The heavily trailed Australian Open has today been officially announced and will be held in Bendigo, Victoria.
This is great news. Even better news is that it is confirmed as an annual event until at least 2013.
There was, as I have written before, an Australian Open announced in 1989, the only snag being that it was played in Hong Kong. The WPBSA discovered that the promoter’s ‘business address’ was actually a bus shelter.
I have rather more faith in this new event.
Pedants will point out that it isn’t the first ranking tournament staged in Australia because the 1975 World Championship, held in Nunawading – also in Victoria – carried ranking points retrospectively.
But that’s hardly comparable. This is a new tournament and most welcome. It represents a genuine attempt by World Snooker to globalise the sport.
And it gets better. In a letter to the players, Barry Hearn has stated that: “we are in discussion for many more events around the world so watch this space” and that “Eastern Europe, Scandinavia, India, Canada etc are all on the agenda.”
Hearn adds that: “I believe a £10m prize fund per season is achievable.”
I hope the players – all the players – support the moves to make our game properly international.
It is the best way of guaranteeing its growth and ongoing success.
With regards to the new Australian tournament, I’m particularly pleased for Neil Robertson, whose world title triumph last year certainly played a major part in this tournament happening.
As you will know, his mother had never seen him play live as a professional before she flew to Sheffield for his Crucible final against Graeme Dott.
Now, his family and friends will surely turn up mob handed as Neil plays in his own country...and snooker takes another welcome step into the future.
39 comments:
Thrilled!
Now that players have to pay their own flights and hotel expenses for the foreign trips surely the prize money has to be raised to accomodate this?.
It has been raised - from £3.5m to £6m
1.08, why should players be subsidised when Ding, Robertson and other overseas players have had to pay their own way for years.
If players are successful they can easily afford it. If they are journeymen they can enter theyre local tournaments or the ones they can afford. No point in wasting money on deadwood. They always have the ptc's to rely on.
The real issue is surely whether they are going to bring back subsidised flights/hotels for the press
Hmmm, Dave considering you're probably on 30k as a journalist, and you get about 1k–2k for each match you commentate on (call that 10k–20k per tournament across half a dozen or so events), that puts your annual salary at about 100k–150k. Fair enough, you do the blog for free so none of us begrudge you your six figure salary, but on that money you don't need free holidays!
I wish you were right about that, Betty, but unfortunately your calculations are way, way off
You might have something there Dave. I assumed your comment about subsidies was tongue in cheek, but if subsidising the press meant a considerable increase in media coverage, then surely it would be an investment more than an expense.
One would imagine that WS could swing considerable discounts on hotels and air fares, due to the amount and regularity of custom that would be delivered between players, officials and press.
This discount, topped up with a small subsidy from WS, could make a serious difference to the expenses of everyone involved.
but you comment from an office in the uk dave?
The money IS an issue. Already for many players playing in the PTCs, especially the EPTCs, last season, has cost them, not earned them money.
The total prize money has been raised, but the expenses the players have to expose, with more events and more traveling have also. And that's true also for Ding and Robertson ...
The flight to Melbourne, and back with British Airways, in economy class, but flexible conditions, players don't stay around after losing, costs over 2600 £ and takes 22 hours (each trip and yes this is a DIRECT flight); add accommodations, local transports, food... what stage of the tournament will players have to reach to only cover their expenses and make it worth it? Is this viable for the players?
It's all well and good to claim that "mediocrity" shouldn't be rewarded, but you can't hope to build a global sport and to attract new blood if only 20-30 sportsmen can make a decent living out of it.
This is a concern.
Also, theoretically players could pick and chose the events they play in, but that's not really true. The current ranking system doesn't allow it. I've heard the word "blackmail" in the mouth of some players I won't name. Unlike other sports, in snooker ALL ranking events are taken into account. Which means that a player who can't afford to play in all of them will struggle to keep their ranking and find themselves in more financial trouble in the near future.
It's a good thing that the snooker goes global, and that the circuit expands, it really is, but without the players it's useless - they make the sport - and they have to make a decent living out of it. Especially as this is not a job that they will be able to carry on until 65 or get a pension when they retire.
