posted Dec 8, 2008

No, not at all.

The game is ruled by Ronnie, about how he feels with each contest. He is way above all others and is comparable to the greats of the 70s, 80s and early 90s.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Dec 8, 2008

Yes, in my opinion, the Masters is easily the best snooker tournament there is. From 2004-2007 all four finals have been great, thanks to Ronnie and last seasons was also good with Mark Selby playing very well, particularly in the final when he won 8 frames in a row to win 10-3.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Dec 9, 2008

The UK is clearly 2nd only to the World Championships with the multi-sessions throughout, amd the very top seeds are likely to face somebody in form in the last 16, plus it's ranking.

The Wembley Masters. Clearly the 3rd biggest event in the callendar but some way behind the UK. The only multi-session match is the final, the really top seeds have a virtual bye into the quarter finals facing a 14th to 16th seed who are only in the top 16 because of their "career" form very early season before last where since, they have barely won a match who in reality just making up the numbers there at Wembley. Plus there's no ranking points on offer.

What other major sporting event in any other sport has the top 16 invited because of that they achieved in the past rather than what they are achieving presently, the way the Masters Snooker is. The lower 10th to 16th seeded well out of form players making up the numbers weakens the Masters snooker event considerably.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Dec 10, 2008

they dont have a virtual bye. they are playing a fellow top 16 player, which im sure they wouldnt prefer to a top 32 player.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Dec 11, 2008

the pottinggenius

Yes, the really top seeds are playing fellow top 16 ranked players 1st round. But most of the lower seeds they are facing 1st round haven't looked in top 16 form since early season before last, a ranking they of course earned by right to give them their their place at the Masters. But invitations in snooker are sadly based on form that's far too historic and not relevant to how they are performing now.

You wouldn't get a similar type tennis event where 4 players ranked 13 to 16 have only won 3 matches between them since October season before last the way they do in snooker. Nor a similar golf event where the 13th to 16th ranked have scraped 6 cuts in 80 tournaments between them and faded badly in the few cuts they have made since 1.5 years ago, the golf equivalent to dreadful snooker form since early season before last.

In truth those lower seeds at Wembley clearly dillutes the event somewhat.

When you compare UK and Woirld Champiopnship doubles and the Masters and World Championship double achieved in the same season, the UK-world double has clearly been achieved more than the Masters-World double, proving that that's the key event in judging form that if you win the UK you are usually likely to go on and win the World Championships end of same season. You can't say that in the same way with the Masters after winning that, though yes of course it's possible and has been done.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Dec 11, 2008

fantastically insightful thread yes I do enjoy the masters,its one of the better tournaments! last yrs was a fantastic final too

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Dec 11, 2008

I agree with you on the somewhat outdated rankings format, but looking at possible matches between top eight and 9-16 ranked players you would struggle to find a match you wouldnt want to watch or that would be poor quality. if you need proof look at how the event went last year, none of the last 16 matches were one sided.

Its obvious that also the UK championship will better prepare you for the world championship, the masters matches are best of 11s up to the final whereas the UK is best of 17s with the world championship obviously being larger framed matches.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Dec 12, 2008

The last ten years have seen six very close finals, four of which I would consider great (2001, 2002, 2004 and 2006), and four dominating performances. However, as a tournament it is nowhere near the UK Championship.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Dec 12, 2008

Nowhere near the UK but the semi's and the final's are good most of the time.

add comment | complain about this comment