Some argue that the tournament is fair because it rewards consistent performance over time. They claim that new players need to prove themselves in smaller tournaments first before challenging the elite at the world championship level. This perspective sees the current structure as a necessary step for genuine skill development, not a barrier.

The risk lies in alienating younger fans who crave unpredictability and fresh faces.

Sponsors and long-term players benefit from maintaining the status quo to ensure stability and predictability.

As the tournament continues, expect more calls for reform to balance tradition with opportunities for new talent. The debate will intensify as emerging players push harder against the established order, demanding a fairer chance at glory.

Human tribalism will split this vote sharply. Fans of long-standing champions will defend the status quo, while newcomers and younger audiences will rally behind calls for change, arguing that snooker needs fresh blood to stay relevant.