Jump to content

Talk:Triple Crown (snooker)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Triple Crown is not official

[edit]

Please note that the usage of snooker's "Triple Crown" is not official, nor does it come anywhere close to the usage of the same term in, for example, rugby union. So let's keep a perspective on triple-crown titles. They shouldn't, therefore, appear in the intro to a player's career but it may be ok to list them further down an article. bigpad (talk) 12:50, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

World and UK double winners

[edit]

I wonder if it'll be worth compiling a list of all World and UK winners? Christopher Connor (talk) 20:23, 30 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think it is redundant to this list. Armbrust Talk Contribs 00:09, 31 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"big three"

[edit]

helpful to add somewhere that these events are also referred to as the "big three"? - InspectorTiger (talk) 10:40, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Armbrust The Homunculus 12:16, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Origin of the term

[edit]

I'm just wondering when the term originated. My feeling is that it's relatively new.

I found this from 13 February 1999 in The Independent "Higgins is trying to become only the third player, after Steve Davis and Stephen Hendry, to hold the Masters, World and UK titles at the same time. "That triple crown would be a dream but it's going to be tough," he said. "I've got Anthony Hamilton next and he beat me here last season. He also put out Tony Drago in the quarter-finals and he was flying. I'll certainly have to up my game." A couple of days later The Record says "John Higgins wrote his name into snooker history at Wembley last night by achieving the sport's Triple Crown. The Wishaw wizard beat Irishman Ken Doherty 10-8 to capture his first Benson and Hedges Masters title at Wembley. He now holds the World, UK and Masters crowns at the same time - a feat only matched by legends Steve Davis and Stephen Hendry."

https://www.independent.co.uk/sport/snooker-osullivan-is-beaten-by-bruised-doherty-1070573.html https://www.irishtimes.com/sport/doherty-reaches-last-four-1.152567

I'd be interested to know if anyone has any earlier references. Almost seems from the first reference that John Higgins himself actually invented the term.

From my own memory, the term was mainly used (in the old days) in relation to Rugby Union: Triple Crown (rugby union)#Name, although it may also have been in sports I wasn't following like Horse Racing. Nigej (talk) 10:27, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Lead

[edit]

I'm not very happy about the start of the article. Triple Crown says that it "is the act of winning or completing the three most important or difficult or prestigious events, tournaments, or prizes in a given field." The snooker Triple Crown is the winning of the three Triple Crown events; the events themselves are not the Triple Crown. Nigej (talk) 12:13, 5 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I did start a Peer review of this to see what people thought of the article. Whilst "winning a triple crown" is the term for winning all three events, plenty of broadcasters and sources state that each individual event is a triple crown event. We can only go on what sources say. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 12:35, 5 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
My impression is that they talk about a "triple crown event", "triple crown title", "triple crown champion", "triple crown win". No one says that this event is a triple crown. Nigej (talk) 13:11, 5 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Grand Slam (golf) "is winning all of golf's major championships in the same calendar year." but Grand Slam (tennis) says "The Grand Slam tournaments, also called majors, are the four most important annual tennis events" but adds "The term Grand Slam, without qualification, and also originally, refers to the achievement of winning all four major championships within a single calendar year". I'm of the view that, in snooker, Triple Crown refers to the winning of the three events and that the events are Triple Crown events, winners of the events are Triple Crown champions, etc. Nigej (talk) 17:16, 5 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Start of article

[edit]

Now that Triple Crown winners have something on their waistcoats I'm wondering whether "The Triple Crown in snooker is winning the three most prestigious tournaments ..." could be changed to "The Triple Crown in snooker is awarded to a player who wins the three most prestigious tournaments ..." or something similar. Nigej (talk) 13:51, 27 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A "Triple Crown" in snooker is the act of winning a trio of tournaments: the UK Championship, Masters and the World Championship. Each tournament is identified as one of the triple crown events and form the "Triple Crown Series".
I don't think we should be using the word "prestige" at all really, as different people have different ideas of prestige. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 14:09, 27 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Agree with you there. I was just wondering whether the Triple Crown is now "the act of winning ..." or whether it is an award given to a player when they have won ... Nigej (talk) 14:17, 27 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Triple Crown (rugby union) says "Traditionally the Triple Crown was an informal honour with no trophy associated with it. However a trophy now exists, which has been awarded to Triple Crown winners since 2006." Probably we need something similar here. Nigej (talk) 14:24, 27 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Use of colours/bold/daggers in tables

