Sussex Mens/Ladies singles 2009

[NigelS]

Sussex Mens draw, tables/ times to be added when I have worked them out

[NigelS]

And Ladies draw

[NigelS]

Start times for all men and ladies on Sunday

11.00 Tony Lewis v Adam Squires
11.00 Steve Burns v Kevin Tunstall
11.00 Doug Dawson v Richard Spurrier
11.00 Steve Ayelmore v Mark James
11.00 Arthur Brewster v Rob Hall
11.00 Martin Smith v Gary Frizzell
11.45 Rick Dewdney v Terry Molloy
11.45 Jim Millward v Gareth Lloyd
11.45 Geoff Jukes v Bob Mechan
11.45 Nigel Senior v Tony Jenner
11.45 James Bicknell v Martin Cole
11.45 Mark Senior v Jim Greensted
12.30 Dave Reeves v Adam Bateup
12.30 Charlie Cooper v Richard Wooton
12.30 Dave Robins v Kevin Hall
12.30 Henry Brooks v Alan Brackneridge
12.30 Chris Reeves v Richard Jeffrey
12.30 Ros Appleby v Jean Brackenridge
1.15 Mick Barsby v Dave Hampton
1.15 Dick Dewdney v Kevin Stoner
1.15 Dave Ingram v Bill Kerr
1.15 Chris Tupper v Ric Cunningham
1.15 Gina Sherratt v Kay Cole
1.15 Bella Stoner v Lorraine Hall
2.00 Dave Anscombe v Dave Jones
2.00 Dave France v Gary Mechan
2.00 Terry Race v Alan Messer
2.00 Terry Coghlan v Tim Cole
2.00 Ian Lelliott v Barry Holt
2.45 Andy Farmer- Wright v winner of round 1 match
2.45 Sandra Race v Hayley Tunstall
3.30 Colleen Park v Suzanne Vaux
4.15 Helen Brewster v winner round 1 match

[NigelS]

For info the final should finish at 8pm

[bigtj]

Congratulations to Nigel Senior for an excellent win from Terry Race in the singles final. Lorraine Hall won a hard fought Ladies Singles from Gina Sherratt. Once again the tables were challenging, but all held a ggod score at some point during the day.

Well supported day and enjoyed running it, but could not have done so without the help of Jean. Thanks to Bella for her work on the raffle which raised £130.

[BB Warrior]

Yes, many congratulations to Nigel and Lorraine on their victories today, some excellent games and high scores from several players on some of the tables although many people struggled on some of them. ::)

A big thank you to TJ and the rest of the team for all their hard work which certainly made the weekend a great success. 8-) ;D

[BFG]

Congratulations to TJ and his backup team for a very well run first BB tournament for him! :D
Obviously the darts practice paid off!! ;)

Congratulations to Nigel and Lorraine and to anyone who did just a little more than they expected!

Personally I got my highest ever competetive break and next round the highest ever break against me 18880!! Funny old game! ::)

[SirKT]

Well done TJ & Jean for a smoothly run weekend. Congrats to Nigel & Lorraine for their wins.
Thanks also to the Hurst club for all their hard work and excellent food.

A big contrast in tables made it a challenging competition.
Tables 1,5 & 6 were very good, 2,3 & 4 quite difficult, with the added problem of raised cups on one and a broken clock on another and on saturday, the front of the ball tray on table 3 almost coming off (Alan B. sorted it on sunday with one or two screws in the right places ;))

If Tarratts are only supplying 3 tables maximum for all future events, then at least they could give us some good ones. :-/

[H]

In contrast, when I played the Sussex Singles and Open back in 2005 before I went off to uni, the tables supplied by Tarratts were of excellent quality - I remember thinking I'd never played on such nice tables. This was the first competition supplied by Tarratts I have played in since and the change in quality is astounding :S

[Dave Anscombe]

Again, Congratulations to Nigel and Loraine on their wins. Also to TJ and Jean for a well organised weekend. :) :)

As Kt said, there was a big contrast in tables over the weekend. One suggestion I have is, if Tarratt are going to start supplying inferior tables for competitions, is for Sussex to invest in two or three tables of our own. Tables do come up on ebay occasionally. They can easily be stored in a garage or lock up or possibly rent one of those units that are available nowadays. These units come in various sizes. Maybe we can possibly look at something like this. We will then have our own tables, which we can look after ourselves and know they are up to standard.

