A cueist strikes during the 4th International Ranking Snooker Championship in Karachi on Tuesday. PHOTO: PPI
Masih, who had beaten world champion Mohammad Asif on day one, started the game by winning the first three frames. But Aftab, who will represent Pakistan in the upcoming IBSF World Cup, bounced back to take the score to 3-1.
The fifth game was a close affair, but it ended in Masih’s favour, as he triumphed with a scoreline of 55-09, 67-01, 60-24, 68-70 and 68-57.
In the battle of the young guns, Mohammad Majid stunned Asjad Iqbal 4-2 in a closely contested match.
Majid built early pressure, winning two games with a slight margin, but Asjad drew parity by claiming the next two games with ease. However, Majid upped his game to win with scores of 76-69, 67-64, 15-62, 31-64, 74-24 and 63-54.
Meanwhile, another world cup candidate Imran Shehzad lost against Muhammad Bilal, who won 4-1 by a scoreline of 75-33, 14-77, 105-15 (70), 80-58 and 57-14.
So far, all the world cup candidates, including Asif have lost in the ongoing competition — the last tournament before going into the mega event.
In another shock result, Khurram Agha piped Abdul Sattar in a seven-setter as he swung the result in his favour by winning the decider by a mere point. Agha won by scores of 70-13, 42-55, 84-53, 77-54, 30-69, 36-74 and 75-74.
Asif shows move in pace
World Champion Asif notched up his second win of the tournament, after a loss in his first match, as he thrashed Mohsin Amin 4-1.
Even though Asif did not play to his best of form, he still managed to win by scores of 80-08, 61-24, 55-69, 68-11 and 64-40.
Youngster Hamza Akbar was made to work as he won one game and lost the other two. On the other hand, Mohammad Sajjad chalked up an easy 4-2 victory against Sharjeel Mehmood.
Published in The Express Tribune, November 21st, 2013.
Like Sports on Facebook, follow @ETribuneSports on Twitter to stay informed and join in the conversation.
COMMENTS
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