Standard of play

[Slasher]

Do you suppose it's the best of 5 that's not allowing some players to settle? the standard in some matches has been pretty poor.

[rambon]

My take is as follows:

Frame 1: Vital to win so quite tense for both players
Frame 2: If you've lost first frame, vital
Frame 3: If 1-1, vital, if 0-2 critical
Frame 4: If 1-2 critical
Frame 5: Critical

Therefore there are only frames 2-4 where one player will be feeling slightly relaxed, and likely to be more fluent.

When you look at longer format matches, the better snooker, as a rule, tends to be played early in matches, and the later frames of matches finishing 9-8, 10-9, 13-12, etc tend to be scrappy.

Tension does funny things to you

[MacB]

My take is as follows:

Frame 1: Vital to win so quite tense for both players
Frame 2: If you've lost first frame, vital
Frame 3: If 1-1, vital, if 0-2 critical
Frame 4: If 1-2 critical
Frame 5: Critical

Therefore there are only frames 2-4 where one player will be feeling slightly relaxed, and likely to be more fluent.

When you look at longer format matches, the better snooker, as a rule, tends to be played early in matches, and the later frames of matches finishing 9-8, 10-9, 13-12, etc tend to be scrappy.

Tension does funny things to you

Good way to look at it, the pressure in the shorter format usually makes for scrappier play but you can still have plenty of drama because of it.

You can't beat a scrappy decider for pure excitement imo.

[hotpot]

I f Barry Hearn wanted this new format to appeal to the wider audiences then it should,nt have been a ranking tournament , pheraps the players would,nt be afraid to let their elbow go then .

[Slasher]

This is more like a Pro-Am and maybe not good for TV.

[thinsy]

Even if it wasn't a ranking event and they we're just playing for monetary gain there would still be pressure which would affect their play!!! The only way they would play a relaxed game is to split the money evenly and make it an exhibition!!!! Then they could go all-out for everything.

[rambon]

I actually think this IS appealing to a wider audience. We've had a 147, century breaks and the usual incredible quality, but if that were on show every frame, the game would be boring.

Showing the players are not infallible and showing how people react to pressure and can still perform is interesting for me. I maintain that just because a game of football has 8 goals, doesn't mean it was better than a 1-0.

I think as the tournament goes on standards will get better too, as at the moment, 2 matches have been played by most and there have been three or four days between those games.

Variety is the spice of life and this is the sort of things that is needed to maintain interest. Ranking points are justified for this kind of tournament, maybe not to the same degree as the longer formats, but certainly justified.

One other thing. I've been impressed with Stephen Hendry as a commentator. Far better than some and you certainly can't deny that he knows what he's talking about in any situation.

[ltfc39]

I think this has been a fantastic tournament so far. And in my opinion, it will definitely get better further you get into the championship. We've seen nearly half the professional tour on the 1-table setup, giving lower ranked players a decent chance to get in the limelight.

There's definitely room for this tournament - even whinger Stephen Hendry thinks so!

[wildJONESEYE]

People have been brain washed to think standards are higher than its ever been its not just its perceived that way now people want 100 breaks fantastic clearances all the time......its not like that and never has been like that unless you get the very top ie Hendry in the 90s Ronnie today winning tournaments Regularly.

[debs]

People have been brain washed to think standards are higher than its ever been its not just its perceived that way now people want 100 breaks fantastic clearances all the time......its not like that and never has been like that unless you get the very top ie Hendry in the 90s Ronnie today winning tournaments Regularly.

Spot on

[Terry Davidson]

I think this type of tournament will encourage both the fans and more importantly get more players into the game and trying to improve because they see the pros can make mistakes and their opponents do get chances to win frames and matches.

Although the best players are coming through, even they are allowing their lower-ranked opponents the opportunities to win and I also think there are a lot of amateurs around watching this and saying to themselves 'jeez, I wouldn't have missed that shot once out of 10 (meaning...'I should be there and playing these guys').

Even though they're ignoring the reality of the situation I still think there will be a lot of players encouraged by this format and the PTC's to get out and practice and give it a shot when they think they have improved enough.

Terry

[Slasher]

You may be right Terry, after the Campbell/Dunn and Ebdon/O Brien matches I was bout ready to jump on a plane lol :snooker:

[missneworleans]

really best of 5 matches with that much points at stake of course standart will be poor

[JohnPizzapan]

really best of 5 matches with that much points at stake of course standart will be poor

So you think that because there isn't much to get ranking-points wise the players just don't really care and play "poorly" on purpose?

I certainly hope you're wrong for the sake of the game.

[jrc750]

So you think that because there isn't much to get ranking-points wise the players just don't really care and play "poorly" on purpose? ....

I think you have read missneworleans post in the wrong way !
Because there are too many ranking points at stake for only a best of 5 match format, the players are sometimes being too careful & hence dont play their normal game.