Welsh Open Feb 16-22, 2015

[The Twitching Pigeon]

LMFAO...... Trump clearly decided he's had enough as well.

[cyberheater]

Well, 6 is pretty rare, but you do see it sometimes. Shaun Murphy springs to mind, I think he played on for 7 in his match against Adrian Gunnell in the 2008 Grand Prix. Trump played on for 5 against Maguire in the Masters this season. :smile:

LOL. You're not exactly making a strong argument here.

I remember the Trump vs Maguire match. Trump really did look bewildered and shellshocked and couldn't believe it was over. Even the commentators couldn't believe he played on.

Well done Williams. This should help you when it comes to qualifying within the top 16 for the Worlds.

[Dr_Doctor]

Well done Mark.

[cyberheater]

Well done Ben.

[Odrl]

I remember the Trump vs Maguire match. Trump really did look bewildered and shellshocked and couldn't believe it was over. Even the commentators couldn't believe he played on.

The commentators rarely believe it, they usually start making their farewell speech right after match ball goes down. :wink:

It's true though, sometimes players play on because they are in denial a little and just don't want to accept they've lost. Other times they genuinely believe they still have a chance, and I think we've seen both situations with Selby in the past. I'm not sure he is the only player who would have played on though, that's all I wanted to say. :smile:


Surprisingly poor stuff from Trump then, reminiscent of his loss to Allen in the UK Championship last season, where he just couldn't do anything right all match. Williams looked quite good at times, but again his mistakes might get punished more heavily on another day. :smile:

[Neil Taperell]

Had a mad bet today on the following players to win their respective matches:

Brecel
Woolaston
Williams
Stevens
Walden

1 down ......4 to go !

3 down .......2 to go !!!

[Stony152]

It's simply ridiculous that Mark carried on playing needing 6 snookers. Just time wasting and grandstanding.

I'm not an expert on snooker etiquette, but that made me really angry. Instead of shaking Brecel's hand and saying nice win he made him wait longer for no reason other than "I'm Mark Selby, and you're not"

If it was O'Sullivan or Robertson he never would have done that. It really made me lose some respect for him.

[cyberheater]

The commentators rarely believe it, they usually start making their farewell speech right after match ball goes down. :wink:

It's true though, sometimes players play on because they are in denial a little and just don't want to accept they've lost. Other times they genuinely believe they still have a chance, and I think we've seen both situations with Selby in the past. I'm not sure he is the only player who would have played on though, that's all I wanted to say. :smile:

Well to be fair. Mark is one of the best players in the world for laying snookers so if anyone could get 5 then it's him.

Surprisingly poor stuff from Trump then, reminiscent of his loss to Allen in the UK Championship last season, where he just couldn't do anything right all match. Williams looked quite good at times, but again his mistakes might get punished more heavily on another day. :smile:

It was a very odd performance from Judd. I think sometimes he tries too hard.

3 down .......2 to go !!!

LOL.

[Stony152]

As mentioned previously in this thread, it's ridiculous that a full ranking event has best of 7 matches.

Can someone explain why they do that. Why not start an hour earlier and have a best of 9? The larger the sample size the greater the chance that the better player will win. Don't the tournament organizers want to give the top players the best possible opportunity to win?

It's OK in the PTC events, but it should be a minimum of best of 9 in ranking events.

[Odrl]

3 down .......2 to go !!!

Not looking too bad now, the three toughest ones are already down. :smile: The other two matches seem like a 50-50 at the moment, although Bingham did beat Walden 6-0 the last time they played, and Fu won the last two against Stevens as well. :smile:

[Odrl]

As mentioned previously in this thread, it's ridiculous that a full ranking event has best of 7 matches.

Can someone explain why they do that. Why not start an hour earlier and have a best of 9? The larger the sample size the greater the chance that the better player will win. Don't the tournament organizers want to give the top players the best possible opportunity to win?

It's OK in the PTC events, but it should be a minimum of best of 9 in ranking events.

Well, when they first dumbed down the Welsh Open the supposed reason was to go from three tables to two at the venue, so all matches could be televised, but they needed to shorten them to squeeze in an extra session.

And this year we had 11 tables and only one televised, so no excuse really. This format is clearly disliked by the majority of snooker fans, so I think it's just Hearn stubbornly refusing to admit it was a bad idea. Kind of like the continued degradation of the UK Championship. :wink:

[cyberheater]

As mentioned previously in this thread, it's ridiculous that a full ranking event has best of 7 matches.

Can someone explain why they do that. Why not start an hour earlier and have a best of 9? The larger the sample size the greater the chance that the better player will win. Don't the tournament organizers want to give the top players the best possible opportunity to win?

It's OK in the PTC events, but it should be a minimum of best of 9 in ranking events.

I would prefer a best of 9 as well. Some players barely get started and it's game over.

I also would like all professional snooker tournaments finals to have a best of 15 frames minimum. Over two sessions.

[Stony152]

Well, when they first dumbed down the Welsh Open the supposed reason was to go from three tables to two at the venue, so all matches could be televised, but they needed to shorten them to squeeze in an extra session.

And this year we had 11 tables and only one televised, so no excuse really. This format is clearly disliked by the majority of snooker fans, so I think it's just Hearn stubbornly refusing to admit it was a bad idea. Kind of like the continued degradation of the UK Championship. :wink:

I just find it bizarre that the QUALIFYING for the world championships is best of 19 and the FINAL of a full ranking event is best of 17 and the semis are only a best of 11. Is the world championship that much more important than any other tournament? This tournament, as evidenced by the results, is just basically flipping coins. Nothing against Gary Wilson, but I can't believe anybody wants to see him play Robertson tonight.

I love a lot of what Hearn has done. How nobody else was able to arrange tournaments in Europe and Asia where there is obviously a lot of interest is beyond me. I guess he really is a genius at promoting.

But I think most serious snooker fans would like to see best of 19+ matches at more than just the world championships. I'm all for giving lower ranked players a better chance to progress up the rankings, but if a 128 draw requires best of 7 matches in a full ranking tournament then perhaps we need to go to a compromise and a 64 draw with everybody starting on equal footing. Maybe the top 56 and lower ranked players playing off for the final 8 spots.

[robertmac]

Trump never seemed to settle down and clearly
wasnt in this match.
Hopefully Robertson will bring his A game.
Some good matches left tho.

[cyberheater]

Well it's Stevens vs Fu. I expect Marco to win this.

Also on just now is Maguire vs McManus. I would love for McManus to win but I think Mags will dominate.