Post a reply

Phil Yates comments in PL last week

Postby Monique

I think everyone will agree that the PL this season is one of the best we ever had. The field having been selected on merits, it has yielded excellent, high quality, matches overall; there were a couple of not so good ones but that happens in every tournament. It has also demonstrated that, provided the players are good enough, the shot clock is not incompatible with good safety and hard matchplay. The Selby-Murphy last frame was a prime example of it.
I'm surprised that nobody reacted to Phil Yates comments though...
Phil was commenting on Marco Fu, who isn't particularly fast as a player, but still proved himself a handful for everyone in PL this season. Marco was playing a shot with the rest, putting an extension on both the rest and his cue, and Phil observed that 25 seconds is actually plenty of time. He then went on saying something along the lines "A couple of seasons ago I would have thought this is heresy, but now I think that ranking events should actually be played under shot clock". Phil elaborated, saying that he would favour a 30 seconds shot clock with ample provision of timeouts. Interestingly he also stressed on the reason for his change of opinion. "That would prevent players to deliberately slow down for the sole purpose of putting their opponents off" and he added that nobody needs over 25 seconds to play a shot bar exceptional circumstances.
Now I must admit this pleased me.
First and foremost because IMO players should win on the table, not by putting their opponents off with questionable tactics. The rules state clearly that the ref should warn a player who takes excessive time over a shot as this is deemed ungentlemanly conduct. The weakness of the rule is that it's left to the ref to judge it and most have been afraid to put it into force. But the fact that that rule is there is evidence that this practice is NOT what snooker should be about. It's ungentlemanly conduct just as much as making noise when your opponent is on the shot would be (or actually is, because I've seen at least one occurence of a player doing this, by crunching ice several times just as his opponent was down on the shot, and again the ref didn't intervene; it's his opponent who confronted him.)
Next it pleased me because if came from Phil Yates, a man nobody can accuse of being stupid. Nobody neither can claim Phil doesn't know his snooker and doesn't love the game: he's devoted his live to it and it's promotion. He's also not a "Barry Hearn man", he's always been his own man. He's not a ROS fanboy neither, he's actually a massive Hendry fan.
Phil hinted that the outcome of the World Open played a part in his change of opinion.
What the World Open has proved is that it is a myth that you need a long format to have the best players come out on top. Pressure is a main factor and pressure can be triggered in several ways. The very short cut-throat format of the World Open did it. The shot-clock time pressure does it too. Under shot-clock the best players will come on top, the others will struggle more.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not pleading for the disappearance of long formats. I love the UK as it is (bar Telford, it should be brought back in a better place), I love the WC provided a bit of tweaking is done in order to make the final better and fairer.
I'm pleading for variety. For the sake of the audience first of all: different formats will attract more of a cross section. For the sake of the players being tested on all facets of their skills and that includes the ability to think and excecute correctly under (time) pressure.
And before anyone jumps at me saying the PL is a mickey mouse event ... here is what Selby has to say about it: http://www.edp24.co.uk/sport/potters_go ... t_1_719710
Make no mistake: the top players value it very much. Now Mark is going a tad too far ... you can't have a 7 men event, almost purely on invitation, being ranking! "Ronnie moment" Mark? ;)

Re: Phil Yates comments in PL last week

Postby Wildey

THEY ALL TALKING bullocks

how can you have a qualifier with shot clocks beeps going off ever minute.

and Alex O'Paul commented if there's a maximum 25 second a shot tournament there should be a minimum 25 second a shot tournament to balance it out which i agree with in Ranking tournaments whitch are players livelihood you can not have it contrived for some players and not others it has to be at the table a equal playing field at ALL TIME without question.

that frame between Selby and Murphy had nothing to do with shot clock it was a exciting frame because of the match......

yes i agree most play under 25 seconds so i have to ask why do we need a shot clock ?

yes some players goes over that but very rearly in these days any player avarages over 25 seconds a shot so the shot clock is useless.

i did comment on it at the time and i called Phil yates a clueless moron which they are.

comment 11th viewtopic.php?f=175&t=1553

players and commentators looks absalutly thick in knowing what works and what don't <doh>

Re: Phil Yates comments in PL last week

Postby Witz78

wildLOVESWAGNER wrote:THEY ALL TALKING bullocks

how can you have a qualifier with shot clocks beeps going off ever minute.

and Alex O'Paul commented if there's a maximum 25 second a shot tournament there should be a minimum 25 second a shot tournament to balance it out which i agree with in Ranking tournaments whitch are players livelihood you can not have it contrived for some players and not others it has to be at the table a equal playing field at ALL TIME without question.

