PTC5 Draw and Schedule, Clean Sweep for Pros in Shanghai

A couple of newlines for you today as World Snooker have released the draw and playing order for the PTC5 event in Sheffield while it has been a perfect day for the eight professionals in action in Shanghai this morning as all came through their wildcard clashes. For the full results from today please click here to view my updated drawsheet.

Going back to the PTC5 draw though, does anyone know why Eden Sharav and Jak Jones have to play qualifying matches despite having finished inside the top 64 on the Order of Merit after PTC4 which I had understood would secure them a seeding?

EDIT: It seems that they way the last 128 draw is made up, 97 of the places have gone to the professionals with the top three amateurs taking the total to 100. The final 128 places will go to amateur qualifiers. Is this fair? At first glance it does seem to be harsh to have denied both Eden and Jak one of the seeded spots despite both having finished inside the top 64 on the Order of Merit after PTC4.

A more comprehensive report from Shanghai will follow when the real action gets underway tomorrow…

  • Alan Craig

    I personally paid Eden’s entry fees for the next PTCs and I am less than pleased and really disappointed for him.

    First of all we need to establish if WS had published the fact that all in the top 64 would be seeded.

    If they did then it is a right balls-up. If they didn’t, well they should have in order to avoid all this nonsense after the event.

    • matt2745

      The Players Pack I linked to here back in July states that there would be ’64 seeds only per event’

      • Alan Craig

        Thanks Matt, I’ve just checked that again. World Snooker don’t have a leg to stand on.

        Someone in the tournament direction team has cocked it up and made a decision just to seed three of the amateurs. That conflicts with what everyone has signed up for. It certainly conflicts with what we have paid for!!

        You couldn’t make it up. It’s just as easy to make a draw for 26 qualifiers as it is for 28. The same number of amateurs play in the last 128 no matter what.

        Where is the common sense?

  • Witz78

    This is a joke and contradicts what the rules say so WPSBA dont have any justification for this.

    Amateurs are up against it as it is without injustices like this.

    And as Alan says it doesnt matter whether its 26 or 28 or however many amateurs needing to qualify for last 128. A qualifying draw can always be accomodated to suit the exact number.

    Which brings me onto another pet hate of mine, the fact in PTC 1-4 theres usually 3 or 4 amateurs seeded straight into the last 128 whilst the rest have to win 2 or 3 qualifiers to get there. Totally unfair and makes the whole thing a total lottery. Just another example of the organisers thinking you have to have a certain number in the last 128 so the qualifying draw works, when as explained above it can always be made to work whatever the number.

    If yous dont get a successful resolution to this Alan, yous have a string legal case to ( at very least ) be paid expenses to cover the extra nights accomodation for Eden whilst he has to play in these qualifying rounds, but common sense should prevail and him AND Jak Jones should take their rightful places in the last 128 as seeds and not be forced to play qualifiers then face a seed, when the fact is they are seeds themselves.

    One of the worst shambles and farces ive seen, though theres been that many, its almost predictable this would happen.

    Good luck. Safe to say you have the support of all the fans and most players too in this.

  • edd (aka wild)

    another point in PTC 8 theres 96 pros meaning 1 out of Eden Sharav or Jak Jones will be seeded and the other in to qualifying.

    it does seem to me World Snooker has moved the goalpost because had all 99 pros entered Gary Wilson would have been the 1 and only amateur seeded.