15.10.09

ONEFORSEVEN LAUNCHED

The folks at global-snooker.com have trialled a new short form version of the game called ONEFORSEVEN.

It lasts 147 minutes and features players playing frames against one another within this time, with the overall winner the player who has scored the most points.

Unusually, the audience will be encouraged to make noise rather than sit in stony silence, as is traditional at all other events.

A tournament, worth £25,000, will be staged in Cardiff on December 21 and feature Ryan Day, Mark Williams, Matthew Stevens and Ricky Walden.

There will also be satellite events with the winners progressing to the final to take on the star names.

For more details, check the global snooker website here.

This is an attempt to find a snooker version of Twenty20, which has proved popular in cricket.

One of the biggest problems snooker has with the media is that it is impossible to know what time a match will finish, so broadcasters have problems with their schedules and newspaper editors with their deadlines.

The shortest ever best of nine contest was 34 minutes duration while the longest lasted seven hours.

“Somewhere between the two” is a rather vague, if accurate, answer to the perennial question of how long a match will last.

I haven’t seen ONEFORSEVEN yet but I wish them all the best.

Anything a bit different that encourages interest in snooker should be welcomed.

30 comments:

Anonymous said...

Good ideas as long as the shot clock is used to avoid anyone being "Thorburned" in an attempt to waste time if ahead.

JohnMcBrideIRE said...

"Anything a bit different that encourages interest in snooker should be welcomed."

I would certainly go along with that.

When players are knocked out of the group stage's, can some thought be put into running plate competitons to be encouraged to still particpate?

Anonymous said...

Talk about clutching at straws! I thought the Pot Black timeframe would put the nail firmly in any such concept.

This is getting utterly ridiculous now. For gods sake, leave the damn format alone and get plugging the game properly and in countries which are crying out for it!

Anonymous said...

This is probably the worst idea in the history of the universe.

Anonymous said...

I think this is a great idea.
Something for the fans for once.

I dont know why Anon at 11.31 and 11.59 are running down something they haven't even seen yet.

Anonymous said...

We've all got to accept snooker needs changing at some level. People just are not playing or watching in anything like the numbers they used too. Our snooker league (Newcastle) is 95% over 40's. Young people, many indoctrinated into the instant gratification culture we now have in Britain, are quickly losing interest.
It pains me to say it, even if it is a cross between Billy Smarts Circus and Skins, that this kind of event, whether we traditionalists like it or not, is the future of snooker, in Britain at least.

Mat Wilson

Anonymous said...

Just checked my calender but I see it is not April the first!

Good luck to the players for a fun well paid exhibition on the run up to Christmas- although the concept as a whole is as ludicrous as Pot Black timeframe.

What is really needed is a lot more proper tournaments and if that means a first prize of £8000 at the end of a week and the top players dont want to enter it will be there loss in the long run- if they can afford not to play in a small money event they should be able to afford to give back their time free to promote the game.

Dave H said...

Nice to see it's being given a chance

Keith said...

Nice idea. The foul/miss rule change is very interesting - I remember Steve Davis suggesting this ages ago.
If there are any time wasting problems, how about a shot clock that only applies to the player who's in front?

Anonymous said...

Aggregate score is one thing, but putting it on the clock is where this fails. As the reader above states, this smells of Pot Black timeframe.

Aggregate scores would be a more welcome alternative to the current events because most snooker clubs across the land have aggregate score contests. However this is more apt for amateurs as it also makes for more boring viewing as every ball has to be potted and when the table's a mess, sometimes it's better to rack 'em up.

I'm sure this new concept will split the fans down the middle. Dare I say it, those that understand snooker v's those that don't!

DOnal said...

The time limit will encourage the trailing player to rush his shots once the end of the 147 mins draws near. Surely this may turn the game into a farce with players running around the table and neglecting to line-up shots properly.

Anonymous said...

like it says - the average frame time at sheffield was less then twenty minutes so no need to rush - all it is doing is putting a limit on it - and no need for a shot clock - if you waste time against me - there are six other players scoring like mad against you!!!

Anonymous said...

i was at the launch the other night and no player was rushing (not even Lee Walker) and not one frame went over 21 minutes

Anonymous said...

So I can build up a nice 200 point lead and spend the rest of the night sticking balls on cushions? Sounds like fantastic viewing entertainment!

Anonymous said...

yeah but it sounds like if you build up a 200 point lead, it is against the other players so you can only put balls on cushions on one table. While youre doing that - the others will get you!!!

jamie brannon said...