[BB Warrior]

Jan 12, 2009 9:18:03 GMT SirKT said:

A big contrast in tables made it a challenging competition.
Tables 1,5 & 6 were very good, 2,3 & 4 quite difficult, with the added problem of raised cups on one and a broken clock on another and on saturday, the front of the ball tray on table 3 almost coming off (Alan B. sorted it on sunday with one or two screws in the right places ;))

If Tarratts are only supplying 3 tables maximum for all future events, then at least they could give us some good ones. :-/

Before we are too quick to condemn ALL of the tables suppled by Tarratts, I think that SirKT has summed it up very well...... even without the benefit of the actual match scores that were achieved. 8-)

Based on the Mens Singles Scores......

Table 1 (Tarratt) was the best table, despite the dead back cushion and broken timing spring! ::) In the 14 games played on the table, the average game score was 12,950 with 5 scores of 5k plus, 6 scores of 10k plus and 3 scores of 15k plus. 8-) ;D

Table 6 (Hurst Club) was next best, with an average of 10,540 from the 12 games played on it, 11 scores of 5k plus, 2 x 10k plus and the Richard Wooton's 18,880 which was the highest score of the Tournament. ;D

Table 5 (Sportsman) was 3rd with an average of 8,859 from 10 games with 4 x 5k plus scores and 3 x 10k plus scores. :D

Table 4 (Romans) came next, average of 7,860 from 16 games with 5 x 5k plus and 3 x 10k plus scores. Most people seemed to find this table okay, but pretty slow. :-/

Table 2 (Tarratts), famed for it's rising cups :o :-X, came 5th with an average of 7,762 from 18 games but only 8 people managed to score more than 5k and nobody reached 10k in the singles. :(

Which left Table 3 (Tarratts) as bottom of this list, with an average of only 6,979 from 16 games, only 6 players managed to get more than 5k and 2 scored 10k. :-/

In the Mens Doubles, Table 6 (Hurst) led the way with an average of 10,754 followed (in descending order) by 1,3,2,5 with Table 4 at the bottom with and average of just 6,038. :'(

The Ladies also found Table 6 (Hurst) to their liking with it finishing as top table in both the Singles (average 5,645) and Doubles (7,445) followed by Table 1 (Tarratts, average 5,342) in the Singles and Table 5 (Sportsman, average 6,015) in the Doubles.

Hopefully, by the time that the One Day Interleague comes around, Tarratts will either have remedied the problems with cushions, timers and rising pockets...... or found some different tables! ::)

A good statistical analysis, Warrior.

So what conclusions are we to draw ?

1. That Tarratts supplied one quality table out of the three.
2. That the one with the cups problem played better on the Sunday (problems overcome ?)
3. That the Hurst Club own table seems to have bedded in and now has nothing wrong with it.
4. That the Sportsman and Romans tables get a vote of confidence as they were better than two of the Tarratt Tables.

Now there is the question of how we approach Mr Tarratt. We don't want to antogonise the last remaining public table operator in the country. The situation for Finals such as this is just about tenable with the mixture of 3 hired tables and three private, but really the tables supplied should be of sufficient quality not to need running repairs during the middle of a tournament.

[DA-DM]

Excuse me for joining in, but -

Jan 12, 2009 12:30:06 GMT tommo III said:

So what conclusions are we to draw ?

1. That Tarratts supplied one quality table out of the three.not really, they each had a 'problem'
2. That the one with the cups problem played better on the Sunday (problems overcome ?)the cups had to be 'persuaded' back down before EVERY game and were still persistent in re-upping themselves during play
3. That the Hurst Club own table seems to have bedded in and now has nothing wrong with it.it's now had time to settle, being no expert, i think that the issues it did have were overcome by a few days resting into it's new position and the setting up of the organisers - TJ etc, so between everyone (bobble included) the table is now almost back to it's best - 18980 from Richard wooton on it reflects this !
4. That the Sportsman and Romans tables get a vote of confidence as they were better than two of the Tarratt Tables.
true, the sportsman played better than it did at the sportsman, for the same sort of reasons as the hurst - position, settling and setting up/levelling etc. I didn't play on 4 so I can't comment except that when brushing it you can feel the resistance in the cloth that a bl**dy good iron would help to overcome.....

