How the Champion of Champions Participants are Decided

The Champion of Champions (CoC) is a non-ranking snooker event that has been featured on the main tour since 2013. The event consists of tournament winners (for the most part) prior to the event taking place, which makes it an extremely exclusive event to partake in. Sometimes, it can cause confusion as to the players which are included, so hopefully this breakdown for the 2020 CoC makes it clearer for those who wanted to understand the selection criteria.

Firstly, it’s useful to know that only sixteen participants are invited to compete in the CoC. These individuals are made up of the sixteen or so tournament winners from the previous CoC in 2019, up until this current edition in 2020. Effectively, if a player won a tournament then they’re guaranteed a spot in the CoC. There aren’t really any tournaments exempt from this selection, so non-ranking events such as the Shanghai Masters, as well as World Cup and Six-Reds would be included, such as they were last year.

In the case of this year, there have been twenty tournaments since the last CoC (including 2019). However, this doesn’t mean that there were twenty different winners of tournaments in those past twelve months. Quite often the case, certain players are able to capture multiple titles in a season, which would significantly reduce the number of eligible applicants that could compete in the CoC. In fact, out of the twenty tournaments that took place there were only twelve unique winners due to the likes of Trump and Robertson winning multiple trophies within that space of time. This doesn’t include the winner of the third Championship League in a few days’ time.

Even so, this is only twelve out of the required sixteen competitors necessary for the event. Despite being able to capture more than one title, it doesn’t afford those players any benefit when it comes to the CoC so the spaces must still be filled. Most of the time, spaces would be filled by the players who are highest in the world rankings even though they haven’t won a title within the required period. For this year, Mark Allen (5) and John Higgins (8) would be invited to participate in the CoC as players ranked 1-4 and 6-7 had already won a tournament in the prior twelve months.

Another included individual is generally the World Championship runner-up, as has been the case for the past few years. That cements Kyren Wilson’s involvement in the CoC this year. Even if Wilson hadn’t come second place in the WSC, he would still be competing this year due to his ranking position (6) thereby pushing out Higgins from the tournament. However, Higgins will be thanking his lucky stars that Wilson came runner-up to allow his participation.

Other times WST will make their own decisions as to who can play in the CoC. Last year, Reanne Evans was included in the event aided by her success in capturing the Women’s WSC, making her the first female to play in the event as she ran a close contest against Shaun Murphy. Stephen Maguire was also allowed to compete given that he was one-half of the winning team at the World Cup. Additionally, the winner of the World Seniors is invited to test their ability against the rest.

A combination of these factors eventually make up the draw for the Champion of Champions where we can find out which of these winners will come out on top and secure a six-figure payday. The CoC is a unique format, similar to the Coral Cup which instead of looks at the best on the one-year list, it allows the winners of recognised snooker events to go head-to-head as they battle for the coveted title of the ‘Champion of Champions’.

My only question is, will anything be able to top the final we witnessed last year?

---

Like this Short? Click here to read: Why Do Snooker Players Not Wear Pool Gloves?

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

Snookers BEST 147?

It is the one you’re thinking of. No, not that one. That’s the one. While the 5:08 maximum break in 1997 is something truly special and easily the perfect break, the ‘best’ maximum has to be the one that has a bit of drama, as well as requires some creativity and problem solving on the table. Which is why I think many people, Ronnie O’Sullivan included, find themselves coming back to the 2008 World Championship.

The Professor of 147’s, Ronnie O’Sullivan, found himself against Mark Williams in the second round of the 2008 WSC. At this point in time, O’Sullivan was a two-time world champion and had made eight maximum breaks, tied alongside Stephen Hendry. O’Sullivan led Williams for the entirety of the match, but Williams was always on his heels. Although, O’Sullivan started to run away with the match at the end with a century and two 50+ breaks as he led 12-7.

Cuing well and feeling full of confidence, O’Sullivan sunk a long pot to leave himself a slightly tricky cut-back black. Using the reds on the table, he was able to pot the black while keeping himself in his comfort zone – on the high scoring end of the table. O’Sullivan’s cue action was in full effect and if anything, was striking too well as noted by commentator, Willie Thorne. Some of the earlier shots throughout the break were marginally overrun due to how fluently O’Sullivan was cuing.

It normally irks me whenever commentators prematurely narrate how many reds and blacks have been potted during the early stages of a break, but there was an air of inevitability about this circumstance that Dennis Taylor stated following the first black about O’Sullivan’s intentions to make the maximum. It was so apparent that even Willie Thorne had a slight chuckle before Taylor finished his sentence because he knew exactly what he was going to say. And how many times have we seen O’Sullivan close out a match with a 147? Many times.

