That's a neat way of doing it. It make the whole season count, yet still gives the long shots a chance. Thanks for explaining.Yeah, snooker historically has always had long matches (the early years had matches that lasted for days), although it wasn't always single elimination, but some sort of challenge format (the history is quite interesting, but I can't remember the exact details off the top of my head).
In terms of the modern tournament, the top 16 in the rankings automatically get seeded through (and separated so 1 can't play 2 until the final and seed 1 vs seed 4 wouldn't happen until the semi-final).
In terms of who qualifies, its slightly more complicated, but is something like this:
Qualifying round one: Players ranked 81 to 112 against those seeded 113+
Qualifying round two: Qualifying round one winners against players ranked 49-80
Qualifying round three: Qualifying round two winners will against players ranked 17-48
Qualifying round four: Qualifying round three winners play each other
Then the qualifiers are randomly drawn against the top 16 seeds for the first round at the Crucible, so it can be the case that someone ranked 17/18/19/20 has just had a bad run, dropped out of the top 16 and you get two world class players meeting in round 1!
Yes, I did notice this. The motions of the players were fast. Almost no wasted time like most pool players. I didn't notice a shot clock though. Are they all just naturally fast? Or is there some unwritten rule to present the game in a fan friendly pace?Oh and even thought the frames and matches take a bit longer, pretty much every snooker player shoots faster than the fastest pool player.
Yes, I did notice this. The motions of the players were fast. Almost no wasted time like most pool players. I didn't notice a shot clock though. Are they all just naturally fast? Or is there some unwritten rule to present the game in a fan friendly pace?
Two words Beebs: Peter EbdonOh and even thought the frames and matches take a bit longer, pretty much every snooker player shoots faster than the fastest pool player.
I just watched this deciding frame from his 2002 WC win. (I never heard of him before). He must have been having a fast day? He definitely seemed slower than the other snooker players, but not pool player slow. ha ha.Two words Beebs: Peter Ebdon
As for finding the non-Ronnie matches interesting, it helps a lot of you have seen the players before and know a little about them.
Ebdon has a certain reputation ...I just watched this deciding frame from his 2002 WC win. (I never heard of him before). He must have been having a fast day? He definitely seemed slower than the other snooker players, but not pool player slow. ha ha.
That might have been the funniest YouTube video I’ve ever seen. Even when his opponent was picking his fingernails was perfect.Ebdon has a certain reputation ...
They are just that good. The top players will take the extra time when needed. No shot clock. When you see Ronnie studying.....must be a tough situation.Yes, I did notice this. The motions of the players were fast. Almost no wasted time like most pool players. I didn't notice a shot clock though. Are they all just naturally fast? Or is there some unwritten rule to present the game in a fan friendly pace?
I don't get the daily resubscribe come-on any more. They must think I'm either special or hopeless.... Buy a month then cancel the next day. You get the 30 days and request to renew every day.
I don't think you can subscribe and then cancel the next day anymore.
When I subscribed on 4/21, there was a small disclaimer that said you have to give 30 days notice. So pretty sure I'm getting billed on 5/21 even if I cancelled today.
My first experience was 30 days notice required on cancel. So when I watched for 2 weeks and canceled, I had to pay for the 2 weeks into the next month not another month.I don't think you can subscribe and then cancel the next day anymore.
When I subscribed on 4/21, there was a small disclaimer that said you have to give 30 days notice. So pretty sure I'm getting billed on 5/21 even if I cancelled today.
A frame from 1987 just popped up on my YouTube. The score was in the 300's. Did they carry forward the scores from each frame back then, and total ball score determined the winner, rather than total frames won?