[edit]

The use of colours, bold and daggers does need sorting out. Perhaps it's a sign that the tables are over-complicated. Note however MOS:COLOUR which says "Ensure that color is not the only method used to convey important information. Especially, do not use colored text or background unless its status is also indicated using another method such as an accessible symbol matched to a legend, or footnote labels." So just having a coloured background is not satisfactory. I'm assuming that this is why the daggers are there. Not sure where we standing on bolding stuff. Nigej (talk) 06:56, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. I plan on expanding/citing the rest of the article to take to GA soon, and wanted to fix the tables first. We use {{dagger}} etc. due to MOS:ACCESS reasons - some viewers use screen readers. I'm quite happy to discuss the requirements for things like denoting active players, or those who have won all three items, but not removing the ACCESS fixes. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 07:03, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Personally I'd be happy to get rid of the "active players" aspect. I'm not 100% clear what it means anyway and, in addition, it's something that's likely to get out of date. Generally, not a very encyclopedic concept. Nigej (talk) 07:07, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I think the implication is that they can still gain more. Active would just mean on the professional tour. I'm not pro tables in the first place, so I'm a bad person to ask. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 07:55, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Why is the season in bold in the first table? Seems to serve no useful purpose. And the "Total" column is in bold in the second table for no reason and then, confusingly, the player with the most wins in the individual events is in bold in the next three columns. It's all too much. Nigej (talk) 07:41, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'd cull this. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 07:55, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Done. Nigej (talk) 08:10, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm thinking that the second table could be trimmed to just include winners of the career triple crown. In snooker circles, the career triple crown seems to be the dominant use of the term "triple crown" nowadays (rather than the season triple crown or three-in-a-row). To me such a table seems much more logical that the current one, which lists those who've won two or more triple crown events - a pretty obscure demarcation it seems to me. I'd then reorder the two tables. Nigej (talk) 11:36, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I agree... Although I would feel a SPLIT article for List of snooker Triple Crown champions or List of snooker Triple Crown event winners would be suitable. The current table seems to suggest that 2 is somehow the cutoff point arbitrarily, when it should either list winners of the lot, or just the ones that have completed the trio. That's a different discussion, however. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 11:47, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Snooker's majors, the big three BBC events, the big three

[edit]

I think we can get rid of these as "definitions". To me they are generally used in a journalistic way, rather than indicating some sort of definition. eg "Now the 29-year-old heads to Sheffield’s Crucible Theatre in April with an amazing hat-trick of snooker’s top three BBC events in sight.". How does "Aside from Williams, Stephen Hendry - who completed the treble twice - and Steve Davis are the only other players to have completed the hat-trick of major tournament wins in the same season." define them as "snooker's majors"? We could have a sentence pointing out the similarity between these three and the golf major's/tennis grand-slams but I don't see the point. Similarly we could have a sentence pointing out that they have been the most important events shown on the BBC. Nigej (talk) 07:31, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Yeah, I'm planning a rewrite. I'd suggest keeping the aspect of them being called Big BBC in the prose somewhere, but otherwise, it's hardly lede worthy. Potentially:

The Triple Crown in snooker (sometimes called the snooker majors) is a series...

Surely the snooker majors are the Triple Crown events, not the Triple Crown itself. Nigej (talk) 11:38, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Surely this article covers both aspects per WP:BROAD? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 11:42, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with that but my point is that although you could say that Ronnie has won 19 snooker majors, it would incorrect to say that he has won 19 Triple Crowns. He has won 19 Triple Crown events. ie snooker major=triple crown event. Currently the lead implies that snooker major=triple crown which is incorrect. Nigej (talk) 13:04, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm, yes, I see your point. Maybe say The Triple Crown in snooker (sometimes individually called the snooker majors) is a series...? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 13:15, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Triple Crown (snooker)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Cavie78 (talk · contribs) 10:47, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]


