I know i'm not the only person to have had this experience, when in a tournament game, especially in a speed tournament, and the time for the round runs out and you both get disqualified. If this is because it is a tight game and you could both win (but don't want to give a winning opportunity to the opponent) this seems reasonable. The practicality of having a time limit for the round is unquestionable in my opinion, otherwise the top players would be waiting hours for round 2.

However, some of us will have been in the situation where we are very likely to win, ie more points ahead than there are remaining but less than the 12 point default win, and our opponent decides to spite us (for want of a better term) and delays, playing tap shots etc in order to get both of us disqualified because they know they can't win. I was 36 up with the colours remaining when it happened to me.

Obviously most players out there would see the time limit running out and would, being sporting, flag to allow the leader to go through. But some wouldn't. Is there a possibility therefore for a system to be implemented where if a player can flag and chooses not to in order to run time out, the player leading is given the default win when time runs out - an automatic flag.

I'm not suggesting that the player who is winning should go through in all situations, just when the player trailing could flag. I can see this being especially useful in speed tournaments.

Any thoughts on this please :)?

ye someone did it 2 me 2dai i won he neva flagged needed 3 snookers but wasted tym and both got DQ

Edited by forum moderator revenge, at 14:18 Thu 07/01/10 (GMT)

Amirul, remove that name from your post please.

The way I've seen your post: Your opponent is tapping up to the balls while needing snookers. You - scared to actually foul yet it being quite obvious that even if you hit the black once, your opponent wouldn't be able to win - also tapped up the shot after. If you have the lead and know that you'll be DQ'd if you don't do something, you should create something. Don't just follow your opponent's example, they have nothing to lose by tapping up.

If they tap, hit the ball full power. You may foul or it may leave your opponent a tough shot, one they can't tap on. I, personally, see no need for this seeing as you can always do something to help yourself.

Any half decent player can get nine points back off of the colours. Play their game and snooker them if you can't pot. If they foul, you've won the game.

I did exactly what you suggested, hit everything full, tried long doubles and everything. nothing dropped. If you take a couple of similar, though obviously not exact analogies:

1) in a football game, a team is losing 2-0, they just defend until the end so they dont lose 3-0 or worse. when the whistle goes, they still lose. they don't get a draw for not conceeding again.

2) in a one-day cricket match a team needs 100 off 8 overs with 2 wickets left. so they block out so they aren't all out, but they still lose.

Should it be that in a game of skill like snooker, the only way to actually win and not be disqualified would be to try and get a fluke?

i think what he was saying was more along the lines of:

instead of tapping, try and push the object ball near a pocket so that your opponent cant tap and has no choice but to pot it or at least needs to play a good shot.

on your idea of flagging early:

i think whoever is winning when time runs out should be given the win, especially if you are ahead and your opponent needs snookers.
is there any reason why that shouldnt be allowed? i suppose it is possible that the opposite would occur then, some people would abuse the rule by tapping to run down the clock when they are ahead to win the game instead of both being knocked out

oh cheers, that makes sense actually!!! ill remember that one.

and on your problem about the leader tapping to run the clock down, surely if they are so far ahead that the opponent needs snookers then that classes as good safety play??? safety is a massive part of the game, this might encourage better safety play? and that idea is just like a football team keeping the ball to run the clock down, its playing safe. nothing wrong with that in my opinion. and my idea about flagging was primarily aimed at speed tournaments where running the clock down is easily possible.

See I never worry about this, if i need to pot a ball to win and time is running out I don't care I smash it I go for it aslong as the ball goes in it makes no difference

Also play shots where your opoment will find it hard to snooker you etc so if your on yellow play a shot where on his turn he won't be able snooker you on your shot go for the snooker if he misses then you win anyways

You got to remember you have got nuthing to loose your going to get DQ'd anyways so you might aswell go out and give it ago. It makes no difference if you miss he clears and wins or he taps you get knocked out atleast attacking way you got the chance to pot aswell!

I don't deny that with the current circumstances, that is the best way to play it. The point is more, why should someone who has clearly outplayed their opponent and has got a convincing lead be disqualified?

hmmmmmmmmmmm 1 snooker i wanted so what you saying is if you need 1 snooker you LOST lol wake up it happened loads to me and if it was more than 1 snooker behind i would quit any way

if you had clearly outplayed them the scores would have been more than 13 when you missed and it wouldnt be an issue

I think that's a very good idea for tournaments. If your opponent needs snookers, and it's running out of time then you deserve to go through. Much needed, far too many people just tap, tap, tap when they know it's running out of time, just so you won't be able to go through.

you had to point out the harsh truth! but in a speed tournament you can end up having to rush a difficult shot and lose position so a 36 point lead at that stage would be good . Just saying maybe it would be an idea for speed tournaments!

yoyo... wah happend im 36-0 or sumin up with colours left now theres 1 minute 2 go so he takes all 10 secs to pot and he knows he wont be able to get 3 snookers and clear up in that minute so whats the point

please get out of the ghetto and speak english fool no idea what you are saying

How can you not understand it? lol...

wat cant u understand lol

i think he was trying (and failed) to make himself look "cool", despite the text speak, it wasnt difficult to understand what you meant about being 36 ahead with one minute left and only the colours remaining

http://www.funkysnooker.com/thread/3859/forum-rules-please-read-before-posting

Read the forum rules are it clearly states to refrain from using "txt" speech. Makes it harder to understand for people who's English isn't their first language.

Do you have anyone in mind Dame...?

Yes, you do get some people who just tap the ball, but then again you get some people who are really good at playing snookers, and are really far behind, it would be unfair against then dont you think?

I think its a good idea, when there is 1 minute left, and say your 9-12 points ahead, you should automatically win, that would be a better option