Post a reply

Re: Should Snooker implement shot clocks?

Postby SnookerFan

Badsnookerplayer wrote:No. He is a good long potter and should stick to potting long balls.

If certain players are causing a problem with slow play, then an average shot time limit would be a better solution.



:goodpost:

Re: Should Snooker implement shot clocks?

Postby mick745

Snooker is not just about fluent break building and potting. It is a tactical sport, vying for an advantage. The tactical side can be as absorbing if not more than the potting aspect. Shot clocks would reduce this side of the sport and make it poorer as a spectator sport.

Re: Should Snooker implement shot clocks?

Postby SnookerFan

I'm in agreement.

I just find it odd that there are professional players out there that push for this sort of thing. (Shaun Murphy seemingly the most vocal. But I once got in a Twitter argument with Mark Allen about it, as well.)

Re: Should Snooker implement shot clocks?

Postby Johnny Bravo

Hell yes, it would be the best way the grow the number of spectators.
Just like in any other sport, the snooker audience is composed mostly of people that want to be entertained. These type of people simply want their money's worth, meaning they like to see people pot balls, make big breaks and attempt flashy shots. Only purists care about tactical and safety play, for the average Joe watching the game, there couldn't be anything more boring.
Shots clocks also tend to benefit the more talented players.
Most of the time, Murphy talks garbage, but this time he has a great idea. Just look at the Mosconi Cup. It's a shot clock tournament and it's packed every year.
Shot clock is the way to go.

Re: Should Snooker implement shot clocks?

Postby Cloud Strife

Johnny Bravo wrote:Hell yes, it would be the best way the grow the number of spectators.
Just like in any other sport, the snooker audience is composed mostly of people that want to be entertained. These type of people simply want their money's worth, meaning they like to see people pot balls, make big breaks and attempt flashy shots. Only purists care about tactical and safety play, for the average Joe watching the game, there couldn't be anything more boring.
Shots clocks also tend to benefit the more talented players.
Most of the time, Murphy talks garbage, but this time he has a great idea. Just look at the Mosconi Cup. It's a shot clock tournament and it's packed every year.
Shot clock is the way to go.


I wouldn't mind having it one tournament a season, and by that I mean a proper ranking event and not the shoutout.

Re: Should Snooker implement shot clocks?

Postby Johnny Bravo

Cloud Strife wrote:
Johnny Bravo wrote:Hell yes, it would be the best way the grow the number of spectators.
Just like in any other sport, the snooker audience is composed mostly of people that want to be entertained. These type of people simply want their money's worth, meaning they like to see people pot balls, make big breaks and attempt flashy shots. Only purists care about tactical and safety play, for the average Joe watching the game, there couldn't be anything more boring.
Shots clocks also tend to benefit the more talented players.
Most of the time, Murphy talks garbage, but this time he has a great idea. Just look at the Mosconi Cup. It's a shot clock tournament and it's packed every year.
Shot clock is the way to go.


I wouldn't mind having it one tournament a season, and by that I mean a proper ranking event and not the shoutout.


How about at the Masters ???

Re: Should Snooker implement shot clocks?

Postby Pink Ball

Johnny Bravo wrote:
Cloud Strife wrote:
Johnny Bravo wrote:Hell yes, it would be the best way the grow the number of spectators.
Just like in any other sport, the snooker audience is composed mostly of people that want to be entertained. These type of people simply want their money's worth, meaning they like to see people pot balls, make big breaks and attempt flashy shots. Only purists care about tactical and safety play, for the average Joe watching the game, there couldn't be anything more boring.
Shots clocks also tend to benefit the more talented players.
Most of the time, Murphy talks garbage, but this time he has a great idea. Just look at the Mosconi Cup. It's a shot clock tournament and it's packed every year.
Shot clock is the way to go.


I wouldn't mind having it one tournament a season, and by that I mean a proper ranking event and not the shoutout.


How about at the Masters ???

Wow, what a brilliant idea

Re: Should Snooker implement shot clocks?