Lead

  • "The Triple Crown (sometimes called snooker's majors) in snooker is winning the three most prestigious tournaments" -> Think it would be better to say "The Triple Crown (sometimes called snooker's majors) in snooker is the name given to the three most prestigious tournaments" As you say later, Players who win all three tournaments are said to have "won the Triple Crown". It's my understanding that the name is used to describe the events, not just winning them.
  • "The individual events are deemed to be the most reputable" -> Suggest rewording to "The individual events are deemed to be the most prestigious in the snooker calendar"
  • Link ranking points to Snooker world rankings?
  • "The Triple Crown dates back to the 1969 World Snooker Championship, when the event changed reverted to a knockout format from the prior "challenge" basis." I think you need to make it clear this is retrospective and say something in the lead about 1977 being the first year the three Triple Crown tournaments were played (see also commment below regarding History)
  • "with both Stephen Hendry and Ronnie O'Sullivan winning each event five times or more" -> "with only Stephen Hendry and Ronnie O'Sullivan having won each event five times or more"?
  • "Three players have won all three in the space of a season, with Mark Williams, Steve Davis each and Hendry having done so on two occasions" -> "Three players have won all three in the space of a season, a feat Mark Williams and Steve Davis have achieved once, with Hendry being the only player to do so on two occasions"
  • "the name was officialised as part of a "Triple Crown series"" This is a bit confusing. Do you mean "the "Triple Crown series" name was officially recognised"? And who was it reognised by? The WPBSA? You don't mention this in the body, you only make reference to the waistcoat badges.

History

  • There appears to be nothing about the first use of the term? Was this in 1977 with the first Masters? When was it retrospectively conferred?
    • It was retrospectively done yes, but from 1984. Just searching for a source. BennyOnTheLoose - have you got anything in Snooker Scene about this? I thought it would be an easy fix, but there's no overview page for Triple Crown; so it'll have to be contemporary sources. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 14:34, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
      • Lee Vilenski I checked NewsBank and the earliest use of the term I found there was a quote by John Higgins: "Higgins is trying to become only the third player, after Steve Davis and Stephen Hendry, to hold the Masters, World and UK titles at the same time. "That triple crown would be a dream but it's going to be tough," he said." (O'Sullivan is beaten by bruised Doherty, The Independent, 13 Feb 1999). (There were earlier references to an "overseas" triple crown but that was just about winning three tournaments outside the UK.) Has the actual term been around since the 80s? I'll have a look in a couple of books. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 15:47, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • "In 1977, a third Triple Crown event was created" -> "In 1977, the final Triple Crown event was created"
  • "it was opened up to all professionals and became a ranking event in 1984" -> "in 1984 the competition was opened to all professionals and also became a ranking event."
  • "called the "snooker's majors""
  • "Triple Crown events are considered the highest professional titles in terms of prestige, and often host the most prize money" -> "Triple Crown events are considered the most prestigious snooker titles, and have generally offered the most prize money"
  • "However, in recent years, money for other events, such as the China Open and the upcoming Saudi Arabia Snooker Masters." You haven't finished this sentence. Presumably you mean to say that those events have offered larger prize funds?
  • "As of 2019, players who had completed the Triple Crown had a gold crown embroidered into their playing waistcoats" -> From the 2019 Masters onwards, players who have completed the Triple Crown have a gold crown embroidered on their playing waistcoats in recognition of their achievement.


Triple Crown winners

Tournament winners

  • Ok

Images

  • Ok. Ronnie image is appropriately licenced. I think the PD licence for the Triple Crown logo is borderline. Is the stylised crown really a "simple geometric shape"?

