WPBSA chairman Jason Ferguson has acknowledged significant concerns about the spread of tiered tournament formats across the World Snooker Tour, warning that successive qualifying rounds are pushing lower-ranked players into damaging downward spirals and creating prolonged periods of inactivity later in the season. Speaking to Metro on 20 September 2026, Ferguson confirmed that tour structures and the current prize-money-based ranking system are both under active review by the governing body.
How the tiered system works and why players are frustrated
Under the tiered formats being criticised, players ranked outside the top 16 must win multiple matches in behind-closed-doors qualifying rounds at the Mattioli Arena in Leicester before they can reach the main televised stages of an event, which are sometimes held weeks or months after those qualifiers are completed. Top-16 players enter directly at the venue stages. The commercial rationale is that broadcasters and promoters are guaranteed the sport’s most prominent names at televised events.
The debate intensified after amateur player Peter Devlin, who is seeking to return to the professional circuit, raised two specific objections on social media. Devlin argued that a top-16 player can win a single match at the venue and earn more ranking points and prize money than a player who has won three qualifying matches to reach the same stage. He also pointed out that when qualifying and main-event stages are separated by months, any competitive momentum built during qualifying is entirely lost by the time the televised rounds begin.
Former world champion Shaun Murphy agreed with Devlin’s position, stating his view that anything other than a flat draw — in which all 128 professionals enter at round one — is unfair, and reporting that the feeling among players is that the tour should return to flat draws alongside a points-based ranking list. Murphy did, however, acknowledge the logistical difficulties that 128-player flat draws present for the WST at every event.
Three-time world champion Mark Williams took the argument further, suggesting that the professional tour’s overall size would need to be reduced to make venue-based flat draws logistically workable. Three-time ranking event winner Gary Wilson was more measured, arguing that tiered structures for a small number of prestige events had previously been justifiable as a reward for players who had performed well elsewhere, but that the balance had shifted too far and — in his assessment — the game had gone back 20 years.
Ferguson’s position: balance rather than uniformity
Ferguson told Metro that his personal view — which he distinguished from any formal WPBSA position — is that a balance between tiered and flat draws is correct, and that he does not want to see flat-draw events disappear from the calendar. He noted that flat draws carry their own complications, pointing out that a lower-ranked player can face the world’s best in round one and exit immediately, though equally a player in form can progress further than their ranking might suggest.
His more pressing stated concern is the effect on players of consecutive qualifying rounds. Ferguson explained that losing a close match during a sequence of qualifiers can rapidly shift a player’s mindset from competing to win to merely preserving their season standing, and that he remembered the psychological burden of back-to-back qualifiers from his own playing career. He described the situation as a work in progress and said tour structure is under review at all times.
Ferguson also outlined what he sees as the genuine advantages of well-run tiered events, citing the China Open in Taiyuan as an example where a 32-player field allowed for a five-star hotel, dedicated transport, chefs, and a two-table venue setup that enabled every match to be broadcast.
The top-16 entrenchment concern
Recent British Open winner Jak Jones, who has claimed two ranking titles this season, raised a distinct but connected issue. Jones told Metro that the combination of tiered main-tour events and the Players Series — which comprises the 32-player World Grand Prix, the 16-player Players Championship and the 12-player Tour Championship, all of which carry ranking points — makes it virtually impossible for a player already inside the top 16 to fall out of that group. He said many players share his view that the tour is effectively being split between the top 16 and everyone else.
Ferguson accepted this as a genuine concern, acknowledging that the Players Series events create a substantial gap in the calendar for the majority of tour members during the second half of the season when only 32, 16 or 12 players are competing. He said the WPBSA’s stated aim is for all members to be competing at all times.
Ranking system review under way
The current prize-money-based ranking system has also drawn criticism, with Judd Trump and Mark Selby both calling for a shift to a points-based model on the grounds that the existing system rewards a well-timed single run in a high-prize event more than sustained consistency across a season. Ferguson confirmed that the WPBSA has engaged mathematical experts who specialise in ranking systems used in other sports to analyse the current structure and compare it formally with points-based alternatives. He said the review also involves the WPBSA Players body, and that any recommendation for change would be based on the findings of that analysis. He noted that the tour has used both prize-money and points-based systems previously, and that neither had been without its critics.
The comments emerged during an intensive period of qualifier activity in Leicester, with the International Championship qualifiers having concluded on 19 September 2026 and Scottish Open qualifiers running from 20 to 23 September. The breadth of concern — from Devlin, who is seeking a return to the professional tour, through to established professionals such as Murphy, Williams, Wilson and Jones — gives Ferguson’s admission of WPBSA unease a weight that goes beyond routine player discontent, even if the precise shape of any reforms remains, as he put it, a work in progress.