1.01 bust on the snooker

Amazed there wasn't more matched.

1.01    £910.00        £1,385.99
1.02    £1,084.42        £488.59
1.03    £809.04        £215.59
1.04    £675.00        £2,532.80
1.05    £490.00        £4,959.45
1.06    £459.04        £3,285.91
1.07    £59.00        £2,890.45

Back in the day at least 10k+ 1.01

An unbelievable miss on the black from Allen

straight black for the money

no

leave note to family, thought i had betfair by the nuts.  i'll be at the bottom of beachy.

Allen wouldn't miss that shot once in a thousand goes.
The pressure got to him and he twitched

a truly incredible miss..and it cost him the match

appens quite a lot "pressure" the pockets suddenly shrink and a routine pot that he would knock in 100 times in a row without thinking about it but the pressure gets to em.

the old saying looks  a penalty kick but in reality a penalty kick is much more difficult than that snooker black he missed ,penalty in a big match you not only have the goalkeeper to beat but also the opposing teams fans who are screaming and shouting and trying to distract ,the snooker crowd are silent as he takes the shot.

ALLEN had an amazing run of the balls all day till the snooker gods intervened and said enoughs ,enough

If you watch it back, he failed to actually cue properly, by creating a proper 'rest' position with his hand - it was almost a casual kind of shot style he used, as you might in a practice or friendly match - and it cost him massively.
This was pointed out by Kyren Wilson watching it on the beeb as one issue - added to the pressure of course on the shot, but I think he actually thought it would take pressure off to play it more 'casually' in style. A big mistake.

On a side note, just shows why playing snooker is actually so flaming difficult as a sport - and why I miss about 80% of my pot attempts, even easy ones, playing on a full scale table!

Agree, Stu. I used to be a decent pool player but could never pot more than two reds and a colour on a snooker table. So difficult.

technical pursuits like snooker, tennis, golf are subject to this sort of thing because you have to remain calm and precise whereas rugby for example, you just bash someone and get it out of your system

im world no1 at tennis knocking-up until the money is down and we have an audience and you tense up

We've all seen easy misses, through losing concentration during a break, or having to do something funky with the cue ball and forgetting about the pot - but a straight black off its spot from close range to win a World semi final? - i've never seen that before in 50 years of being a casual watcher of the sport

Too casual and no bridge on the table said the pundits.

He has potted that ball a million times.....no difference to a pro golfer missing a 2 footer....it happens. I don't think it was concentration, Allen would have been on autopilot anyway. That is why these pros are so good. It's natural to them. Jimmy White missing that black against Hendry years ago would be similar, no twitch, no lack of concentration, possibly a tad rushed but just a missed pot.

An incredibly difficult sport made to look easy by geniuses.

tad ott there^

its not a sport and i doubt theres a genius amongst them, let alone multiples

"its not a sport".......explain

"not a genius amongst them"......explain

So your opinion on darts and golf?

phag paper ffffs

this new censorship is nuts, possibly a i

same

Tiger Woods or Ronnie O'Sullivan not in the genius bracket in your opinion?

I very much doubt that Busy has even made a 30 Break.
A game of technique but even more importantly,natural ability.
You could practice for ten hours a day and never make a hundred break in your life

Or Phil Taylor?

Two 9 darters in a match

A 147 in just north of 5 mins

Golf played to a level where us mere mortals just salivate


Busy, you are a plonker at best

"A sport is commonly defined as a physical, competitive activity requiring skill and exertion, governed by rules, and undertaken for enjoyment or reward. Key elements typically include structured, objective competition (scoring) and physical exertion or athleticism"

Snooker very similar to darts - the key elements are precision rather than strength. It's debateable, but I'd argue snooker is even more about precision than darts - such fine margins for how the ball will move when hit by the cue ball, and tiny margins make it move differently so the muscle control has to be immense to repeatedly pot accurately.

Of course, that last one should have been a gimme for him still. But he must have altered his shot and arm/cue movement etc just so slightly as to miss it, from the millions of times he would have done it before on such shots. The 'rest' or 'bridge' of the hand could clearly have contributed to that (or lack of it).

In terms of skill/difficulty, snooker is on a different level to darts.

Absolutely,swifty

nelly simplistic. because there might be the odd genius in all sorts of activities, it doesnt mean they all are does it? all golfers immortal? 100s of em? you are a berk at best

and ironer. whether i could do it with 10 hours a day practice is irrelevant, and a diversion. few can but few get the chance or have the inclination. as it happens, my max break was 28 so you are correct

typical of the dismal level forum debate. few capable of rational thought or seeing beyond the obvious. everything is personalised, a bit like the 'never ridden a horse' non argument that gets wheeled out all the time

Snooker and darts are 65/35 games/sports imo. You don’t need any athleticism to excel at them like some sports stars.

