Post a reply

Should the PTC finals carry ranking points? (Off topic split)

Postby Monique

The 12 PTCs are ranking, even if each individually doesn't carry much points, the sum of them does. And the Grand Final is ranking. It shouldn't be for the same reasons the Masters isn't. That's in fact over 20 ranking events. In the 90th there were NEVER more than 10 and the calendar was full. The difference was that they were much more invitationals. They cost less and allow the players more freedom for expression and interaction.
I would be in favour of a system where, say, 3 best results in PTC, would be taken into account, irrespective of where and when they are played. And that would be added at the end of the season. The Grand Final should carry high prize money but no ranking points and be based on the same 3 best results. I would resurrect Irish Masters, Scottish Masters and convert Welsh Open into Welsh Masters, all invitationals with enough prize money to be attractive and in such venues that people would travel there not just for snooker but also for tourism or culture. I would also resurrect European Masters with venues traveling across Europe's high profile cities: Berlin, Brussels, St Petersburg, Vienna, Warsaw, ...

Should the PTC finals carry ranking points? (Off topic split)

Postby Wildey

Monique

as someone that was very heavily interested in Snooker throughout the 80s and 90s Invitationals never really gave any opportunities to young players at most 4 Wild Cards and English Born amateurs had no opportunity at all.

The PTC Gives players that opportunity in large numbers they never had before and i know from Tweets that Young Players are over the moon with the PTC and the chances they can get.

OK EPTC are expensive to get there for Brits but at the flip-side it gives cheaper opportunities to continental europe they never had before.

Before Hearn WPBSA tried a challenge series on the cheap and it flopped and scrapped because Top Players couldn't give a dam.

yes we need Invitationals and we are Getting them But for Young Players making their Mark in to the Pro Game the PTC are invaluable for them.

Re: Pink Ribbon Tournament Draw and Discussions !!!!

Postby Witz78

Monique wrote:The 12 PTCs are ranking, even if each individually doesn't carry much points, the sum of them does. And the Grand Final is ranking. It shouldn't be for the same reasons the Masters isn't. That's in fact over 20 ranking events. In the 90th there were NEVER more than 10 and the calendar was full. The difference was that they were much more invitationals. They cost less and allow the players more freedom for expression and interaction.
I would be in favour of a system where, say, 3 best results in PTC, would be taken into account, irrespective of where and when they are played. And that would be added at the end of the season. The Grand Final should carry high prize money but no ranking points and be based on the same 3 best results. I would resurrect Irish Masters, Scottish Masters and convert Welsh Open into Welsh Masters, all invitationals with enough prize money to be attractive and in such venues that people would travel there not just for snooker but also for tourism or culture. I would also resurrect European Masters with venues traveling across Europe's high profile cities: Berlin, Brussels, St Petersburg, Vienna, Warsaw, ...



you sort of contradict yourself Monique

On the one hand you said earlier you talk about the young talent and up and coming players getting chances, but then you almost dismiss the PTC and wish for invitational events, whicha are essentially for the elite of the game, the established older players :shrug:

Re: Pink Ribbon Tournament Draw and Discussions !!!!

Postby Monique

no, invitationals are not necessarily for elite. That's a misconception. I don't see why the - say - Scottish masters wouldn't be about the top 16 vs the best 16 Scots, pro or not, with handicap system if needed.
I'm not dismissing PTCs, I think they should, like in tennis, be there but with only 3 (or 4, or 2... ) best results on. With the top players not blackmailed into playing it would actually give amateurs and youngsters MORE chances, not less. With the current system I don't expect many PTCS being won by anyone else than top guys this season, and with the costs of it it will soon deter amateurs to enter.
The Pink Ribbon is invitational and it's the prime evidence that invitationals can be successful and NOT for elite. Make it a PTC, add the pressure of ranking point and you'll kill the fun of it. Sport is NOT all about winning. It's about enjoying also, it's about trying ones best, it's about progressing and exceeding ones own limits... actually my opinion is that "professionalism" is killing sport rather than helping it.

