heavily and we're getting a 'truer' world number one rather than one, in the old system, who could maybe have two good events and reach the top.

Re: Rolling Rankings a year on !!!!!

Postby Snooker Overdrive

Bourne wrote:
Snooker Overdrive wrote:The big advantage:
it's a lot better if you want the best players for the big tournaments seeded

The disadvantage:
becoming the world no. 1 isn't as desirable as it was before because it is changing so often it isn't a landmark as it was before.

I don't see that as a disadvantage, it's the same for all players only it's better that they're all getting tested more heavily and we're getting a 'truer' world number one rather than one, in the old system, who could maybe have two good events and reach the top.


Yes but being the no. 1 for a whole season is something else than just a few months for the respective player.

Before last season there were only 5 world no. 1: Hendry, Davis, O'Sullivan, Higgins, Williams
Robertson, maybe Selby (or any other player) shouldn't be mentioned with them in the same breath if they are only for a month or so at the top.

Re: Rolling Rankings a year on !!!!!

Postby Bourne

Snooker Overdrive wrote:
Bourne wrote:
Snooker Overdrive wrote:The big advantage:
it's a lot better if you want the best players for the big tournaments seeded

The disadvantage:
becoming the world no. 1 isn't as desirable as it was before because it is changing so often it isn't a landmark as it was before.

I don't see that as a disadvantage, it's the same for all players only it's better that they're all getting tested more heavily and we're getting a 'truer' world number one rather than one, in the old system, who could maybe have two good events and reach the top.


Yes but being the no. 1 for a whole season is something else than just a few months for the respective player.

Before last season there were only 5 world no. 1: Hendry, Davis, O'Sullivan, Higgins, Williams
Robertson, maybe Selby (or any other player) shouldn't be listed with them in the same breath if they are only for a month or so at the top.

Being world number-one is a sign that you're the best player on the planet AT THAT TIME, no-one's trying to make out by these rankings that it automatically makes Selby a great of the game alongside Hendry/Higgins etc ... just like it's silly to say O'Sullivan's ranking is too low based on the fact he's such a decorated player ... er no, the rankings judge 2 years not a career <ok>

Re: Rolling Rankings a year on !!!!!

Postby Wildey

yes in 2006 Stephen Hendry was WN1 for a whole 12 months without winning a single tournament BUT He did win more matches than anyone else and there wasn't PTC Events back then.

Re: Rolling Rankings a year on !!!!!

Postby Tubberlad

It's like this mate, if O'Sullivan ain't putting in the hard work, then it's his fault that he's ranked so lowly. You can't hand him points. If O'Sullivan can come back next season, play with the right attitude and put in some work, then I guarantee you he won't be long climbing up that list.

Maybe the rankings look distorted with him so far down, but the fact of the matter is that he hasn't played anywhere near enough to merit a ranking that matches his rep.

Re: Rolling Rankings a year on !!!!!

Postby Wildey

Bourne wrote:And the matches he did play, he generally sucked at.

well between the World Open semi in september to the 1st Round of the World in April he did not win any ranking match in 7 MONTHS.

Re: Rolling Rankings a year on !!!!!

Postby Tubberlad

Bourne wrote:And the matches he did play, he generally sucked at.

Well exactly. If I was to be asked where Sullivan stood in my opinion of players last year, the truth is he'd struggle to make my top sixteen.

The rankings system reward the best players at the present time, and there's nothing wrong at all with that. My sole criticism is that their should be more points for each of the mainstream events, and to be fair, that wouldn't exactly help Sullivan either

Re: Rolling Rankings a year on !!!!!

Postby Wildey

Tubberlad wrote:
Bourne wrote:And the matches he did play, he generally sucked at.

Well exactly. If I was to be asked where Sullivan stood in my opinion of players last year, the truth is he'd struggle to make my top sixteen.

The rankings system reward the best players at the present time, and there's nothing wrong at all with that. My sole criticism is that their should be more points for each of the mainstream events, and to be fair, that wouldn't exactly help Sullivan either

yes the only difference would be to give 7,000 points for wales and every Main Rankers and increase the World and UK i think the PTC Win is fine at 2,000 roughly the same as Last 32 in Main Rankers incidentally Barry Hearn did say in one of the recent Snooker scene mag he was thinking of increasing PTC Points but i guess he didnt do that.

Re: Rolling Rankings a year on !!!!!

