Snooker
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
A press conference has been called for 12 oclock to hear if Ronnie can be bothered to play at this years world championships to defend his title.
Who knows?, its just been one of Ronnies many games that seem so important to him where his cue does not have to prove anything and inaction gives him as many headlines.
No matter what he says today it would be really silly to run out and back him because his price will be far bigger on the day he plays.
Like most, part of me wants to see him there but another part of me wishes his actual achievements lived up to the supposed best ever.
He is not that, Hendry is..........Time for a good old fashioned row. We Hendry fans have the evidence, not sure what you O'sullivan fans have .......but it aint proof. Let battle begin
Who knows?, its just been one of Ronnies many games that seem so important to him where his cue does not have to prove anything and inaction gives him as many headlines.
No matter what he says today it would be really silly to run out and back him because his price will be far bigger on the day he plays.
Like most, part of me wants to see him there but another part of me wishes his actual achievements lived up to the supposed best ever.
He is not that, Hendry is..........Time for a good old fashioned row. We Hendry fans have the evidence, not sure what you O'sullivan fans have .......but it aint proof. Let battle begin
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 58
|
By:
probably retire again lol. love ronnie so hope he plays. link to interview?
|
|
By:
He IS playing. Confirmed. It's a shame I was hoping the tw@t would stay away from the game.
|
|
By:
Yes he will defend his crown.
Not sure why they called a press conference. Not even sky sports afforded the announcement 15 seconds. Anyway if he turns up it will add something but a fifth world crown? |
|
By:
moondan, your village called
|
|
By:
Eldrick, are you suggesting I am the village idiot
If Ronnie turns up and a qualifier beats him 10.3 which is not so far fetched, perhaps then you will concede I understand the game a little.  |
|
By:
While he may not win the worlds his presence will greatly enhance the event.Will be a massive buzz at 10am that saturday morning and would be great if he got a good run.Think the quarters would be a great result for him but Selby.Robertson and Higgins are way ahead of him as likely winners.Hope also he sticks with it next season,game needs him.
Welcome back Ronnie i say  . |
|
By:
thestunning,
Yes I go along with that, but not sure everyone in the game is happy about the lack of respect he continually shows the game. Its coming up to 2 hours since his entourage acted as if they were anouncing the second coming yet recieved not 15 seconds of live tv which did make the situation ridiculous and World snooker still has not mentioned anything on its website. I have little doubt a strong message is being sent to Ronnie that snooker is and will be alive and thriving without him. Snooker got over Alex Higgins and he was a much greater star and attraction than Ronnie ever has been. |
|
By:
Be honest,rather watch Ronnie any day of the week than Alex,that's not a slight on the Hurricane,but Ronnie is the greatest talent the game has ever seen,like him or not.In an ideal world i wish he went about his snooker life as Hendry did then who knows how much he would have won.Guess that's what makes him the enigma he has become.
That press conference was just a dig at Hearn i'm thinking. |
|
By:
The day he walked out midway through getting panned by Hendry in the UK was the day he lost any respect from me, the guy is representative of a generation who think the world owes them a favour. Alex Higgins was an enigma and a legend, Ronnie wishes he had half the enigmatic draw that the great Hurricane had.
|
|
By:
hope osullivan and selby are in opposite halfs of the draw so i can dutch them for fee
|
|
By:
free £££
|
|
By:
great to see him back,snooker needs him for a few more years yet
|
|
By:
100% predictable the whining little sh*t would play. It was a certainty all year, he just couldn't be bothered supporting the tour so he made up a lie about not playing this season. Hearn of course let him do what he wants, he makes up the rules as he goes along for anyone he thinks might pull in a few punters.
|
|
By:
Moondan, you're on very safe ground in saying Hendry was a better player than Ronnie. Not only did he win 7 worlds compared to Ronnie's 4, which is ultimately all the evidence one needs; they once played in a Crucible semi when both men were at their peak. The morning session on the Saturday was one of the best ever, with 6 centuries in 8 frames, including a missed pink for a 147 from Ronnie. The evening session was one of the most eagerly awaited of all time. Hendry hammered Ronnie that night.
|
|
By:
i think ronnie was at his peak a little while after that when he had the paul hunter hairstyle and hammered dott in the world final,think he beat higgins 10-1 in the masters final about the same time,early noughties i think
|
|
By:
2004 i think. absolutely demolished hendry 17-3 or 4 in the semi final. played magnificently that tourney
|
|
By:
cant wait to see selby grind him into the dirt
|
|
By:
John Lennon famously said that before Elvis there was nothing, if he had been a snooker fan I am sure he would have said before Hendry there was nothing.