Re: Pink Ribbon Tournament Draw and Discussions !!!!

Postby Monique

Alex0paul wrote:Pink Ribbon isn't an invitational event though, its an open event.


OK let me rephrase it then... I want LESS rankers and MORE open events. Now don't be naïve, top players are "invited" to join... it adds prestige.

Re: Pink Ribbon Tournament Draw and Discussions !!!!

Postby Wildey

Witz78 wrote:I can see your point Monique but ultimately most sports are about winning rather than fun. Its the way the world works.

yes i want hard competative matches with a few fun things thrown in i think the ballance at the moment is as good as its ever been there was talk of increasing the PTC to 18 i dont think there's enough weeks in the year to do that and get playing conditions up to scratch lol

Re: Pink Ribbon Tournament Draw and Discussions !!!!

Postby Wildey

Monique wrote:
Alex0paul wrote:Pink Ribbon isn't an invitational event though, its an open event.


OK let me rephrase it then... I want LESS rankers and MORE open events. Now don't be naïve, top players are "invited" to join... it adds prestige.

monique

Top players wont go will they thats the main reason for giving as much ranking points in PTC to get players to go and there was still problems getting them there.

Re: Pink Ribbon Tournament Draw and Discussions !!!!

Postby Monique

Witz78 wrote:I can see your point Monique but ultimately most sports are about winning rather than fun. Its the way the world works.


Maybe but that doesn't mean it's the way it should work.
The way the world works means that essential needs are not covered for the ones who can't "pay" for it, that children and women are abused in some many places because the "law of the strongest" apply, that people who are perceived as "different" are discriminated and excluded from society...

Hendry (36-38) and Ronnie (22-23) have won more invitational titles than ranking titles. Higgins has won 24 rankers and 13 invitationals, Williams 18 rankers and only 4 invitationals. What this stats tells to me is that - contrary to the widespread perception - the first two gave it their best, most of the time, irrespective of what was at stake, professional ranking or just pride in their sport for the benefits of the audience. That's what real sportsmen should do. Their 1997 Victoria Challenge Final - an invitational event - will remain one of the greatest matches of all times. The two others, Williams in particular (and I am a fan of him and of his game) don't unless there is professional ranking at stake.

Re: Pink Ribbon Tournament Draw and Discussions !!!!

Postby Witz78

Monique wrote:
Witz78 wrote:I can see your point Monique but ultimately most sports are about winning rather than fun. Its the way the world works.


Maybe but that doesn't mean it's the way it should work.
The way the world works means that essential needs are not covered for the ones who can't "pay" for it, that children and women are abused in some many places because the "law of the strongest" apply, that people who are perceived as "different" are discriminated and excluded from society...

Hendry (36-38) and Ronnie (22-23) have won more invitational titles than ranking titles. Higgins has won 24 rankers and 13 invitationals, Williams 18 rankers and only 4 invitationals. What this stats tells to me is that - contrary to the widespread perception - the first two gave it their best, most of the time, irrespective of what was at stake, professional ranking or just pride in their sport for the benefits of the audience. That's what real sportsmen should do. Their 1997 Victoria Challenge Final - an invitational event - will remain one of the greatest matches of all times. The two others, Williams in particular (and I am a fan of him and of his game) don't unless there is professional ranking at stake.


Ignoring the views on society paragraph, im starting to struggle to fathom, exactly what your point is.

If we reduce the number of rankers over a season and subsitute them with invitationals, then all that happens is that theres less opportunities for youngsters to rise and make their mark in the game, whilst the elite become even more elite.

I wouldnt mind a few more invitational events ill admit but dont see any sense in sacrificing the current PTC opportunities.

Infact i dont see why they cant play 2 Sheffield PTC events back to back from say a Monday to a Wednesday and Thursday to a Saturday. That would kill 2 birds with one stone, and free up a week each time.

