Champion of Champions Snooker

[Odrl]

I don't see what the problem is...

It was known in advance that this tournament would feature players who have won recent events, so it's not really an "invitational", in the same way that the Masters is not. You qualify by winning a relevant title. And since there weren't 16 winners in this period, they invited the two highest-ranked players as well, which is the only fair decision the governing body can make. They have a responsibility to treat all players equally, and I don't want to see them just inviting their favourite players, like they did with Jimmy White at the Masters.

So, even if you think that Gould hasn't won anything relevant and shouldn't be in it, the next in line would be Robert Milkins, not Mark Williams. There are other former World Champions and major winners on the tour, but this event is not about former champions, is it? :wink:

[sberry]

but this event is not about former champions, is it?

but surely you could forgive joe punter for thinking it might be from it's name?

maybe they should have given it another name then, like "Barry's Extra Made Up Competition For Telly That Has Nothing To Do With Former Champions"

[SnookerFan]

but surely you could forgive joe punter for thinking it might be from it's name?

maybe they should have given it another name then, like "Barry's Extra Made Up Competition For Telly That Has Nothing To Do With Former Champions"

To be fair, it's supposed to have nothing to do with former champions. It's supposed to have something to do with current champions.

Martin Gould is there because in 2013 he won The Championship League and the Snooker Shootout. Nobody is claiming these tournament wins are better than Mark Williams combined achievements, it's just that Mark Williams isn't currently champion of anything that would qualify him to be here.

Besides, if you're going to let people in based on achievements in the past, you could say Steve Davis deserves it more because he's won more than Mark Williams. You could even claim he is a champion, as he's just won the Seniors Championship.

At the end of the day, in the absence of 16 current champions they've decided to let the two highest ranked players in that haven't won a tournament in the last season. You could argue that that's unfair also. Why should people who are not champions of something be let in to a Champion Of Champions?

The point I'm trying to make is, much though I like Mark Williams, you could quibble a lot of things if you really want to. The rules have always been; "They have to currently be a defending champion, and if there aren't enough defending champions we start letting the highest ranked players in." Unfortunately, Mark Williams qualifies as neither.

[gavpowell]

but surely you could forgive joe punter for thinking it might be from it's name?

maybe they should have given it another name then, like "Barry's Extra Made Up Competition For Telly That Has Nothing To Do With Former Champions"

Maybe it's me, but the first thing I thought of was that it would be all the current reigning champions. It turns out to be "Not quite" and it seems a bit silly from the name that they're letting Murphy and Davis in, but if you have to fill the place, it seems fair to give it on merit.

If you can't make the draw with all the current champions, it is far more credible in my opinion to invite the next-highest ranked guys rather than a guy who was tremendously successful but has seen better days. Otherwise, Steve Davis should be given priority over Williams, which would be even sillier.

If you were basing it on past champions, you might as well say the winner is a pretender to the throne because Joe Davis and Stephen Hendry weren't playing

[SnookerFan]

Maybe it's me, but the first thing I thought of was that it would be all the current reigning champions. It turns out to be "Not quite" and it seems a bit silly from the name that they're letting Murphy and Davis in, but if you have to fill the place, it seems fair to give it on merit.

If you can't make the draw with all the current champions, it is far more credible in my opinion to invite the next-highest ranked guys rather than a guy who was tremendously successful but has seen better days. Otherwise, Steve Davis should be given priority over Williams, which would be even sillier.

If you were basing it on past champions, you might as well say the winner is a pretender to the throne because Joe Davis and Stephen Hendry weren't playing

Yeah agreed.

In my mind, and with no disrespect to either players, it seems more of a shame to me that they let Davis and Murphy in. Neither of them are champions. I'd rather it be 16 reigning champions in, even if it's a champion of some piffly little event.

Of course though, this involves there being 16 players that can be called champions to let in. If there isn't, letting in the highest ranking non-champions seems as fair a way to do it as anything.

[SnookerFan]

Though, in all honesty, I think we're in danger of over-analysing this.

It's just an invitational event, and it's nice to see that there's a bit of snooker on ITV 4. That's all this event really means to me. Doesn't seem worth getting too upset about.

[wildJONESEYE]

Doesn't explain it to me - the fifth most successful player of the modern game, double world champ, multiple maximums, world number 1 for three seasons, 18 ranking titles, over 250 centuries, nearly £4million in prize money, etc, missing out on a champions invitation event in favour of someone who has never been world champ, or number 1 (or even the top ten) or won a ranking event, or made a maximum and who is below MW in the rankings!

Fair play to MG for his invite and good luck but I can't help feeling somebody has upset somebody for that decision to have been made, doesn't make sense to me and devalues the event, imo

Lets invite Ray Reardon he has 6 world titles.

doesn't matter what Mark has done over 20 years its irrelevant its here and now and Gould did win the shootout. personally the player that shouldn't be there is Shaun Murphy he hasent won a tournament of any description since the Brazilian Masters in 2011 at least in that time Mark Williams has won a PTC in 2013.

[SnookerFan]

Lets invite Ray Reardon he has 6 world titles.

doesn't matter what Mark has done over 20 years its irrelevant its here and now and Gould did win the shootout. personally the player that shouldn't be there is Shaun Murphy he hasent won a tournament of any description since the Brazilian Masters in 2011 at least in that time Mark Williams has won a PTC in 2013.

THE BIGGER DISGRACE IS THAT THEY ARE INGORING STEVE'S SENIOR TRIUMPH!


Just kidding.

[wildJONESEYE]

THE BIGGER DISGRACE IS THAT THEY ARE INGORING STEVE'S SENIOR TRIUMPH!


Just kidding.

he would have ignored the invite anyway he is getting very intimate with kangaroo balls and crock privates.

[SnookerFan]

he would have ignored the invite anyway he is getting very intimate with kangaroo balls and crock privates.

Oh right. That starts this weekend, don't it?

I thought at first it was only on a week or so. However long it's on, it's too much.

[mythman69]

Who do you think will win it?

ROS paying $4
Robertson $6
Ding $8
Trump $9
Selby $10
Higgins $11
Allen $13
Murphy $17
Maguire $17
Fu $21
Bingham $21
Carter $34
Hawkins $34
Walden $34
Davis $51
Gould $61

I am thinking Robertson (but I'm biased) and the longshot Murphy or Hawkins.

[coomsey76]

I would say on current form it would have to be Ding or Allen......

So going by those pay outs, Ronnie is favourite??

[Byrom]

Mark Allen Ding and Robertson are favourites for me but I see a bit of value in Mark Selby for this event - and my outsider is Maguire

So that's the two I am on - - I been on a bit of a good run of late with a few good wins so don't go off what I say - the run has to end sooner or later.

[coomsey76]

That wouldn't be a bad bet Byrom.....

Allen 12-1
Ding 7-1
Robertson 5-1

That trio would definitely be worth a punt.... I'm surprised Ding is 7's considering he has just won 3 tournaments!!

[SouthPaw]

I'd have to say Robertson, though most of those players could win it no problem, personally i don't see the point in snooker outright betting... the odds are usually poor and should be higher considering how many matches are usually played before any final!