Poor Zhang has fallen apart.
Redcafe Snooker
- Thread starter Ronnie O'Sullivan
- Start date
I’m a very casual snooker follower and only really watch the major tournaments
What happened to Mark Selby? He was winning absolutely everything at one point
What happened to Mark Selby? He was winning absolutely everything at one point
Allen always seems to be in the final of these ITV events.
Problems with his mental health which took priority for a while.
But also patchy form when he does play - one moment he looks unstoppable (6-0 v Ronnie) and the next he's losing to an equally patchy Zhang, despite having all the momentum going in to the final frame decider including a century.
He gets a lot of stick, mainly from idiotic Ronnie obsessives who think everyone should play five shots per minute. Snooker tournaments will be a much nicer thing to attend once he retires and they're out of the audience.
But there's no doubting his class, his Crucible record is one of the best out there - four titles and twice each runner-up and a losing semi-finalist.
Just on the final itself last night the quality really was dire, only three breaks over 50 in the evening session, out of ten frames.
Zhang needed to win to push Ali Carter out of the top eight and get in to the Tour Championship places, there is now only one ranking event left before it.
Selby is a great player, but he can be a tough watch, particularly when chasing four snookers for an hour and that kind of stuff.
Disappointing from Ronnie to play the first day of group 7 in the Championship League, and then pull out - making those games null and void and denying another person the chance to enter.
I was disappointed when Lisowksi and Trump (amongst others) pulled out as well - especially Jack, who needs to start winning games this season and has a genuine chance at winning a minor tournament like this. However at least the pulled out earlier and allowed others to take their place.
It feels like O'Sullivan definitely does things like this on purpose to make a point - to show his disdain of smaller British events with limited prize money and facilities, and so to stick two fingers up at the Snooker bosses. He's always fit for the bigger British tournaments and the Asian ones so it's always predictable which tournaments he suddenly has to pull out of.
I was disappointed when Lisowksi and Trump (amongst others) pulled out as well - especially Jack, who needs to start winning games this season and has a genuine chance at winning a minor tournament like this. However at least the pulled out earlier and allowed others to take their place.
It feels like O'Sullivan definitely does things like this on purpose to make a point - to show his disdain of smaller British events with limited prize money and facilities, and so to stick two fingers up at the Snooker bosses. He's always fit for the bigger British tournaments and the Asian ones so it's always predictable which tournaments he suddenly has to pull out of.
Is that a bad thing?
Your obsession with Ronnie is just weird.
It's funny how you can say Selby has mental health issues, yet completely ignore O'Sullivan's. This guy was a champion at the youngest age, and has carried the whole game on his back for his whole life.
Yeah, let's see what happens when he retires...Let's see what happens to the crowds.
I think so, yeah.
If the US were looking to take over Snooker and move most tournaments there, I'd say many UK based fans wouldn't be happy with the 'Americanisation' of the Sport. I feel the same about the Chinese and Saudi Arabian money buying tournaments to the point that players are more interested in attending exhibition games there rather than tournaments here.
I've been a Snooker fan most of my life and was very happy with how it was all that time. I didn't want it to change much at all. I certainly don't want it to pretty much just become an Asian based and dominated Sport, which is the way it's heading and O'Sullivan seems to be one of the most vocal people pushing for it. And antics like today's is done on purpose to make a point about it.
I can certainly see why the players want more and more money - same as anyone does. But for me as a UK based fan, I don't want the sport sold to China and Saudi Arabia and have it mostly based their instead, played at inconvenient time zones (for us), and impossible to attend, etc.
Did you get out of bed the wrong side this morning
That’s all well and good for you as a fan but these players have got to make a living. I know the top players are all millionaires but those scraping the 32 are barely getting by once they pay for travel and overheads. For all the stick Ronnie gets for his actions he’s often trying highlight just how absurdly the professional players are treated when there is millions and millions in flooding into the game through betting sponsors.
I get your point. And I did say I understand why the players would want it - money. Lots of it.