Re: Pink Ribbon Tournament Draw and Discussions !!!!

Postby Monique

I don't want to reduce the number of PTCs. I wish that only the best 3 results out of possibly 12 would be taken into account for rankings. That would probably result in the top pros playing in less of them because once they are satisfied with their best 3 they would probably not enter. While younger or lower ranked played would in the hope top better their best 3, hence their rankings. That would mean that those players, young and lower ranked would get more opportunities, not less to make more money. As it is I expect most top boys to take them seriously because of the rankings blackmail. This will basically mean that the others have less chances to get to the latter stages and ultimately to earn decent money out of them.
You will tell me that it will mean that the events will be less appealing to the audience. I'm not sure about that. The top players who will enter those events will do so because they want to, not because they feel forced to and therefore will try morevseriously when they chose to enter. Something that wasn't always the case this season.

Re: Pink Ribbon Tournament Draw and Discussions !!!!

Postby Wildey

Monique wrote:I don't want to reduce the number of PTCs. I wish that only the best 3 results out of possibly 12 would be taken into account for rankings. That would probably result in the top pros playing in less of them because once they are satisfied with their best 3 they would probably not enter. While younger or lower ranked played would in the hope top better their best 3, hence their rankings. That would mean that those players, young and lower ranked would get more opportunities, not less to make more money. As it is I expect most top boys to take them seriously because of the rankings blackmail. This will basically mean that the others have less chances to get to the latter stages and ultimately to earn decent money out of them.
You will tell me that it will mean that the events will be less appealing to the audience. I'm not sure about that. The top players who will enter those events will do so because they want to, not because they feel forced to and therefore will try morevseriously when they chose to enter. Something that wasn't always the case this season.

Monique top players has to play in the european ones just to get them established on a wider scale we all know what happened with EPTC4 because a few players was missing.

Re: Pink Ribbon Tournament Draw and Discussions !!!!

Postby Wildey

ask a question and got a answer

BenHarrison147 Ben Harrison
@
@wildey_1 love them! think their great, best thing they ve come up with for amateurs!


then i asked about the expense

BenHarrison147 Ben Harrison
@
@wildey_1 yeah they certainly are expensive but everything is these days, its great experience and you ve just got to get on with it!!
Last edited by Wildey on 08 Jun 2011, edited 1 time in total.

Re: Pink Ribbon Tournament Draw and Discussions !!!!

Postby Witz78

Monique wrote:I don't want to reduce the number of PTCs. I wish that only the best 3 results out of possibly 12 would be taken into account for rankings. That would probably result in the top pros playing in less of them because once they are satisfied with their best 3 they would probably not enter. While younger or lower ranked played would in the hope top better their best 3, hence their rankings. That would mean that those players, young and lower ranked would get more opportunities, not less to make more money. As it is I expect most top boys to take them seriously because of the rankings blackmail. This will basically mean that the others have less chances to get to the latter stages and ultimately to earn decent money out of them.
You will tell me that it will mean that the events will be less appealing to the audience. I'm not sure about that. The top players who will enter those events will do so because they want to, not because they feel forced to and therefore will try morevseriously when they chose to enter. Something that wasn't always the case this season.


On the flipside then the effect of that would be if the lower ranked players have more opportunities to get 3 good positions from the PTCs as the top guys wouldnt enter all of them once they had their 3 "good" results...................

then it would eventually dawn on the top players to play in all of these events as if they could get more top results then whilst only 3 would count, they would at least be stopping those guys lower than them getting good results.

I just see your proposal as some sort of cop out in between the PTCs being proper ranking events and exhibitions. They should all be taken seriously and players encouraged to take part, especially the EPTCs which are meant to be spreading the gospel of snooker to the new countries and expanding the game. These fans would want to see the stars. You only need to look at Hearns comments on the likes of Ding, Robbo, Ronnies attitudes towards the PTCs last season to see that he wants them to pull their weight.

