Thailand’s Siripaporn Nuanthakhamjan has defeated Bai Yulu of China 6-3 to win the World Women’s Snooker Championship for the first time at the Hi-End Snooker Club in Bangkok.
The victory ensures that Nuanthakhamjan will join the professional World Snooker Tour from the start of the 2023/24 season.
The historic 40th staging of the World Women’s Snooker Championship saw the event return to the Hi-End Snooker Club in Bangkok for the first time since 2019, with an all-star field which featured 17 of the world’s top 20 ranked players.
Following a dramatic four days which saw a shock last 16 defeat for three-time world champion Ng On Yee at ther last 16 stage, as well as semi-final exits for the world’s top two ranked players Mink Nutcharut and Reanne Evans, it was Siripaporn Nuanthakhamjan and Bai Yulu who progressed to only the second ever all-Asian final in the history of the tournament (2017).
Competing in her debut World Women’s Snooker (WWS) Tour event, 19-year-old Bai had already made headlines following her record-breaking 127 in the group stage, before she came back from 3-1 down to defeat 12-time champion Evans in what had been an eagerly anticipated semi-final clash.
For Nuanthakhamjan, having defeated five-time finalist Maria Catalano to top her group, she overcame world number five Jamie Hunter, Bayarsaikhan Narantuya of Mongolia and defending champion Nutcharut 5-2 to reach the title match.
It was Bai who made the early running as she led 2-0 and then 3-2 at the mid-session interval. Crucially, however, it was the Thai star Nuanthakhamjan who claimed frames three and six – both with pressure pots on the final black – to remain in contention.
After she took the seventh frame to lead the best of 11 frame contest for the first time, the momentum was in her favour and she finished strongly by adding the following two frames to seal a career-best victory and a place on the professional circuit for the first time.
The victory sees Nuanthakhamjan become only the 14th different winner of the tournament during its history, the third from Asia and only the second from Thailand following Mink Nutcharut’s success a year ago.
Having played snooker since the age of 14, Nuanthakhamjan made her WWS Tour debut at the 2017 World Championship in Singapore where she reached the quarter-finals, before reaching the semi-finals two years later at Hi-End. She is also a former Women’s Snooker World Cup winner and finalist at the mixed-gender Thai national championships.
It was not until April 2022 that she began to compete on the WWS Tour full-time and her victory in Bangkok will now see her enter the world’s top 10 for the first time at number nine.
Victories for Ramachandran and Talbot-Deegan
Alongside the main World Championship, the five-day event also saw the latest staging of the World Women’s Under-21 and Seniors Championships, with a new winner crowned in each competition.
India’s Anupama Ramachanran capped a week to remember as just days on from her victory at the Women’s Snooker World Cup, the Chennai cueist ended the reign of two-time defending champion Ploychompoo Laokiatphong with a 3-2 victory in the Under-21 competition.
The 20-year-old had already accounted for Sophie Nix, Saravalee Songsermsawad and Bai Yulu to reach the final, before she came back from 1-2 down to end Laokiatphong’s bid for a hat-trick of junior world titles.
There was also a maiden victory for England’s Mary Talbot-Deegan in the Seniors Championship as she defeated 2017 World Championship finalist Vidya Pillai 3-1 in the final.
Competing in the event for the first time, 42-year-old Talbot-Deegan reached the final with victories against Altangerel Bolortuya of Mongolia and India’s Pooja Galundia, while Pillai accounted for defending champion Tessa Davidson and former world number one Maria Catalano to reach the title match.
The opening frames were shared as Pillai top scored with a run of 59 in the second frame, but it was to be Talbot-Deegan who would not be denied as she won the following two frames to claim her maiden world title and second Seniors crown in total.
Finally, there was also victory for India’s Amee Kamani in the final of the Challenge Cup, for players who did not reach the last 16 of the main competition. She defeated Waratthanun Sukritthanes of Thailand 3-2 in the final and also compiled the highest break of the Challenge with a run of 71.
World Women’s Snooker would like to thank all of our partners who helped to make the tournament possible, including the Billiard Sports Association of Thailand and Hi-End Snooker Club.
