Post a reply

The Main Tour.

Postby Wildey

Does Ronnie O'Sullivan have a point.

This Season there are Going to be 19 Ranking Event including the Shootout with 15 of them flat 128 draws

Is having 128 players on tour too much and in Ronnie's Words a lot of those players cant play?

-Would it be better having a tour of 64 with players ranked 33 to 64 in the drop zone.
-Would it be better having 10 or 12 ranking events and then high quality corporate invitational events for the top players

Re: The Main Tour.

Postby Andre147

The 128 system is allright, so I think the 2nd option would be better.

Have these high prestigious invitional tournaments for the top players, and maybe one day have a big brand sponsoring these tournaments, e.g, something like a Rolex, big car brand, a big sponsor like this would put Snooker even more on the map. I think Snooker is too reliant nowadays on betting sponsors, similar to the old days with tobacco sponsoring.

Re: The Main Tour.

Postby Wildey

Andre147 wrote:The 128 system is allright, so I think the 2nd option would be better.

Have these high prestigious invitional tournaments for the top players, and maybe one day have a big brand sponsoring these tournaments, e.g, something like a Rolex, big car brand, a big sponsor like this would put Snooker even more on the map. I think Snooker is too reliant nowadays on betting sponsors, similar to the old days with tobacco sponsoring.

The problem as i see it is Barry Hearn wants everything Ranking.

Next season the China Championship will be Ranking for 128 flat draw. then the dreaded hoot out and the World Grand prix ....

and then he perseveres with this championship league crap...you dont need that rubbish.

ranking events
World Championship (top 16 in to venue)
UK Championship (top 16 in to venue)
International Championship (top 16 in to venue)
Players Championship for top 16 on the one year list (last event before WC)
Flat 128
2 Home nation events (rotations between Scot, Eng, Wales and NI)
German Masters
China Open
European Masters
Shanghai Masters
World Open

then play invitationals based on Rankings, one year list and Champion of Champions

Re: The Main Tour.

Postby Cloud Strife

Wildey wrote:Does Ronnie O'Sullivan have a point.

This Season there are Going to be 19 Ranking Event including the Shootout with 15 of them flat 128 draws

Is having 128 players on tour too much and in Ronnie's Words a lot of those players cant play?

-Would it be better having a tour of 64 with players ranked 33 to 64 in the drop zone.
-Would it be better having 10 or 12 ranking events and then high quality corporate invitational events for the top players


No, I don't think the tour should be cut. However, I do think having all 128 players at every tournament is abit silly tbh.

What I think there should be is a set of main rankers which is open to those with a sufficiently high enough ranking. Then below that you could have a sort of challenger tour with events open to all, but with mainly the lower ranked players playing in them. It would act as a breeding ground for players until they are ready to graduate to the main tour, provided they are good enough. It works well in tennis, IMO. I believe the PTCs could have acted as the challenger tour of snooker which is why I was sad to see them go.

And before anyone asks, if it was down to me I would reserve a certain amount of spots in the main events for qualifiers, so it doesn't become a closed shop completely.

And by all means have more prestigious invitationals as well if there is a demand to stage them.

Re: The Main Tour.

Postby Cloud Strife

Hearn is obsessed with his mantra of fairness for all and that's where this 128 flat draw bullocks comes from. He's made the mistake of trying to copy golf when what he should be copying is tennis as that's a one-on-one sport like snooker is.

Re: The Main Tour.

Postby Pink Ball

Nothing wrong with the 128 format, but I like that it's not there for the World Championship. I'd also like it not to be used for the UK Championship - I think those two should be special, and he can do whatever he likes with the rest of them. It's not a bad format by any means and it's a lot fairer than the old tiered system. My only gripe is that it can seem a bit silly when top players are gone before you even reach the venue, but that's only one gripe.

I'm not a fan of invitationals personally, but I can understand their appeal and how lucrative and gilded they can be. I wouldn't object to a few more of them, and it's nice to reward the top players for making it to the top.

Re: The Main Tour.

Postby Wildey

Pink Ball wrote:Nothing wrong with the 128 format, but I like that it's not there for the World Championship. I'd also like it not to be used for the UK Championship - I think those two should be special, and he can do whatever he likes with the rest of them. It's not a bad format by any means and it's a lot fairer than the old tiered system. My only gripe is that it can seem a bit silly when top players are gone before you even reach the venue, but that's only one gripe.

I'm not a fan of invitationals personally, but I can understand their appeal and how lucrative and gilded they can be. I wouldn't object to a few more of them, and it's nice to reward the top players for making it to the top.

Thats the thing a lot of fans don't like invitationals even snooker players on twitter including MJW suggested making the Masters ranking.

Ronnie does look at things from a selfish point of view no doubt but i think you need medium ground.

Regarding the tour cut to 64 that would mean Jimmy White is gone......you cant justify giving him a wild card because there definitely are 64 better players than him on tour.

but with 128 there are a lot making up the numbers that will never cut it as pro players the likes of Darren Morgan would be more of a challenge so maybe to make it more competitive it would be better with 64.

Snookerbacker idea of a amateur tour would be a great idea and the dropping out 64 would have something to play in and win tour spots.

snookerbacker doesn't want WS to run the tour all he wants is tour spots to be awarded via his tour.

Re: The Main Tour.

Postby Cheshire Cat

The worst thing is, I don't think Hearn cares. Snooker is very popular in China, and I can see more events possibly cropping up there or thereabouts. He'll go where the money is, the players be damned. He can justify it by saying 'it's another event on the calendar, another tournament for players to win. I don't want to hear you complaining.'

The interview with Anthony Hamilton during the NI Open really opened my eyes. We take for granted all of the tournaments we can now follow and watch, I don't think we really give enough consideration to the effort lower-ranked players have to go through to and the consequences of not performing well.

Re: The Main Tour.

Postby Cloud Strife

Cheshire Cat wrote:The worst thing is, I don't think Hearn cares. Snooker is very popular in China, and I can see more events possibly cropping up there or thereabouts. He'll go where the money is, the players be damned. He can justify it by saying 'it's another event on the calendar, another tournament for players to win. I don't want to hear you complaining.'

The interview with Anthony Hamilton during the NI Open really opened my eyes. We take for granted all of the tournaments we can now follow and watch, I don't think we really give enough consideration to the effort lower-ranked players have to go through to and the consequences of not performing well.


Hearn is the type of person who the more people complain about his ideas the less likely he is to change it back or backtrack.