Re: Pink Ribbon Tournament Draw and Discussions !!!!

Postby Monique

Witz78 wrote:
Monique wrote:I don't want to reduce the number of PTCs. I wish that only the best 3 results out of possibly 12 would be taken into account for rankings. That would probably result in the top pros playing in less of them because once they are satisfied with their best 3 they would probably not enter. While younger or lower ranked played would in the hope top better their best 3, hence their rankings. That would mean that those players, young and lower ranked would get more opportunities, not less to make more money. As it is I expect most top boys to take them seriously because of the rankings blackmail. This will basically mean that the others have less chances to get to the latter stages and ultimately to earn decent money out of them.
You will tell me that it will mean that the events will be less appealing to the audience. I'm not sure about that. The top players who will enter those events will do so because they want to, not because they feel forced to and therefore will try morevseriously when they chose to enter. Something that wasn't always the case this season.


On the flipside then the effect of that would be if the lower ranked players have more opportunities to get 3 good positions from the PTCs as the top guys wouldnt enter all of them once they had their 3 "good" results...................

then it would eventually dawn on the top players to play in all of these events as if they could get more top results then whilst only 3 would count, they would at least be stopping those guys lower than them getting good results.

I just see your proposal as some sort of cop out in between the PTCs being proper ranking events and exhibitions. They should all be taken seriously and players encouraged to take part, especially the EPTCs which are meant to be spreading the gospel of snooker to the new countries and expanding the game. These fans would want to see the stars. You only need to look at Hearns comments on the likes of Ding, Robbo, Ronnies attitudes towards the PTCs last season to see that he wants them to pull their weight.


Well I think Mr Hearn should have been there at some of them and see with his own eyes some of the things that happened there and the attitude of some top players, and not so top players, who entered and were there only because they felt they had no choice. As those incidents have neither been reported, nor punished (except the Ding one) I won't enter into details or name the names. But from the audience point of view, I'm not sure it did snooker any good. I'd rather have players being honest and not entering if they are not determined to give it their best rather than some of what I've witnessed. I that respect, I have to command Murphy, Selby and Higgins for their attitude. Although the latter had obviously a stronger motivation to behave perfectly than just the promotion of those events.
If he wants the big boys to want to play in them he has to think about providing better playing conditions in the first place. I've heard (and seen written) complaints from top players about them because they didn't allow them to play the game to their abilities and treat the audience with what they consider to be "good snooker". He also has to make sure the match schedule is reasonable and more or less predictable and respected. The audience will turn up more willingly if they know who they will see when and where...
All this has contributed to form my opinion that maybe here less who have been better if less also meant more effort and care put in each event. And don't get me wrong: the organisers of the events worked very, very hard, before and during them. They can't be blamed. But there is only so much you can do in a short time frame with limited resources.

Re: Pink Ribbon Tournament Draw and Discussions !!!!

Postby Roland

The Pink Ribbon showed you can run a heavy schedule of best of 7 matches and get them finished inside 2 hours so there should be a way of ensuring PTC don't run on until 3am or something ridiculous like that.

And if some of the players don't want to take them seriously, that's their problem. There are plenty of people who do and can capitalise.

I noticed Selby saying he probably won't play in all PTC this time around to keep himself fresh. He's got the right idea and you can bet your bottom dollar those he does enter he'll be looking to win.

Re: Pink Ribbon Tournament Draw and Discussions !!!!

Postby Monique

Sonny wrote:The Pink Ribbon showed you can run a heavy schedule of best of 7 matches and get them finished inside 2 hours so there should be a way of ensuring PTC don't run on until 3am or something ridiculous like that.

And if some of the players don't want to take them seriously, that's their problem. There are plenty of people who do and can capitalise.

I noticed Selby saying he probably won't play in all PTC this time around to keep himself fresh. He's got the right idea and you can bet your bottom dollar those he does enter he'll be looking to win.


