China or Sheffield for World Championships?

[Stuarty]

Which should host the World Championships from 2013 onwards?

If neither where exactly then!



I sy china as it will make more money for the sport of sooner but doubt the world championship wil ever move from Sheffield.

Your thoughts please!

[Woolf147]

wembley masters.
Will you go to watch final in china lol?

[wildJONESEYE]

i wont say the championship should stay indefinitely in Sheffield. times change etc but when and if they move they got to try and recreate the crucible feeling its special. moving it for moving sake because venue bigger or overseas could just wreck a great championship.

The Masters at Wembly arena has not got the same feel as it had at the Conference Centre.

[Stuarty]

China or Sheffield for World Championships?

no i would not go to china to watch world championship snooker but I bet millions of the billions of people in china will though!

I only ever watch snooker on televsion (where ever it is played).

would you go to china to watch snooker.

[snooky147]

It would be a death knell for TV Coverage for Europeans. The BBC in particular would not have the same blanket coverage as it does now.

[Burwat Champ]

For me the World championship will lose its magic if it moves from the Crucible.

I hope the powers that be NEVER EVER feel it will be the right move to take the WC abroad.

[wildJONESEYE]

For me the World championship will lose its magic if it moves from the Crucible.

I hope the powers that be NEVER EVER feel it will be the right move to take the WC abroad.

i agree the crucible is the only snooker venue where you get some of the atmosphere of the venue coming through the TV and you feel your there.

thats why i said never move it because they think they got to.

the crucible was picked as a venue because it felt the right place....in moving the Masters they didn't have a choice but moving the UK From preston was a big mistake and it is now struggling to find it feet.

[miscuehamburg]

The WC belongs to Crucible and nowhere else. Maybe when there were 14 Chinese players in the top 16 one would have to reconsider the matter though

[Acrowot]

The last frame I played WAS in China!
:snooker:

[gem]

It would be an absolute disaster for snooker as we know it if it went to China.
Asian players would see it differently I suppose.

Why not try and create another long frame tournament over there and it may end up on a par with the Crucible event.

[miscuehamburg]

The last frame I played WAS in China!
:snooker:

Interesting. How comes that?

[Odrl]

Why not try and create another long frame tournament over there and it may end up on a par with the Crucible event.

Interesting that you should call it the "Crucible event", as that is exactly where the problem lies in my opinion. Calling this event the "World Championship" is ridiculous, because it's nothing like what a world championship is supposed to be.

The name implies that it has contestants from all over the world, and probably a limited number from each country, which is currently impossible to implement in snooker if you want to have all the top players participating. It should also be organized in a different country every year, and it should be organized by an international governing body, which professional snooker currently doesn't have.

But what the "Crucible event" actually is, is a ranking tournament like any other, with a minor difference in how the seeding works, and a couple of pointless pre-rounds for amateurs. The history and prestige of the event are synonymous with its venue, so it should never be moved. The moment you change the venue, let alone the country, you essentially start a new tournament, because the history of the previous event stays behind. If there is ever a tournament with the same name held in China, you can be sure that the history will be split in two, just like it is now when we talk about the Crucible and the pre-Crucible eras.

Just like I said, the problem is in the name. There is potential to have a big tournament in China, and possibly some other place in the future, but it's always going to be a struggle if another event is called the "World Championship". What I would do is rename the current WC to "the Crucible something", and thus immortalize it as a British and specifically a Sheffield event. That would also open up the possibility of a rival tournament being held sometime in the future, although it takes time to build up prestige. The way to do it is to ensure that the prize money is high, and that the event is of the highest level in terms of organization. That makes the players want to win it, and it also makes them try to get in form for that specific event. What follows is great snooker, classic matches, and ultimately history and prestige. And you eventually get a big event without taking one away. And if that situation ever happens and a new event compares favourably to the Crucible event, I would have no problem if the new event was held as the season finale instead.

As for an event that is a true world championship, the way it is in most other sports... I don't see the need nor the opportunity to stage an event like that in snooker. At least not in the near future. And I don't think snooker should be in the Olympics either, but that's a different discussion.

[tcollick]

Interesting that you should call it the "Crucible event", as that is exactly where the problem lies in my opinion. Calling this event the "World Championship" is ridiculous, because it's nothing like what a world championship is supposed to be.

The name implies that it has contestants from all over the world, and probably a limited number from each country, which is currently impossible to implement in snooker if you want to have all the top players participating. It should also be organized in a different country every year, and it should be organized by an international governing body, which professional snooker currently doesn't have.

But what the "Crucible event" actually is, is a ranking tournament like any other, with a minor difference in how the seeding works, and a couple of pointless pre-rounds for amateurs. The history and prestige of the event are synonymous with its venue, so it should never be moved. The moment you change the venue, let alone the country, you essentially start a new tournament, because the history of the previous event stays behind. If there is ever a tournament with the same name held in China, you can be sure that the history will be split in two, just like it is now when we talk about the Crucible and the pre-Crucible eras.

Just like I said, the problem is in the name. There is potential to have a big tournament in China, and possibly some other place in the future, but it's always going to be a struggle if another event is called the "World Championship". What I would do is rename the current WC to "the Crucible something", and thus immortalize it as a British and specifically a Sheffield event. That would also open up the possibility of a rival tournament being held sometime in the future, although it takes time to build up prestige. The way to do it is to ensure that the prize money is high, and that the event is of the highest level in terms of organization. That makes the players want to win it, and it also makes them try to get in form for that specific event. What follows is great snooker, classic matches, and ultimately history and prestige. And you eventually get a big event without taking one away. And if that situation ever happens and a new event compares favourably to the Crucible event, I would have no problem if the new event was held as the season finale instead.

As for an event that is a true world championship, the way it is in most other sports... I don't see the need nor the opportunity to stage an event like that in snooker. At least not in the near future. And I don't think snooker should be in the Olympics either, but that's a different discussion.

What's ridiculous about calling it the World Championship? Its a standard name in many sports for the biggest event on the calendar. The name implies nothing like what you are saying. (It just so happens that the athletics world championship is like what you say, and probably what you are refering to, but so what.) They do not have a monopoly on the name and format of "a world championship". Its all hypothetical I know, but it is beyond me why on earth you would want to degrade an event (by renaming it) that obviously everybody including the fans and the pros look forward to as the BIG ONE and season finale, just so that some new event can challenge it as the World Championship (or whatever it is you would call it).

[shiyii]

It would be an absolute disaster for snooker as we know it if it went to China.
Asian players would see it differently I suppose.

Why not try and create another long frame tournament over there and it may end up on a par with the Crucible event.

i bet it wont be a disaster when i watch WC in Shanghai or Beijing in 2013
cant wait for that day's comes.

[ncyaa]

should world championship be like the football world cup in that every year the tournament is held in a different country? or should snooker follow the path of tennis or golf where every year there are some big competitions in some fixed venues and the world championship is just one of them?

i think it makes more sense for world championship to stay in the crucible. however, we definitely need more big overseas events which have the same status as the world championship in order to attract international audience. if there will be a big event in china, why not calling it the world cup? what about australia? i think it is healthier to have four big events in different countries to make up a grand slam.