I think the "best-of-21 frame" final is a poisoned gift for the fans

[cesard]

When fans knew thr format of the tournament, that it will be best-of-11 with a best-of-19 semi and a best-of-21 final , make a jump in the chair. It is that fans really want.

But I think the reason can be another one. We know that Hearn wants to reduce the format, and "why don´t we reduce the World Championship too, that is too long and old-fashioned?"

Even Ronnie wants to reduce the World Championship:

https://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/other...nooker-7310013

Then I guess that the reason is this:

-Hearn wants a World Championship far shorter than now, but on same time, that it would be a respectable tournament. Then I guess that his idea would be a 48 or 64 tournament with all matches in 2 sessions, like UK a few years ago. UK was best-of-17 with a best-of-19 final. Then the possible future WC would be with one more round in the draw, but all matches best-of-17 or best-of-19 (or both formats according to the round). Then, the problem would be the final. If many finals in the circuit are best-of-19, it would have no sense that WC final would be "best-of-19". If it is in two days or more than 2 sessions would be longer. Then, the next solution, would be a "best-of-21" in 2 sessions. Probably they discussed that this format has 2 sessions, but they are too long. Then the answer would have been:

-And why don´t we check in a normal tournament, a best-of-21 before we make the change?

The reason is obvious, if all tournaments are shorter every time, why extend the final just one step?

[DeanH]

ring ring
"Hello?"
"hi boss, I have an idea; I work half the time but you still pay me the same and of course the pay goes up a bit every year, and maybe reduce my hours again in the future. What do you think?"
click buuuurrrrr

[JimMalone]

I think it's great and also right to have such a final for a big event. Definitely a step into the right direction.

[Mark187187]

I don't think reducing the world's would be popular with fans, and Hearn knows that. If it was something he thought people wanted he would have already done it. He doesn't seem like someone who pussy foot's around shaping the game the way he wants it, and he's consistently said the world's aren't going so be shorter format. And ROS talks a lot of BS. He's said the complete opposite before.

[cesard]

ring ring
"Hello?"
"hi boss, I have an idea; I work half the time but you still pay me the same and of course the pay goes up a bit every year, and maybe reduce my hours again in the future. What do you think?"
click buuuurrrrr

No , I told you already it would be more players in the tournament

Now the WC is , in sessions:

1st Round: 16 * 2 sessions = 32
2nd Round 8 * 3 = 24
Quarter-FInals 4 *3 = 12
Semi-Finals 2 * 4= 8
Final 4

Total = 80 sessions

A 48 players format it would be 94 sessions; and 64 players 126 sessions.

It would be more lucrative; and Ronnie supports this.

I prefer the current format, but I think this "best-of-21" it is to check for the future World Championship final

[DeanH]

I was replying as per ROS liking the idea; of course he would he wants to take the money for less work

[cesard]

I was replying as per ROS liking the idea; of course he would he wants to take the money for less work

Ah, sorry, I understood it was sarcasm why this format wouldn´t change.

But I don´t understand Ronnie position. With this format is easier for him to achieve final rounds. I think that top players should love at it is now, that favours top players

[Csmith]

If you reduce the match length of the World Championships, you reduce the prestige. You can't just slap the title "World Championship" on a tournament and expect it to mean anything. Pool slaps big titles on undeserving tournaments all the time and it's really goofy. There needs to be something about the event that makes it a bigger test. Similar to golf where the courses are often more difficult and in tennis where the matches are longer.

There is a reason why there has only been something like 17 winners in the last 40 years. The format tends to favor the best player of the moment. If you cut it to a best of 11, then it's no different than any other best of 11 and it's honestly fair game for anyone in the top 32. Before the format change of the UK championship, I considered it the second most important tournament on the calender. Now I rank it as number three behind the Masters.

[thai_son22]

I like the longer matches. More snooker on TV haha. Id love to have snooker on all day, all year round haha

[cesard]

If you reduce the match length of the World Championships, you reduce the prestige. You can't just slap the title "World Championship" on a tournament and expect it to mean anything. Pool slaps big titles on undeserving tournaments all the time and it's really goofy. There needs to be something about the event that makes it a bigger test. Similar to golf where the courses are often more difficult and in tennis where the matches are longer.

There is a reason why there has only been something like 17 winners in the last 40 years. The format tends to favor the best player of the moment. If you cut it to a best of 11, then it's no different than any other best of 11 and it's honestly fair game for anyone in the top 32. Before the format change of the UK championship, I considered it the second most important tournament on the calender. Now I rank it as number three behind the Masters.

I fully agree with you; just I´m thinking what Hearn thinks

Anyway, WC would have more prestige, UK winner plays 8 sessions, Master winner 5, China open 8 too, WC at least 10 (48 players) or 12 (64 players)

[TooDark]

World Championship is the World Championship and format should not be touched as it’s earned not won!

[DeanH]

I think the "best-of-21 frame" final is a poisoned gift for the fans

didn't Hearn say a year or so ago that WSC format would not be changed?


IIRC when he announced the home nations and the £1M if anyone won all four.

[kibo]

Ronnie said:

. The Worlds could be best of 11s, maybe best of 13s for the semis and best of 17 for the final. That is plenty, more than enough.

Really hilarious, straight out of his arse

[cesard]

Maybe it is the opposite thing, I honestly think that the idea is that i wrote in the first post; but maybe you are right and then, next year some finals like UK, Masters and 1-2 tournaments more, like China Open, will make best-of-21 final and will be usual format, like now they are best-of-17 or best-of-19

By the way, when Ronnie said best-of-13, I think it is a stupid format, it is too long for 1 session and too short for 2 sessions

[Rane]

Ah, sorry, I understood it was sarcasm why this format wouldn´t change.

But I don´t understand Ronnie position. With this format is easier for him to achieve final rounds. I think that top players should love at it is now, that favours top players

O´Sullivan has been talking about that he doesn´t have the mental stamina for three weeks any longer, so offcause he sees a possibility of remaining a contender for a longer period of time, if the langth of the WC is reduced.