2019 World championship qualifiers and draw

[Stony152]

I don't see the logic there. You're still talking about a 5k difference, so what does it matter?

The logic is that in every other tournament the prize money difference increases as you advance through the rounds. A typical distribution would be 0, 1000, 3000, 6000, 12000, 24000, 50000, and 100000. It makes no sense to have a 10000 difference between R1 and R2 and then only a 5000 difference between R2 and R3 and R3 and qualifying. It's a very strange way of doing it.

[DeanH]

Anyone got any idea why R1 losers get £10k. R2 losers only pick up another £5k? You would think it more logical for R1 losers to get £5k and R2 losers to get £10k. Does that not make more sense or am I missing something?

R1 (L144) losers get £0
R2 (L80) losers gets £10k
R3 (L48) loser gets £15k
R4 (L32) loser gets £20k
I see a natural progression here

I am sure a R2 loser will disagree with you, £5 instead of £10k

[Stony152]

Mei Xiwen is an interesting case. He's actually four and a half years older than Ding and has been around the tour off and on for 10 years. He must have some kind of financial backing because he's never cracked the top 64 and has only made about 100k in his career. Are there any other Chinese players in their mid 30s still giving it a go? Liang Wenbo and Tian Pengfei are about Ding's age.

[Stony152]

R1 (L144) losers get £0
R2 (L80) losers gets £10k
R3 (L48) loser gets £15k
R4 (L32) loser gets £20k
I see a natural progression here

I am sure a R2 loser will disagree with you, £5 instead of £10k

I'm not sure what the best way to do it if they want the qualifiers to get the same 20k that the top 16 get for reaching the Crucible. Probably something like...

R1 loser = 0
R2 loser = 4k
R3 loser = 10k
qualifier = 20k

The problem with that is that the total prize money per section goes down from 45k to 34 k. For some reason they really want to reward players for ANY win in qualifying, which makes no sense since the standard of play required to win many QR1 matches is very low.

[JimMalone]

Nearly all matches are close.
Gary Wilson leads Dominic Dale 8-1 and Joe O'Connor has a 6-3-lead over Jimmy Robertson, while Peter Ebdon is 5-2 in front against Michael Georgiou. All eight other matches have a 5-4 after the first session.

[DeanH]

I'm not sure what the best way to do it if they want the qualifiers to get the same 20k that the top 16 get for reaching the Crucible. Probably something like...

R1 loser = 0
R2 loser = 4k
R3 loser = 10k
qualifier = 20k

The problem with that is that the total prize money per section goes down from 45k to 34 k. For some reason they really want to reward players for ANY win in qualifying, which makes no sense since the standard of play required to win many QR1 matches is very low.

and there is Hearn saying he has heard the players needing more money at the bottom end and you take it away?
so the progression is £5k, so they start at 10k and go from there, I don't see an issue; it could be £15k start and then £25k for the next, £10k progression, better for you?
They play best of 19 to get that starting pay, more frames than most event winners have to do for much more money!

[Billy]

It makes no sense to have a 10000 difference between R1 and R2 and then only a 5000 difference between R2 and R3 and R3 and qualifying. It's a very strange way of doing it.

But that's not what Nifty50 said, hence my confusion. He said R1 losers get £10k and R2 losers get £15k, and then suggested it should be £5k for R1 losers and £10k for R2 losers.

Both of those mean an increase of £5k between R1 losers and R2 losers. What's the difference apart from robbing both players of £5k?

[Neil Taperell]

Round one losers don’t get anything . If you win your first match you get £10K.

[Billy]

Round one losers don’t get anything . If you win your first match you get £10K.

This is getting terribly confusing. I think I'll bow out.

[Stony152]

This is getting terribly confusing. I think I'll bow out.

What's confusing about it is that it's unlike any other tournament on the schedule. It would be like giving quarter-final losers 20k, semi-final losers 30k and then giving the runner up 35k and the winner 40k. How much sense would that make? That's pretty much what they're doing with this qualifying tournament. At the most important stage (R3) you get less of an added reward for making the Crucible than a player gets for beating some amateur or player ranked outside of the top 100 in R1.

[Nifty50]

This is getting terribly confusing. I think I'll bow out.

Wise move Billy, think I didn't read the prize money list very well and I didn't explain my point very well either lol.
The way I was looking at it was......win ONE match GET £10. Win TWO matches GET £15k. Only another £5k.

[Billy]

The way I was looking at it was......win ONE match GET £10. Win TWO matches GET £15k. Only another £5k.

Ah! I see your point now.

[Stony152]

So according to the internet Zhao is pronounced like cow and Zhou is pronounced like moo.

From Reddit...

Pre-Qin unification China was not an Imperial system, but best understood as a feudal confederacy of kingdoms, with the Kingdom of Zhou being the central government others answered to.

The Zhou Dynasty lasted for allegedly 800 years, but the latter 400 years (known as "Eastern Zhou" - when the capital moved to Chengzhou in the east) saw a disintegration of their real power of the Zhou King. The Zhou King (not Emperor, the Dynasties of Zhou & Shang only had Kings) - was more a figurehead, of ritual and symbolic important, but had drastically less power and control over China, and the other kingdoms had greater autonomy. This era is the saw called "Spring & Autumn", followed by "The Warring States".

The Warring States saw China transform from hundreds of smaller states into seven. Qin and Zhao were both amongst these states (alongside Chu, Qi, Han, Yan & Wei). Also, unlike Spring & Autumn, during the Warring States period there were kings who no longer recognised the authority of the Zhou King.

Qin eventually annihilated the other six (including Zhao) and implemented an Imperial system.

[DeanH]

So according to the internet Zhao is pronounced like cow and Zhou is pronounced like moo.

Sorry, but not "according to the internet" but according to the Chinese people who speak the language :wink:

The pronunciation is different between the two names hence we spell them differently in Roman characters

Interesting history though

[Stony152]

Sorry, but not "according to the internet" but according to the Chinese people who speak the language :wink:

The pronunciation is different between the two names hence we spell them differently in Roman characters

Interesting history though

Don't the commentators pronounce both of them like "cow"?

Aren't there cases where we pronounce Chinese names the same and spell them differently. Fu and Foo. Also, why do spell a name Pham? Wouldn't Fam be easier and still pronounced the same?