The Snooker Dress Code

Waistcoat, tie, trousers, shoes – is there any other sport that requires players to accommodate to this dress code? Almost all sports couldn’t be played to their fullest effect if players were made to wear this. But we all know that snooker is unlike any other sport. Where has this strict dress policy come from and is it still necessary for it to be upheld to this day?

The formality was introduced since the early beginnings of cue sports in the 19th century. The game was played frequently by British nobles and those considered ‘upper-class’, where smart clothing was the standard and tradition had remained ever since.

The dress code has somewhat relaxed in recent years with players wearing various coloured shirts and flamboyant shoes but the topic always came up as to whether the these rules need to be changed or modernised. It’s a quality that is attributable to the sport which signifies its class and uniqueness that most outside viewers associate with the game.

There are many players (current and former) such as Parrott who support sticking to the tradition of smart clothing in snooker to push the gentlemanly image. Davis and Hendry were also supporters with the mentality that ‘dressing up’ gets a player in the right frame of mind as opposed to thinking of a match as another practice session if they were to go casual.

Shaun Murphy has previously raised concerns regarding the ‘restrictive’ feel of a player’s uniform, stating that it limits them from reaching certain shots and the tendency to overheat under the TV lights. While these points are valid, I think something he mentioned which is truly a missed opportunity is the ability to sell merchandise backed by the top clothing brands. Similar to golf polos, snooker could benefit from the sales of clothing as worn by the players. It may not be as lucrative or substantial as other sports but it’s definitely a waste by not exploring this option.

Here’s what I think. The reason I’m a huge fan of snooker is because of the class I believe it holds over other sports. Part of this belief may be prompted by the dress code but in large, it’s due to the level of skill involved and the ease to which it seems to be played with by the professionals.

I reckon the dress code should still apply to the Triple Crowns and some high-ticket China events. There are places outside the UK where certain fans expect players to show up in formal attire and would express disappointment if this didn’t happen. For other tournaments, I think a more golf-like approach should be taken. Polo shirts, trousers and shoes. It’s still regarded as smart clothing but at least gives a little more comfort to the players. I think this should also be enforced in the qualifying, non-televised stages of events; where viewers are few and the requirement doesn’t seem as necessary.

The difficulty from the governing body’s point of view is how viewership and subsequent ticket sales would be affected if some of these things were to change. As mentioned before, one of snookers notable qualities is the associated dress code which has been a part of the game since its conception over a century ago.

What are your thoughts on the Snooker Dress Code?

Will Snooker’s Fastest Maximum Break Ever Be Beaten?

No – is the simple answer. And also the long answer. Whether you class it as 5:20 or 5:08, 1997 saw the infamous and arguably most flawlessly executed 147 break in the history of the game. It was Round 1 in the 1997 World Championship and Ronnie O’Sullivan was 8-5 up against Mick Price where a loose safety shot travelled a bit too far and well…the rest is history.

There isn’t really a definitive list as to the fastest maximum breaks as players don’t really go for speed when compiling these breaks. But to give some context, O’Sullivan holds at least 3-4 of the Top 5 quickest maximum breaks with times (excluding 1997) ranging in the 6 minute territory. He also most likely holds at least 7 out of the Top 10. Most of these feats were accomplished before 2003!

But will 1997 ever be beaten? Unlikely, for a few reasons. Firstly, the record wasn’t just broken. It was annihilated. The previous record before this time was James Wattana making a 147 in just over 7 minutes in 1992. O’Sullivan broke this by near enough 2 minutes; in the context of a maximum break, this is a considerable amount of time.

If we’re also looking at the general speed of a player, it’s not like the 5:08 was made by a player on a fluke. It was made by (arguably) the quickest player the game has seen and possibly the only player that could have made that break happen. I feel that if O’Sullivan wasn’t in snooker, the fastest 147 times would hover around the 8-9 minute mark. Nowadays, 147s take on average around 10-14 minutes or so. We wouldn’t even know that a time in the realm of the low 5 minutes was even fathomable.