Sources

  • What makes Chris Turner's Snooker Archive a reliable source?
  • What makes Global Snooker Centre a reliable source?
    • Similar.
  • What makes Snooker Database a reliable source?
    • Been respected as significantly more reliable alongside snooker.org for use on results and similar.
  • What makes Snooker Scene a reliable source?
  • Source 19 should include Sky Sports in the ref
  • What makes snooker.org a reliable source?
    • Most of the above are items that are deemed reliable, but more than willing to open up a talk to gain consensus. For reference, we are pretty quick to make items unreliable when they are likely to not always be accurate, such as cuetracker.net, which is globally blacklisted. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 13:31, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
      • I've stumbled across discussion relating to cuetracker.net when reading snooker articles in the past, but I would highly recommend adding something about sources to Wikipedia:WikiProject Snooker regarding which ones are considered realiable and which are not. Because of the, shall we say, rather homemade nature of many of these sites, they don't scream RELIABLE. In the example of Chris Turner, I can't find much about him on the web, so it would be useful for reviewers if you could establish why he was considered a "notable snooker historian". You clearly know your stuff, but I think this question will come up again and again unless there's a discussion and somewhere to point reviewers to to explain Cavie78 (talk) 10:12, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
An interesting read on a subject I love, but feels like there's quite a lot to do to take this to GA status. Placing on hold for Cavie78 (talk) 10:47, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
No problem, this all seems very doable. Glad to hear you are a fan! If you are interested in snooker, I have a whole series of articles coming through GAN! Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 14:39, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Just looking for an additional source, and I'll have covered the above Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 14:39, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I think I've made all of the above fixes, I hope it's suitable. I was unable to find an exact date for the Triple Crown being founded, so I've made a few changes Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 16:19, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for making the changers Lee Vilenski I'm going to pass this, but I think you need to address the issue with the sources for snooker articles once and for all. Congrats. I saw my first Triple Crown last year in York at the Uks when play was stopped three times due to people in the audience fainting/being sick before Higgins and Bingham played one of the worst matches I've ever seen! Feel free to let me know if you need anymore reviews for snooker articles Cavie78 (talk) 20:32, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
You'll never catch me working on snooker articles! That the 2019 UK Championship? I've been putting off writing that one, but it is on the to-do list. Apart from a majestic semi for Maguire, it wasn't my favourite comp! I'll write something up at WT:SNOOKER in due course about the sourcing, as it makes a lot of sense. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 20:37, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Move

[edit]

Hi guys, the articles has been moved from Triple Crown (snooker) to Triple Crown Series (snooker). The events may now have this title, but this is hardly the WP:COMMONNAME for the event and is quite heavily recentism. I suggest we move the title back. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 12:03, 14 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Agree. Seems to me that at the moment Triple Crown (especially the career Triple Crown) and Triple Crown event/tournament are the common usages. Nigej (talk) 12:59, 14 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It should be noted I'm not against a name change per se, but only when it's the term used most often for the series of events. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 14:18, 14 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, guys, this was me. I thought that since the event was formally renamed the Triple Crown Series earlier this year that the article title should reflect that ... but no issues with the revert, per consensus! :) Bedeviled (talk) 08:21, 23 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Winning streak notability?

[edit]

Hello. I'm not sure if this is something worth including, mainly because it is just based on what Wikipedia would probably define as original research, but is it worth noting that Steve Davis, Stephen Hendry and Ronnie O'Sullivan are the only players to have a record streak of winning at least one triple crown event per season for 9 consecutive seasons? It doesn't have to be the same tournament each time, but just the act of winning one of the tournaments per season would be enough to qualify as "a consecutive winning streak":

Again, I suspect this would count as original research, but given how very few others had such a winning streak, it feels like something we should probably mention somehow. Going to tag @Lee Vilenski: and @Nigej: for thoughts since I don't know how often, or how many, people check these kind of talkpages. --CitroenLover (talk) 21:33, 1 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Well spotted! but as you say we shouldn't really include it unless we can find others who have noted the same thing. Also the essence of the "Triple Crown" is winning all three, so, although winning one in 9 successive seasons is of some interest, its a bit away from the topic. Nigej (talk) 21:48, 1 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I mean it's cool, but unless sources are talking about it, we shouldn't. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 22:15, 1 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed recent additions of "Winner of x tournaments in a row" on the same basis. Do sources talk about it. No, just stats. Nigej (talk) 08:11, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Restricted to Britsh at first?