I'm sure he will. But he will not enter them all because it's simply too much given the current calendar. And he should not be penalised for managing his career and health sensibly. That's why I think only a pre-determined number of best results in them should count ranking wise. I'm sure more top players, not less, would try seriously in those they enter if that was the case.

Re: Pink Ribbon Tournament Draw and Discussions !!!!

Postby Wildey

Sonny wrote:The Pink Ribbon showed you can run a heavy schedule of best of 7 matches and get them finished inside 2 hours so there should be a way of ensuring PTC don't run on until 3am or something ridiculous like that.

And if some of the players don't want to take them seriously, that's their problem. There are plenty of people who do and can capitalise.

I noticed Selby saying he probably won't play in all PTC this time around to keep himself fresh. He's got the right idea and you can bet your bottom dollar those he does enter he'll be looking to win.

Regarding PTC.

8 Tables is the bare minimum for that Schedule we all know that in Gloucester there are 9 Tables plus Practice Tables so that would relieve The Pressure in 2 Events.

its the players choice and i know the young up and coming players cant wait for them.

Re: Pink Ribbon Tournament Draw and Discussions !!!!

Postby Roland

You could have the criteria must play in 3 in UK and 3 in Europe to qualify for the final event, but also only your best 10 results count towards the rankings. It would be a headache for PSB Matt though :redneck:

I remember doing GCSE maths and we had 5 projects over the two years of which we submitted our best 3. Well in my first 4 I already bagged 3 A grades so when it came to the last one I didn't bother doing anything. I let my classmates sweat it out and I went and played snooker. I got such a bollocking off the teachers and I think they even called my parents in. In other words, if you pick and choose then the last couple of PTCs could be pretty dead of entries.

Re: Pink Ribbon Tournament Draw and Discussions !!!!

Postby Wildey

Sonny wrote:You could have the criteria must play in 3 in UK and 3 in Europe to qualify for the final event, but also only your best 10 results count towards the rankings. It would be a headache for PSB Matt though :redneck:

I remember doing GCSE maths and we had 5 projects over the two years of which we submitted our best 3. Well in my first 4 I already bagged 3 A grades so when it came to the last one I didn't bother doing anything. I let my classmates sweat it out and I went and played snooker. I got such a bollocking off the teachers and I think they even called my parents in. In other words, if you pick and choose then the last couple of PTCs could be pretty dead of entries.

it would be a headake for players too even last season some players thought they were safe on tour looking at the rankings WSA has only to find themselves in Q School.

Re: Pink Ribbon Tournament Draw and Discussions !!!!

Postby Monique

Sonny wrote:You could have the criteria must play in 3 in UK and 3 in Europe to qualify for the final event, but also only your best 10 results count towards the rankings. It would be a headache for PSB Matt though :redneck:

I remember doing GCSE maths and we had 5 projects over the two years of which we submitted our best 3. Well in my first 4 I already bagged 3 A grades so when it came to the last one I didn't bother doing anything. I let my classmates sweat it out and I went and played snooker. I got such a bollocking off the teachers and I think they even called my parents in. In other words, if you pick and choose then the last couple of PTCs could be pretty dead of entries.


I'd say that your teachers were inconsistent there ;). I personally would relax completely the constraints about where and when you play, would make sure the European ones, which cost more to the players, get attractive venues and much better prize money - at the expenses of those in UK if needed - and take into account no more than 6 out of 12. And there would be no nightmare if PTC results were only taken into the picture for the last cut-off of the season, when they're all over. And I would not give the PTC Grand Final any ranking points. Just like the Masters and for the same reasons.

Re: Pink Ribbon Tournament Draw and Discussions !!!!

Postby Witz78

Sonny wrote:PTC Grand Final has to have ranking points otherwise what's the point? It's what they're all playing for - a place in the finals.


There playing for money in that event more than ranking points.