Before Ronnie, we had Alex and then Jimmy but Alex only compiled about 50 centuries in his entire career. Its true that conditions were very relevent in the improvement in breakbuilding but the arrival of Hendry and him smashing the pack from the blue was the defining event in the modern game and while Ronnie would get more marks for artistic content his game has never been as destructive as Hendry at his best. They are both my favourite players and would gladly watch them put a 2 day match on every week. Much is made of Ronnies head but in my entire twenty seasons of watching him his head has been fine until his opponant stood up to him and probably because he had a very spoiled upbringing in an unconventional household, simple rules were not for him. As for who is or was the best, If you say Ronnie was the best then by the same yardstick you would have to conclude that both Alex and Jimmy were superior to Steve Davis but not even in a thousand full moons would you find anyone mad enough to even suggest that. Ronnie four world championship finals, Hendry nine. Not even a contest in the sane world. |
|
By:
I am not a fan of O'Sullivan but you cant automatically say Hendry was the greatest player of all time based just on his 7 world titles. Both O'Sullivan and Hendry turned professional at around the same age as did John Higgins but Hendry is 7 years older than the other two. Nearly all of Hendrys world title wins were in the time span of that seven year start he had over O'Sullivan and Higgins when competition was a lot weaker.
Who would be the best player if they played one long match at their very peak. I would say O'Sullivan just. Who would be the win more frames if they had to play every day for a month when they were at their peak and they each had to put up all their money in a winner takes all match bet. I would go for Hendry and he would hold his form and temperment for much longer than O'Sullivan would. |
|
By:
To give you an idea of the standard of competition Hendry faced in the seven years he turned professional before O'Sullivan these are the players he beat in finals during that period - Dennis Taylor (twice),Mike Hallet,Doug Mountjoy,James Wattan, Nigel Bond, Gary Wilkinson,Darren Morgan Steve Davis and Jimmy White. He won 3 of his world titles in that period before O'Sullivan turned professional and another 3 of his 7 world titles when O'Sullivan was still young.
When O'Sullivan began winning tournaments Hendry, John Higgins, Mark Williams and others were in the field. O,Sullivan has a record of 3-2 wins over Hendry in finals. While Hendry is first in century breaks and O'Sullivan second i think if you looked at the stats O'Sullivan might have more centiry breaks per frame played. |
|
By:
Paddletoe,
I do not accept that players today are better players than those of yesteryear, in fact you can put together an argument that says the player Hendry faced was more tactically aware and they played on conditions that was less helpful to the breakbuilder. Thinner cloths around the cushions and playing surfaces have allowed the ball to enter the pocket more easily than at any other point in the history of the game, running around off 3 or 4 cushions has never been achieved more easily than today. We put up with the kick today because going back to thicker cloths would inhibit breakbuilding. Bigger breaks is how the game is measured, yet that is hardly fair when conditions have altered so much. Ronnie is an exceptional talent but take away his ability with both hands then for my money Jimmy was just as good and in some areas better. And take away Hendry its likely he would be sitting with 6 world titles as Hendry shattered his confidence. Thanks to Steve Davis most fans have been led to believe we are watching superior players, having watched players from the middle seventies up to the present day who faced entirely different problems on the table I do not accept that in any way. I could name dozens of players from yesteryear who's game would have flourished on these modified tables and every last one of them could push through their cue just as straight as anyone today. Improvement in the game has been conditions led, super players have existed through the ages. The only sensible thing Steve Davis has said on the subject is that players have never had conditions as perfect as this. That for me says it all. |
|
By:
Very hard to compare players from different eras in any sphere. You need to factor in lots of things over and above the condition of the tables. But thats another debate.