While the reds were fairly split out to pick off as opposed to being in a tight cluster, work still needed to be done to solve this puzzle. A prime example of O’Sullivan’s exceptional snooker brain was when he came onto the sixth red. As mentioned by Thorne in commentary, instead of potting the obvious red to the left of the table, O’Sullivan elected to pot the red at the bottom of the pack to give himself room to negotiate a better split when cannoning into them. Which he then went on to do. It may not have looked like much, but this was an impressive display of snooker knowledge.

Another example of O’Sullivan’s supreme cuing was evident on the thirteenth red that he potted. It was an exquisite example of how little effort he put into striking the cue ball in order to get a tremendous reaction from the cue ball to screw it back that distance off the cushion for the next black. A terrific snooker shot. And then we all know what came next.

The reason we’re all here. The single shot that everyone comes back to whenever we hear the words ‘World Championship 2008 maximum break’. The red that was glued to the pink which was on everyone’s mind throughout the whole break. Because it had to somehow be dealt with. But no one expected it from this following shot. Virtually straight on the black with little-to-no angle to work with, O’Sullivan forcefully stunned the cue ball (with perhaps a trace of left), to bounce off the cushion in a vertical line to perfectly separate the pink and red.

There was no angle to follow through or screw back to the pink/red and O’Sullivan really had to ‘make’ this shot out of nothing. It was played with a bit of insurance in mind given the last red that was situated but O’Sullivan was cuing so incredibly well and was in the zone that he figured he had to go for it. The last thing that made this shot one for the ages was that if the cue ball had a fuller contact on the red, it would have stuck and the break likely would have been over. But it had the perfect quarter-ball contact. It was such a spectacular shot that it warranted a worthy reaction from the Crucible crowd and commentators.

A visible puff of the cheeks by O’Sullivan showed that the hard work was indeed done. And he now had to remain calm and collected as he pieced together the rest of the maximum break. A maximum break which would have earned him £157,000 – if Ali Carter didn’t happen to make one that same tournament. O’Sullivan himself has gone on to mention how this 147 is one of his favourites due to how well he was playing and dealing with the possibility of being banned for comments made earlier in the season. However, O’Sullivan gave authorities a reason to rethink their decisions with a display that only he can provide.

For me, the 2008 maximum is the ultimate showcase of sublime cuing, break-building, audience participation and a single shot that will remain in history. Every 147 is spectacular in its own right, but none still generate the buzz that this one does regardless of how many times I watch it. Many more maximums will be made as time goes on, but it will take a lot to get fans to forget about the 2008 WSC.

---

Like this Short? Click here to read: Will Snooker's Fastest Maximum Break Ever Be Beaten?

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

Why Do Snooker Players Not Wear Pool Gloves?

Something that didn’t really occur to me until I saw Darren Morgan at the World Seniors Championship, was the very insignificant number of snooker players that choose to play with a glove on their bridge hand. It hasn’t been something that I had really thought about, but it’s very evident in the game of pool and not so much in its snooker counterpart. I wanted to find out the reasoning behind this and whether there was some fundamental factor between the games that result in such a difference in choice.

The first thing would be to gauge an understanding as to why a glove is necessary in the first place. The chief reason for wearing a glove is to combat the effects of a ‘sweaty’ bridge when playing without one. When playing, particularly for a lengthy period of time, the gap in the bridge where your cue lies can often become damp thus, increasing friction. As the cue tries to motion through the bridge, increased friction can deter the smooth movement in the cue action.

Now, this hinders a pool player more so than a snooker player due to the closed-loop bridge utilised by these individuals. The closed-loop, which involves the index finger and thumb forming a ring around the cue creates more of a surface for the cue to run against, which increases the chances of cuing through friction. Wearing a glove negates this impact as they often absorb the sweat and give a consistent running surface.

However, a damp bridge doesn’t mean that all pool players suffer from hyperhidrosis. General playing conditions in America involve players coping with higher humidity than perhaps snooker players, given most events taking place in the UK and Europe. Higher humidity will increase moisture and wearing a glove substantially reduces the effect that this would have.

Another considerable factor that differs between snooker and pool players is the type of cues that they use. Pool players for the most part use slightly thicker, maple cues while snooker players predominately use ash-made cues. The importance of this lies in the properties of each wood, where maple has a tendency to get dirtier quicker, requiring it to be cleaned more often.

