Ssb - rankings system set for major change

[wildJONESEYE]

Snoopy, where do you get those figures from mate?. Cos if it's the one year list they are way off. Check out Janie's one year list compiled after the World Championship. http://www.global-snooker.com/2009-1...nking-List.asp

one year list is nil and void

[snoopy2608]

Snoopy, where do you get those figures from mate?. Cos if it's the one year list they are way off. Check out Janie's one year list compiled after the World Championship. http://www.global-snooker.com/2009-1...nking-List.asp

its a 2 year rolling ranking list so John Higgins points earned so far are caclulated as follows:

Points to end of 2009/2010 - 57820

less points earned in:
NI Trophy 2008 - 3200
Shanghai 2008 - 1900
Grand Prix 2008 - 6250

revised total - 46470

and the same for everyone else.

What we don't know as yet is how they calculate points for players who didn't play in these touranments and have been allocated starting points.

Also be interesting to see how they deal with platyers like Jamie Jones (and a few others) who played in these events but not on last years tour and are back on the main tour this year.

[wildJONESEYE]

simple if they did not play in the events points are not going to be deducted are they and as for players that was on tour then left and back again well they aren't going to get points deducted either because the points they had was dissolve as soon as they dropped off tour.

[thinsy]

I guess the only downside is the lower ranked players who start ok in the year but go through a bad patch at the end of the year could lose their pro status but a player of similar ranking had their season getting exactly the same results but ending the season with better results could just manage to keep their pro status!!!!!

I think I know what I mean!!!!

[snooky147]

its a 2 year rolling ranking list so John Higgins points earned so far are caclulated as follows:

Points to end of 2009/2010 - 57820

less points earned in:
NI Trophy 2008 - 3200
Shanghai 2008 - 1900
Grand Prix 2008 - 6250

revised total - 46470

and the same for everyone else.

What we don't know as yet is how they calculate points for players who didn't play in these touranments and have been allocated starting points.

Also be interesting to see how they deal with platyers like Jamie Jones (and a few others) who played in these events but not on last years tour and are back on the main tour this year.

How can you take these points away now?. It's a pointless exercise as they do not get removed until after the World Open (A truly awful event disguised as a ranking event).

[wildJONESEYE]

How can you take these points away now?. It's a pointless exercise as they do not get removed until after the World Open (A truly awful event disguised as a ranking event).

dont you think its fairer to reward modern results rather than the dark ages.

dont forget there are potentially 10,000 points from 5 PTC Events,Shanghai and the World Open to go on top of thoes points to get the top 16 for the UK Championship. come on if players cant be competative and maintain their rankings after them then they dont deserve to be rewarded for results that happened in 2008 while being seeded for tournaments in 2011.

[snooky147]

dont you think its fairer to reward modern results rather than the dark ages.

My only point mate is that, until I take my dying breath I will never be convinced that a best of five should be awarded ranking status. I would never attend such an event. I live in Glasgow and have attended the Grand Prix before and yes it was poorly supported but only because no one knew about it. It was never publicised enough. All I am saying is that Barry Hearn(who I mostly support) says that ability must be the ONLY criteria. Well Barry ability needs a chance because mediocrity can have a real good day now and again especially in a best of five situation. C'mon, give Scotland the tournament it deserves with at least a best of seven start off point.

[wildJONESEYE]

the grand prix had 7,000 points for the winner same as shanghai and the china open however if the World Open carries the same points as shanghai and china this season believe me barry hearn and world snooker WILL get the full wrath of my disapproval.

[thinsy]

If the Wuxi tournament final was a best of 15 Ding would have thrashed Murphy, because it was best of 17 Murphy won!! So what if one tournament is best of 5. Will best of 7 make much difference?

Variety is the spice of life

[snooky147]

If the Wuxi tournament final was a best of 15 Ding would have thrashed Murphy, because it was best of 17 Murphy won!! So what if one tournament is best of 5. Will best of 7 make much difference?

Variety is the spice of life

I for one and I know many more that would not attend a tournament where the outcome can be done and dusted before the players ice melts in their glass. That's not value for money for a snooker supporter. Nor is it value for the player who lost, considering the cost of travel and hotels only to possibly be beaten in such a short time. At least a best of seven gives them and the fans a bit more value.
As for the ranking, I have no problem with it other than having to re write my exel program to accomodate.

[thinsy]

I for one and I know many more that would not attend a tournament where the outcome can be done and dusted before the players ice melts in their glass. That's not value for money for a snooker supporter. Nor is it value for the player who lost, considering the cost of travel and hotels only to possibly be beaten in such a short time. At least a best of seven gives them and the fans a bit more value.
As for the ranking, I have no problem with it other than having to re write my exel program to accomodate.

It's a good job we all allowed to have our own opinions

Watching best of 5 or best of 7 isn't a huge difference, surely if you are a snooker fan and happy to watch all kinds of styles and skills of various players a scheme that sold day passes as opposed to certain matches would make a great days viewing

Good luck with your exel program

[snooky147]

It's a good job we all allowed to have our own opinions

Watching best of 5 or best of 7 isn't a huge difference, surely if you are a snooker fan and happy to watch all kinds of styles and skills of various players a scheme that sold day passes as opposed to certain matches would make a great days viewing

Good luck with your exel program

I am in fact a huge snooker fan, who loves to watch ALL styles of play but the thought of watching a reasonable amateur having a blisteringly good three frames against a top class player fills me with dread. Consistency in the application and implementation of ranking tournaments is vital to the fairness of the system. The ptc events are all best of seven start off. So should the World Open.

[thinsy]

I am in fact a huge snooker fan, who loves to watch ALL styles of play but the thought of watching a reasonable amateur having a blisteringly good three frames against a top class player fills me with dread. Consistency in the application and implementation of ranking tournaments is vital to the fairness of the system. The ptc events are all best of seven start off. So should the World Open.

I didn't imply you weren't a huge snooker fan and i'm not saying your ideas and comments are wrong.... I'm not trying to pick an arguement either, I live miles away from glasgow too so I wouldn't be watching from the seats but I will be watching from the TV.

If that amateur has a blistering three frames whats to stop him having a fourth? All pro's were amateurs once.. Some amateurs were better than pro's before they even became pro's!!!!!!!

[merlin1234]

Yeah but it's all about what kind of chances you get, isn't it? You want the guy who plays best to win, not the guy who gets the better chances.

Put it this way, flipping 3 heads in a row is quite a lot more likely than flipping 5 in a row. The likelihood decreases exponentially with each additional toss.

It doesn't scale up the same way, for instance, that adding a fourth and fifth brick to a pile of three bricks increases the overall weight of the bricks.

[Rane]

It will be an advantage to the newcomers. Two good tourments in the start of the year, can get you inside top 64 and thus having one match lesser to play and more starting points for the rest of the year.