Really like what both of you have said.tungsten tossers wrote:Zeyes wrote:IMHO, Q School is getting to the point where it needs to be played in two stages. The large number of no-hopers in the field means that there are just too many meaningless games and at the same time too much luck of the draw. I'd be in favour of letting the small fry fight it out for one weekend in early December, let's say for 64 spots (4 tournaments, last 16 of each qualify), who then join the "real" Q School in January. All players proven to be reasonably competent (recent tour card holders, high finishers of the CT and DT and regional tours, players who did well on the Pro Tour without tour cards) to get exempted directly into the January QS.tungsten tossers wrote:I think QS would be better if held over two weekends.. more games and a better chance to see who is more consistent.
Would lead to a Q School proper with maybe 200-250 players, rather than the 600+ we saw this year across the two sites. In addition, paring down the field like that could allow them to play more tournaments in the same four days, so your objective would be fulfilled, too.
Good shout.. a prelim Q School could work..
Lets face it there were a lot of players that didn't win a game this year and those would be eliminated at prelim.. There were 183 players that ended up with zero points in the Uk QS alone..and another 70 that only got 1 point..
There were 453 entrants for the UK so if it gets much bigger it will become unworkable anyway.
I am sure something must be in the pipeline as it could be a logistical nightmare
This year's Q-School must be proof if any that there needs to be a much smaller field for any future editions. Seeing those draw pages start at the last 512 with tens if not hundreds of byes was mindblowing.