So why don’t snooker players wear gloves? You’d think that there would be at least a few more players using this when playing the game. I think it mainly comes down to the culture of both sports. Snooker is more of a traditional game which rarely ever changes (look at the break-off shot as an example) whereas, pool doesn’t mind adding a few accessories to their arsenal.

Also, snooker players tend to look after their cues in a way that doesn’t require them to wear a glove. In matches you will often see players (when seated) looking after their cues, whether it’s filing down their tip or using the provided towel to wipe down the cue. The towel is where I feel one of the main distinction lies. You’ll often see Ronnie O’Sullivan wiping his hands or holding a warm mug between frames and this helps reduce the moisture in his hands, creating that smooth surface for cuing.

Lastly, I reckon that wearing a glove would create a surface that is too smooth for players to get accustomed to. This can lead to the cue unintentionally sliding too quickly within the bridge and even lead to a little deflection. Given that snooker players frequently care for their cues and sometimes even use chalk to reduce moisture on their hands (if needed), it is unnecessary for them to equip a glove as it would involve a readjustment to their existing technique.

---

Like this Short? Click here to read: The Snooker Dress Code

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

The Difficulty With Popularising Snooker In America

Snooker has become a fairly global sport; and it has spent the past decade or so trying to increase its global presence. However, many fans would agree that there is one region in particular that they would like to see the sport prosper: the North Americas, specifically the US. Given all this time that has passed, why is it such a challenging prospect, trying to break snooker into the States?

One of the main reasons is down to the competition from other sports. Most articles would show you that American Football, Baseball and Basketball are the top sports in the country, with tremendous viewing figures to match. Introducing snooker to this region would mean trying to compete for fans of these sports, which is no easy task. These sports may not be popular internationally, but it’s known internationally how passionate US fans are about them.

Another thing to consider is how favoured the underlying collegiate level sports are in the US – an area which could be considered their own sports respectively, given how involved the fans are. These are all challenges that snooker would have to face, and what pool is currently trying to deal with. Despite pools popularity, most US surveys don’t even have the game in their top 10s. So how could snooker possibly compete with fast-paced, high impact sports that make it seem like a bike ride in comparison?

The answer lies in the problem that snooker faces with breaking into the US – and that’s its perception. Barry Hearn mentioned in an interview a few years ago about how the American psyche is ‘all about results and crash, bang, wallop’, leaning to the impression of US sports fans being excited by the faster paced sports with a quick result. Which means that popularising snooker doesn’t only mean introducing a new sport to viewers, but also trying to ingrain a more patient characteristic into those that would choose to watch.

America certainly has the venues to support some incredible snooker events but there has been difficulty in the past for Hearn in trying to procure broadcasting rights that would make hosting worthwhile. Hearn stated that some sports just don’t translate to other countries which some have to accept. But it certainly means we shouldn’t stop trying. WST were able to take advantage of the growing popularity in China to integrate snooker alongside other sports such as table tennis and badminton. And now China is one of snooker’s most important regions/markets.

How can we make snooker in the US work then? It all comes down to awareness. This isn’t something that can be done quickly either. It’s something that would need to be nurtured into American culture. Eddie Hearn stated in the ‘WST: No Time Like The Future’ video at the beginning of the year how fans would need to be educated on the sport, and the main way this could be done is through the top personalities.

This is how golf remains a top sport in the US and the likes of snooker or cricket have suffered in trying to break through. Golf has a significant volume of American professionals and personalities despite being a sport with a pace similar to snooker. Players like Tiger Woods have led to a raised interest in the sport which is why there are over 24 million Americans that choose to play the sport, regardless of the ruleset.

The reason I said ‘regardless of the ruleset’ was because it has been suggested on a few occasions to play snooker on a smaller, or even a pool sized table to ease snooker into American culture. Changing the foundations of snooker to adhere to a different market changes the sport completely and we all already know snooker’s track record with entertaining viewers as it stands. So I don’t necessarily think this would work. It all goes back to educating the sports fans.

Making the US fans aware of the stars like O’Sullivan, Trump and Selby will at least raise the question to them as to why these players aren’t competing here. Unfortunately, there is no prominent American snooker star that could help in being an ambassador for the sport, similar to the likes of Robertson for Australia, or Ding for China. Sadly, this is potentially the reason as to the lack of young risers taking up an interest in snooker. This underlines the importance of raising the awareness of snooker and its personalities in the US market, and through similar promotion and partnership strategies that were utilised in China, would take a positive step in achieving this.

---

Like this Short? Click here to read: Snooker Events in Australia?

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