Plate Competitions in World Championships 1973 and 1974

[cesard]

In the Crucible Almanac, by Chris Downer , it appears me this. I don´t know exactly full rules, if somebody can expand. But according to Almanac:

-Eliminated players in first and secound rounds of the World Championship can play
-Winner was 100 pounds in 1973 and 300 in 1974

I make a couple of questions:

-Where and when were played these tournaments?
-What was the prizepool in World Championships to compare the money that got semi-finalist or quarter-finalist losers comparing with Plate winner or Plate runner-up?
-How were the pairing made?
-Why was this tournament decided to play and why was abolished?

1973

1st round

David Taylor 5-0 Jack Rea
Cliff Thorburn 5-1 Bernard Bennett
Geoff Thompson 5-4 Jim Meadowcroft
Warren Simpson 5-3 Ron Gross
Maurice Parkin 5-0 Perrie Mans
John Pullman w/o Kingsley Kennerley
Dennis Taylor 5-2 David Greaves
John Dunning 5-2 Pat Houlihan

Quarter-Finals

Cliff Thorburn 9-3 David Taylor
Warren Simpson 9-5 Geoff Thompson
John Pullman 9-5 Maurice Parkin´
Dennis Taylor 9-2 John Dunning

Semi-Finals

Cliff Thorburn 9-4 Warren Simpson
John Pullman 9-8 Dennis Taylor

Final

John Pullman 16-12 Cliff Thorburn

1974

Preliminary Round

David Greaves 4-3 Sydney Lee
Geoff Thompson 4-3 Maurice Parkin
Kingsley Kennerley 4-1 Ian Anderson
Pat Houlihan 4-2 Ron Gross

First Round (there are best-of-7 and best-of-9)

John Spencer 5-1 David Greaves
Dennis Taylor 4-1 Bernard Bennett
Jim Meadowcroft 5-4 Geoff Thompson
Paddy Morgan 5-2 Kingsley Kennerley
John Pullman 5-0 Pat Houlihan
Cliff Wilson 4-2 David Taylor
Bill Werbeniuk 5-1 Jack Karnehm
Eddie Charlton 5-0 Jack Rea

Quarter-Finals

John Spencer 9-4 Dennis Taylor
Jim Meadowcroft 9-8 Paddy Morgan
John Pullman 9-2 Cliff Wilson
Bill Werbeniuk 9-8 Eddie Charlton

Semi-Finals

John Spencer 9-3 Jim Meadowcraft
John Pullman 9-7 Bill Werbeniuk

Final

John Spencer 15-5 John Pullman

[DeanH]

-Eliminated players in first and second rounds of the World Championship can play
-Winner was 100 pounds in 1973 and 300 in 1974
I make a couple of questions:

-Where and when were played these tournaments?

They were played during the Semi-finals of the competition proper, an articles states that they were not that well attended.

-What was the prizepool in World Championships to compare the money that got semi-finalist or quarter-finalist losers comparing with Plate winner or Plate runner-up?

1973 Prize Fund - £8,000
Winner - £1,500
Runner-up - £1,000
Semi-fianlist - £500
Q4 - £350
R2 - £175
R1 - £100
Plate - £100

-How were the pairing made?

Random draw I would think.

-Why was this tournament decided to play and why was abolished?

my thoughts 
Sponsor thought to sell more tickets.
Sponsor did not want to continue with the format.

[cesard]

They were played during the Semi-finals of the competition proper, an articles states that they were not that well attended.



1973 Prize Fund - £8,000
Winner - £1,500
Runner-up - £1,000
Semi-fianlist - £500
Q4 - £350
R2 - £175
R1 - £100
Plate - £100




Random draw I would think.


my thoughts 
Sponsor thought to sell more tickets.
Sponsor did not want to continue with the format.

Ok, thanks!

And in plate competition only winner received money. It is surprising, because they were long matches, from quarter-finals to the end.

By the way, I see in UK are very popular these plate competitions, that is a thing is never used in other countries. What is the idea of these kind of tournaments? And how is see a "plate final" or a plate champion, comparing to a main tournament? (this question is a little off-topic, outside the idea of this original post; but serves me to understand on same time the main idea of the Plate of the World Championship)

[DeanH]

There could have been other prize for runner-up but not found anything yet
Not sure that "plate competitions" are very popular in the UK in the Pro-game, but they do crop up yes
In Pro-Ams and Amateur competitions they are popular because it means that a paying entrant gets at least a certain number of games for their money, to make it worthwhile for entrants to turn up (imagine travelling some distance only to turn around after a few frames )
In the pool pub league I used to play in, this had a plate for the knockout competitions, as to "value" of the winner, hm good for the plate champion - not so much for the "real" champion :biggrin:
At least everyone got to play a few more frames.
I will try to find that article after the 1974 event were the players described the plate.

[jonny66]

I used to play in a pool tournament that had a similar setup, but the final was the winner of the main v the winner of the plate half, with the winner of the main half only having to win once and the winner of the plate half having to beat him twice to win. If that makes any sense.