But given the seemingly inevitable conclusion (money talks after all), then I'd say the whole situation is certainly not 'all well and good' for me as a fan, really, because like so much that I previously loved it's being changed so much to either appeal to different audiences / demographics, or selling out to the wealthier markets, and will soon be another thing that feels like I've 'lost' when it just becomes an Asian based and dominated sport.
It seems to be a similar conversation being had in plenty of sports (including our ownership takeover talks) - how much you're prepared to see change in order to 'follow the money'? How much you're prepared to 'sell out' to the huge riches of China, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, etc?
I fully imagine the players will be happy to push for it to get their hands on the money, same as in other sports - but as a fan I don't have to want it to happen or like it when it does.
Little bitDid you get out of bed the wrong side this morning
Yep. Snooker has been run badly for years, and whilst I agree with @Bertie Wooster about changing the game itself, that's not what needs to happen. For a start they could put much more effort into promotion of the game and events, you hardly see it anywhere as a casual.
Ronnie is right to stick up for the players and moan about the way it's run. When he does finally retire, the game is 100% going to take a dip so him speaking out now and trying to get them to think about the future can only be a good thing imo.
You would have "lost" it years ago if we kept it to little England.
And Ronnie has addressed the lack of young players coming through too. That's a far bigger threat to what you want than anything else.
What’s this Snooker 900 business
I do agree with you to a certain extent about how snooker is run.Little bit
Yep. Snooker has been run badly for years, and whilst I agree with @Bertie Wooster about changing the game itself, that's not what needs to happen. For a start they could put much more effort into promotion of the game and events, you hardly see it anywhere as a casual.
Ronnie is right to stick up for the players and moan about the way it's run. When he does finally retire, the game is 100% going to take a dip so him speaking out now and trying to get them to think about the future can only be a good thing imo.
You would have "lost" it years ago if we kept it to little England.
And Ronnie has addressed the lack of young players coming through too. That's a far bigger threat to what you want than anything else.
I don't think it's run terribly, but there's lots of room for improvement.
There's no doubt Ronnie is the biggest draw in the sport and the people who run it need to start planning for his retirement and how they are going to market it because there will be a slight vacuum of fans.
I don't think it will be catastrophic because it was around long before him and will survive - you only need to look at ticket sales for Sheffield which have absolutely exploded in recent years, and that's people buying effectively blind because you don't know which players you will see.
One thing that doesn't help is the apparent rotation of venues. It feels like a lot of the tournaments don't feel safe where they are, with a few exceptions of which the Crucible is the obvious one.
They all need to be given a permanent home (I think the Barbican for the UKC and Waterfront for the NI Open are another couple which are safe) which should be agreed by a majority vote amongst the players.
There are plenty of other things to think about but the above would be a positive first step.
It will be a tough few years for many sports that aren't called football. That will always attract youngsters because the money is obscene. But move on to any other sports and while there's still good money to be made, a lot of kids these days are likely to wonder if it's worth the effort to reach the top when they can get a normal job and play games online!
It's part of the seniors tour - so the likes of Jimmy White, Ken Doherty, Stephen Hendry...
And the name stems from the fact each frame lasts a maximum of 15 minutes (900 seconds). There's also a 20 second shot clock.
More and more tournaments (and sports in general) seem to need - or feel the need - for more formats with gimmicks, rather than just stick to the established format. But it makes more sense when it's something like this rather than the main Tour.
Thanks for taking the time to explain.
I guess this kind of thing has its place and is more and more common in slow paced games (see 20/20 cricket and The Hundred)
Is that the one where they let in the louts that shout out drivel in between shots?
Yeah you're thinking of the Shootout where it's one frame per match and they have a shot clock of 15 seconds (turns to 10 seconds near the end).
To be fair, that particular tournament probably wouldn't work with totally quiet crowds but you do get some idiots shouting random stuff as more and more beer is consumed!
All of the other traditional multi-frame tournaments will eventually be subject to tweaks, I think at some point a one-minute shot clock will come in - that might sound a lot but a lot of players go over it. I appreciate they have to get the long stuff out at times for tricky shots but as with pool you can have one or two extensions per player per frame.
I love the format of the World Championship and the final being four sessions over two days, first to 18 - but modern sport is moving away from that, look at Bazball; great to watch but it will kill five day cricket.