Postby Cloud Strife

Pink Ball wrote:
Johnny Bravo wrote:
Cloud Strife wrote:
Johnny Bravo wrote:Hell yes, it would be the best way the grow the number of spectators.
Just like in any other sport, the snooker audience is composed mostly of people that want to be entertained. These type of people simply want their money's worth, meaning they like to see people pot balls, make big breaks and attempt flashy shots. Only purists care about tactical and safety play, for the average Joe watching the game, there couldn't be anything more boring.
Shots clocks also tend to benefit the more talented players.
Most of the time, Murphy talks garbage, but this time he has a great idea. Just look at the Mosconi Cup. It's a shot clock tournament and it's packed every year.
Shot clock is the way to go.


I wouldn't mind having it one tournament a season, and by that I mean a proper ranking event and not the shoutout.


How about at the Masters ???

Wow, what a brilliant idea


No, not The Masters. The Grand Prix seems like the ideal candidate.

Re: Should Snooker implement shot clocks?

Postby SnookerFan

Pink Ball wrote:
Johnny Bravo wrote:
Cloud Strife wrote:
Johnny Bravo wrote:Hell yes, it would be the best way the grow the number of spectators.
Just like in any other sport, the snooker audience is composed mostly of people that want to be entertained. These type of people simply want their money's worth, meaning they like to see people pot balls, make big breaks and attempt flashy shots. Only purists care about tactical and safety play, for the average Joe watching the game, there couldn't be anything more boring.
Shots clocks also tend to benefit the more talented players.
Most of the time, Murphy talks garbage, but this time he has a great idea. Just look at the Mosconi Cup. It's a shot clock tournament and it's packed every year.
Shot clock is the way to go.


I wouldn't mind having it one tournament a season, and by that I mean a proper ranking event and not the shoutout.


How about at the Masters ???

Wow, what a brilliant idea


rofl

Re: Should Snooker implement shot clocks?

Postby Badsnookerplayer

The basic premise of a shot clock is flawed.

Once the balls are struck and in motion relative to an observer, they no longer obey Newtonian mechanics in the true sense. In fact, in the frame of reference of the balls time passes more slowly for the players - this is basic (special) relativity. In essence, players who hit the balls harder should be given proportionately longer times adjusted for the relativistic effect of this motion compared to players who strike the ball softly - like Mark Williams.

I am all for relativistic shot clocks but until this is considered it is a non starter.

Re: Should Snooker implement shot clocks?

Postby Johnny Bravo

Badsnookerplayer wrote:The basic premise of a shot clock is flawed.

Once the balls are struck and in motion relative to an observer, they no longer obey Newtonian mechanics in the true sense. In fact, in the frame of reference of the balls time passes more slowly for the players - this is basic (special) relativity. In essence, players who hit the balls harder should be given proportionately longer times adjusted for the relativistic effect of this motion compared to players who strike the ball softly - like Mark Williams.

I am all for relativistic shot clocks but until this is considered it is a non starter.


:| :? :? :hmmm: :dizzy:

Re: Should Snooker implement shot clocks?

Postby Pink Ball

Badsnookerplayer wrote:The basic premise of a shot clock is flawed.

Once the balls are struck and in motion relative to an observer, they no longer obey Newtonian mechanics in the true sense. In fact, in the frame of reference of the balls time passes more slowly for the players - this is basic (special) relativity. In essence, players who hit the balls harder should be given proportionately longer times adjusted for the relativistic effect of this motion compared to players who strike the ball softly - like Mark Williams.

I am all for relativistic shot clocks but until this is considered it is a non starter.

Yeah

Re: Should Snooker implement shot clocks?

Postby SnookerFan

Badsnookerplayer wrote:The basic premise of a shot clock is flawed.

Once the balls are struck and in motion relative to an observer, they no longer obey Newtonian mechanics in the true sense. In fact, in the frame of reference of the balls time passes more slowly for the players - this is basic (special) relativity. In essence, players who hit the balls harder should be given proportionately longer times adjusted for the relativistic effect of this motion compared to players who strike the ball softly - like Mark Williams.