Another point to consider are the referees of today. Referees today are a lot more careful and take their time when re-spotting colours. If anything, this makes me want to give a huge amount of credit to Len Ganley, who refereed the 1997 R1 WSC match for keeping with the pace of O’Sullivan and what was happening. If it was one of today’s referees, who knows what the time achieved would have been?

However, I do think what it ultimately came down to was a number of things falling into place at the right time. The break itself was perfectly executed in that there were no complicated shots that required much thought. The referee was going round the table as quickly as O’Sullivan. And the time was set by the one person that could have made it happen. Don’t believe me? Set up the opening shot for any pro and see how they do. And see what their average shot times are like.

O’Sullivan was 21 at the time and he was a lot more carefree in his game and considering he was 8-5 up, this only added to how relaxed he was. I mean, he was chalking practically every other shot and didn’t even do so when potting the final 3 colours. He wasn’t having to check any of the potting angles. It was literally like watching a computer make the perfect break. And it didn’t seem as if he was rushing.

So again, do I think it will be beaten? No. The only person that could come close to reaching that time is O’Sullivan himself. And even in his 40s I’d say he has a good chance of achieving it in the 6 minute mark. Just look at his 146 against Ding in the 2017 WSC quarter-finals. I think Rollie Williams said it best in one of his YouTube videos: ‘the guy is a one-man highlight reel’.

Edit: this was written well before 14 year old talent, Iulian Boiko from Ukraine made a 147 in under 6 minutes in training. Does this change my opinion – will the fastest break ever be beaten? Officially, no. Unofficially, maybe. I definitely don’t think it will be beaten in competitive play, due to the factors explained above. Even in unofficial, non-competitive play, players will get close but only if they and a referee run around the table. And I feel the only way it will truly be recognised is if it happens in competitive play.

Are There Too Many Events In The Calendar?

It depends who you ask. This time 10 years ago, there were only 6 ranking events and a very small handful of non-ranking invitational tournaments. Now, in the 2019/20 season there are 19 ranking events and a multitude of non-ranking, variant and senior tournaments. Surely that’s a great thing, right?

Before Barry Hearn took over the reins of World Snooker, it was a very difficult sport to prosper in, even for those at the top. There were weeks between tournaments and players in the Top 64 couldn’t sustain a living as a professional. Imagine being one of the Top 50 or 100 players in the world of a particular sport and not being able to even maintain a living by participating in the activity.

Effectively, those outside the Top 16 (and particularly the Top 64) were having a difficult time. This was only worsened by the few events held in a year and the significant periods of time between each tournament. Fewer events meant fewer opportunities for players to earn money which often led to high level players having to work outside of Snooker in the considerable periods of time between events.

Fast forward to recent years where tournaments are now back-to-back and most take place immediately after one another, the inverse problem seems to have risen. Players complain that there are too many events and there isn’t enough rest time between events for players to recuperate, particularly those that venture deep into a given tournament. I mean, who can remember Mark Allen coming runner up in last year’s UK and then the very next day travelling to Scotland and spending the next week winning the Scottish Open. What an accomplishment.

The increase in the number of tournaments has allowed for flexibility in which players to decide which tournaments they want to compete in. It’s rare that you find players that will compete in every single tournament in a season. But the main concern comes from the fact that because there are so many ranking events, players (especially towards the top) feel they need to compete in all of them in order to remain high in the rankings.

So, are there too many events in the calendar? From the view of an amateur or someone low in the rankings: probably not. There is plenty of opportunity to earn money as well as tremendously improve their game by coming up against the top. From the perspective of the top: maybe. Every player’s views are different. O’Sullivan will have a different view to David Gilbert.

However, I do think there should be a better scheduling of events based on location. A large tiring factor comes from travelling between venues. If frequent back-and-forth travel can be minimised, this will help with fatigue and coping with the increasing number of tournaments. Many have already suggested, but holding all China and India tournaments at a particular time in the year to limit long distance travel, considering most players are UK and Europe based. But obviously, spending a month or two in China will be difficult for those players with family commitments.