There is one event remaining of the 2022/23 season as the Tour returns to the UK for the staging of the British Open at the Landywood Snooker Club from 13-14 May.
Siripaporn Nuanthakhamjan, like many Thai players, uses a shorter name and she wants to be named Baipat.
From what I was able to watch, the final itself was not the highest quality. It was a very long match and both players were clearly under pressure. The tactical play was quite good, but their break-building deserted them a bit…
This event was probably the most talked about Women Snooker event ever. The fans were able to watch a lot of matches and discover very interesting players they very rarely get the opportunity to see and appreciate.
Snooker is very big in Mongolia, but their players rarely have the means to travel far. This event allowed a number of their female players to show their talent.
Bai Yulu impressed, as I expected. She didn’t perform at her best in the final. Maybe pressure got at her, or maybe a bit of fatigue (she also played in the Junior event). She’s only 19. I hope that she will be allowed to travel to Europe if she gets invitations in events. She is certainly a very promising talent. She had finished top of her group, ahead of Mink who she beat at that stage, and she beat Reanne Evans by 5-3 in the semi-finals of the main event. Reanne had only lost two frames in the previous rounds.
Prior to the main individual event, a number of teams competed in the World Cup. That event also brought a big surprise as “Team India” beat “Team England A”. Team England A was Reanne Evans and Rebecca Kenna, both main tour players.
Team India A have defeated England A 4-3 following a thrilling match to win the 2023 Women’s Snooker World Cup at the Hi-End Snooker Club in Bangkok, Thailand.
Represented by Amee Kamani and Anupama Ramachandran, the leading team from India emerged successful from a knockout draw which saw them overcome Thailand C and Thailand A to reach the final, before they toppled the team that featured two of the world’s top four players to claim a famous victory. All three knockout wins were earned following deciding-frames as they succeeded Waratthanun Sukritthanes and Siripaporn Nuanthakhamjan as champions.
Both unranked on the Tour coming into the tournament, Kamani and Ramachandran exhibited both skill and determinaton as they overcame established players on the World Women’s Snooker Tour including world champion Mink Nutcharut, 12-time world champion Reanne Evans and current world number four Rebecca Kenna to lift the title.
In the final it was India who claimed the opening two frames against Evans and Kenna to earn the early advantage, before the English duo claimed the doubles frames and subsequently drew level at 2-2.
The following two frames were again shared with a telling snooker from Evans enough to earn the opportunity for Kenna to pot blue and pink and force what would prove to be a nail-biting deciding frame.
With Kenna up against Kamani in the decisive battle, it was Kamani who would gain the upper hand for Team India, only for a valiant effort from Kenna to chase – and in many cases lay – successful snookers, meaning that the outcome remained in doubt until the final moments.
Ultimately, it was Kamani who would pot the final balls required to earn what was to prove an emotional victory for the India as the pair revealed after the match.
“It feels amazing because I started playing snooker back in 2011 and this is my first world title,” said Kamani. “It feels like magic and all the hard work that I have done has paid off today and this is just the start. I just want to keep winning every world title, that is what I look up to, but for now I am super happy and proud because I have made my nation India proud.
“I think the biggest thrill for a sportsperson is the tricolour, the national flag going high and the national anthem in the background, I think that is the biggest thrill that we play for in India and I have made my nation proud by winning this world title. It feels amazing, I can’t even express it in words, but I think it is a prestigious world title for my country.”
Teammate Ramachandran added: “I am really happy because this has been my first tournament with World Women’s Snooker and the first couple of days I was finding it really hard to adjust to the tables, it was like a completely new environment for me but I just wanted to enjoy what I was doing on the table and not thinking too much about whether I win or lose. I was going shot by shot and that really helped. I have no words!”
Kamani also revealed that the feat was to be even more remarkable as the pair only decided to enter the team event shortly before the entry deadline, looking to gain valuable match practice ahead of the start of the upcoming World Championship at the same venue.
“I think it’s an irony that we decided to pair up at the last moment. Just before we booked our tickets, she [Ramachandran] called me and said let’s play!
“We do not play on XingPai tables, this is our first time and I think we have done amazingly well. Beating Thailand and England one by one makes it more important for us and special to win because we have beaten the top players of the world and then reached the number one place.”