Some interesting points there, many of which I agree with. It may be that eventually the rankings are determined by taking a certain number of tournaments into account, although giving players a disincentive to play doesn't sound like a good idea.
On a more general point, though, snooker players have never been given proper instruction as to how to handle their money and indeed how to maximise their off table incomes, which are paltry compared to many sports.
I know a player who very quickly invested his winnings in property and is today nicely off. I know another who just went out spending and is now not well off. They were both working class lads who won large amounts of money. They had to decide what to do with it with little advice or direction.
It's not just about how much you earn, it's what you do with it. The WPBSA should provide more support to players rather than just handing over cheques.
That must have been the ranking event Mike Hallett won.
At least they changed the name in time, as in the books it says Hong Kong Open Champion.
Betty can you clarify how you came up with those figures?
We mustn't forget that snooker is still in the early stages of a transformation which will hopefully evolve into a major global sport.
If Hearn's forecasts about the countries above and a 10million pound circuit come to fruition, (and his forecasts up to now have been pretty good), it will get to the stage where new tournaments will have to raise the prizemoney and smaller ones will be squeezed out.
When the game is big enough, management contracts will be keenly sought after and the idea of a player looking after his own affairs will be considered absurd, with off table earnings supplementing prize money.
We're not far from that point now. Another half dozen tournaments and the calendar will be full, then the prizemoney has to rise.
Journalists should be independent.I think its a bad idea that the body which they report on, be it good or bad is also subsidising its enpenses.Reliance on such compromises its position whether intentional or nor.
I think this season most of professional players will adjust their number of PTC events because this sereis can be flexible individually
i agree 7.31
well said
Good to see a new event in Australia. Good blog as ever, Dave
snooker is not exclusive when it comes to travel expenses but listening to some on here it seems its a new phenomena yes it is for snooker but there's players in other sports been doing that mileage for years for peanuts.
if we want snooker to grow and grow players has to take that responsibility and Challenge on. yes in the beginning there will be hardships but unless they up to that challenge snooker just will stand still.
i am all for not subsidising players or journos
subbing players is one thing that was wrong in the past, tho i do agree that prizemoney should increas slightly to compensate for the "recent loss" of subbing
At least they've decided to broadcast it. We haven't seen the World Championship yet.
Well subsidising journalist like you dave might be helpful but it will create the question of bias. Journalists will be biased towards the body and wouldn't try to criticise them.
Like it goes you don't cut off the hand that feeds you
This would lead to less freedom of the press
The comment about the sport being able to support only 30-40 players or so is very relevant indeed. Snooker grows, playing opportunities increase but if the sweet life of luxury is limited to a very few, it is not worth it for a lot of talented players.
How can snooker make life on the tour comfortable for more players?
It was only a joke, although I was once on a subsidised trip and still banned from the tournament. I should tell that story on her, it's rather funny.
tf u were joking dave
i was beginning to wonder...
Dave will eurosport be showing Australian open?
I don't believe Eurosport are covering this event, are they?
I honestly have no idea but given the time difference live coverage would seem unlikely
Apparently I heard Fox Sports have the broadcast rights for this.
A shame I won't be able to watch it.
Would Eurosport not be able to show pre-recorded matches/highlights in the afternoon or evening?
Quite possibly, but the new Eurosport contract hasn't been signed yet
BUT this season the eurosport contract is extending to the paul hunter classic so isn't that part of the new contact ?
Yes, if the contract is agreed
I SEE So its stil up in the air then
"The event will showcase our beautiful and historic Goldfields region through a global broadcast which will reach over 66 countries; including key tourism markets such as China and the United Kingdom.
Thats according to the Ws website, so we're going to see at least recorded highlights somewhere.
11:20PM Judith Chalmers is buzzing on wish you were here...
It would be a hammer blow if EuroSport didn't sign a new contract with World Snooker. They show the baulk of the events.
I imagine some deal is going to happen but a few small details need to be ironed out in terms of the quantity of events to be broadcast.
Good news is expected, that's all I'm saying
To be truly international more players need to break through from other regions too, which doesn't look like it will happen that soon — while it's still a circus of British blokes and a couple of others the claims of 'international sport' will be scoffed at by some.
baulk of the events
i get it
you should be on stage jamie
Post a Comment