Whether you’re a fan or not, we’re all likely familiar with the current ranking system which consists of a rolling prize-money accumulation from the previous two years. If you’re unfamiliar with how the ranking system works, check out Snooker Short’s very first post which explains this (scroll to the bottom). So it’s fitting for the 100th post to circle back to the ranking system and how it used to work, then we can understand how things stand presently.

The ranking system has gone through multiple changes throughout the years but has primarily shifted from being a point’s based tariff to one based on the earnings received by a player, determined by their result in a tournament. Initially, when the list was introduced in 1976/77, rankings were measured against a player’s performance in the past three World Championships (as it was the only classified ranking event). Five points were awarded to the winner, four points to the finalist and so on…

This was the ongoing method until the 1982/83, where more players and ranking events were being added to the sport. For this reason, it was necessary to incorporate performances from these further events to a player’s ranking tally. Points allocated to each event were determined by their relative weighting. For example, in the 1998/99 season, winning the WSC earned 8100 ranking points; and the UK winner would earn 6075. The other ranking events that season would reward up to 4560 ranking points.

Another way the ranking system has changed is through the way seeding revisions were implemented. Formerly, the rankings used to be updated just once, at the end of every season, with tournament seedings based off this list. Obviously, the problem with this is that it wouldn’t reflect the currently best performing players through the season.

Since 2010/11 to now, rankings are updated following every tournament (still using the points basis until 2014/15) – databases even go so far as to produce provisional rankings so we can predict future standings. Seeding lists are updated frequently throughout the season to be able to fairly organise future events.

The reason seedings were necessary was because a player safely in the Top 16 at the end of a season didn’t have to perform well at all to be entered in the Masters. Introduction of seeding revisions provides incentive for those players to try and maintain their rankings as well as encourage lower ranked players to perform highly in the periods between the start of the season and the corresponding event.

Lastly, from the 2014/15 season, the system shifted from a points-based ranking system to the money list we are all accustomed to today. This means that whatever prize money a professional earns from a ranking event equates to the amount of points added to their ranking tally. Is it the perfect system? Maybe not. Is it better than what it used to be? Perhaps. Should it be protected from the fact that other countries can throw a substantial amount of money towards WST in order to ‘create’ a World Championship? Yes.

Hopefully this helped provide a bit of insight as to what the old ranking system was like. Thanks for reaching this point and reading the 100th Short post! Here’s to another 100!

Like this Short? Click here to read: How does the snooker ranking system work?

Have an idea for a Short post? Feel free to get in touch using the social media links below! Thanks for reading!