Journal of the Operational Research Society

, Volume 60, Issue 12, pp 1670–1673 | Cite as

Criteria for a tournament: the World Professional Snooker Championship

Case-Oriented Paper


Desirable qualities of a tournament are fairness (the better the player, the better his chance of success), balance (few one-sided matches) and efficiency (long enough to benefit the more skillful yet being completed within schedule). The World Professional Snooker Championship is examined to see how well it meets these criteria.


sports statistics snooker 


  1. Appleton DR (1995). May the best man win? Statistician 44(4): 529–538.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Chen R and Hwang FK (1988). Stronger players win more balanced knockout tournaments. Graphs and Combinatorics 4: 95–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Clarke SR (1996). Calculating premiership odds by computer—An analysis of the AFL final eight playoff system. Asia-Pacific J Opl Res 13: 89–104.Google Scholar
  4. Clarke SR and Norman JM (1979). Comparison of North American and international squash scoring systems—Analytical results. Res Quart 50(4): 723–728.Google Scholar
  5. Colwell DJ and Gillett JR (1987). The expected length of a tournament final. Math Gazette 71: 129–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Glickman ME (2007). Bayesian locally-optimal design of knockout tournaments. Presented at the International Conference on Advances in Interdisciplinary Statistics and Combinatorics, University of North Carolina, Greenboro.Google Scholar
  7. Hwang FK (1982). New concepts for seeding knockout tournaments. Am Math Month 89: 235–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Israel RB (1982). Stronger players need not win more knockout tournaments. J Am Stat Assoc 76: 950–951.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Konig RH (2000). Competitive balance in Dutch soccer. J Roy Statist Soc Ser D 49: 419–431.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Lundh T (2006). Which ball is the roundest—A suggested tournament stability index. J Quant Anal Sports 2(3): 1–21.Google Scholar
  11. McGarry T (1998). On the design of sports tournaments. In: Bennett J (ed). Statistics in Sport. Edward Arnold: London, 199–217.Google Scholar
  12. McGarry T and Schutz RW (1997). Efficacy of traditional sport tournament structures. J Opl Res Soc 48: 65–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Percy DF (2007). A mathematical analysis of badminton scoring systems. J Opl Res Soc, 7 November 2007. Advance online publication doi:10.1057/palgrave.jors.2602528.Google Scholar
  14. Scarf P and Bilbao M (2006). The optimal design of sporting contests. Salford Business School Working Paper 320/06.Google Scholar
  15. Schutz RW (1970). A mathematical model for evaluating scoring systems with special reference to tennis. Res Quart 41: 552–561.Google Scholar
  16. Szymanski S (2003). The economic design of sporting contests. J Econ Lit 41: 1137–1187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Palgrave Macmillan 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Swinburne UniversityHawthornAustralia
  2. 2.University of SheffieldSheffieldUK

Personalised recommendations