This of course is a reminder that snooker is also big in India and the country has very talented players. I met and spoke to the likes of Pankaj Adjani, Lucky Vatnani and Aditya Mehta when taking pictures on tour. One aspect that was rarely talked about is how homesick they all were. Living as expats, away from their family, in a completely different culture – with a completely different food culture – is something they found difficult. That was the main reason for Pankaj Advani to quit the main tour. Some fans branded him “a quitter” but the man had nothing to prove and he was extremely unhappy. Why should he put himself through it?
Baipat has been offered a tour card. Should she take it, one other tour card remains for the grabs and will go to the highest Women Snooker ranked player, not already on tour at the end of the season. That is currently Reanne Evans, but she is not safe yet as there is still one event counting and On Yee could still get ahead of her. Again, I question the UK centric organisation of the sport here. With most events played in the UK, many of the very talented Asian players that we have seen over the last week have no chance to get high enough in the rankings because they simply can’t afford to travel to the UK each time, nor to live in the UK as ex-pats.
And finally a big bravo to the the Hi-End Snooker Club in Bangkokand to Gappa Gappafor being fantastic hosts!
11 thoughts on “Baipat is the 2023 Women Snooker World Champion!”
Yes, the organisers worked hard and did a very good job with so many competitions taking place. But I would question the playing conditions, particularly in the latter stages of the main event. The semi-finals were played on two adjacent tables – with even less space than the Crucible. In general the table conditions were not helpful. Any tournament which carries a professional tour card should be played with cloths that come as close as possible to replicate tour conditions. This is especially important for women’s events, but there was a similar problem in the WSF events in Sydney. Players that did well, such as Ma Hailong and now Siripaporn Nuanthakhamjan, have a good tactical game but their scoring is questionable. More attack-minded players, such as Bai Yulu, were frustrated. Unfortunately, it’s a totally different game on the main tour.
The other glaring question is why did the established players Nutcharut Wongharuthai, Reanne Evans, Ng On Yee and Rebecca Kenna do so badly? I had thought that the advantages of full-time play and continual match experience against top players would pull them away from the rest of the women players, making them an almost permanent top-4. In fact, the opposite has happened. OK, there’s the table conditions argument, but perhaps playing on the main tour has wrecked their confidence, having lost badly in almost all of their matches? I’m pretty sure the idea of 4 women on the main tour (and not even the most suitable ones) isn’t the best strategy for developing the women’s game. But WST have cooked their goose: there’s no going back now.
Anyway, congratulations to the winners. It’s a major achievement to come through such a long event. We will see where it leads them.
I’m afraid that you may be very right about the shattered confidence and that I think Reanne realized that. She ranted about the lack of money for the women’s game and got a lot of negative reactions and abuse. People argued that she had no right to complain, being on the main tour without properly qualifying for it, and getting good money with the Mixed Double without winning much at all. But that’s not the point. She wants a more attractive women’s tour. Jason Ferguson likes to say that because snooker is not a sport that requires a lot of strength, there is no reason why women can’t compete with men. Well, I’m a woman and I’m not so sure. Excellent eye-hand coordination is absolutely essential in snooker. I believe that more men than women are blessed with that. It’s very apparent if you observe young toddlers. Little boys are, on average, better than little girls at games that require such coordination, like ball games for instance, whilst little girls, on average, are more advanced when it comes to language skills.
I still prefer the possibility of these women having a chance on the main tour rather than being restricted to the women’s tour. Incidentally as bad as it may sound, I’m happy Jamie Hunter did not win it, so it is not in the focus of comments.
They should not be “restricted” to the women’s tour, but they should not be on it if they aren’t good enough. They should get on it via the normal qualifying routes. It’s not doing them any good as it is, and it’s not at all helping the “image” od women in snooker.
But there are various qualifying routes to the main tour (age group, geographical location), so this (being the women’s champion) is just one of them. Reanne and maybe even On Yee are possibly too old, but I still hold out hope that one of these younger women can accomplish something as they are not yet too hurt by the very mediocre play on the women’s tour. If not, it will just reinforce what people already think about women’s snooker just by looking at the women’s game.