that frame between Selby and Murphy had nothing to do with shot clock it was a exciting frame because of the match......

yes i agree most play under 25 seconds so i have to ask why do we need a shot clock ?

yes some players goes over that but very rearly in these days any player avarages over 25 seconds a shot so the shot clock is useless.


i did comment on it at the time and i called Phil yates a clueless moron which they are.

comment 11th viewtopic.php?f=175&t=1553

players and commentators looks absalutly thick in knowing what works and what don't <doh>


Why NOT have a shot clock then, youve kinda answered your own argument there rofl

Since bulk of players normally have an average shot time of under 25 seconds, then with a suitable number of time outs it works fine. As Monique says all it does is eradicate the go slow on purpose merchants (no names ;) ) who take an eternity on purpose to frustrate their opponents and kill the game as a spectacle.

Re: Phil Yates comments in PL last week

Postby Wildey

Witz78 wrote:
wildLOVESWAGNER wrote:THEY ALL TALKING bullocks

how can you have a qualifier with shot clocks beeps going off ever minute.

and Alex O'Paul commented if there's a maximum 25 second a shot tournament there should be a minimum 25 second a shot tournament to balance it out which i agree with in Ranking tournaments whitch are players livelihood you can not have it contrived for some players and not others it has to be at the table a equal playing field at ALL TIME without question.

that frame between Selby and Murphy had nothing to do with shot clock it was a exciting frame because of the match......

yes i agree most play under 25 seconds so i have to ask why do we need a shot clock ?

yes some players goes over that but very rearly in these days any player avarages over 25 seconds a shot so the shot clock is useless.


i did comment on it at the time and i called Phil yates a clueless moron which they are.

comment 11th viewtopic.php?f=175&t=1553

players and commentators looks absalutly thick in knowing what works and what don't <doh>


Why NOT have a shot clock then, youve kinda answered your own argument there rofl

Since bulk of players normally have an average shot time of under 25 seconds, then with a suitable number of time outs it works fine. As Monique says all it does is eradicate the go slow on purpose merchants (no names ;) ) who take an eternity on purpose to frustrate their opponents and kill the game as a spectacle.


shot clocks will encourage slower players to rush shots and it will be car crash nonsense....

in the end players will be playing shots at 17 or 18 seconds for the hell of it and then will prompt stupid idiots in the commentary box to say "ohhhh they playing at 18 second a shot why not have a 20 second shot clock tournament".

they average 25 seconds or less because they play at their natural pace why would anyone want a tournament that makes players play unnaturally out of time fear ?

Re: Phil Yates comments in PL last week

Postby Roland

The last frame in the Murphy v Selby match was one of the best frames I've seen this season and they had both run out of time outs and were forced into thinking fast and on several occasions nearly ran out of time and had to rush. It was entertaining but in the context of a big event it would have been farcical.

Re: Phil Yates comments in PL last week

Postby Bourne

What the argument basically is is between do you want quick snooker that quality will generally be diminished with, or do you want to keep snooker with players taking their time but generally making the right shots and quality is maintained ?

No brainer.

Re: Phil Yates comments in PL last week

Postby Witz78

Theres a swing of opinion from players, commentators and some fans towards a Shot Clock Ranking Event so i reckon we will see one next season withiut a doubt.

To be honest if its an additional tournament added onto the calendar whats the harm?

Re: Phil Yates comments in PL last week

Postby Roland

As for Phil Yates, I've always liked him and he loves snooker. He's one of those people like Alex0paul who can reel off interesting and relevent stats off the top of his head. But his knowledge on gameplay and stategy isn't strong enough to take him seriously on matters such as a shot clock. The thing which I hate is the suggestion of increasing it to 30 or 40 seconds because that's an attempt to make it commonplace across all of snooker and for me it should remain a gimmick for entertainment purposes.

Also Monique has no appreciation of the art of mind games ;)

Re: Phil Yates comments in PL last week

Postby Wildey

yes i take it even if they increase it to 40 there will be time outs so really whats the point because you really can count on 1 hand the amount of shots that goes over 40 seconds per match.

Re: Phil Yates comments in PL last week

Postby Monique

wildLOVESWAGNER wrote:yes i take it even if they increase it to 40 there will be time outs so really whats the point because you really can count on 1 hand the amount of shots that goes over 40 seconds per match.