I am all for relativistic shot clocks but until this is considered it is a non starter.


Saviour?

Re: Should Snooker implement shot clocks?

Postby The_Abbott

Johnny Bravo wrote:Hell yes, it would be the best way the grow the number of spectators.
Just like in any other sport, the snooker audience is composed mostly of people that want to be entertained. These type of people simply want their money's worth, meaning they like to see people pot balls, make big breaks and attempt flashy shots. Only purists care about tactical and safety play, for the average Joe watching the game, there couldn't be anything more boring.
Shots clocks also tend to benefit the more talented players.
Most of the time, Murphy talks garbage, but this time he has a great idea. Just look at the Mosconi Cup. It's a shot clock tournament and it's packed every year.
Shot clock is the way to go.


BIB - Really? Didn't Nigel Bond win the shoot out once? Which has a shot clock.

Re: Should Snooker implement shot clocks?

Postby Johnny Bravo

The_Abbott wrote:
Johnny Bravo wrote:Hell yes, it would be the best way the grow the number of spectators.
Just like in any other sport, the snooker audience is composed mostly of people that want to be entertained. These type of people simply want their money's worth, meaning they like to see people pot balls, make big breaks and attempt flashy shots. Only purists care about tactical and safety play, for the average Joe watching the game, there couldn't be anything more boring.
Shots clocks also tend to benefit the more talented players.
Most of the time, Murphy talks garbage, but this time he has a great idea. Just look at the Mosconi Cup. It's a shot clock tournament and it's packed every year.
Shot clock is the way to go.


BIB - Really? Didn't Nigel Bond win the shoot out once? Which has a shot clock.


But that was only 1 frame per match, entirely different matter altogether.

Re: Should Snooker implement shot clocks?

Postby PLtheRef

Badsnookerplayer wrote:A chess style system would be better.


One of the Billiards events used to have a chess style format. Each player had got 15 minutes table time in each game with the match best of three games (Blue Arrow Masters I think it was)

Re: Should Snooker implement shot clocks?

Postby Badsnookerplayer

PLtheRef wrote:
Badsnookerplayer wrote:A chess style system would be better.


One of the Billiards events used to have a chess style format. Each player had got 15 minutes table time in each game with the match best of three games (Blue Arrow Masters I think it was)


Fairer than a shot clock I think.
Not that I would want any timings really.

Re: Should Snooker implement shot clocks?

Postby PLtheRef

Badsnookerplayer wrote:
PLtheRef wrote:
Badsnookerplayer wrote:A chess style system would be better.


One of the Billiards events used to have a chess style format. Each player had got 15 minutes table time in each game with the match best of three games (Blue Arrow Masters I think it was)


Fairer than a shot clock I think.
Not that I would want any timings really.


I think it'd be interesting to have a timed format for an event e.g. having a match played over two hours for example like there is in billiards. You wouldn't have it as the rule however

Re: Should Snooker implement shot clocks?

Postby Sickpotter

Advocates for a shot clocks in ranking/professional events need to get back on their ADD meds and leave the beautiful game alone or go back to watching darts. <ok>

Re: Should Snooker implement shot clocks?

Postby Cloud Strife

Sickpotter wrote:Advocates for a shot clocks in ranking/professional events need to get back on their ADD meds and leave the beautiful game alone or go back to watching darts. <ok>


Typical bull response.

Nobody's asking for widespread use of shot clocks. If it ever happens, it will only probably be for one event, in order to retain the novelty value of it. I don't see why that would be such a big deal.

I would personally like to see it, even in an experimental capacity if needs be, and this is coming from someone who can't stand the Shootout and thinks the World Championship is the most entertaining sporting event of the year....I suppose I had better get back to my ADD meds. :roll:

Re: Should Snooker implement shot clocks?