I dont mind some changes, but the more you promote mickey mouse snooker the more it takes oof. Twenty Twenty has now left test cricket rocking, only iconic series like The Ashes grab viewers interest, do we want the traditional snooker format to go the same way.

Anonymous said...

how is circus snooker going to entice potential sponsors ?

these ideas would work if the game was thriving but introduce them now is seen as desperation and panic and that wont be very attractive for sponsors.

work on the fundamentals in the game and get the foundation sound before building on a extension to a shaky building.

Anonymous said...

well you could do...but won't the rest of the players catch you up! that's the whole point and the novel bit is that the players arent only playing against their opponent they are playing agsinst everyone!!

Anonymous said...

Brilliant! Disney has arrived for snooker. This sport is well and truly over for me. Next to no tournaments, and if there is there's no atmosphere. And now we have time limits on our once great game! Where will this all end? Well, for one thing, without my support.

Matt said...

Hmm, not for me, I love the longer format of the game and this watered down version just doesn't grab me. I find the best of nine frame matches far too short for example, they are almost like 20/20 compared to the Crucible as it is.

I expect that others will feel differently though so good luck to them. At least they are trying something new even if I don't particularly like the idea.

Anonymous said...

Good luck to them trying new ideas but I agree with the above post - best of 9s are twenty-twenty snooker.

If you want more variety go for 4 man groups of best of 3's like the old yamaha organs in 81-83! or a team championship - at least it was the proper game with 15 reds on the table

Anonymous said...

So it's a points race against everyone else on all other tables i.e. those you don't have control over? This gets more and more ridiculous by the minute. I've never heard anything so absurd in my life.

Oh well, do what you will but if this is the future of snooker then I've wasted the last 30 years of my life and it's now time to do something else.

Anonymous said...

Will the player's walk on with music blearing out if so, the classic by Kiss sums this up "Crazy Crazy Nights".

Anonymous said...

I don't think this will catch on at all - 147 minutes of play isn't exactly what you would call a 'shortened' version of the game, surely? Sounds more like something that would confuse people and be a turn off.

Anonymous said...

Now don't get me wrong - this idea is pathetic. Snooker's problem IS NOT with the game itself but with how it is run/promoted, but Matt's comment of...

"I find the best of nine frame matches far too short for example, they are almost like 20/20 compared to the Crucible as it is."

...is taking it too far. Snooker matches also have to have some appeal for the casual viewer and have, in the main, been best-of-nine in ranking events for over 25 years. To compare best-of-nine snooker to 20/20 is totally missing the point.

Anonymous said...

2 time outs a frame
30 seconds per shot shot clock
time outs are a 60 second extension.

start live progs 30 minutes after the session (red button for those who are "into snooker"). cut out the racking of balls and pee breaks between frames for that 30 minute gap.

raise the mid barrier so both matches can be viewed (except at the worlds).

create a database of snooker/9ball clubs within a 50 mile radius of the venues and letter them 2 months prior to events and perhaps donate tickets to be played for or auctioned for charity.

for a start (tho much or all has been said before)

Anonymous said...

The resources that's put into this type of nonsense could be put into an actual proper snooker tournament. The six reds thing isn't a great idea either but it's more feasible than this one.

I give my hat off to them for trying new things, but anyone with half a brain surely can see this one four seven idea is very stupid and has no appeal whatsoever. They'd be as well as trying a frame with three players in it some of the rubbish that they're coming out with now.

If there's £25,000 been raised to fund a tournament like this, why can't that money, say, for talking sake be used to create one of the following:

1. A revival of the Nations Cup or World Cup type idea as a tournament
2. Perhaps a doubles event with players from the main tour teaming up
3. Possibly creating a snooker 'Ryder Cup' type thing between say the UK and China

Anonymous said...

The resources that's put into this type of nonsense could be put into an actual proper snooker tournament. The six reds thing isn't a great idea either but it's more feasible than this one.

I give my hat off to them for trying new things, but anyone with half a brain surely can see this one four seven idea is very stupid and has no appeal whatsoever. They'd be as well as trying a frame with three players in it some of the rubbish that they're coming out with now.

If there's £25,000 been raised to fund a tournament like this, why can't that money, say, for talking sake be used to create one of the following:

1. A revival of the Nations Cup or World Cup type idea as a tournament
2. Perhaps a doubles event with players from the main tour teaming up
3. Possibly creating a snooker 'Ryder Cup' type thing between say the UK and China

Anonymous said...

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Can you put that in English please!!!

Anonymous said...

^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Thats meant for the 5-35pm post