Would it be harsh to say that the new generation of sports fans don't have the attention span anymore? Back in the late 80s when my dad was taking me to the Assembly Rooms in Derby for the snooker there were no phones, tables, online console gaming or anything like that but I think these days it's very different. People seem to have so much they think they need to do that things like live sport can't take up as much of their time!
It's played in a less formal atmosphere compared to 'proper' Snooker, but it's nowhere near as bad as the Shoot-out crowd on the Main Tour.
As @ChrisNelson just said, that one has ten minute frames, and a shot clock, and the crowd seem to be encouraged to be as drunk and intrusively loud as possible!
And I agree about the 'attention span' issue of the modern sports fan that's going to drive more and more changes (that I'd call dumbing down). I think one of the main reasons is because they're changing who they're aimed at - though I think that's just a natural response to society as a whole generally changing and being more, again, dumbed down and aiming things more at the lowest common denominator.
I think if you carried on aiming the likes of Cricket and Snooker at existing fans and demographics, they'd like them to stay as they are and can fully appreciate them. However that's a limited and ageing demographic, and they seemingly have to change these sports (dumb them down!) to try to appeal to a younger and wider demographic for the next generation of fans. Which is a huge shame for me, but understandable given the way everything else is heading in that direction too. So I guess for a lot of things it's a matter of adjust or become an anachronism.
Last edited:
They need to learn from Cricket and I think they are. Introduce more exciting formats for the average viewer and leave “Test” Snooker the feck alone.
I see your point and you are probably right regarding current attention spans.
I do think with the current players though that apart from Selby that they all do get on with it at a good pace and there has to be leeway when it comes to the safety aspect of the game.
The thing that I used to notice from the crowd was the constant coughing but gladly that is a thing of the past.
I really cannot work it out as I think it is a shocking look for a TV audience.
When I have played or watched competition snooker in any hall there has always been respectful relative quietness and that is what the game always has been.
When I have played or watched competition snooker in any hall there has always been respectful relative quietness and that is what the game always has been.
I think the main trouble is, as I've just recently posted, society as a whole has generally changed and now aims pretty much everything at the lowest common denominator as that's where the main, growing market is.
So the types of fans who appreciate traditional forms of things like Cricket and Snooker are a limited and ageing demographic, and they seemingly have to do dumbed down versions to try to appeal to younger and wider demographics for the next generation of fans.
And, unfortunately, those shorter, dumbed down versions are probably going to end up being the main formats of the sports going forward as for a lot of things that's mainly appreciated by an ageing demographic it's going to be a matter of adjust or become an anachronism.
I am not keen on quite a few American sports like Baseball and NFL as I find them to have so much downtime and as far as I am aware they are still well followed so I am not sure if the sport following Americans are a more patient audience.
A golf tournament goes for 4 days and I think that is made for TV.
It's true that American Football and Baseball have quite a lot of downtime, though Baseball (if you compare it to Cricket) is still similar in length to a Twenty20 match, or at most a one day game. America has never, then and now, understood the idea of patient, 5 day Test cricket. Similarly, much preferring Pool to Snooker as it's quicker.
So it's not facing such a huge cultural shift as we are, and one hitting the longer, established versions of sport quite as much. Yet, even so, reading up on it I see that Baseball has been suffering in ratings in recent years due to the length of its games (and was apparently much less popular with those under 40 in polls), and it has made recent changes to appeal to a changing audience - including introducing a Pitch clock to speed up the game!
So, yeah, even they're facing those problems of appealing to a new demographic of fans with less patience / attention span. But it's an even bigger change over here.
Absolutely insane match between Allen & Selby. No clue how Selby lost that
Stunning stuff from O'Sullivan!
As much as I like the SF line up, I can't fully get into tournaments like the World Masters and the World Mixed Doubles - they just feel like Exhibition tournaments there solely for the money of Saudi Arabia, and then to help give the female players some TV exposure competing with / against the top players in glorified friendlies.