[cesard]

There could have been other prize for runner-up but not found anything yet
Not sure that "plate competitions" are very popular in the UK in the Pro-game, but they do crop up yes
In Pro-Ams and Amateur competitions they are popular because it means that a paying entrant gets at least a certain number of games for their money, to make it worthwhile for entrants to turn up (imagine travelling some distance only to turn around after a few frames )
In the pool pub league I used to play in, this had a plate for the knockout competitions, as to "value" of the winner, hm good for the plate champion - not so much for the "real" champion :biggrin:
At least everyone got to play a few more frames.
I will try to find that article after the 1974 event were the players described the plate.

Interesting, then it is a tournament just to avoid that first losers go home and that is all.

I just heard in UK these kind of tournaments (in football Europa League has a little bit of it, but I´m not sure it is the same idea). But in an amateur tournament, how is seen by the people the Plate tournament? How is seen the Plate winner, better than a semi-finalist for example? When it is a plate, who receives trophy, usually: winner, runner-up and plate winner?

I-m interested in this idea, it is curious for me; that even in a World Championship was used

I used to play in a pool tournament that had a similar setup, but the final was the winner of the main v the winner of the plate half, with the winner of the main half only having to win once and the winner of the plate half having to beat him twice to win. If that makes any sense.

I think this is a Double Elimination tournament, not a plate tournament. There is a Winners Bracket (where all players start), when you lose, whatever round, go to Losers Bracket, and there another loss is your elimination. At the end, the winners of each bracket must play between them, but the Winner´s winner has no losses, and Losers´ Winner has 1, and therefore he must beat twice meanwhile the first only need a win

[DeanH]

Plate Competitions in World Championships 1973 and 1974

you have to remember that in the early 70's the world championship (and the whole structure of a "season" - unknown officially) was in transition from challenge format to the tournament we know today. There was no main organisation running snooker at the time - the players organisation (pbsa) and the Council were playing against each other since the late 60's to arrange events to get sponsors and money to attract the players to attend.
So a plate where players could earn more money was a carrot to attract the "names" to participate. So I think it was a "gimmick" that ran it's course and was dropped once players did not need it anymore as competition proper prize fund grew enough.
Don't know anything about football
Amateur and proam events now obviously need to attract participants by what every means they can - if this means a plate to give players more frames for their entrants fee - so be it

[cesard]

you have to remember that in the early 70's the world championship (and the whole structure of a "season" - unknown officially) was in transition from challenge format to the tournament we know today. There was no main organisation running snooker at the time - the players organisation (pbsa) and the Council were playing against each other since the late 60's to arrange events to get sponsors and money to attract the players to attend.
So a plate where players could earn more money was a carrot to attract the "names" to participate. So I think it was a "gimmick" that ran it's course and was dropped once players did not need it anymore as competition proper prize fund grew enough.
Don't know anything about football
Amateur and proam events now obviously need to attract participants by what every means they can - if this means a plate to give players more frames for their entrants fee - so be it

Ok, understood.

Thanks for the answers

But I don´t understand, then, why don´t organize, in not top tournaments, double eliminations (where nobody is eliminated after the 1st loss) or modified single elimination (where players are not eliminated if they lost first or second round, therefore they are eliminated after two losses, or a single loss if this one occurs after 3rd round)?

But on same time I don´t understand exactly how a plate tournament works. Who usually can play? Only losers in first round? Or losers in first and second round (this is the 75% of the players of the main tournament?

Can a good player, but not top, get voluntareely a loss in the first round, to pick a higher prize winning the plate instead to play the main and loss in quarter-finals or semi-finals or so? Or for example, if you know that in next round you play against one of the best, loss voluntareely in previous round if you can go to plate competition and try get a shot ?

[DeanH]

To me the plate is definitely a consolation prize and not to really aim for

In the league I play in the plate is purely for the first round losers.

I very much doubt any player would deliberately drop from the main event to go for the plate.

[cesard]

To me the plate is definitely a consolation prize and not to really aim for

In the league I play in the plate is purely for the first round losers.

I very much doubt any player would deliberately drop from the main event to go for the plate.

Maybe I must understand more how it works. Correct me if I´m wrong.

If a tournament has 128 players, and trophy for the winner and the runner-up, and money for quarter-final losers and onwards; the plate should be a tournament where 64 first round losers (or 96 top two first round losers) play where there are only money and trophy for the winner, but not for anybody else, including plate runner-up; and this money is around a quarter-final loser
Is it like that?

[DeanH]

You got it for the numbers of players.
As to prizes, I doubt there is an official ratio from CP-Winner to Plate-Winner, just whatever the organisers/sponsor are prepared to pay.

There are some ProAm/Am events today that have Plate rounds, maybe someone who knows about those can indicate the prize for plate.

[jrc750]

The plate is for "losers" to give them some more table time rather than go straight home, it is not something to aim for lol, don't dwell on it it's not important

[cesard]

Ok, it seems that I have a wrong idea about plate. I thought it was a competition, less important than main, but that winner has some kind of recognition (therefore, a plate winner is best seen a has a trophy instead quarter-final losers). But I see that it has less importance than I thought

[Drac]

Do the second round losers play for a saucer?

[cesard]

Anyway, the format for the plate of these 2 World Championship were close like the Old Uk. Quarters and semis best-of-17 and final best-of-29 and best-of-31. It seems a very serious tournament with top players (excluding top 8 or so)