Ssb - time to ditch the wildcards

[MySockPuppet]

The forthcoming Roewe Shanghai Masters will be the tenth world ranking event staged in China in the last five years.

The first of these was the 2005 China Open in Beijing, won by Ding Junhui and the start of the boom that has created snooker fans of millions.

But these millions, like anywhere else in the world, want to watch the top stars. The days when wildcards were needed to prop up interest are over.

This is why the current system of local wildcards for Chinese events should end.

Years ago, an invited player from the host country had little chance of success. Now, the Chinese players, on home soil and without the pressure of ranking points, have every chance of beating the qualifiers, who are on a hiding to nothing – literally, as they get no money for playing an extra match. In the dim and distant past they received £500.

This is supposed to be a new era, a meritocracy.

If that is the case then it is grossly unfair on those who have come through the qualifiers to have to play talented wildcards, some of whom were on the circuit last season, instead of going straight through to the top 32, a place they have earned fairly.

But there is another issue. Any sporting event should hit the ground running with its biggest names.

It tells those watching on TV that this is a proper event and worth following for the week.

According to the format, the first TV match on day one will be Jamie Burnett v Tian Pengfei and the second will be Dave Harold v Yu Delu. The other matches in this round are not any more appetising with the possible exception of Ken Doherty, a big name, who, farcically, will play the only non-Chinese wildcard and is therefore certain not to be on TV.

And the knock on effect is that the last 32 has to be played over two days not three and so TV viewers will not see some of the game’s best known faces early on.

On the second evening, Ronnie O’Sullivan plays Burnett or Tian on the first TV table. Marco Fu, as he is from Hong Kong, will play Mark Davis on the second.

This means that Mark Williams v Ricky Walden – arguably the tie of the round – will be out of range of the cameras.

Neil Robertson, Shaun Murphy and Stephen Hendry are all on the same session so, again, one of these will be put round the back.

Long time readers may remember the utter farce of John Higgins and Mark Selby, playing for the first time since their world final three years ago, being put on table 3.

There is actually a simple solution to this, one myself and colleagues have suggested before: play two wildcard matches on the second day and put two last 32 games on the first day. This way you would start with big names and they wouldn’t then find themselves out on table three.

Needless to say, such suggestions have been ignored.

Wildcards are a good way of growing an event but Chinese tournaments have grown sufficiently and there’s no need for them now.

Their effect is a glacially slow start to the event, big names not exposed to TV coverage and an understandable sense of grudging resentment among a number of the players.

It’s time for them to go.


More...

[Odrl]

I am a big fan of the Chinese wildcard rounds, and I have opposed the idea of abandoning them several times on this forum. My opinion has not changed at all lately, so I couldn't disagree more with this post.

Years ago, an invited player from the host country had little chance of success. Now, the Chinese players, on home soil and without the pressure of ranking points, have every chance of beating the qualifiers, who are on a hiding to nothing – literally, as they get no money for playing an extra match. In the dim and distant past they received £500.

This is supposed to be a new era, a meritocracy.

If that is the case then it is grossly unfair on those who have come through the qualifiers to have to play talented wildcards, some of whom were on the circuit last season, instead of going straight through to the top 32, a place they have earned fairly.

So the fact that these wildcards are actually competitive is supposed to be an argument against them? If they all lost comfortably there wouldn't be any sense in them playing, and not the other way around. It's actually a good indication of what the quality of Chinese and Asian amateurs is, and it should be used to open channels for these players to qualify to the Main Tour, according to how well they play here.

It may look unfair when qualifiers are knocked out by these players, but it's often overstated. Surely the qualifiers still get the ranking points and the prize money, as if they'd played their last32 match and lost? And by losing to an amateur, I have little sympathy for them not getting a crack at a top16 player.

Yes, a lot of these players will have played in the qualifiers themselves in the previous season, but wasn't it unfair to them that they had to play their matches in a cubicle in Wales, often against players who lived within driving distance of the place? I would say it evens itself out.

But there is another issue. Any sporting event should hit the ground running with its biggest names.

It tells those watching on TV that this is a proper event and worth following for the week.

According to the format, the first TV match on day one will be Jamie Burnett v Tian Pengfei and the second will be Dave Harold v Yu Delu. The other matches in this round are not any more appetising with the possible exception of Ken Doherty, a big name, who, farcically, will play the only non-Chinese wildcard and is therefore certain not to be on TV.

I can't say I find the opening match with Tian Pengfei a boring proposition. This is the guy that made a name for himself by beating Ronnie O'Sullivan in the China Open last season. He also played in the two biggest summer tournaments in China, getting to the semi-finals of the Wuxi Classic, and winning the BTV Cup - a tournament that featured a number of top16 players, including Ryan Day whom Tian thrashed in the final. So I would speculate that Tian does indeed have a decent fan base in China, and maybe even globally. It's not that different from opening the Welsh Open with Ryan Day against a qualifier, for example.

