If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Thinking back to the early 90's, a few of the ranking event semi's were b/o 17 but are now only b/o 11. Off the top of my head, I can recall Alex Higgins beating Steve James in the Pearl Assurance British Open semi in 1990, 9-3. Also, Nigel Bond beating Jimmy White 9-8 in the Rothmans Grand Prix semi around about the same time. I'm sure this was the usual duration during the 80's as well.
I think the long matches are one of the reasons people look forward to the Worlds each year. There are too many players to extend the frames very much but I'm sure they could go back to a few b/o 17-frame semi's and certainly a b/o 31-frame UK final.
I think all the ranking events should be at least best of 11, or even better, best of 13, in the early stages. The Uk semis-finals should be longer, maybe, best of 21 or 23, and the final something like a world semi, best of 33.
The World's are just about right, imo.
"There has only ever been Alex Higgins, myself and now Ronnie O'sullivan who play the game the way it should be played with such excitement - I know the fans love it this way" - Jimmy White
I think the format of play is ok for the most main tour events. Maybe some finals could be longer (i.e. best of 31), but the schedules are limited. I too would love to see more round robin matches in the early stages like Grand Prix. It is really interesting to watch so many different players and matches going on in relatively short time.
I am no friend of a shot clock, because i fear it would alternate the game too much. It diminishes the strategic side of play and gives an unjust advantage to those instinct-driven players (i.e. ROS).
As an average chess player I would like to add that Blitz-Format (5 min/each) hasn't given this game anything. The games are of poor standard, and it definetly failed to make chess accessible for the masses.
longer for me without a doubt - maybe not best of 151 etc as in the past but i think the longer matches favour the greater players and it takes real grit to win a best of 35+ whereas a best of 5 match between any two professional players is a total coin toss.
I dont like the shot clock, I saw a few players just slashed when the time is up, and it is not the way snooker should be played.
We need to remember those knowledgeable who watch snooker like to watch the intelligent side of the game, not just a bunch of potting--safety is also very interesting. I enjoy to see how the momentum shifts sometimes a few times during a safety battle. It is par tof the charm of snooker. Time clock sometimes forces the players to rush their shots, rather than coming up with the best solution to tackle the problem presented to them at the table.
I think the format now is quite good, but perhaps a slightly longer match in the earlier rounds would reduce the number of upsets of big names? I am not sure. It seems like there are more unseeded players in the quarters and semis recently.
Going back to the post earlier that all frames should be a maximum of 30 minutes. The only way to try and speed the matches up would be to introduce the shot-clock. Which is going to suit different peoples playing styles (namely ROS).
The group stage in the grand prix didn't really achieve much - why not introduce the shot clock for this situation and try and play best of 15-19 frames for early rounds with a 30 second limit?
Does anyone know if the shot-clock is going to be used in the new Premier League format starting this year?
I think the format is fine as it stands, but I would like the UK Championship semi and finl over logner distance Semi Final best of 25 Frames and final best of 29 because it is a important to the players.
Ronnie O' Sullivan seven times the record breaking Snooker Master
Give the UK Championship back a best of 31 frame Final also increase the Semi Finals to a best of 19 frames to make it different from earlier rounds....
but then introduce another tournament possibly upgrade the grand prix to a best of 17 frame matches right through to the final and make the final a best of 19 frames.....
-If semifinal of a normal tournament was best-of-17 tournament lasts 1 day more.
-If semifinal of UK was best-of-25 or the final like old times, best-of-31 the same
-And World Champ final is shorter, best-of-35 (and semifinal best-of-33 so strange)
I suppose that World Snooker wanna reduce long tournaments and including more people
Other thing, when UK final was best-of-31, which format was used? (7-8-7-9?, 7-7-7-10?, 7-7-8-9?, 7-8-8-8?
Does anybody know it?
i think it was 7-8-7-9
reason i think was they had less frames in the afternoon seshions back then most matches was much slower than today so it would be easier to finish the seshions in enough time to prepere for the evening....although i think that was the theary but some even then over ran lol
I think the shortest professional match should be best of seventeen. I've been to the qualifiers and it's a shame to see guys with their livlihoods at stake twitching all over the place and not getting time to settle in!
Comment