[/size]

anyway, thanks to TJ and all for a great weekend, the hurst club and the 'dinner laides' much appreciated and enjoyed.
Congratulations to all winners and runner-ups.
looking forward to next year.

[davejones]

Excellent weekend and well run TJ, Jean, Nigel and BB Warrior. Congratulations to all winners, Yes, some of the tables were challenging but that makes a great competition and a winner who can say he or she was the best at adapting to all sorts of tables.

[Sparky]

I would add my congratulations to Nigel and Lorraine who showed how good they are at playing on such a variety of tables. I think the same applies to others that progressed well through the rounds especially the other finalists and semi finalists.

[BB Warrior]

Jan 12, 2009 12:30:06 GMT tommo III said:

A good statistical analysis, Warrior.

So what conclusions are we to draw ?

1. That Tarratts supplied one quality table out of the three.
2. That the one with the cups problem played better on the Sunday (problems overcome ?)
3. That the Hurst Club own table seems to have bedded in and now has nothing wrong with it.
4. That the Sportsman and Romans tables get a vote of confidence as they were better than two of the Tarratt Tables.

Now there is the question of how we approach Mr Tarratt. We don't want to antogonise the last remaining public table operator in the country. The situation for Finals such as this is just about tenable with the mixture of 3 hired tables and three private, but really the tables supplied should be of sufficient quality not to need running repairs during the middle of a tournament.

I feel that somebody from SCBBA (preferably somebody who knows Tarratts well) should contact them about the tables and discuss the points that have been raised here, and at the weekend, before we use the tables again.

Certainly, we do not wish to antagonise Tarratts, however since they know that the tables are to be used for a major competition within Sussex, they should at least ensure that the tables are of a good quality..... and will not fall apart! :o

With regards to the points that you made above....

1. Yes, Table 1 was pretty good and seemed to improve as the weekend went on. But, the spring on the timer broke at the start of one match and the back cushion was as responsive as a concrete block! ::)
2. No, Table 2 didn't get better on the Sunday. >:( As DA-DM said, the pockets had to be knocked down between each game and even then the red ball often bounced off the 50 hole on the break shot during the course of a game. Sir KT and Nigel did manage to (partially) overcome this by playing reverse break, but should players have to resort to this.... especially in a semi-final of a competition? :o
3. Yes, I am pleased to say that the Hurst Club table was playing much better at the weekend than it was last week, after Mr Reaper had made a few adjustments to the table before the start of the Tournament. ;D Certainly, the break and split shots are there as proved by Richard Wooton with his great break! 8-) But, there is still a left hand roll on the table.... according to SirKT who had an "alternate rules" game with LadyH on Sunday night after the Tournament had ended.
4. Yes, the Sportsman and Romans tables both played better than the 2 other Tarratts Tables, although Table 3 (Tarratts) had played pretty well on the Saturday (average 8,939) but by Sunday the break had become very tricky and the back pockets started to whip the balls out very easily, meaning that the average reduced to 6,979 in the Singles whereas on most of the other tables the averages increased in the Singles on the Sunday.

Doesn't really sound great for the future.

Is this "tarretts" thing for all county opens, if so I don't wish to drive all that distance to get annoyed.

[BB Warrior]

Jan 12, 2009 13:42:31 GMT @sithlord said:

Doesn't really sound great for the future.

Is this "tarretts" thing for all county opens, if so I don't wish to drive all that distance to get annoyed.

No Johnny, don't panic...... the tables used in Opens are supplied by others. ;D

Anyway, a good player can adapt to the table which was proved by the players who reached the later rounds of the competition. 8-)

Maybe, one day, I will remember that myself....... ::) :-[ ;D

I suppose I can adapt, however would you want to keep fixing the holes after every game?

Thank god it's not opens, phheww ;D

[bobhall]

i must add that table 3 in the ladies final saw the ball on the right hand 30 roll into the corner and was in there deep i have not soon this before but after a solid whack from gina the ball managed to pop out

[Sparky]

Please see separate thread (Tables situation) for discussion of the future for competition tables.