Tweet
In the present game, China seems to be the only region in the sport that seems to have guaranteed, almost ritual awarding of wildcards in the Chinese hosted events. In effect this means that we have fields of 40 for the Chinese tournaments rather than the 32 that nearly every other event.
The standard of the Chinese game is much much higher than it was a decade or more ago when the wild cards were first brought in to the Asian tournaments. There is no doubt that back then that they obviously managed to help the game and the tournament in the locality, and that they have worked in creating an environment full of keen snooker enthusiasts where the game is hugely popular. However, that these have become the norm rather than the exception. It can't be fun to win four games but still not advance to the last 32 of the tournament because of the parachuting local players. As one person put it, the Chinese amateurs get more tournament finals exposure than those Chinese pros who are further down the rankings.
The pedigree of the Chinese professional game is without question in granting eight places directly to amateurs. At the Crucible, four Chinese qualified to play, (including Ding who was seeded)
There are some circumstances where inviting a local wild card to play in the finals of a tournament can be a good thing, look at Lu, World U21 Champion at the age of fourteen. He backed his wildcard up with a terrific win over Fu, but still no one suggested Michael White should have had a Wild Card to the 2007 Welsh Open as IBSF Grand Prix champion.
I understand the idea behind the Wild cards and I agree that in certain areas, where the game needs development, i.e. India for an example that they can be of great benefit. E.g. Igor in the Brazil Masters, the German Masters too but in China, where there the game is well developed, and is pretty successful, I don't see how they are valuable.
The standard of the Chinese game is much much higher than it was a decade or more ago when the wild cards were first brought in to the Asian tournaments. There is no doubt that back then that they obviously managed to help the game and the tournament in the locality, and that they have worked in creating an environment full of keen snooker enthusiasts where the game is hugely popular. However, that these have become the norm rather than the exception. It can't be fun to win four games but still not advance to the last 32 of the tournament because of the parachuting local players. As one person put it, the Chinese amateurs get more tournament finals exposure than those Chinese pros who are further down the rankings.
The pedigree of the Chinese professional game is without question in granting eight places directly to amateurs. At the Crucible, four Chinese qualified to play, (including Ding who was seeded)
There are some circumstances where inviting a local wild card to play in the finals of a tournament can be a good thing, look at Lu, World U21 Champion at the age of fourteen. He backed his wildcard up with a terrific win over Fu, but still no one suggested Michael White should have had a Wild Card to the 2007 Welsh Open as IBSF Grand Prix champion.
I understand the idea behind the Wild cards and I agree that in certain areas, where the game needs development, i.e. India for an example that they can be of great benefit. E.g. Igor in the Brazil Masters, the German Masters too but in China, where there the game is well developed, and is pretty successful, I don't see how they are valuable.
Comment