HoratioNelson Joined: 10 Apr 25
Replies: 172303 May 26 15:29 
"A sport is commonly defined as a PHYSICAL, competitive activity requiring skill and EXERTION, governed by rules, and undertaken for enjoyment or reward. Key elements typically include structured, objective competition (scoring) and PHYSICAL EXERTION OR ATHLETICISM"


and nelly puts this up to support his daft argument. all it does is undermine it. what a plonker and plainly not a genius

Your highest break is admittedly 28 (mine is in truth similar) yet a man can score the maximum in just over 5 minutes.....would you not admit to that being genius?

I do not know about your darts prowess, I have never hit a 180, I couldn't even remember my biggest checkout, it's likely to be some double or other.

If you are under the impression that the likes of Taylor, O'Sullivan amongst others an Woods are not Genius's then that is your call.

For anyone to be at the peak of their craft makes them so, until they are toppled or bettered.

That is just how I see it however. 

We are allowed to disagree

Mitolo was being a pedant with his genius comment (even though he’s correct in what he’s saying). Taylor was a genius on the oche, Ronnie the same at the snooker table. Both would be unlikely to be anywhere near genius level on an IQ test though.

We are all allowed to disagree,Horatio,unless you attempt to debate with Delbert

snooker has gone back over,far easier than 50 ys ago,50/60 yrs ago centre pockets were there as a back up,roll ins etc, now their chosen/preferred to black spot  corner pockets lots of the time,now way were you hammering balls in to the centre pockets from tight angles 50/60 yrs ago,Taylor said in comms their far more difficult than centre pockets in your local social club,lots of people would argue the opposite

Taylor is correct,the pro table pockets here are very tight and the players have to be spot on.
In China they are like dustbin lids

I wouldn't call Phil Taylor or any darts player a genius. He simply had a relentless, metronomic accuracy which others could not match.
A dart board does not move, you throw the same three darts at it over and over again and your opponent cannot really affect your game as it's just you against the board.
There is very little to "reinvent".

You can make more of a case for Ronnie being a genius because he can make shots on a regular basis that others cannot. There is a lot more skill and tactics involved in snooker than darts, for a start you have an opponent who is playing the same set of balls that you are, you have to be able to judge angles, pace etc as well as what side or screw to apply for every shot you are playing. Darts is much more straightforward in that regard.

s.kenbo 03 May 26 18:10 
Mitolo was being a pedant with his genius comment (even though he’s correct in what he’s saying). Taylor was a genius on the oche, Ronnie the same at the snooker table. Both would be unlikely to be anywhere near genius level on an IQ test though.




S.Kenbo....Genius does not only involve IQ......surely being at the absolute peak of any sport makes you a genius because you are the best that there has ever been..

If you believe Tiger Woods, Ronnie O'Sullivan, Phil Taylor, Lionel Messi, Christiano Ronaldo, Michael Jordan, Mohammed Ali et al were not genius's at their individual sports then that is your call. I have no qualms with you disagreeing.

For me, all of the above are genius's and legends.

leave him out of it. nelly said snooker was played by 'geniuses'. and genius's. it isnt. one or 2 players of any activity could be but not multiples and not 100s of golfers either

and its not a sport. nothing pedantic about that. by his simplistic reckoning anyone with extreme competence has to be a genius. very few try to play these games professionally. does that mean there are millions of geniuses out there who dont even realise it because they are not exposed to them? dont fink so

magnus carlsen might be a genius but i doubt some he mentions are and it doesnt make chess a sport

Carlsen is a genius imo.

Chess is a sport.

Lawn Bowls

Ten Pin Bowling

Curling


Archery

Sports or not?


The list goes on

Genius is predominately measured by an IQ score. If anything some of those players are more like a savant!!!

They are superb at what they do. They excel more than anybody else in their profession. They’re geniuses at that one thing.

Magnus on the other hand is probably a genius at what he does, and also in the correct sense of the term. He’s one smart cookie.

So does IQ make you a Genius or being the best of something make you a genius....IYO?

An IQ above 140 makes someone a genius. 

Being the best at something doesn’t make you a genius imo.

surely being the best of anything means you have mastered that craft.....that surely makes you a "genius" or the best of on that front no matter what it is?

I see your point kenbo......being the best Knitter doesn't make you a "genius".......but when it comes to sport I just think it does.

It’s a word that’s always been thrown around, often wrongly really if we are taking it at its true sense.

Gaza was a genius on the football pitch. I’d happily take him on in an IQ test!

Very true

gazza wasnt very bright but his old man bamber certainly was so you never can tell

nelly. you aint finkin strait. the list doesnt go on, unless you are compiling a list of games

huge numbers of people dont get to play certain sports. a tiny number get into an f1 car but aficianodos will tell you senna was a g. but 5 billion dont get a go in the go cart. if everyone did and a million of em became that good or as good as the best we have does that make all of em a genius? no

who nose how many who never got the chance would have been equal or better than woods? that would relegate him to not a genius according to your metric

opportunity and work and dedication combined with talent dont make anyone a genius

gazza wasnt very bright but his old man bamber certainly was so you never can tell

   

And then Wize goes on to win the final 18-17
Probably the best final since Davis Taylor 1975

Davis Taylor 1985 obviously

Dennis

Today's Final standard was  light years ahead of Davis v Taylor