There is actually a simple solution to this, one myself and colleagues have suggested before: play two wildcard matches on the second day and put two last 32 games on the first day. This way you would start with big names and they wouldn’t then find themselves out on table three.

Yes, I like this suggestion, and it would certainly solve some problems without robbing us of the wildcard round itself. But then again, you do see a lot of the likes of Hendry and Murphy over the course of the season, and if they are playing well, you are guaranteed to see them in the tournament anyway. But you only get to see someone like Yu Delu once or twice, if you're lucky.

Wildcards are a good way of growing an event but Chinese tournaments have grown sufficiently and there’s no need for them now.

You know, I've never been a fan of Hearn's "every tournament should be different" argument, but thinking about it, the wildcard round is certainly one of the reasons why I always look forward to this tournament in particular, as well as the China Open. It's has become a part of their identity and their "soul", and I would rather see it left alone.


Now, I'm not saying that the wildcard round is something that should always be in these events, no matter what the circumstances. I'll tell you when I think the time would be to abandon them...

First of all, there needs to be a fairer system in which amateurs can qualify for the Main Tour. If you look at how many Main Tour players have come from Asia in recent seasons, it's probably about one in five players, depending on the particular season. You could say that their success is in line with the expectations, some of them being unable to hold on to their spots, some of them making a decent mark. In fact, looking at who most of the youngest players to appear at the Crucible in recent seasons are, you could say they are doing pretty well.

But the number of qualifying spots for the Main Tour that they are eligible for is very limited. The PIOS, which was the main qualifying channel, put them at a huge disadvantage compared to British players, because they basically needed a lot of time and resources (as well as the time and ability to adapt to a different culture) to spend a good portion of the year in a foreign country and try their luck. I think the new qualifying school system is a great improvement for these players in particular, because it reduces that disadvantage a lot. But it's still a disadvantage. As I said at the time, if you have a decent percentage of Asian professionals, as well as major tournaments, viewing public, and presumably also a lot of very promising amateurs, then surely one of the four qualifying events should be staged somewhere in Asia. That would give a lot of amateurs the chance of playing somewhere closer to their home, and in an environment they are more familiar with. And if European players want to play in that event, they would have to make a similar trip to the one Asians have to make now.

And another thing I would request before agreeing to cancel the wildcard rounds - qualifiers for the Chinese events should be staged in China. I realize this is something that would be difficult to do currently, for a number of reasons, but there will come a time when this "move" can be justified. The reason this should eventually happen is that the current system puts a number (currently a minority) of players at a disadvantage. As I've said, it forces players to move to a foreign country, to adapt to a different culture and environment, and to play most of their snooker in a place where they feel less comfortable than most of their opponents.

When they play as wildcards in China, they often knock out more famous opponents, because the situation is reversed. And when you look at their Main Tour performances, it's a different story. It's often a struggle against much lesser opponents than those who actually reach the TV stages of the Shanghai Masters. The venue is a huge difference! So, when "local" players can actually play at home in their local tournaments, even all the way down to the 1st qualifying round, and thus have a fairer chance of going through, then we can talk about abandoning the wildcard round.


And on another note... When I turn on Eurosport on the first morning of the Shanghai Masters (and I certainly will), and the commentators talk about how interesting it is to see new faces, should I "read between the lines" and assume they are actually bored out of their mind and only waiting for the tournament proper to get under way? Because that's a long way from how I usually feel on that day.

[wildJONESEYE]

but whats the point of wild cards

how about sheffield players getting wild cards in to the WC

players got to achieve it on their own china is now a snooker hot bed 4 Chinese players have made the crucible.

wild cards idea was to give locals the chance now we got Tian Pengfei playing this guy has pedigree and already a tournament winner this season as a wild card.

Li Hang and Jin Long main tour pros only last season.

wild cards in china has past it sell by date.

[Odrl]

players got to achieve it on their own china is now a snooker hot bed 4 Chinese players have made the crucible.

Yes, that's a good argument against wildcards, and I hope circumstances will allow it to prevail one day. But as I said, only when it's a level playing field.

[wildJONESEYE]

Yes, that's a good argument against wildcards, and I hope circumstances will allow it to prevail one day. But as I said, only when it's a level playing field.

yes but going back to the early 90s how many Scottish players got wild cards ?

Welsh Players ?

wild cards in the Irish masters was rewarded for on table success not because they Irish but with a ranking event you cant give a player a wild card if they lost in qualifying.

but how about Wild Cards based on PTC Success in other events there is no stopping the potential for wild cards in every tournament if you look hard enough.

[Odrl]

yes but going back to the early 90s how many Scottish players got wild cards ?

Welsh Players ?

wild cards in the Irish masters was rewarded for on table success not because they Irish but with a ranking event you cant give a player a wild card if they lost in qualifying.

