Ssb - your starter for 5,040...

[MySockPuppet]

For the many commenters wondering about how the ranking list would be presented, starter points etc...we now have an answer.

New professionals will receive 5,040 starter points, equal to the eighth placed player on the one-year list from last season not already on the tour.

Players who played on the tour in 2008/09 but not 2009/10 do not keep the points they earned in the first season.

The WPBSA has issued the first ranking list of the season WITHOUT the points for the first three tournaments of the 2008/09 campaign removed.

These will be removed at the first cut-off point in October.

The problem with this is that the list gives a misleading picture. As it stands right now, Ronnie O'Sullivan appears to be second in the rankings but, if you subtract the points that will come off in October, he is actually fourth.

This latter list is more representative of the true position - a bit like the provisional list we have been used to for years and years - and can be followed thanks to the excellent work undertaken at Pro Snooker Blog.

Perhaps the WPBSA should issue two lists: pre and post points deduction so that players and everyone else can follow the various movements.

Or maybe that would just confuse people even more.


More...

[wildJONESEYE]

Someone Working for World Snooker needs sacking.....

i cant believe for 1 moment Barry Hearn will go along with the list WS Has issued.

[The Statman]

Yes there should only be two lists, the official rankings as they stand now, which is what transpired at the end of Sheffield; and the provisional list where the tournaments which will cease to count at the next official update have already been removed.

This would fit in with exactly what we have always had, albeit that the official updates are happening more often.

What used to be provisional "One-year" lists, will become the provisional "seven-term" list, comprising the seven quarters of a season which will still count next time round, to which the current 'quarter' will be added to make the rolling two-year ranking.

As for what will happen when a tournament shifts its position in the calendar, as happened to the British Open a few years ago – well, we'll just have to work that out when we come to it. It could be a little misleading if extra events are added (or removed) from different bits of the calendar, so that each official revision does not end up having the same number of tournaments. Having said that, it would still be the same for everyone.

[rambon]

I don't really understand why you need more than 1 list to be honest.

A ranking list is a list of players at a point in time. Why do you need to have a provisional list where points are taken off? You provide a rankings list with different columns which explain what the current situation is, and when the next list is issued (which should be after every tournament that carrries ranking points) you send that list to all on it, with a reminder of how many points they will lose when the next ranking list comes out and how many are in play in the next tournament. The players can then look at this and work out what is likely to happen.

Over the course of time, players will know (listen to any tennis player and he knows how precarious is position is if he earned a lot of ranking points in a particular tournament the year before). This will become second nature to snooker players relatively quickly.

The problem at the moment is the relative infrequency of tournaments played last season. FWIW I would just do it on a tournament by tournament basis. Add in the current PTC scores as we go along and then when it comes to the time to take off a ranking tournament, just do it then. I don't see the reason in taking off three in one go.

Right, that's my tuppence, I'm off back to my cardboard box....

[wildJONESEYE]

I don't really understand why you need more than 1 list to be honest.

A ranking list is a list of players at a point in time. Why do you need to have a provisional list where points are taken off? You provide a rankings list with different columns which explain what the current situation is, and when the next list is issued (which should be after every tournament that carrries ranking points) you send that list to all on it, with a reminder of how many points they will lose when the next ranking list comes out and how many are in play in the next tournament. The players can then look at this and work out what is likely to happen.

Over the course of time, players will know (listen to any tennis player and he knows how precarious is position is if he earned a lot of ranking points in a particular tournament the year before). This will become second nature to snooker players relatively quickly.

The problem at the moment is the relative infrequency of tournaments played last season. FWIW I would just do it on a tournament by tournament basis. Add in the current PTC scores as we go along and then when it comes to the time to take off a ranking tournament, just do it then. I don't see the reason in taking off three in one go.

Right, that's my tuppence, I'm off back to my cardboard box....

rambon

the ranking list world snooker has issued today will mean nothing its not relavent to anything so whats the point having it at all....

if they going to show provisionals show the correct provisionals for example they got Dave Harold at 31 the reality is Dave Harold is 4,000 points off being 31 at 50th so what the hell is the point of showing him at 31st ????????????????????????

[rambon]

rambon

the ranking list world snooker has issued today will mean nothing its not relavent to anything so whats the point having it at all....

if they going to show provisionals show the correct provisionals for example they got Dave Harold at 31 the reality is Dave Harold is 4,000 points off being 31 at 50th so what the hell is the point of showing him at 31st ????????????????????????

I haven't seen the list, I'm just advocating the need for one list. Of course the list needs to be accurate. In time, surely the thing is to get rid of starter points, and that way new apparitions appear at the bottom of the list, where they should be.