Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Crucible Theatre, Sheffield. Format Change

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • vmax4steve
    replied
    Originally posted by Cyril View Post
    Indeed. I think actually Lindrum last played in England in 1933. Joe Davis travelled to Australia for the 1934 Championship and after beating New Zealander Clark McConachy, lost narrowly to Lindrum in their match for the title. It took Joe several months of playing exhibitions around Australia to raise enough money for his fare home so not surprisingly he didn't see it worthwhile to go back to challenge him again.
    And the balls used had a lot to do with it. In england they insisted on using ivory balls and Lindrum struggled to adapt his nursery cannon game to them for a few years before eventually winning the title. Back in australia Lindrum set the ground rules and composite balls were used for the first time (bonzoline I believe) and no one could get near him.

    Leave a comment:


  • Cyril
    replied
    Originally posted by DeanH View Post
    the way I see it is that Lindrum was so good that no one wanted to play him, especially in AU.
    Joe Davis had already gone out there and failed and never wanted to go back. There was no one else close that could get an event worth while
    Indeed. I think actually Lindrum last played in England in 1933. Joe Davis travelled to Australia for the 1934 Championship and after beating New Zealander Clark McConachy, lost narrowly to Lindrum in their match for the title. It took Joe several months of playing exhibitions around Australia to raise enough money for his fare home so not surprisingly he didn't see it worthwhile to go back to challenge him again.

    Leave a comment:


  • gavpowell
    replied
    Originally posted by Cyril View Post
    The UK was rightly regarded as the 2nd tournament after the worlds for that reason.
    Frankly, if they mess about with the UK much more, it's going to be overshadowed by the Champion of Champions and the Masters.

    Leave a comment:


  • DeanH
    replied
    Crucible Theatre, Sheffield. Format Change

    the way I see it is that Lindrum was so good that no one wanted to play him, especially in AU.
    Joe Davis had already gone out there and failed and never wanted to go back. There was no one else close that could get an event worth while

    Leave a comment:


  • mythman69
    replied
    Originally posted by Cyril View Post
    I suppose it reflects how the game was at that time. In the 1920's, billiards was still very much the premier game. It wasn't until 1934 when Walter Lindrum returned home to Australia with the Billiards title that the game more or less died off as a public entertainment and snooker took over. Of course, this was at a time when gate receipts, not sponsorship (or television), made up most of the players earnings - so the longer the match the bigger the share. It was also considered that a true test of skill required at least a match of a weeks duration (best of 75 frames) to determine the best player. The final was later played over a fortnight (best of 145 frames). Interestingly, when the organisers decided to make the 1950 News of the World Tournament 3 day matches instead of 5, the World Champion of that time, Fred Davis, withdrew on the grounds that 3 days was not a sufficient test!
    Why did billiards die off when Lindrum returned to Australia?

    Leave a comment:


  • Cyril
    replied
    Originally posted by steveflanuk View Post
    The thing with the length of matches in the World Championship is that, over a longer match, the better player will win the majority of the time. It should not be messed with.

    Whilst the recent UK Championship was an enjoyable tournament - I still preferred it when it was best of 17 all the way through to the final.
    Agree 100%.
    Ronnie and a couple of others criticised the decision to reduce the number of frames in the UK and Mr Hearn didn't like it. The UK was rightly regarded as the 2nd tournament after the worlds for that reason. In my opinion, the great UK Finals were those 16-15 ones between Messrs Higgins (A), Griffiths, Davis, Hendry etc.

    Leave a comment:


  • steveflanuk
    replied
    The thing with the length of matches in the World Championship is that, over a longer match, the better player will win the majority of the time. It should not be messed with.

    Whilst the recent UK Championship was an enjoyable tournament - I still preferred it when it was best of 17 all the way through to the final.

    Leave a comment:


  • Cyril
    replied
    Originally posted by gavpowell View Post
    I just looked at the tournament history - why was the format so erratic during the 40s and 50s? Joe Davis wins one title with 16 frames and another with 78!

    I'd like to see how Ronnie would cope with the news that they were going back a few years and the final would be played over 140 frames
    I suppose it reflects how the game was at that time. In the 1920's, billiards was still very much the premier game. It wasn't until 1934 when Walter Lindrum returned home to Australia with the Billiards title that the game more or less died off as a public entertainment and snooker took over. Of course, this was at a time when gate receipts, not sponsorship (or television), made up most of the players earnings - so the longer the match the bigger the share. It was also considered that a true test of skill required at least a match of a weeks duration (best of 75 frames) to determine the best player. The final was later played over a fortnight (best of 145 frames). Interestingly, when the organisers decided to make the 1950 News of the World Tournament 3 day matches instead of 5, the World Champion of that time, Fred Davis, withdrew on the grounds that 3 days was not a sufficient test!
    Last edited by Cyril; 9th December 2014, 12:33 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • svendh
    replied
    i cant find any information about that, seems to be a hoax like that they build a crucible replica in china

    Leave a comment:


  • gavpowell
    replied
    Originally posted by Cyril View Post
    The worlds took from 1927 until 1982 to find the perfect format we enjoy today so let us just hope they don't ever start meddling with it, and certainly not to bow to the whims of any television company. The status of World Champion is the absolute pinnacle few players ever accomplish and that's exactly how it should be. That's how the legends: Reardon, Davis, Hendry and O'Sullivan's greatness can rightly be measured against their contemporaries. To be a rightful world champion it surely has to be necessary to go "the full distance"!
    I just looked at the tournament history - why was the format so erratic during the 40s and 50s? Joe Davis wins one title with 16 frames and another with 78!

    I'd like to see how Ronnie would cope with the news that they were going back a few years and the final would be played over 140 frames

    Leave a comment:


  • Cyril
    replied
    The worlds took from 1927 until 1982 to find the perfect format we enjoy today so let us just hope they don't ever start meddling with it, and certainly not to bow to the whims of any television company. The status of World Champion is the absolute pinnacle few players ever accomplish and that's exactly how it should be. That's how the legends: Reardon, Davis, Hendry and O'Sullivan's greatness can rightly be measured against their contemporaries. To be a rightful world champion it surely has to be necessary to go "the full distance"!
    Last edited by Cyril; 9th December 2014, 01:25 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • neuronic
    replied
    A BO19 World semi?
    Come on...

    Leave a comment:


  • svendh
    replied
    Originally posted by Mr Snooker View Post
    Hi all this as just been posted on the Crucible Theatre, Sheffield, faceook


    Barry Hearn Speaking today: said the World Championship format could be changed in future possible all matches best of 19 frames until the Final (best of 35 frames) as the BBC Sport Television want to reduce frames. Hearn always want to leave the format alone at the world championship but things could be change in future.
    Can't find that on their Facebook page, have you got a link?

    Leave a comment:


  • johno
    replied
    Crucible Theatre, Sheffield. Format Change

    I'm sure Hearn has said in the past he would not alter the format of the WC, it would be a travesty. I can't believe they would go through with this

    Leave a comment:


  • gavpowell
    replied
    Can we be sure Hearn's not using the BBC as an excuse?

    I can find no evidence of Hearn saying anything of the kind, nor anything on Facebook relating to this. Is this a wind-up?
    Last edited by gavpowell; 8th December 2014, 08:20 PM.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X