That's not true. In frame one of the World Open semis Ebdon vs ROS, Ebdon was up to a 47 seconds average shot time at a point. So clearly there must have been many shots that were over 40 seconds and that was totally unnecessary. Yes there was a lot of safeties involved, and they traded them, but Ronnie was still around the 25 sec on average. Ebbo still lost it which pleased me to no ends.
If you want to allow mind games why not go for it fully? Why not allow making noise, insulting your opponent, quitting the arena for several minutes in the middle of the frame, preferably when you are at the table? Where do you put the limits?
The rules have provisions that deem unnecessarily long shot time as ungentlemanly and against the rules. If it can't be enforced by the refs, because they are afraid of God knows what, then it should be enforced otherwise.

Why do we need a shot clock if most shots are played under 25 seconds? Precisely to stop that kind of unsporting behaviour, as Phil Yates stressed. The ones who play the game properly won't be bothered. They won't play any differently if there is a 30 sec limit than they do today, they are comfortably within it anyway.

Re: Phil Yates comments in PL last week

Postby Monique

Sonny wrote:The last frame in the Murphy v Selby match was one of the best frames I've seen this season and they had both run out of time outs and were forced into thinking fast and on several occasions nearly ran out of time and had to rush. It was entertaining but in the context of a big event it would have been farcical.


No it wouldn't, certainly not with 30 seconds as Phil proposed and more timeouts available. It would be extremely interesting at it would sort the boys from the men as clear and clever thinking is one of the qualities you expect from a top snooker player. Not the cheats from the sportsmen.

Re: Phil Yates comments in PL last week

Postby Casey

When players are on top form the shot clock works well, however when one or more players are not at their best things go really wrong. Fu v Robbo was a good example, because both were struggling the shot clock dragged the match out even longer ( over two hours for 6 frames) they were rushing and as a result missing pots. they also played alot of negative safety because they hadn't time to think a bit more. This dragged the match out even further.

When thinking shot clock for a ranking event you have to think about the whole 96 players, just because the likes of Ronnie, Williams and Selby play top class snooker with it doesn't mean the rest will. Car crash would be my prediction.

People use Peter Ebdon as an example, but remember his actual cue action is drawn out (unintentional) this is not something he can change...why should he be punished for this? :chin:

It would seem there will be some form of shot clock ranker in the next few years, although when ssome of the matches are still taking well over 2 hours the desired result will be different from whats expected.

Re: Phil Yates comments in PL last week

Postby Wildey

right then just imagine we have a shot clock tournament.

how will that work with 8 table set up at the academy ?

its all very well and good saying shot clock but you cant have half a tournament played under 1 rule to the other half but you cant have players saying time out and pips going off all over the place in a 8 table set up so ive yet to hear anyone saying how it will work.

Re: Phil Yates comments in PL last week

Postby Witz78

wildLOVESWAGNER wrote:right then just imagine we have a shot clock tournament.

how will that work with 8 table set up at the academy ?

its all very well and good saying shot clock but you cant have half a tournament played under 1 rule to the other half but you cant have players saying time out and pips going off all over the place in a 8 table set up so ive yet to hear anyone saying how it will work.


theres a thing called modern technology.

a small pager-style device could vibrate in the players pocket to alert them that they only have 5 seconds left.

there could be a digital countdown clock on the wall so they can see how long they have left.

or the ref could even act as the clock telling the players when they have 10, 5 then 0 seconds left.

Re: Phil Yates comments in PL last week

Postby Wildey

Yes Great a player down on a shot pulling back the cue ready to follow through then something vibrating in his pocket he then cues down on the ball and it ends up on another Table <doh>

how the hell can that keep quality up if their pocket vibrates every so often <laugh> ......

Re: Phil Yates comments in PL last week

Postby Monique

Oh boys ... no need for beeps or vibrators ;) ... why not borrow an idea from power snooker? The lamps above the table turn red when they reach the 5 secs limit. No problem in a multi-table environment and if the playing area is open the audience would notice right away.

Re: Phil Yates comments in PL last week

Postby Wildey

Vibrators and Red Lights are we sure its Snooker thats Being talked about here rofl

Re: Phil Yates comments in PL last week

Postby Monique

wildLOVESWAGNER wrote:Vibrators and Red Lights are we sure its Snooker thats Being talked about here rofl


It's all about sexing up the game innit? :innocent:

Re: Phil Yates comments in PL last week

Postby Wildey

Monique wrote:
wildLOVESWAGNER wrote:Vibrators and Red Lights are we sure its Snooker thats Being talked about here rofl


It's all about sexing up the game innit? :innocent:

<laugh>

Re: Phil Yates comments in PL last week

Postby JohnFromLondonTown

Not so sure I agree with you Mon. Once you get inside a fella's head having spotted the flaws in his game, you jump all over it.

I used to know straight away how to beat some fella's & I could notice that things weren't right, & if their bottle or mental strenght couldn't hack it, so be it.