As much as I like the SF line up, I can't fully get into tournaments like the World Masters and the World Mixed Doubles - they just feel like Exhibition tournaments there solely for the money of Saudi Arabia, and then to help give the female players some TV exposure competing with / against the top players in glorified friendlies.
Last edited:
Ronnie just beat Higgins 4-0 with 3 centuries and amazingly Higgins did not pot a ball in the match
Probably won't be long before they change the rules where a snooker isn't allowed
Anyone who hasn’t seen this, absolutely incredible finish
That's pretty much been mooted.Probably won't be long before they change the rules where a snooker isn't allowed
Or, at least, I've heard a few - most recently the likes of Stephen Hendry and Shaun Murphy - suggest that the frame should end once a player has a lead that's more than the points remaining (unless they're still on a break of course), rather than a player carry on playing for snookers and 'dragging' the frame on for longer.
The thinking being, of course, that it would speed the game up and most people prefer to see potting rather than the 'chess' battle that develops when a player is looking for snookers.
And in the Shoot out, they've removed the miss rule so any foul doesn't get put back you just get ball in hand to keep the potting / excitement going for the fans.
So while snookers won't be eradicated, there's certainly suggestions / early signs of them being tweaked to speed up the game.
There should be a calculation for me. One snooker with 3 balls remaining should be fair. Five snookers with 3 balls remaining daft.
They will look to make a change at some point with regard to playing for snookers.
The only issue with it is that it's quite subjective - for example if you need three snookers and there's only the colours left that's difficult but what if there are balls lined up in baulk perfect for snookering? That makes it more likely it could be achieved.
So players will say it's unfair to have the opportunity to do it when the balls are lying in a certain position, but not when they are in others.
Then what happens if a player has passed the three snookers needed stage but goes in-off?
I think it will cause a very big change to how players approach the game, and it's not going to be simple to introduce.
They will be better off starting with the shot clock because that will go some way to alleviating the above anyway, if players have less time to play a snooker it's more likely they won't get it, giving the opponent a chance to seal the frame.
It is frustrating to see a player carry on needing more than three snookers but some players, Selby in particular, genuinely feel they can pull it off.
The only issue with it is that it's quite subjective - for example if you need three snookers and there's only the colours left that's difficult but what if there are balls lined up in baulk perfect for snookering? That makes it more likely it could be achieved.
So players will say it's unfair to have the opportunity to do it when the balls are lying in a certain position, but not when they are in others.
Then what happens if a player has passed the three snookers needed stage but goes in-off?
I think it will cause a very big change to how players approach the game, and it's not going to be simple to introduce.
They will be better off starting with the shot clock because that will go some way to alleviating the above anyway, if players have less time to play a snooker it's more likely they won't get it, giving the opponent a chance to seal the frame.
It is frustrating to see a player carry on needing more than three snookers but some players, Selby in particular, genuinely feel they can pull it off.
Even though I'm generally a fan of the quicker, attacking players - Trump, Lisowksi, Brecel, etc - I've never really had a problem with players playing on for snookers as it's still an intriguing, if less dynamic, aspect of the game.
The only time I have issue with it is when it feels the person is doing it in an 'unsporting' way, just to get under the skin of the opponent. Peter Ebdon, for example, regularly did that. I don't think that's right in a sport that prides itself on the players being fair and honest, calling fouls on themselves and so on. It feels like the Snooker equivalent of time wasting.
But hard to prove with certainty when a player is doing it much more for mind games, or to throw the other player out of rhythm, and when they genuinely believe they have a good chance of getting them.
Snookers are a huge part of the game, and it'll be really sad if they feel like they have to change that too much just to stay appealing to a modern / future audience.
Likewise, even though I'm fonder of the quicker players - and don't really like those who regularly average 30+ seconds a shot - a negative with the shot clock idea is there's times when it's really interesting when players are getting each other in difficulty and having to puzzle ways out of it. It's a shame to lose that, though there's also times when - similar to the snooker point above - certain players deliberately play slow in order to frustrate their opponent (again, classic Peter Ebdon tactic). And that's the kind of thing that it would be good to stamp out.
