Post a reply

Should Matches be carried forward?

YES
4
44%
NO
5
56%
 
Total votes : 9

Should certain players play at the final venue?

Postby Wildey

With the Likes of Ding Junhui Defending Champion Ricky Walden and Defending World Champion Ronnie O'Sullivan having to play a Round away from the main venue in Wuxi...should some players have a free pass to a venue under a 128 flat system or isn't that a level playing field?

Jewell wrote:What a joke!

Ronnie should be playing his matches at the main venue!

its everyone or nothing thats the fairest way of doing it there wont be no favoritism.

Re: Wuxi Classic Last 128 Discussion !!!!

Postby Wildey

Jewell wrote:It wouldn't surprise me now if Ronnie pulled out of this event now, and quite rightly too. This is no way to treat the reigning World Champion, having his matches held over in a qualifying venue. <ok>

Good let him revert to type and have a tantrum <ok>

Re: Wuxi Classic Last 128 Discussion !!!!

Postby Wildey

Jewell wrote:
Wildey wrote:Good let him revert to type and have a tantrum


Be careful what you wish for.

No World Champion = Event is rerduced to tin-pot status

it doesn't just in a few idiots deluded minds <ok>

Re: Wuxi Classic Last 128 Discussion !!!!

Postby Dannyboy

With 64 players going to Wuxi, fancy a fair few amateurs shocking the pros and getting to the venue.

Not sure 64 players travelling to China is the way forward really. That said, I think hotac is provided? £3,000 is possibly just about an OK balance to reward players taking into account expenses.

Re: Wuxi Classic Last 128 Discussion !!!!

Postby Wildey

Dannyboy wrote:With 64 players going to Wuxi, fancy a fair few amateurs shocking the pros and getting to the venue.

Not sure 64 players travelling to China is the way forward really. That said, I think hotac is provided? £3,000 is possibly just about an OK balance to reward players taking into account expenses.

The way Forward is taking every player on tour its a bit stupid playing overseas events in Britain but at the moment that's not a option so this is definitely Better than just having 32 at a venue.

Re: Wuxi Classic Last 128 Discussion !!!!

Postby Alpha

Wildey wrote:
Jewell wrote:
Wildey wrote:Good let him revert to type and have a tantrum


Be careful what you wish for.

No World Champion = Event is rerduced to tin-pot status

it doesn't just in a few idiots deluded minds <ok>


I can think of two players who should've had their matches held over to Wuxi: Walden (the defending champion) and Ding (the hometown boy). Not O'Sullivan who will only pull out the day before the last 128 anyway.

Re: Wuxi Classic Last 128 Discussion !!!!

Postby Roland

Ding definitely should and there's a case for Ronnie and Walden as well. Obviously their first round opponents should get their expenses paid for the extra days.

Re: Wuxi Classic Last 128 Discussion !!!!

Postby Wildey

Sonny wrote:Ding definitely should and there's a case for Ronnie and Walden as well. Obviously their first round opponents should get their expenses paid for the extra days.

that's not a equal playing field if Dott plays in a cubical and Ronnie in a venue that was one of the reason i was against a flat system players would be picked on popularity to get a better deal instead of rankings.

im pleased Barry hearn decided against that.

Re: Wuxi Classic Last 128 Discussion !!!!

Postby Roland

Yes but it will happen in other events. Pankaj and Aditya will surely play their first round match in India if indeed there is a tournament there this season which seems likely.

Home player e.g. Luca if in Belgium, Kurt if in Norway etc plus World Champion and defending champion. I don't see a problem with that.

Re: Wuxi Classic Last 128 Discussion !!!!

Postby Wildey

Sonny wrote:Yes but it will happen in other events. Pankaj and Aditya will surely play their first round match in India if indeed there is a tournament there this season which seems likely.

Home player e.g. Luca if in Belgium, Kurt if in Norway etc plus World Champion and defending champion. I don't see a problem with that.


but its not level.

every player has to be treated as equals or there's no point in Barry saying it gives all players same chance because it doesn't if some plays matches in different conditions to others....i get your point with Adi and Pankaj but with the likes of Ronnie he would be getting that treatment in every country giving him a advantage straight off over every other player as if he needs a advantage.

Re: Wuxi Classic Last 128 Discussion !!!!

Postby Roland

But he's earned that right by being World Champion. You should take your World Champion across the globe to showcase to the world. Which is entirely my beef with Ronnie last year because I knew he was likely to miss doing that when it's almost like a duty to do it. Anyway, I'm not against the WC earning the right to play only in venues or get television priority whoever they are and I hope that's what ends up happening in practice.

Re: Wuxi Classic Last 128 Discussion !!!!

Postby Wildey

Sonny wrote:But he's earned that right by being World Champion. You should take your World Champion across the globe to showcase to the world. Which is entirely my beef with Ronnie last year because I knew he was likely to miss doing that when it's almost like a duty to do it. Anyway, I'm not against the WC earning the right to play only in venues or get television priority whoever they are and I hope that's what ends up happening in practice.

But he would still get that same right had he lost in the first round that's the point but if "A World Champion" gets special treatment then that's different but im concerned if the same players always gets special treatment based on popularity as is Jason Ferguson in a interview he did with you around Christmas http://www.snookerisland.com/blog/inter ... rguson-22/

Re: Should certain players play at the final venue?