Yes it’s one of the routes, but one that is not open to all. Just women. And those women can go to q-school but never succeeded in it (so far), can play in EBSA and WSF events but never succeeded (so far). So we have now 4 of them on tour and there are people who think that, because the number of players on tour is capped to 128 (+ invitational cards) they are taking spots away from players who would do better than them and would be more deserving. They have a point. That said, a rating system like the one Lewis exposed on here some weeks ago would greatly ease the situation because it’s much more flexible and there would be no need to “cap” the number of professionals. Every sport is a number game. The more exponents, the higher the chance to see exceptional talents in the field. Visibility is essential to attract new potential players and having women on tour gives them visibility. But if they really aren’t getting any win, it only vindicates the opinion of those who think that woman are just not good enough.
That is true, but the age groups and geographical groups are also restricted to a certain category of players. I understand why people would complain that the women take spots away, also why a more flexible rating system could help, but as it is now: Reanne complains about the prize money for the women and it is indeed ridiculously low – on the other hand, given the standard of play on the women’s tour, I don’t think it deserves more. I know, they have the chance in the qualifying tournaments, I wish more tried there, visibility might help more women to consider it instead of heading straight to the women’s tour. Maybe a few years can at least result in some conclusion and if there is any truth in the idea that at least some women can be competitive with men, let’s hope this kind of visibility encourages them. If not – they are welcome to play in their own little tour, but it would be ludicrous to pour more money into it as it is just not attractive.
Some “geographical” groups have also consistently produced players who weren’t competitive on the main tour and many of those just gave up. Some “oceania/pacific” nominees even barely ever played at all. That’s not good either and it has attracted criticism as well.
Glad someone still dares to say out loud what most consider “sexism” these days. It’s simply a consequence of the way humans evolved that, on average (as you rightly say), men tend to be better at some things, such as hand-eye coordination, and women tend to be better at others, such as communication skills or multi-tasking. There’s an actual difference in brain structure that has a long evolutionary history. Of course that does not mean that women should not compete with men. In fact, I definitely think they should, and that they deserve every chance to develop the women’s game as much as possible. But it does make the question of what is “fair” a lot harder…
Actually I would say if women do have a disadvantage, it’s more likely to be strength than coordination. Even on faster tables, there are always forcing shots that are needed in breakbuilding. But I have no objection to women playing on the main tour. But 4 playing in every event is too much at this moment. It should have been more gradual. Instead, more should be done to improve conditions on the women’s tour.
Um… not optimistic as main tour does not have enough money or any aggressive reform farming money for their own(as inflation goes).
It is unexpected 2 finalists is neither of 4 tour players…
but they have a disadvantage, the world cup was too close to world championship.
Though Bai made some crazy performance, she did not win U21. (save power?)
Ronnie O'Sullivan 
Yes, the organisers worked hard and did a very good job with so many competitions taking place. But I would question the playing conditions, particularly in the latter stages of the main event. The semi-finals were played on two adjacent tables – with even less space than the Crucible. In general the table conditions were not helpful. Any tournament which carries a professional tour card should be played with cloths that come as close as possible to replicate tour conditions. This is especially important for women’s events, but there was a similar problem in the WSF events in Sydney. Players that did well, such as Ma Hailong and now Siripaporn Nuanthakhamjan, have a good tactical game but their scoring is questionable. More attack-minded players, such as Bai Yulu, were frustrated. Unfortunately, it’s a totally different game on the main tour.
The other glaring question is why did the established players Nutcharut Wongharuthai, Reanne Evans, Ng On Yee and Rebecca Kenna do so badly? I had thought that the advantages of full-time play and continual match experience against top players would pull them away from the rest of the women players, making them an almost permanent top-4. In fact, the opposite has happened. OK, there’s the table conditions argument, but perhaps playing on the main tour has wrecked their confidence, having lost badly in almost all of their matches? I’m pretty sure the idea of 4 women on the main tour (and not even the most suitable ones) isn’t the best strategy for developing the women’s game. But WST have cooked their goose: there’s no going back now.
Anyway, congratulations to the winners. It’s a major achievement to come through such a long event. We will see where it leads them.
