Talk:2018–19 snooker world ranking points

Table
Thanks for doing this. Which column is the ranking position based on? I can't figure it out. --Dweller (talk) Become old fashioned! 07:48, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
 * There is no order as yet because we are still waiting for World Snooker to publish the rota for removing ranking points, but once they do the order will correlate with the cut-off points at each stage through the season, starting with cut-off point 1. Once we get past that stage cut-off point 2 will be activated in the template and the players will be sorted according to that column, and so on. Really the article should not be in main article space while it is in this state but World Snooker has already started the blasted season, so we need the article live so we can start adding in the points! Betty Logan (talk) 08:40, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Ah. Tyvm. --Dweller (talk) Become old fashioned! 08:48, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

Withdrawals count as losses
recorded "not enters" for a couple of players who withdrew from the Riga Masters. Can I please point out that when a player withdraws from a match for whatever reason it is recorded as a loss rather than a "not entered". This is done for several reasons: Best regards. I hope this clears this matter up. Betty Logan (talk) 19:52, 2 August 2018 (UTC)
 * His opponent is awarded a win for the match, so by definition if somebody "wins" a match then somebody has to lose.
 * Consistency. Sometimes a player will advance to the venue stage and then withdraw. In such cases the player is recorded as losing. Let's take Sam Craigie as an example at the 2018 Riga Masters: Craigie got a walkover to the venue stage (after Thor withdrew), and then Craigie himself withdrew from the venue stage. As we can see from the official ranking list Craigie was still award 1500 points which corresponds to a first-round win, even though he never played a match. Even though Craigie never played a match the points system treats him as playing both—winning the qualifier and then losing at the venue.
 * Snooker.org also records both Thor and Rhys Clarke's withdrawals as having entered and lost rather than having not entered.

Hi Betty, This is not consistent with what is done in the past seasons. For examples eight players (M. Selt, D. John, K. Wilson, ...) withdraw in RM 2016. They are all noted as DNE. The same apply in IO 2016, in CC 2017... It seems that we can find lot of such examples and none as you explain. Regards.ZeSnoRo (talk) 08:07, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Consistency does not make the other argument invalid. I feel this may have to be brought up at the Snooker WikiProject. However, I'd lean towards entering someone as not entering. The prize money argument is a good one, however, the money is simply for reaching a round, and not for winning a certain number of matches.  Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 08:13, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
 * If editors have entered this data incorrectly this is unfortunate, but it is incorrect to say this is how it has always been done. Take Snooker world ranking points 2014/2015 for example, Ali Carter withdrew from the Wuxi and was awarded 0 points, or O'Sullivan withdrawing from the China Open and being awarded 0 points.  Furthermore, this is how World Snooker do it themselves. They don't publish point sheets anymore, but World Snooker has traditionally awarded 0 points to players who withdraw in the first round. For example, O'Sullivan withdrew from the 2010 Shanghai Masters while John Higgins was not permitted to enter because of his ban; however, you can clearly see on the points sheet issued by World Snooker they awarded O'Sullivan 0 points, while Higgins was not awarded anything. This is also recorded in the same way at Snooker world ranking points 2010/2011. Betty Logan (talk) 08:58, 3 August 2018 (UTC)

This is very clear. Thank you Betty. ZeSnoRo (talk) 09:33, 3 August 2018 (UTC)

Seeding revision 9
According to the World Snooker calendar there was no seeding revision after the Welsh Open but instead after the World Grand Prix. --BlueFire10 Let's talkabout my edits? 14:34, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Bollocks. It looks like they changed it. The calendar we have in the article has the revision listed on the 18th. It is easier enough to alter at template level but we'd have to find a fresh source and fix the permalink. The easiest way to do this would probably be to copy out the list to some draft space, re-sort it then copy it back in briefly to get a permalink, and then restore the current version of the article. The Snooker Shoot-out begins tomorrow so it would cause chaos to do this now, but there is a clear 2-day gap after that so that will give me a window to sort it out. We also need a post-WGP ranking list too. Betty Logan (talk) 18:06, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Managed to track down a replacement calendar (http://www.worldsnooker.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/Calendar_2018_19_v15.pdf) and post-WGP ranking list: http://www.worldsnooker.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/World-Ranking-List-after-2019-World-Grand-Prix-.pdf. This is at least fixable now. Thankyou so much for bringing this to my attention. Betty Logan (talk) 18:20, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

Barry Pinches
Did Pinches enter the snooker shoot out as an amateur? I was expecting him to pop up here. --Dweller (talk) Become old fashioned! 11:25, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
 * He must have. No sign of him at http://www.worldsnooker.com/rankings/. Half the top 16 didn't enter it so a bunch of players off the tour were brought in to get the numbers up to 128. Can't see the Shoot Out lasting if it is no longer a draw for the top players. Betty Logan (talk) 22:28, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Dunno why players would agree to take part for no money. Unless the deal was prize money yes, ranking points no, which rather makes a joke of the whole thing. --Dweller (talk) Become old fashioned! 23:07, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
 * They will get the prize money, it just won't be translated into ranking points because snooker doesn't have an open tour. I take your point though: if you get someone on a wildcard winning a 100k tournament that could in theory catapult them into the top 64 so why shouldn't they have the ranking?? Unnecessary exclusivity that harms the sport, but World Snooker has often been in its own worst enemy so nothing new there. Betty Logan (talk) 00:51, 28 February 2019 (UTC)