Postby Wildey

its come to my attention regarding the Format for the UK Championship http://static.seetickets.com/Content/si ... champs.pdf its quite clearly not a level playing field in that format anyway with 4 Last 128 being played Live on the Saturday when the BBC Start rolling and some matches in the pre TV Stage played at a sports hall.

so quite clearly there is a precedent so why not in WUXI where ding is actually from?

Re: Should certain players play at the final venue?

Postby Wildey

Jewell wrote:I'm all for having a level playing field, but it's simply impossible for everything to be level for everyone.

If one player plays his match on a Monday which is sunny and another plays his match on Tuesday which is cold and rainy, you could argue that is not a level playing as they are not playing in the exact same conditions. Also having different referees for different matches is not a level playing field as certain referees will vary in performance with regards to how they see the miss rule, speed of replacing the balls and so on.

The point I'm trying to make is it's impossible to make it 100% fair and level for everyone, so let's not get hung up on so-called fairness.

Don't get me wrong, having a flat 128 is a great step in the right direction as far as fairness goes.

Get certain players playing in venues straightaway, is what I want to see happen.


i think that's a great point in fact and as i said there's a precedent set of playing 4 128 matches during the TV Stages at the UK.

But id like a structure in place and not just pick Ronnie.

say carry 4 matches to the venue with this criteria.

Defending Champion
World Champion
Local Players
World no 1
UK Champion
Masters Champion
World Rankings


so in Wuxi in this order 4 matches is carried forward

Ricky Walden v Pankaj Advani
Ronnie O'Sullivan v Michael Wasley
Ding Junhui v Aditya Mehta
Liang Wenbo v Fraser Patrick

Re: Should certain players play at the final venue?

Postby roy142857

Agree with the point about it needing to be done systematically - not just picking the perceived 'popular' players.

So yes, defending champion should always be at the venue. World Champion and current World No. 1 probably too. Regardless of who they are.

I think having the local players is probably good, but I can see a problem with the number of competitors in China, doesn't strike me as fair unless you let all the players from whatever the 'home' nation is play at the final venue. Could (should!) be an increasing problem with China regarding numbers.

I'd like that even with China, but the numbers may be an issue. If not that, then perhaps one or two 'at the venue' for every Chinese player on the Tour, and pick at random which Tournaments.

Re: Should certain players play at the final venue?

Postby snooky147

I have no problem with the reigning world champion having matches held over but any others I do have a problem with because the ones being held over are their perceived golden boys who are getting an advantage that's undeserved. No matter what anyone says there is a vast difference playing a qualifier in a cubicle rather than the venue. Also, occasionally opportunities arrive for a one off sponsorship at a venue. The players being held back at a cubicle(through the arbitrary decision at World Snooker) are being denied any chance of that. Everyone should be on the same playing field. Hearn wants a flat draw, well let it be a TOTALLY FAIR flat draw.

Re: Should certain players play at the final venue?

Postby snooky147

Jewell wrote:I'm all for fairness, but let's not sacrifice the well-being of snooker on the altar of fairness. Snooker is not yet in a position to be able to make do without the star names at the venues.


If Hearn wanted to avoid that possible scenario he shouldn't have implemented the flat draw at all. You can't have it both ways. All these players went through the same rigors of qualifying to get where they are in the rankings. They are entitled to the same treatment from the Governing Body and its a damn disgrace sometimes the way some of them are treated in favour of others.

Re: Should certain players play at the final venue?

Postby Wildey

Jewell wrote:These so-called 'golden boys' are the ones who bring in the majority of the revenue to the sport, whether that is through sponsorship, crowds or television audiences, it is they who create the major interest.

I mean we already have a flat 128 draw, so how much more 'fairer' do want it? As I pointed out in my earlier post you can never really have a 100% fully level playing field so you have to draw the line somewhere.

I'm all for fairness, but let's not sacrifice the well-being of snooker on the altar of fairness. Snooker is not yet in a position to be able to make do without the star names at the venues.

Star names weren't even born at one point so lets make new Star names ...im really not all that bothered if Ronnie retires or not the sport will be just fine with or without him.

Re: Should certain players play at the final venue?

Postby Lucky

I feel this is a big gamble. You could end up with some pretty shambolic events, with no star names. hardcore snooker fans will lap it up. But, general sport fans, sponsors and especially TV may be put off by no house hold names in the televised stages. <ok>

Re: Should certain players play at the final venue?

Postby Wildey

Lucky wrote:I feel this is a big gamble. You could end up with some pretty shambolic events, with no star names. hardcore snooker fans will lap it up. But, general sport fans, sponsors and especially TV may be put off by no house hold names in the televised stages. <ok>

i used to be against this idea but no star names a few new young players is whats appealing about it if it happens....i realize that's not to everyone's taste but from what i can gather looking round other snooker sites it really has caught the imagination.

i get your concerns regarding casual fans but i remember the 80s when people would say "snooker is boring same bloody faces on the TV" i think this will be the boost for the game long term if new faces gets on TV and star names is beaten.

Re: Should certain players play at the final venue?

Postby jamesg1985

As far as I could tell most of the big names made it through the Wuxi qualifying round in Gloucester, with some exceptions. So I don't see that big tournaments will be short of big names, this is the first tournament with the flat 128 and there are lots of big names there, Allen, Trump, Carter, Ding, Robertson etc. Class players will generally win these matches, if they're good enough then they'll make it to the main venue.