Isn't the only reason the break ends because the opponent left the game? In that case, the other frames don't need to be taken into account, since they don't need to be played anyway.

I know that the tournament has a feature where the game is automatically won when the opponent needs more than 12 points from snookers, but I don't think that stops the players break, does it?

That only comes into effect when your break ends, not the instant your opponent needs 12+ points from snookers.

So it seems that this feature can be used even in games of more than one frame, since it needs the opponent to leave the game for it to take effect. Otherwise, the player gets to carry on their break anyway, since the opponent is still in the game.

Whinging is making a thread about it, even though Lee must know naming and shaming is against the rules. I whinge for the simple fact of people like you.

On topic: I think Dave has a good point there, and like the sound of it alot. If it was to be introduced, i suppose it would stop alot of arguments and threads being made about opponents leaving. Which in fact, is a good thing.

this solution is still gona create more problems

people saying i was on 94 with only pink and black left and the one minute warning came up i couldnt pot the last two balls etc....

would it be possible to distinguish between games that DQ both players for running out of time and a room with only one active player in it?

the reason i ask is that what if it was possible to change it slightly so that if only one active person was in a tournament room and the time ran out that the game would end and a victory would be given in their favour?

possibly delaying the instruction to the server (my computer technical words are not the best so i dunno if thats correct) that the player has left til 1 second before the time runs out then awarding the win to the player remaining.... thus givin them the maximum time possible

for example player A is on a break, player B leaves. the computer delays the issuing of "default win is awarded as player B has left the game" until before clock has run out and game continues until that stage or when player A missed

hopefully i made sense

i_am_deco: "people saying i was on 94 with only pink and black left and the one minute warning came up i couldnt pot the last two balls etc..."

The three minute warning means people roughly know how long they have left. With this in mind, its at their discretion whether they go for a higher break or take the one they currently have. They can't really have anything to complain about, since they get to carry on their break anyway.

I don't really understand what you're saying with your idea. Could you explain in more detail?

my point was that people are always going to complain no matter how long they have.

my idea was similar to yours except instead of finishing at the 1 minute mark it finishes at 5 seconds remaining or 1 second remaining.

leesil i was on 88 (11 reds 11 blacks) with every red sitting perfect and the dude left.

Just one of those things. I would be lying if i said i wasn't a little unhappy .

deco i found a thread saying the idea of a tournament clock brought up by baff

http://www.funkysnooker.com/viewTopic.do?topicid=5928

could be answer to your point. People also have nothing to complain about as iamtheworst said you have warnings (5 mins, 3 mins 1 min etc) so you have no excuse if you run out of time.

I do think you should be allowed to carryon with your break as if you are DQ it is your fault.

james, that is also a good idea but not exactly what i was on about. the idea of a timer to show exactly how long is left is a brilliant idea IMO.

but anyway my point is a spin-off of IAMTHEWORST's idea that you can continue your break until the the one minute warning.

instead of ending the break at that point end it 1 second before time is up