Latest News

Pennant Finals

This topic contains 0 replies, has 0 voices, and was last updated by  Anonymous 5 years, 8 months ago.

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 24 total)
  • Author
  • #47180


    Could someone please explain to me how KW Mutaki finished fourth in “B” grade and Redcliffe finished fifth when the two teams finished equal on 17 points, yet Redcliffe won 2 more matches according to the ladder ?????????????

    I’ve been playing for almost 30 years and deciding ladder positions has always been as follows:

    In this order,

    1. Points (if equal)
    2. Matches Won (if equal)
    3. Frames Won/Lost (if equal)
    4. Matches played between the two teams.

    So when did they change the rules ??????????




    The rules for determining ladder position are printed on the bottom of the scorecard and are as you have suggested they have alway been. It looks like the ladder at the moment is set up to arrange based on the wrong criteria.

    Thanks Scott




    According to the ladder:
    A Game is played between two teams.
    A Match is played between two players in a Game. So, 4 matches per Game.

    Here is how I was told to sort the Ladder.

    1. Points (From Game wins and draws)
    2. Percentage of Matches won (not Games).

    When I initially made the Ladder, it was Points first and percentage of Games won by the team second. But Paul Coory asked me to change the second sort to Matches instead of Games.





    Ok so there is part of the problem.

    A match is between the two teams
    A game is what the two players play against each other and
    A frame is what the two players play. A and B grade is all 3 frames and c is best of three

    The ladder should be sorted by ladder points first
    Then by matches won
    Then by games percentage.

    This is clearly written on the bottom of the scoresheet.
    Apologies if you have been given the wrong information

    Thanks Scott



    Apologies for any confusion. I wasn’t aware of the description at the bottom of the scoresheet. In light of this it may appear that KW Mutaki makes way for Redcliffe.
    We will confirm this within 24 hours. Apologies to both teams.
    While this is the format that all teams have agreed to enter into, and is therefore clear for this season, its logic is flawed and in sure will be reviewed by the pennant subcommittee.
    Keep an eye out on the website for formal confirmation of finalists for B grade snooker pennant.



    Going from memory-

    After the 2012 Billiards Pennant season, a Brisbane District Pennant Sub Committee meeting was held for the upcoming 2013 Snooker Season.

    At that meeting, finals qualification criteria was discussed and the qualifying format that was agreed is:

    1) Ladder points
    2) Frame differential
    3) Match wins
    4) Result between the tied teams

    2 is in front of 3 to give a greater reward to teams who win by large margins, whilst still retaining ladder points as the first criteria.

    It seems to me from the discussion now that this change was either forgotten about by current BDPSC members, or has been lost in translation.



    Crikey – d we still have a chance ?????

    for what it may be worth if it makes a difference Shane Petty played 9 matches (not 8) the unknown Blank player is a phantom but the results are for Shane.

    Please advise final decision as I have advised our team of the unfortunate result and would love to advise otherwise.



    If the BDPSC changed the format – refer to the minutes of that meeting.
    Also this change would need to be ratified by the QB&SA as it is requesting an alteration to existing By-Laws, so should be in those minutes.
    When we introduced the Mixed Grade Snooker Comp an error was made where the team who finished fifth had actually won more MATCHES than the team who finished second but had won most narrowly & had some rather large losses. It was agreed this should never occur again & that matches won was & would always be the main criteria.



    ARGGGHHHH…. A voice from the wilderness confirming that” sanity prevails”

    How’s the fishing been lately Bazza…keep an eye out for pirates…




    I totally agree with you Barry. I remember the exact situation you are talking about, it was an absolute joke.

    This is a TEAM competition with the emphasis being on the TEAM winning the match on the night. It doesn’t matter if the team wins 11-1 or 7-5, a win is a win.
    Frame differential should only be used to separate two teams on the same points and with the same amount of matches won.

    Some people may argue that once a team gets to 7 frames won on the night there is no incentive to try and win anymore, but everyone knows there is that possibility that come the end of the season those frames could mean something. It should just never mean more than matches won!

    Most snooker players hate losing and will always try to the very end to win a frame even if their team has lost on the night.

    I for one will think very hard about snooker retirement if this farcical rule is introduced in this sport.



    The system as described in the by-laws will naturally need to be the one that is adhered to for determining ladder positions in the current pennant season, that is clear.

    An announcement will be made on the home page with the revised finalists.

    However, I can understand how so many of the long time QBSA members like this system because it is a system you are used to and therefore have come to expect. But the logic of this system is inherently flawed.

    The AFL, NRL, A_League, Premier League and numerous other sports that award points for a draw, use the TOTAL POINTS as the main criteria.

    Take Premier League for EG. A win = 3 pts. A draw = 1 pt. So a team with say 10 wins and 5 draws (35 points) will sit higher than a team with 11 wins and 1 draw (34 pts). Same in AFL, NRL etc.

    Where the TOTAL POINTS are equal, it then comes down to percentages (ie points for and against …. or in our pennant’s situation, that would be games for + against).

    Notwithstanding the above, and as I said earlier, whatever is the current by-law, no matter how flawed, must be followed and the necessary changes to the finals composition will be made this weekend.




    Its horses for courses, Football ie Soccer introduced the 3 point win to try to end the amount of mind numbing draws especially if playing away where a 0-0 result was considered a victory. This is totally different to Snooker where a draw can be very exciting especially if coming from 0-6 at the half way stage. The NRL is not the same as you stated as they added golden point & the AFL award 4 & 2 points for a win & draw respectively with a draw being a very rare occurrence.
    However, regardless of whether the current system is flawed or not, IF this current season has been played as per the incorrect {if by-laws have not been ammended} conditions & these conditions were formally broadcasted prior to commencement then surely these conditions can’t be ammended after the fact.
    Again i respectfully ask for the minutes to be checked, might end any discussions.



    I’m afraid I can’t agree with you Paul.

    Here is another scenario,

    Team A plays 10 matches wins 5, loses 5 – (wins every match 7-5, but loses every match 4-8) Frames for 55, frames against 65

    Team B plays 10 matches, wins 0, draws 10 – Frames for 60, frames against 60.

    Both teams finish on 10 points. Using your logic, that means that Team B should finish higher on the ladder even though they never won a game.

    I’m sorry, but to me that is a flawed system and I would be interested to see how many other people agree/disagree.



    I think its a discussion for another time, so we may have to agree to disagree.
    More importantly now, I can confirm that the revised snooker pennant B Grade finalists will be updated on the home page shortly.

    PS Geoff, your example is a good one, but you only tell it from one side. I would argue the contrary….why should Team A finish higher on the ladder when Team B never lost a game, and Team A lost FIVE games? Sorry, but the AFL, Premier League et al got it right. Its an interesting subject…I look forward to a more detailed discussion on the merits of both at the next BDPSC Meeting. I urge many to attend. Cheers



    Reward a win with 3 points.A draw equals 1 point ie EPL.Simple,proven ,fair.Problem solved
    Rewarding wins in competition ,in my opinion should always be the priority regardless of the sport

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 24 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.