By qualifying in the top 24 theyve already earned more ranking points than others via the PTC and the bonus of that should be that they get into this "elite" event with the chance to win big money (70k top prize this year i believe)

Ranking points again in this event i feel is almost a double dunt of sorts.

Re: Pink Ribbon Tournament Draw and Discussions !!!!

Postby Monique

Witz78 wrote:
Sonny wrote:PTC Grand Final has to have ranking points otherwise what's the point? It's what they're all playing for - a place in the finals.


There playing for money in that event more than ranking points.

By qualifying in the top 24 theyve already earned more ranking points than others via the PTC and the bonus of that should be that they get into this "elite" event with the chance to win big money (70k top prize this year i believe)

Ranking points again in this event i feel is almost a double dunt of sorts.


Exactlly.
That's why the Masters isn't ranking neither. Playing there for prestige and money is the reward for being in top 16. If there were ranking points in addition it would bias the rankings.

Re: Pink Ribbon Tournament Draw and Discussions !!!!

Postby Roland

Fair point. I'm thinking too much about last season, how it helped those out who put the time in. This year if say 20 of the top 24 in the rankings qualified for the finals, it would distance them from the field even more. Let's see how it pans out this season.

Re: Pink Ribbon Tournament Draw and Discussions !!!!

Postby Wildey

Witz78 wrote:
Sonny wrote:PTC Grand Final has to have ranking points otherwise what's the point? It's what they're all playing for - a place in the finals.


There playing for money in that event more than ranking points.

By qualifying in the top 24 theyve already earned more ranking points than others via the PTC and the bonus of that should be that they get into this "elite" event with the chance to win big money (70k top prize this year i believe)

Ranking points again in this event i feel is almost a double dunt of sorts.

i understand what your saying there

Joe Jogia was the no 24 last season he got 5,360 points from the 12 PTC before the finals but i still think players at the moment needs that carrot in front of them until they get the work ethic sorted.

Re: Pink Ribbon Tournament Draw and Discussions !!!!

Postby Wildey

Sonny wrote:Fair point. I'm thinking too much about last season, how it helped those out who put the time in. This year if say 20 of the top 24 in the rankings qualified for the finals, it would distance them from the field even more. Let's see how it pans out this season.

yes but dont they deserve that for doing the traveling playing the matches and winning matches any tom sausage cant get in the top 24 its not invitational its result and success based after 7 or 8 months playing PTC Week in week out.

Re: Pink Ribbon Tournament Draw and Discussions !!!!

Postby Witz78

Wild wrote:
Sonny wrote:Fair point. I'm thinking too much about last season, how it helped those out who put the time in. This year if say 20 of the top 24 in the rankings qualified for the finals, it would distance them from the field even more. Let's see how it pans out this season.

yes but dont they deserve that for doing the traveling playing the matches and winning matches any tom sausage cant get in the top 24 its not invitational its result and success based after 7 or 8 months playing PTC Week in week out.


ahh but you then almost argue that the Masters 16 deserve to play for ranking points too, as technically its not Invitational either, its the top 16 who have played matches, won matches and earned the right to be there on a success based after 2 years of playing.

Re: Pink Ribbon Tournament Draw and Discussions !!!!

Postby Wildey

Witz78 wrote:
Wild wrote:
Sonny wrote:Fair point. I'm thinking too much about last season, how it helped those out who put the time in. This year if say 20 of the top 24 in the rankings qualified for the finals, it would distance them from the field even more. Let's see how it pans out this season.

yes but dont they deserve that for doing the traveling playing the matches and winning matches any tom sausage cant get in the top 24 its not invitational its result and success based after 7 or 8 months playing PTC Week in week out.


ahh but you then almost argue that the Masters 16 deserve to play for ranking points too, as technically its not Invitational either, its the top 16 who have played matches, won matches and earned the right to be there on a success based after 2 years of playing.

yes good point <ok>