Having finished runner up in the initial Q Tour qualifiers, young Liam Davies has now reached the final of the play offs after beating former pros Peter Devlin (5-2) and Rory McLeod (6-1). He meets yet another former pro (and fellow Welshman), Duane Jones, in the final - who will start off as favourite having spent 8 years on the Tour and only dropping off last year. Really hope it's not yet another 'so close' moment for Davies and that he can get himself on the Tour next season.
There's three 'finals', as the 24 players were drawn into three lots of 8 with QF's, SF's and Finals to decide the three players recieving their Tour cards. I'd like Iulian Boiko or Steven Hallworth to get through one of the other sections, though I'm not really too bothered about anyone in the other.
The matches are live on the WPBSA's YouTube channel.
There's three 'finals', as the 24 players were drawn into three lots of 8 with QF's, SF's and Finals to decide the three players recieving their Tour cards. I'd like Iulian Boiko or Steven Hallworth to get through one of the other sections, though I'm not really too bothered about anyone in the other.
The matches are live on the WPBSA's YouTube channel.
Women's World Championship is down to the semi-final stage.
Our Reanne Evans faces Bai Yulu at around 4am tomorrow UK time with the other semi pitting Ng On Yee against Mink Nutcharut which is a huge clash.
@Bertie Wooster unlucky in the qualifiers with Davies and Boiko though they were both comfortably beaten in the end.
Our Reanne Evans faces Bai Yulu at around 4am tomorrow UK time with the other semi pitting Ng On Yee against Mink Nutcharut which is a huge clash.
@Bertie Wooster unlucky in the qualifiers with Davies and Boiko though they were both comfortably beaten in the end.
That was only the first session in best of 19 Finals. Liam Davies has got it back to 7-7 so still in with a chance. But it's still looking bad for Boiko - 9-6 down now.
Bloody hell! 
Liam Davies fought back from 7-4 down to lead 9-7, only to lose the last 3 frames and yet again miss out on the Tour.
Pretty typical of the way sport has gone for me in recent years - with the exception of Judd Trump in Snooker. Invest (way too much) time and emotion watching it, regularly get false hopes as it looks promising, only for it to inevitably end up going pear shaped.
In this instance, out of the 24 players, I was wanting Davies and Boiko to get Tour cards, and none of the Asian players to get one. What happens? Boiko and Davies agonisingly miss out, and 2 of the 3 places go to the Asian players!
Liam Davies fought back from 7-4 down to lead 9-7, only to lose the last 3 frames and yet again miss out on the Tour.
Pretty typical of the way sport has gone for me in recent years - with the exception of Judd Trump in Snooker. Invest (way too much) time and emotion watching it, regularly get false hopes as it looks promising, only for it to inevitably end up going pear shaped.
In this instance, out of the 24 players, I was wanting Davies and Boiko to get Tour cards, and none of the Asian players to get one. What happens? Boiko and Davies agonisingly miss out, and 2 of the 3 places go to the Asian players!
In the spirit of never learning, I'm immediately back invested in Liam Davies' latest attempt to get on the Tour after his agonizing 10-9 defeat in the Q Tour final.
The latest is the Euro U21's - only the winner gets a tour place. Davies is now into the QF, where he meets Latvia's Andrejs Pripjoks.
He's only 17, but after two years of watching him get very close to a Tour card numerous times, only to fall short - well, it's all feeling very familiar as a Jack Lisowksi fan!
EDIT: Davies won his QF, 4-0. He now faces another Latvian, Artemijs Zizins, in the SF.
The other SF has Poland's Antoni Kowalski against Northern Ireland's Robbie McGuigan (Mark Allen's step son).
The latest is the Euro U21's - only the winner gets a tour place. Davies is now into the QF, where he meets Latvia's Andrejs Pripjoks.
He's only 17, but after two years of watching him get very close to a Tour card numerous times, only to fall short - well, it's all feeling very familiar as a Jack Lisowksi fan!
EDIT: Davies won his QF, 4-0. He now faces another Latvian, Artemijs Zizins, in the SF.
The other SF has Poland's Antoni Kowalski against Northern Ireland's Robbie McGuigan (Mark Allen's step son).
Last edited: