Jump to content

Barry Hearn makes a mockery of snooker now.


Mostyn6

Recommended Posts

After seeing how Cricket succeeded with T20, Hearn has tried interfering with any sport he can get his hands on by trying to make it quick and entertaining. Prize Fighter, Premier League Darts and Snooker to name a couple.

But the news that One Frame SHOOTOUT will become a ranking event truly takes the piss IMO

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/snooker/36266842

Now I'm not against variations of sport to get the punters in, but 1 frame is never a fair judgement of competition. When I played pool, I could regularly break and clear the table without my opponent having a shot, it doesn't mean I'm a better player than my opponent, and this is relative in Shoot Out snooker.

What do you think? I'm waiting to read a player agreeing with it, and I hope the top players boycott it!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 22
  • Created
  • Last Reply

It's complete and utter crap. I suppose it's a symptom of modern society in general that people no longer have the patience to watch a sport that taxes the competitors concentration and endurance. Watch out for the updated version of chess where every piece is a queen and the maximum thinking time per move is 10 seconds.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Anon said:

It's complete and utter crap. I suppose it's a symptom of modern society in general that people no longer have the patience to watch a sport that taxes the competitors concentration and endurance. Watch out for the updated version of chess where every piece is a queen and the maximum thinking time per move is 10 seconds.

But I don't think this is true. I think lots of people are still interested in snooker as it has traditionally been. I certainly am, and I suppose if we're talking about a generational thing, I'm the generation you speak of as no longer interested, being in my 20s.

The fact is, people like Barry Hearn give us no credit. They assume people these days are dumbed down and impatient and therefore aren't interested in a slower pace sport. Lots of people are interested.

This happens because people like Barry Hearn make these unfounded assumptions, not because they're true.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Anon said:

It's complete and utter crap. I suppose it's a symptom of modern society in general that people no longer have the patience to watch a sport that taxes the competitors concentration and endurance. Watch out for the updated version of chess where every piece is a queen and the maximum thinking time per move is 10 seconds.

They call that draughs ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Tombo said:

But I don't think this is true. I think lots of people are still interested in snooker as it has traditionally been. I certainly am, and I suppose if we're talking about a generational thing, I'm the generation you speak of as no longer interested, being in my 20s.

The fact is, people like Barry Hearn give us no credit. They assume people these days are dumbed down and impatient and therefore aren't interested in a slower pace sport. Lots of people are interested.

This happens because people like Barry Hearn make these unfounded assumptions, not because they're true.

I'm not accusing millennials, but modern society in general. Life moves faster now than it ever has. I think Mostyn's T20 example is a good indicator. It's a messy bastardisation of the original sport, but it's insanely popular amongst everyone and as much as it pains me to say it, it's the future of the game. I hope you're right and snooker fans do a much better job at resisting the change than cricket fans, but Hearn didn't get rich by calling these things wrong. He'll be expecting this short form to explode in China, just like T20 went big in India.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Anon said:

I'm not accusing millennials, but modern society in general. Life moves faster now than it ever has. I think Mostyn's T20 example is a good indicator. It's a messy bastardisation of the original sport, but it's insanely popular amongst everyone and as much as it pains me to say it, it's the future of the game. I hope you're right and snooker fans do a much better job at resisting the change than cricket fans, but Hearn didn't get rich by calling these things wrong. He'll be expecting this short form to explode in China, just like T20 went big in India.

T20 is very different to this though. It is a bastardisation, but it doesn't insult the intelligence of the viewer. I think T20 was always a good idea, nothing to do with modern society. I'm not a fan, but as said, it's just a faster version of the game.

One frame shootout is never going to be a good idea in any time period ever! I don't care how fast modern society moves! It bears almost no resemblance to snooker as we know it. It insults the intelligence of snooker fans that it even exists, let alone becoming a ranked event. Maybe modern society is faster than it used to be. Maybe there is a need to make a game that's essentially 'snooker on speed' for people who don't want to sit through 35 frames over two days.

But this...?! This is not the way to do it FFS!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sure the traditionalists lambasted the thought of Twenty20 cricket when it was introduced.

The fact it's bought a whole new way of playing the other versions of the game and lifted it another level, with big and new crowds introduced to the game, made it only better to watch.

Welcome to the 21st century Snooker..... About time you joined us here. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Wolfie said:

If you want a faster game with less strategy and safety play - play pool. Simples.

Pool on a snooker table is a good game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Mafiabob said:

I'm sure the traditionalists lambasted the thought of Twenty20 cricket when it was introduced.

The fact it's bought a whole new way of playing the other versions of the game and lifted it another level, with big and new crowds introduced to the game, made it only better to watch.

Welcome to the 21st century Snooker..... About time you joined us here. 

 

Sunday League and 50 over cricket made the move to T20 more of a gradual transition - to do what's proposed in snooker is a huge step.

Heaven knows what they would make of billiards!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Wolfie20 said:

Sunday League and 50 over cricket made the move to T20 more of a gradual transition - to do what's proposed in snooker is a huge step.

Heaven knows what they would make of billiards!

Ok...... Another comparison, which is the bigger sport nowadays? Darts or Snooker? Wasn't so long ago the only coverage you'd get of Darts was the two world championships. Snooker has been overtaken by PDC darts, it's been bought into the 21st century than no other than Barry Hearn.

More televised tournaments, better prize money, playing to big crowds..... Snooker apart from 3 tournaments are televised on Eurosport. If you asked 100 members of the public if imagine at least half could name 6 current Darts players. Probably guarantee they'd be less than 10 who could name 6 current snooker players. Wonder how many could name the World Champion? 

I'm all for this change to snooker. Needed to happen, and it will be for the better. Just a shame some are not on board with it and don't want change..... Wanting a easy life for being knocked out the 2/3rd round of tournaments and picking up a regular wage 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Mafiabob said:

I'm sure the traditionalists lambasted the thought of Twenty20 cricket when it was introduced.

The fact it's bought a whole new way of playing the other versions of the game and lifted it another level, with big and new crowds introduced to the game, made it only better to watch.

Welcome to the 21st century Snooker..... About time you joined us here. 

 

 

41 minutes ago, Mafiabob said:

Ok...... Another comparison, which is the bigger sport nowadays? Darts or Snooker? Wasn't so long ago the only coverage you'd get of Darts was the two world championships. Snooker has been overtaken by PDC darts, it's been bought into the 21st century than no other than Barry Hearn.

More televised tournaments, better prize money, playing to big crowds..... Snooker apart from 3 tournaments are televised on Eurosport. If you asked 100 members of the public if imagine at least half could name 6 current Darts players. Probably guarantee they'd be less than 10 who could name 6 current snooker players. Wonder how many could name the World Champion? 

I'm all for this change to snooker. Needed to happen, and it will be for the better. Just a shame some are not on board with it and don't want change..... Wanting a easy life for being knocked out the 2/3rd round of tournaments and picking up a regular wage 

those sports still remain fair to both participants though. In T20, both teams get equal opportunity to bat and bowl 20 overs. In Darts, even in a leg of darts, an opponent can NOT win in one visit. Snooker is quite unique by comparison in that a player can win a frame without any chance of his opponent affecting that frame.

For this to be fair, the rules would have to state that each player has an equal chance. Perhaps a way would be Player A visits the table alone, has 3 shots to 'develop' the table, then has 2 visits without missing, to amass a points total, then after 2 misses, his scoring visits are over. The table is reset and Player B has the same chance. Whichever player amasses the greater total, wins.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Mostyn6 said:

 

those sports still remain fair to both participants though. In T20, both teams get equal opportunity to bat and bowl 20 overs. In Darts, even in a leg of darts, an opponent can NOT win in one visit. Snooker is quite unique by comparison in that a player can win a frame without any chance of his opponent affecting that frame.

For this to be fair, the rules would have to state that each player has an equal chance. Perhaps a way would be Player A visits the table alone, has 3 shots to 'develop' the table, then has 2 visits without missing, to amass a points total, then after 2 misses, his scoring visits are over. The table is reset and Player B has the same chance. Whichever player amasses the greater total, wins.

But they practice just as much as other sports do. But if Barry read this, he may get more ideas,...,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Mafiabob said:

But they practice just as much as other sports do. But if Barry read this, he may get more ideas,...,

I accept that, and that's why it's a mockery to get them to turn up for a frame in which they may not even get a shot, and to then have their ranking in the game decided by it.

It's like having a penalty shoot out where the first team to score 5 wins, but team A gets 5 continuous shots before team B has them, team A scores all five and team B go home as defeated without a chance. It's misguided IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Mostyn6 said:

After seeing how Cricket succeeded with T20, Hearn has tried interfering with any sport he can get his hands on by trying to make it quick and entertaining. Prize Fighter, Premier League Darts and Snooker to name a couple.

But the news that One Frame SHOOTOUT will become a ranking event truly takes the piss IMO

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/snooker/36266842

Now I'm not against variations of sport to get the punters in, but 1 frame is never a fair judgement of competition. When I played pool, I could regularly break and clear the table without my opponent having a shot, it doesn't mean I'm a better player than my opponent, and this is relative in Shoot Out snooker.

What do you think? I'm waiting to read a player agreeing with it, and I hope the top players boycott it!

So you don't think they'll be cueing up to join? If not the top players, what about the rest? Will they baulk at the chance?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Mafiabob said:

 If you asked 100 members of the public if imagine at least half could name 6 current Darts players. Probably guarantee they'd be less than 10 who could name 6 current snooker players. Wonder how many could name the World Champion? 

Really?. I'd be amazed if people in general have greater awareness of darts than snooker. I realise I can only speak from my own experience but I'd put money on none of my family or close friends being able to name more than a couple of players. I can name one - if Phil Taylor is still playing, that is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't watch snooker or darts.

Can name plenty of Snooker players, don't know any Darts players. Seen that gaudy old bloke about though. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...