I’m afraid that you may be very right about the shattered confidence and that I think Reanne realized that. She ranted about the lack of money for the women’s game and got a lot of negative reactions and abuse. People argued that she had no right to complain, being on the main tour without properly qualifying for it, and getting good money with the Mixed Double without winning much at all. But that’s not the point. She wants a more attractive women’s tour. Jason Ferguson likes to say that because snooker is not a sport that requires a lot of strength, there is no reason why women can’t compete with men. Well, I’m a woman and I’m not so sure. Excellent eye-hand coordination is absolutely essential in snooker. I believe that more men than women are blessed with that. It’s very apparent if you observe young toddlers. Little boys are, on average, better than little girls at games that require such coordination, like ball games for instance, whilst little girls, on average, are more advanced when it comes to language skills.
I still prefer the possibility of these women having a chance on the main tour rather than being restricted to the women’s tour. Incidentally as bad as it may sound, I’m happy Jamie Hunter did not win it, so it is not in the focus of comments.
They should not be “restricted” to the women’s tour, but they should not be on it if they aren’t good enough. They should get on it via the normal qualifying routes. It’s not doing them any good as it is, and it’s not at all helping the “image” od women in snooker.
But there are various qualifying routes to the main tour (age group, geographical location), so this (being the women’s champion) is just one of them. Reanne and maybe even On Yee are possibly too old, but I still hold out hope that one of these younger women can accomplish something as they are not yet too hurt by the very mediocre play on the women’s tour. If not, it will just reinforce what people already think about women’s snooker just by looking at the women’s game.
Yes it’s one of the routes, but one that is not open to all. Just women. And those women can go to q-school but never succeeded in it (so far), can play in EBSA and WSF events but never succeeded (so far). So we have now 4 of them on tour and there are people who think that, because the number of players on tour is capped to 128 (+ invitational cards) they are taking spots away from players who would do better than them and would be more deserving. They have a point. That said, a rating system like the one Lewis exposed on here some weeks ago would greatly ease the situation because it’s much more flexible and there would be no need to “cap” the number of professionals. Every sport is a number game. The more exponents, the higher the chance to see exceptional talents in the field. Visibility is essential to attract new potential players and having women on tour gives them visibility. But if they really aren’t getting any win, it only vindicates the opinion of those who think that woman are just not good enough.
That is true, but the age groups and geographical groups are also restricted to a certain category of players. I understand why people would complain that the women take spots away, also why a more flexible rating system could help, but as it is now: Reanne complains about the prize money for the women and it is indeed ridiculously low – on the other hand, given the standard of play on the women’s tour, I don’t think it deserves more. I know, they have the chance in the qualifying tournaments, I wish more tried there, visibility might help more women to consider it instead of heading straight to the women’s tour. Maybe a few years can at least result in some conclusion and if there is any truth in the idea that at least some women can be competitive with men, let’s hope this kind of visibility encourages them. If not – they are welcome to play in their own little tour, but it would be ludicrous to pour more money into it as it is just not attractive.
Some “geographical” groups have also consistently produced players who weren’t competitive on the main tour and many of those just gave up. Some “oceania/pacific” nominees even barely ever played at all. That’s not good either and it has attracted criticism as well.
Glad someone still dares to say out loud what most consider “sexism” these days. It’s simply a consequence of the way humans evolved that, on average (as you rightly say), men tend to be better at some things, such as hand-eye coordination, and women tend to be better at others, such as communication skills or multi-tasking. There’s an actual difference in brain structure that has a long evolutionary history. Of course that does not mean that women should not compete with men. In fact, I definitely think they should, and that they deserve every chance to develop the women’s game as much as possible. But it does make the question of what is “fair” a lot harder…
Actually I would say if women do have a disadvantage, it’s more likely to be strength than coordination. Even on faster tables, there are always forcing shots that are needed in breakbuilding. But I have no objection to women playing on the main tour. But 4 playing in every event is too much at this moment. It should have been more gradual. Instead, more should be done to improve conditions on the women’s tour.
Um… not optimistic as main tour does not have enough money or any aggressive reform farming money for their own(as inflation goes).
It is unexpected 2 finalists is neither of 4 tour players…
but they have a disadvantage, the world cup was too close to world championship.
Though Bai made some crazy performance, she did not win U21. (save power?)