Postby Wildey

between here and TSF

Brilliant =15
Good =19
OK =2
Dont Like it=1

Re: Rolling Rankings a year on !!!!!

Postby Wildey

Sonny wrote:You liked it when Robbo was WN1 :santa:

thing is under the old system the rankings would have been like that at the end of the season anyway the only difference is there are more tournaments so bourne is right in a way less tournaments there is less deserving someone is of being top dog you just have to apply yourself now which Williams and Selby did.

Re: Rolling Rankings a year on !!!!!

Postby snooky147

While I like the new ranking system I dont think, for the next couple of seasons anyway that there should be any increase in cut off points. Apart from the nightmare logistically this system needs time to bed in but sadly I can totally see it happening anyway so that we have the farce of rankings changing after every tournament, which I absolutely do not agree with. I know I am probably in the minority so I'll shut up now. I should not be posting anyway in the mood I am in.

Re: Rolling Rankings a year on !!!!!

Postby Wildey

snooky147 wrote:While I like the new ranking system I dont think, for the next couple of seasons anyway that there should be any increase in cut off points. Apart from the nightmare logistically this system needs time to bed in but sadly I can totally see it happening anyway so that we have the farce of rankings changing after every tournament, which I absolutely do not agree with. I know I am probably in the minority so I'll shut up now. I should not be posting anyway in the mood I am in.

you got the right to voice an opinion on it.

what have you got against changing after every event ?

personally i cant see it happening any time soon you will need major overhaul of when events being played in the calender to make it possible to go straight from qualifying to tournament seamless.

Re: Rolling Rankings a year on !!!!!

Postby Witz78

snooky147 wrote:While I like the new ranking system I dont think, for the next couple of seasons anyway that there should be any increase in cut off points. Apart from the nightmare logistically this system needs time to bed in but sadly I can totally see it happening anyway so that we have the farce of rankings changing after every tournament, which I absolutely do not agree with. I know I am probably in the minority so I'll shut up now. I should not be posting anyway in the mood I am in.


hows it a farce the rankings changing after every event?

then the rankings would truly be representing the exact true rankings of all the players based on the results over the last 2 years so there could be no qualms from anyone about their accuracy. <doh>

Re: Rolling Rankings a year on !!!!!

Postby Roland

I think they've got it about right with the 3 cut off periods through the course of the season. It's worked for the first season and it'll really kick in next season (i.e. 2012/13) when the points are taken into account from the increased season with PTCs. And remember John Higgins will have no points to defend at the start of that season so I bet he can't wait for that.

Re: Rolling Rankings a year on !!!!!

Postby Witz78

Sonny wrote:I think they've got it about right with the 3 cut off periods through the course of the season. It's worked for the first season and it'll really kick in next season (i.e. 2012/13) when the points are taken into account from the increased season with PTCs. And remember John Higgins will have no points to defend at the start of that season so I bet he can't wait for that.


itll really kick in THIS coming season (2011-12) as the increased points from 2 seasons worth of PTCs, extra tournaments kick in.

i still feel the current 3 changes a season is a bit of a stop gap compromise / transition between the old once a year change system and what we will ultimately end up with, TRUE rolling rankings which change after every event and affect qualification etc.

Re: Rolling Rankings a year on !!!!!

Postby Witz78

and as for the argument that certain players have less points to defend or lots to defend at certain times etc, whilst its important, ultimately the rankings at any given time are based on the 2 year period prior to the most recent cut off.

Re: Rolling Rankings a year on !!!!!

Postby Bourne

The rankings after PTC12 will be the truest reflection we've had in the last year or so with all the PTC points added up and we'll see who's adapted best to the new, tougher calendar <ok>

Re: Rolling Rankings a year on !!!!!

Postby Witz78

Bourne wrote:The rankings after PTC12 will be the truest reflection we've had in the last year or so with all the PTC points added up and we'll see who's adapted best to the new, tougher calendar <ok>


exactly <ok>

thats why its vital for Ronnie and Hendry who didnt show any respect to the PTCs last year to try and undo that damage by taking them serious this year and racking up some points.

Bear in mind that by the New Year when the rankings are updated after PTC12, the 2 years rolling rankings will incorporate 2x12 PTC events plus last years final into the total which equates to (2 x 12 x 2000) + (1 x 3000) points which is 51,000 points which is the equivalent of 5 extra World Championships factored into the totals.

So it shows the massive importance of the PTC ranking points when you look at it that way.