So, what do you think is the best compromise? Should a few China and Europe based tournaments be held together but spread throughout the season? Could this save on players travelling thousands of miles for a single tournament? Should there be a week buffer period between each event?

What is Snookers One-Year Ranking and Provisional Seedings List? (Part 2)

This is Part 2 of the Short which explained the One-Year ranking list in snooker and how it is used for certain events. Click here to read that. This post will now look at the Provisional Seedings list and how this is observed in the context of snooker rankings.

Provisional Seedings are basically updates to the world rankings list which is used to determine the seeding positions for future events. This aids event organisers in scheduling matches for specific tournaments. They are also used to predict changes in the rankings and give an up-to-date representation of the current standings.

The official world ranking list is updated after each event however, instead of sticking to a ranking list at a fixed point in time, provisional seedings are updated and used throughout the year. Imagine stockbrokers at Wall Street staring at the prices changing at the end of a quarter. Yeah, it’s the same. This is particularly useful/daunting for those who hover around positions 8 and 16 for specific events – mainly as the Top 16 automatically qualify for the WSC.

With the exception of the Coral Cup and Masters, most other events in the calendar have a ‘cut-off’ point for which their ranking points will be included up to this point to determine ranking positions or seedings for that event. There are seeding cut-off points spread throughout the season so that seedings are as up-to-date as they can be.

For example (at the time of writing), once the China Championship has ended the rankings will be updated to reflect those who have competed. This new ranking list will be used to determine who the seeds are going into the next tournament: the English Open. Similarly, after the Northern Ireland Open is the cut-off for the UK Championship and Scottish Open. The provisional ranking positions can be calculated to determine the seeds for the UK and Scottish Open. Consequently, the performances in the UK Championship will not affect the positioning of the following Home Nation event.

Provisional seedings are observed before and during tournaments by taking into account the minimum a player will be taking as prize money based on the tournament at that current point in time. For example, we are currently in the Last-64 of the China Championship where each player in this round will be taking home at least £4750. This is pretty much a fact so we can add this to all competing players rankings. At the same time, since the rolling system is used where the previous 2 years are accounted for, we can deduct whatever earnings the player gained from this same event 2 years ago (World Open 2017) as it’s no longer applicable to their ranking total.

This gives an idea with reasonable accuracy as to what the standings will look like going forward to the next event. This provisional ranking is updated as the tournament progresses. So, if a player makes it to the QF of the China Championship, we can easily change that £4750 that was added before to £20000.

When Ding Junhui was eliminated from the China Championship, we saw him lose £150,000 worth of ranking points (from World Open 2017) which was replaced with £4750 based on his performance in this year’s China Championship. Due to his first round exit, we were able to look at provisional seedings and see that this would take him out of the Top-16 and view which players are likely to take his position.

In the case of the Masters, it uses the same 2 year rolling ranking method (up to the UK Championship) to determine who qualifies but at the start of a season, we can look at who are in the best spots to make the Triple Crown. For the 2020 Masters, we know those who qualify will be based on ranking points accumulated from the UK Championship 2017-19. If we were at July 2019 – the start of the season – we could take the ranking list and just subtract any of the points earned before UKC 2017 (i.e. July 2017-Nov. 2017) as they are irrelevant, and look at who is in the driving seat.

Hopefully, this makes some kind of sense when it comes to understanding the Provisional Seedings list. It’s easy to think of it as similar to the official world rankings but updating them as each tournament and match goes on to observe potential future changes in the ranking list. And by being able to look at these changes will allow you to see who will be able to qualify for certain events.

Helpful links:

2019/20 Calendar: http://www.worldsnooker.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/Calendar_2019_20_v15.01.pdf

Provisional Rankings: http://www.snooker.org/res/index.asp?template=35

WPBSA Ranking FAQ: http://www.wpbsa.com/rankings/rankings-faq/