[edit]

Hello, the above text is not quite correct. The original winner, Patsy Fagan, is Irish. He had been based in London for some years, though, and reached the final of the English Amateur. His page makes the same claim re nationality. Unless someone knows of Fagan also being British at that time, perhaps the adverb 'officially' could be prefixed to 'restricted'? Regards, Billsmith60 (talk) 16:09, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm a bit confused about your comment. The article says "Originally restricted to British residents and passport holders" and Fagan was resident, even though he was Irish. Nigej (talk) 16:27, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

See the slight tweak I've made to it, Nigel. The wording's clear now. Regards, Billsmith60 (talk) 16:12, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure how it is any more clear - it's the same wording, but with the repetition of the word "British". Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 17:07, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Most Triple Crown finals

[edit]

I would like to add a section to this article listing players who have appeared in the most Triple Crown finals. This seems like quite a glaring ommission of content as far as I can tell, but I seem to be running into some opposition from another user who wants to revert my edits. The problem with the first table in this article is that it doesn't allow readers to list players by number of Triple Crown events won because it only contains the 11 players who have won the career Triple Crown. An article about the Triple Crown should not only talk about players winning the career Triple Crown, but also give comprehensive summaries and statistics relating to all of the Triple Crown events, and the table which I think needs to be added (shown below) is currently not presented elsewhere on wikipedia as far as I can tell. This article seems like the most appropriate location for this table, which will be very useful to a lot of readers, which should be our main concern. Thanks. Officially Mr X (talk) 08:44, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Legend
† Player has won the career Triple Crown
Flag icon key: List of National Flags
Player Finals Winner Runner-up
England Ronnie O'Sullivan † 28 20 8
Scotland Stephen Hendry † 28 18 10
England Steve Davis † 21 15 6
Scotland John Higgins † 18 9 9
England Mark Selby † 13 9 4
Northern Ireland Alex Higgins † 13 5 8
Wales Ray Reardon 11 7 4
Wales Mark Williams † 11 7 4
England Jimmy White 11 2 9
Wales Terry Griffiths † 9 3 6
England Shaun Murphy † 9 3 6
Australia Neil Robertson † 8 6 2
Republic of Ireland Ken Doherty 8 1 7
Canada Cliff Thorburn 7 4 3
England John Parrott 7 2 5
China Ding Junhui 6 4 2
Wales Doug Mountjoy 6 3 3
England Judd Trump † 6 3 3
Wales Matthew Stevens 6 2 4
England John Spencer 5 4 1
England Peter Ebdon 5 2 3
England Paul Hunter 3 3 0
Northern Ireland Dennis Taylor 3 2 1
Northern Ireland Mark Allen 3 1 2
Scotland Graeme Dott 3 1 2
Scotland Stephen Maguire 3 1 2
England Ali Carter 3 0 3
England Barry Hawkins 3 0 3
  • Oppose addition My fundamental issue is that this article is about the Triple Crown: "The Triple Crown refers to winning the three most prestigious tournaments in professional snooker: the World Championship, the UK Championship and the invitational Masters." The 11 players mentioned above have won the career triple crown. No one else has. Summarising finalists in individual triple crown events is well away from the topic, and really nothing to do with this article. Also fails WP:NOSTATS. We could add all sorts of stats here that's not what this article is about. Where's the evidence that this is a widely discussed statistic. Also completely unreferenced. Nigej (talk) 09:08, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Also worth noting that this is a "Good article". See: Talk:Triple Crown (snooker)/GA1 Nigej (talk) 09:44, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hmm, I think we previously had this discussion. Do you think this might maybe meet WP:LISTN? Maybe a List of snooker Triple Crown finalists or similar, such as we have List of World Snooker Championship winners. The Triple Crown is very much about winning all three, but should we really have no mention at all of players just winning one or two, or even reaching the final? The only issue I have with the table above is that it is sorted, which is almost like a league table for finals. This is a thing pulled over from Olympics, but it's almost like we are ranking these players. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 10:13, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Also, thanks for talking about this on this talk, and preserving WP:BRD. We do benefit from talking it through, rather than just edit warring. :) Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 10:15, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your comments. An article about the Triple Crown has every right to go into detail about the individual events which contribute towards somebody winning a career Triple Crown, and I do not think that it constitutes excessive detail to have a table which allows a reader to list players according to the number of events won and the number of finals participated in - it is fundamentally relevant, useful and interesting for a reader of this article, and that should be more than sufficient reason to include it. I don't see much sense in getting bogged down in all this WP:???? business. Officially Mr X (talk) 15:30, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure what you mean by WP:???? I'm saying that a table such as this would meet our notability guidelines for a standalone list. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 15:37, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The problem is that these sort of tables have a habit of taking over articles. This is an encyclopedia and words are important. Dumping a long table into this article without any context doesn't really make sense. All sorts of tables could be added: most semi-finals, oldest winner, tallest winner. Where does it all end. You still haven't told us where this data comes from and why you selected 3 for the lower bound. If it was limited to 10 and more it would be better. Nigej (talk) 15:53, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Gotta agree with Nigej here: this is a slippery slope of all sorts of statistics and random facts that don't really belong in a wiki. What may be better is to take a leaf out of Chris Downer and Matt Tresco, who created the Crucible and Masters Almanac's respectively, and make an Almanac about the Triple Crown as an entity, which would be out of scope of the Wikipedia.
If the statistics given in this talkpage post are worthy of inclusion to the wiki, then they really need to include a number of sources and other relevant information that would make for a more useful article: as it stands currently, the statistics don't really tell you anything useful, or why I would find that information relevant as a reader. Ronnie reaching 28 triple crown finals is interesting, but not very notable imo. --CitroenLover (talk) 20:15, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
As far as I'm concerned, a healthy amount of stats is very useful and interesting for readers of the article - I would rather list all finalists in the table, to be comprehensive, and certainly would not advocate limiting it to a short list of players. The question about where the data comes from seems trivially simple - it is just aggregated from the 3 finalists' tables from the 3 articles relating to the 3 individual events. I am sure that ranking players based on their height or age would be a step too far, but sortable lists based on number of wins, number of finals, or even number of semi-finals would seem entirely reasonable and within the scope of this article. Officially Mr X (talk) 18:29, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I know you dislike WPs but I'm afraid we have WP:USEFUL and WP:INTERESTING in "Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions". Although this is not a deletion discussion, the same issues arise. And the system we have is that decisions about whether to keep stuff or not should be based on all those WP:Policies and guidelines like WP:NOTSTATS. We already have a table for the career triple crown winners AND a list of the individual event winners, and in my view that's enough stats for this article, which is about the triple crown. Nigej (talk) 18:59, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Summary