My point was about just using Hendrys titles as an indicator of his standing in the greatest player argument. Hendry did not have to compete against O'Sullivan, Higgins and Williams for many of his titles in his early years but they all had to compete against him. Not saying Hendry was not the greatest. Mores its not a closed case just based on his titles. Hendry definately changed the whole game of snooker when he came along. The most significant player in my opinion for the improevement in the standard of snooker was Jimmy White. Without White, players like Hendry and O'Sullivan might never have got into snooker. Davis might have won most titles prior to Hendry but White was the player who got others into the game. The pre Hendry era of players have definately more personality. They played more exhibitions and unlike Hendry and O'Sullivan who had full size snooker tables in their home from a very early age the older players were brought up in a different environment. |
|
By:
The conditions of the tables 20 years ago may have been different but Moondan you said the players Hendry faced in those early years played on conditions not advantageous to break building. It did not seem to stop Hendry. He was simply in a different class to those players.
|
|
By:
Paddletoe,
We certainly agree on the Jimmy thing. When Jimmy met Kirk Stevens you always knew you were in for a treat. Both were party boys and while they put countless hours of practise in, a line, a joint, a pint was also plentyful. We tend to forget just how good so many of them were. Tony Drago was about the best potter I ever saw and he could make Ronnie look pedestrian. I just feel that we have belittled a whole generation of players who were snooker hard men when things were taught and done differently then. The other thing that gets me down is when fans think Hendry was a boring player, in the late eighties and most of the nineties he went for everything and potted everything, that is why Ronnie never won a world title in the nineties. Towards the end of that decade the champion went out of Hendrys game, perhaps burn out, where the intense pressure of years of obsessive practise and competition had taken its toll. I am a bit old fashioned, I do believe you can only win titles on the table, not have them bestowed on you by idiots in a studio who were never in the Hendry class. Thats insulting to what the man actually achieved, also to the game itself. Anyway its a great argument. |
|
By:
How many pressure clearences did you see hendry make when players were playing out of their skins,thousands of frames even when he was 4/5 frames behind he could still produce the goods.O'sullivan not in the same league as hendry under pressure,no one in the history of the game took out pressure clearences like hendr and just to top it off he made al those centuries.I'd have other players infront of o'sullivan under pressure at their best o'sullivan wouldn't even be in the top 3 and this is coming from an james white alex higgins fan,alex higgins may have been an under achiever but without dioubt a true natural genius when on his game.Who couldv'e beat davis from 7-0 down when davis was playing his best,i would say no one apart from maybe hendry,thats the quality of true greats,mark williams played some of the best snooker i;ve ever seen and under pressure incredible clearences against class players.Unfortunately for mark only lasted 3 years but on his A game i'd fancy him to beat all bar hendry at his very best and then of course jimmy white he probably played some of the best snooker ever seen in those finals with hendry.Who wouldv'e matched hendry in those finals as he did,i don't think anyone wouldv'e got as close white was at his peak in those finals and if hendry hadn't been around we could be saying the greatest ever.Instead he's got the tag of bottler which is utter ****,who would not have buckled with the barrage hendry was throwing o'sullivan and john higgins wouldv'e got murdered in those finals.Quite strange looking back through whites history you've got the 1981 final where he was potting them off the lampshades getting beat by davis only a couple of frames in it,then he had the semi final in 82 where alex beat him with that crazy clearence where white wouldv'e gone on to murder reardon!Ten years on he was battling with hendry still,white made the game what it is today along with alex they were true genius's.
 |
|
By:
I think Jimmy lost in the early rounds to Steve in 1981, sir, neither of them being seeded. I remember Doug Mountjoy beating Ray Reardon in the semi final.
|
|
By:
davis would have been seeded in 1981. might even have been favourite with no real dominant player in the post reardon era. pretty sure he was coming into it as uk champion from 1980
|
|
By:
Good morning.
You're correct, sir, Steve was seeded number 15 and defeated Jimmy in the first round. It worked a bit different back then, though, as the top eight seeds didn't enter the competition until the second round (last 16). Alex Higgins (seeded 4) played his first match at this stage, losing to Davis 13-8. |
|
By:
In those early days of snooker (say from 78 onwards)when snooker became almost as popular as football, its players as fawned on as pop stars and the century break was not as common as they later become its easy to think those guys were somehow secondrate.