Postby Sickpotter

Cloud Strife wrote:
Sickpotter wrote:Advocates for a shot clocks in ranking/professional events need to get back on their ADD meds and leave the beautiful game alone or go back to watching darts. <ok>


Typical bull response.

Nobody's asking for widespread use of shot clocks. If it ever happens, it will only probably be for one event, in order to retain the novelty value of it. I don't see why that would be such a big deal.

I would personally like to see it, even in an experimental capacity if needs be, and this is coming from someone who can't stand the Shootout and thinks the World Championship is the most entertaining sporting event of the year....I suppose I had better get back to my ADD meds. :roll:


The question posed made no mention of how many tournaments it would be implemented for so I gave my opinion.....shot clocks have no place in the professional game.

Shot clocks are a gimmick that does nothing to enhance the game and removes a level playing field favoring those who shoot quicker. You don't introduce a format that provides an advantage to any one type of player in professional events....exhibition sure, not actual events.

If you can't stand the shootout why would you push for the shot clock to be brought in for a normal event? The shootout was the experiment for shot clocks. The only difference between a shootout and normal event would be you'd play more than one frame.....was the one frame format your issue with the shootout?

Re: Should Snooker implement shot clocks?

Postby Cloud Strife

Ok fair enough, I take your point about the level playing and giving certain players an advantage over others. That said, there are plenty of instances within a snooker season where there isn't a level playing field and where some are given an advantage over others, so why would this be any different.

As I said, I wouldn't mind an experimental event to get feedback from the players and fans. I don't believe the Shootout was the experiment. If it was, it wasn't a very good one, as it incorporated other rule changes like ball in hand after a foul, every shot must hit a cushion etc. Not to mention the shitty music, one frame matches and boorish crowds.

Re: Should Snooker implement shot clocks?

Postby Sickpotter

Now I'm curious...What other instances of a non-level playing field are you referencing?

IMO as long as any change being brought in doesn't offer an advantage to any one player/type of player I don't mind experimenting with an event or two.

Re: Should Snooker implement shot clocks?

Postby Cloud Strife

Sickpotter wrote:Now I'm curious...What other instances of a non-level playing field are you referencing?

IMO as long as any change being brought in doesn't offer an advantage to any one player/type of player I don't mind experimenting with an event or two.


Take the UK Championship for example. Half playing in the main venue and the other half playing in the sports hall, which by most accounts, is vastly inferior. Not a level playing there, imo.

Re: Should Snooker implement shot clocks?

Postby PLtheRef

Sickpotter wrote:Now I'm curious...What other instances of a non-level playing field are you referencing?

IMO as long as any change being brought in doesn't offer an advantage to any one player/type of player I don't mind experimenting with an event or two.


Might not be a helpful response, but is the example of ranking events with less than 128 players an example of a non-level playing field? Does seeding 16 players into the last 32 of the World Championships generate a non-level playing field?

A shot-clock might not be good for the less prolific players - ok, what about longer formats? It's always said that the higher ranked, more experienced players start favourite in the two session matches, and even more so at the Crucible. Is that not a little unfair on those players who other than the one event, have little or no multi-session match experience. Do we go the way of Tennis and have pretty much every single match over a single format, with the alternative being a slightly longer one - to ensure we have level playing field

What about flukes? Doesn't that remove the level playing field? Do we outlaw them to ensure no player gets an advantage over the other?

Like I said, I'm being facetious and unhelpful with those questions, I know ;-)

I'm not advocating a shot-clock as a routine in Snooker, though with an event like the Shootout, just saying it would be interesting if we had a format in snooker, like billiards where the winner was the one with the most points after a set amount of time wins - similarly, aggregate score after x amount of frames.

You could never have these all the time, in the same way that the shootout only works because its the one event. But it would make for interesting reading

Re: Should Snooker implement shot clocks?

Postby kolompar

I thought not allowing time wasting and gamesmanship woud make a more level playing field.
I'm not supporting shot clocks but that's the worst argument I ever heard, defending slow players like that <doh>