2016 World Championship discussion

[Ben04uk]

Only 7 centuries in the Quarter Finals - can't see there being anyway of getting over 100 for the tournament. The last three matches will have to go deep to even break the current record.

[gavpowell]

The winner doesn't get automatic qualification - he would still have to qualify! I imagine he would go up from 29 to top 16 if he did win however.

Of course he does - Murphy's win in 2005 kept Ian McCulloch out of the top 16, and the champion returns to defend his title in match one on day one.

[Ben04uk]

Of course he does - Murphy's win in 2005 kept Ian McCulloch out of the top 16, and the champion returns to defend his title in match one on day one.

Good point, top 15 + champion. Can't see him winning though!

[gavpowell]

Only the Top 16 qualify by right under the current format. If you are not in the Top 16 you have to qualify.

That applies only on the assumption the champion is in the top 16 - in the event he's not, he plays and then the rest of the field goes down by 1. I'm not sure, but I think O'Sullivan must have been out of the top 16 by time he'd taken a year off and came back to win his fifth title.

[cally]

Like I said. The champ auto quals...

[Billy]

I was going to agree with you but he works really hard at the game and he's a great competitor.

.... I need to have a lie down...

I know, and I honestly don't mean any malice when I say things like that. It's just that I'm afraid his style of play just doesn't inspire me.

Yes! Brilliant indeed. So happy for him. Completely at a loss who to root for in the semi...Ding or McManus.

I was like that when Ding played Williams, but I didn't feel as bad for Mark as I thought I would.

[gavpowell]

Good point, top 15 + champion. Can't see him winning though!

I didn't see him getting to round 2! At every stage of this tournament I've said "Well he's not going to...well ok he's beaten Stevie but he's never getting past Carter...well ok that was a shock but he's never getting past Higgins!"

[adebisi10]

I know it's a wrong attitude but I think I won't see another frame of this championship unless if Selby - Ding final happens, I respect them all but must say I expected a little more from World championship semifinals.

[shmeeko69]

Pitiful, isn't it ....

I wouldn't expect anything less from them, although they're very efficient with their TV licence reminder letters

[neuronic]

What a great tournament so far... so tense, so many major upsets and virtually anything seems possible. Love it.

[shmeeko69]

Super solid match player in his day see was McManus, had to peel him off the table.

I'm not surprised him beating Higgins, they know each other's game so well.

Exactly and I don' think some people factor that in to their thinking or betting (including me)

[cally]

Players that have a more rounded game in every area and have a good tactical snooker brain will have longevity in this game more than the pure 'potters' ever will....

The 'potters' game burns out much quicker than the more rounded 'snooker' players game.

[gavpowell]

What does knowing the other guy's game have to do with it? Aside from everyone knows Higgins' game is "Possibly the greatest all-rounder in history"? We always say snooker is so hard because you can't do anything about your opponent's game, you have to play your own and take your chances.

And can we please now set to rest this ridiculous idea that three qualifying matches ruins everyone? McManus is 45 and in the semis, Ding is in the semis, Mark Williams got to the quarters and was undone by a damaged tip, Kyren Wilson made the quarters on his debut.

[jim evans]

Think two good semi's coming up.

[cally]

What does knowing the other guy's game have to do with it? Aside from everyone knows Higgins' game is "Possibly the greatest all-rounder in history"? We always say snooker is so hard because you can't do anything about your opponent's game, you have to play your own and take your chances..

If you dont see that knowing your mates game inside out has a bearing on things then I dont know what to say. But of course it has a bearing. It's not just a game on the table so to speak, is it. If you know a players game very very well you get to know how that player reacts to certain things etc etc.. I could go on but I won't, it's like playing you're mate you're used to playing week in week out. Don't you think it's a little different to say playing a player you've played only a few times? ... Of course it is and has bearing on a game