[edit]

Seems that so far we have a rough consensus not to include it. However Lee's suggestion does highlight the fact that we're missing an article about Triple Crown events (as opposed to the "Triple Crown"). I'm still of the view that the table is too far away from the actual topic of "Triple Crown" (ie winning all 3). Including Barry Hawkins here, who's not even won one of the three, seems crazy to me. However Triple Crown events are widely talked about. Looking at Tennis, they have an article Grand Slam (tennis) focussed on the "Grand Slam" (ie winning all 4 or getting close, etc) but they also have other articles like List of Grand Slam men's singles champions, Chronological list of men's Grand Slam tennis champions, List of Grand Slam singles finals, List of Grand Slam–related tennis records, etc about the events/winners/etc. This is all way too much for us but an article on the lines of Lee's suggested List of snooker Triple Crown events/finals/finalists/records is I think the way forward here. Readers expect "List of " articles to be full of stats. Nigej (talk) 07:54, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

List of snooker Triple Crown finals seems suitable to me. We generally do list the finals for events themselves, such as Tour Championship (snooker). A list for the Triple Crown events does make sense to me. If no one has any issues, I'll draft something up soon. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 14:40, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I've thrown together Draft:List of snooker Triple Crown finals. It needs some more prose, an image or two and expanding the stats stuff, but I don't think it's terrible. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 14:27, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Good start. I'd like to see this information included: https://wst.tv/corporate/referees/triple-crown-final-referees/ There's never been a suitable place for it before. Nigej (talk) 14:35, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. At least it's a sourced list. Not sure if we need to list the individual referees for every tournament, or just who's done what, but it's something worth mentioning. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 15:32, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I would also be in favour of List of snooker Triple Crown finals or List of snooker Triple Crown records. I understand if you want to keep the Triple Crown (snooker) article itself concise, but going into a bit more detail and listing all players to reach a Triple Crown final, number of wins vs runner-up finishes etc does belong somewhere in my opinion. The Triple Crown as a collective of 3 events gets talked about a lot in the media, so I agree to have an article aggregating certain relevant statistics across all 3 events throughout history. Officially Mr X (talk) 17:54, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Triple_Crown_(snooker)&oldid=1205763371"