I take your point, but there is a difference...

British and Irish players have the advantage of a lively amateur scene. There is no reason to have local wildcards in the British events, because there is already a good system in place to allow the best amateurs to get on the Main Tour, and a system where they can qualify for events without having to sacrifice as much as the foreign players. There was no real need to ever have wildcards, because most of snooker was based in Britain from the very start. And even the foreign players used to come mostly from the English-speaking world. This is no longer the case. The game is more global, but the qualifying system is not, and that was the point I was trying to make. When Asian players have a decent alternative to moving to Britain and playing most of their snooker there, that's when the wildcards become redundant.

The funny thing is that we Europeans love to talk about "local players" in China. You compared it with players from Sheffield getting a wildcard for the WC... Because there are so many cultures and rivalries in Europe and the UK in particular, we like to split it into small regions when we talk about locals, and we just call China - China. But think about what a huge region actually depends and benefits from these wildcards. Beijing and Shanghai are further apart than any two British cities that host major events, and they are hardly on the opposite sides of the country.

Imagine a player like Yu Delu... In the last five years he has played eight times as a wildcard in China, won four of his matches, lost three in deciders and the other one 3-5. With that kind of record, it would be reasonable to assume he would be quite competitive in a PIOS type event. Now, I don't know the guy, so I don't know why he didn't try, but I'm guessing there are some talented players who just couldn't afford that kind of sacrifice. So they remain stuck on an amateur scene that leads nowhere. It remains to be seen if the qualifying school will make it easier for them, let's hope so... But the thing is, I would probably never even hear about this guy, if it wasn't for the wildcard rounds in ranking events.

And I of course agree with you that wildcards shouldn't be given to players who lose in qualifiers. It's the fact that the amateurs can't get the benefit of ranking points or prize money that excuses the whole idea. And the professionals are guaranteed their points and money anyway, they just lose the chance to go further in the tournament if they lose this match, which I don't find particularly unfair.

but how about Wild Cards based on PTC Success in other events there is no stopping the potential for wild cards in every tournament if you look hard enough.

Well, it looks like there will eventually come a point when there are too many Asian players to justify having most of the game based in the UK. This will probably lead to a system that is somewhat fair on everyone. But imagine that a snooker boom then happens somewhere else, like South America for example. They get a major event, and produce a number of quality young players. Should there be a wildcard round then, even if the amateurs become as competitive as they are in China? In my opinion, absolutely! But again, only until there is the qualifying infrastructure that makes it redundant.

[matoski]

For years i'm one of the loudest opponents of the wildcard round at Shanghai and Beijing, and i didn't change my mind to date. If the chinese want to watch chinese players (which unfortunatelly is the case), then they have 3 players in the top 16(Ding, Fu and Wenbo), which guarantees them a lot of televised matches involving their "beloved compatriots". Another thing is that there are swarms of chinese players outside top 16, so if they are good enough they should qualify for the first round proper by themselves. You know, there are lower ranked players that depend on the prize money for their living. It's not fair to put them under such pressure and make them play against a local wildcard player once they qualified for the event.
I wonder will they give wildcards to european players at the German Masters? Do you think some 48-64 ranked player would be glad to play against someone like Luka Brecel. the kid makes back to back maximums....

[wildJONESEYE]

to be honest if i was a promoter or tournament organizer i wouldn't give a stuff what the players wanted. they are there to play whoever i tell them to and in which round.

i just dont think the tournament gets nothing out of wildcards in china no more... regarding Germany thats different and i would have Luca brecel and others in that.

[wildJONESEYE]

Just Look at the volume of German Players taking part in the Paul Hunter Classic about 90 of them give or take we need to tap in to that where as china no longer needs that because they got the benchmark player in Ding to look up to.

[ddrIII]

One thing for sure is that the China Snooker Association will not cut the wildcards forever but will try to introduce more number of wildcards into tournaments.

[Rane]

I think it would be a better idea if the lower ranked chinese player could play the pre-tv qualifiers in China. That would give the audience a chance of seeing more chinese players, which is what this is about after all. Malta open has alway let Tony Drago play his qualifiers in Malta.

[miscuehamburg]

I think too the China wildcards are obsolete since so many of their players are good enough to qualify proper. With Germany it is another matter, - a bit like China 5 years ago in this respect Hopefully with a similar development

[wildJONESEYE]

I think it would be a better idea if the lower ranked chinese player could play the pre-tv qualifiers in China. That would give the audience a chance of seeing more chinese players, which is what this is about after all. Malta open has alway let Tony Drago play his qualifiers in Malta.

yes but it will be a nightmare having Zhang Anda play 1st,2nd,3rd and 4th Qualifier in china then same for Xiao Guodong and Liu Chaung when will we start the last 32 lol