Thats just not the case, the amatuer game was extremely competitive and far more people played the game than do today. I remember vividly when I first saw Jimmy white in his first televised match and he looked like an escapee from a Billy The Kid movie, there was something very young and untamed about him, his teeth slightly protruding ( later fixed ) his cue was his gun and of course he had that ultra bad sidekick Alex Higgins. Boring but lethal Steve Davis was to become the sherriff and Fashion Icons such as Kirk Stevens and Tony Knowles helped the circulation of Sunday newspapers with a girl on each arm and several waiting in their rooms. Quality snooker was not only restricted to the youngsters as Doug Mountjoy did 3 consecutive centuries against Stephen Hendry in the final of the U.K in 88. Much rubbish has been spewed about the quality of play in those days but having attended many of those matches live its complete nonsense. Matches did not go on forever and rarely did I miss last orders, infact some matches at the recent welsh open were of a much longer duration and of poorer qualty. A soap opera it might have been, but more popular. |
|
By:
1984 he lost 18/16 to davis jimmy purely through going for absolutely everything and inexperience,81 lost 10-8 to davis early rounds.
|
|
By:
Great dkiscussion guys. My own feeling is that Hendry at his peak would have beaten anyone else at their peak but no sportsman has provided more pure pleasure than Ronnie at his best.
|
|
By:
Howellsy,
Absolutely spot on. Ronnie might not have won his world championships in the 90s but he was at his peak then as a player, or perhaps its better to say he was the real Ronnie then, wonderous in bursts that will probably never be equalled. Ronnie has often said that he played better snooker at 16 than he ever did later on. I know exactly what he means. |
|
By:
I am the first to admit Ronnie can go on like a petulant child but for me he is the most naturally talented sportsman ever. The way he can play with his wrong hand is akin to Tiger Woods pitching up at Augusta and shooting level par playing left handed
Incredible to watch when in full flow and simply staggering how good he can play left handed |
|
By:
The Mod Father,
Thats difficult to argue with so I will let Ronnies own words on Judd Trump say it all, "it takes a great deal more than talent to win a world title." Ronnie is available at 8s for the title and while he has been puting in hours and hours of work on the table each day for months now, I think he will struggle to get beyond the second round and I would not take 50s for him to do even that, but something will be missing from the game if he retires but this time he really is living in never never land. But good luck to him and hope he returns next season with a little more humility and not listen to his own publicity because he has yet to live up to the hype. |
|
By:
I just dont go along with that at all,i will be amazed if he doesnt make the quarters at least.He was majestic not 11 months ago.
|
|
By:
Can i have 50s on him getting to the quarters please!!
While it will be hard to see him retain the title,he may just relax and be so fresh it might take him back to his very early days when he enjoyed the game so much.His presence will greatly enhance the championship for sure. |
|
By:
Hitman and stunning you might not have watched as much snooker as I have, but I will bet anything, that by the time you get to my age you will have.
One thing I have learned over the years is, top class snooker is played in the head and what Ronnie is trying to do is break every rule in the book and while his talent is beyond doubt, neither is the talent of the guys he will be meeting who in practice rarely miss a pot. Over the years in the modern game no player has defended his first world title and only Davis and Hendry have defended any world title. In fact I think I am right in saying they all got beat in the very first round the following year. Many myths have been perpetuated in snooker and none more than the first round is easy at the crucible. The history books says different, so-called shocks have been very common and there never has been an easy era in professional snooker, not matter what Davis says, even back in the 80s, in every season, he lost more than he won. He played in about 18 tournaments a season and in a very good season he might have won 4-5 the rest he got beat. Ronnie is a great snooker talent but it would be silly to say he is a great match player, if he had been he would certainly have equalled Hendrys tally. Every snooker player in the top 50 would fancy their chances against a player that has not played a competitive match for a year, whether it was Ronnie or not. You see what the head games did to Tiger Woods, they turned the greatest into the odinary overnight. Ronnie has never coped with those at the best of times and the first shot of any difficulty will be a disaster. Nobody has made the game look so easy but in my opinion not even three Ronnies could pull this off. I think its probably only even money he will turn up, a doctors note is far more likely. Love for you guys to be right, and if he did, it would go down as the greatest feat since Hendry dished Ronnie defeat to take his seventh title. Whatever goes on inside your head is soon transferred to your cue, thats why this game is so difficult. His head has rarely been in the right place and the odds of it being right in these circumstances are astronomical. Unfortunately. |
|
By:
I think a lot will depend on who Ronnie draws first round. If its an attacking player then it will suit Ronnie down to the ground. If its a slow,deliberate grinder then it could spell disaster for Ronnie.
|
|
By:
what ronnie is attempting to do is ludicris but if anyone can pull it off its him.
|