Snooker, boredom and extravagance

Watched O'Sullivan dominate the Welsh Open over the last week and a half*. Truly a great player, the vision and potting ability are outstanding. But what an arrogant, petulant little shit he is! Refusing a 147 because it's not enough money (again) and generally being dislikeable due to his constant bullshit. I'm annoyed that Neil Robertson folded so meekly in the final. Does he get much press in Aus? He's underachieving in my view, a great player who isn't winning the tournaments that he has the talent to. I fully expect him to add at least one more world title.

Obviously my judgement is clouded by clear dislike for one of them but I'm still having Hendry as #1. It seems though that most people are blinded by the cult of personality/extravagance (in my view) and pick O'Sullivan. Hendry is apparently too boring. But they all play the super attacking game that he perfected these days. Hendry just did it with cold efficiency and perfect positioning (so, no need to be extravagant) and without controversy. Like his fellow unfavoured Scot Andy Murray who's also too boring. But I respect these people over the "flawed geniuses". Cook > KP. Prost > Senna, Hill > Hamilton (if they were concurrent). It's a minority view, I know.

Maybe Robertson is too "slow and boring", as well   but I enjoy his ruthless efficiency.

*Had to watch this online, only available on BBC2 Wales. Apparently only Welsh people care about the Welsh Open.

Nah, Ronnie the GOAT. Even Hendry says so.

Every time i try to like O'Sullivan, he pulls a stunt like this. Could he not have potted the black and donated the proceeds to charity?

He is a complete chop.

He's averaging about 5 frames per century this year. Anything under 10 is considered world class and miles above what anyone was achieving in the 90s (even Hendry).

No one will ever dominate the game in the same manner as Hendry did in the 90s as it's too competitive these days, Selby, Murphy, Robertson, Judd and Ding on their day are absolute beasts (and even Higgins is having a bit of a resurgence). 

Hendry never won any majors once the 2000s hit, he was around 30 at the time I think. Ronnie has won 3 world titles and a half dozen or so Masters and UK's since turning 30 (can't remember exact stats for Masters and UK's and can't be arsed looking them up but he's won a few).

Did Hendry lose his bottle in the 2000s? Partly, he himself has admitted to suffering with the yips, which however way you look at it is nerves, something he didn't suffer with as a fearless youngster. 

Ronnie is almost the inverse of Hendry, clearly a ridiculously talented youngster (won something like all of his first 70 professional matches, or maybe 70 out of 71 and that 5m20s 147 is unlikely to ever be equalled or anyone even coming close) but he was a mad man with a drug habit, bi-polar, Dad in jail for murder, no temperament, no real safety game and just tried to pot his way out of trouble.

When it paid off it looked incredible and whilst he still plays fast and fluently he has slowed down a lot since the 90s and is a far more complete player these days. 

The prime O'Sullivan of the last 6 or 7 years would have cleaned up in the 90s and early 2000s (Hendry would still have won a few in the 90s of course), with his talent he should have at least 10 world titles and he himself has said that he should have 50+ ranking titles.

There's a great site called cuetracker.com and on almost every metric he is top, percentage of frames won, percentage of matches won, frames per century (although he is pretty much neck and neck with Ding on this though Ding is falling fast so this record should be his again soon), number of centuries, number of 147s.

He also has a winning head to head against every top player apart from John Parrot (!!!! ) but again this is due to him not being anywhere near to being the complete player he is now in the 90s.

But more than anything, he makes the game look so easy when he's in full flow, there's no more beautiful sight in snooker than seeing him in full flow, perfect positioning, century after century, just totally in the zone and looks like he's playing on a 6 foot pool table with bucket pockets. 

And he's playing like this in his 40s!

Snooker is lucky to have him, he can be a c*nt away from the table and whilst I don't think I'd enjoy spending time with him, from a distance I find his petulance quite amusing to be honest.

He's already equalled Hendry's Masters and UK Championship tally, if (being generous) he has 5 more years playing somewhere close to the level he is now (lets not forget Steve Davis made the UK final when he was nearly 50 in a competitive era when it was the longer format and whilst he is a great of the game he would be the first to admit he doesn't have the talent of O'Sullivan) then he should easily pick up at least one of each and then he's only behind in the World's, of which he needs two more to equal Hendry's record.

Personally, I think he might fall just short on the World's, not saying he can't do it but age has got to catch up with him at some point, but then again I thought 2008 would be the last time he won the World's and he is playing as well as he ever has (his frames per century is higher this season than it's ever been (granted he's not playing much so it's likely to even out)) but I think he has maybe one more world title in him, with an outside chance of getting a couple.

If he equals Hendry's tally of World's and is ahead of him in every other metric (aside from total ranking titles possibly, another 8 is possible but still quite far away), added to the fact he is playing in a far more competitive era in terms of quality players (check out the site I mentioned earlier if you have any doubts, list of players in terms of frames per 50+ breaks is 95% players from the last 10 years), added to the fact the f*cker can make century breaks left handed... Need I go on? If he does all of this then there won't be any doubts. He won't have had the same period of dominance as Hendry had in the 90s (unless he keeps up his current form for the rest of this decade but even for him that would be ridiculous) but he'd have all the records and to be honest you only need to have played snooker a couple of times (I play often although highest break is still only 40) to appreciate how he's something special.

But this is all ifs and buts right now. He could well lose the plot again and not win another title, in which case Hendry would have the better record (although not the better head to head record) and the likes of myself would have to use arguments such as the ones I've been using in this post to big up Ronnie as the GOAT. 

I think I have a natural affinity towards him due to similar life trajectory, I was a right f*ck up in my teens and 20s and only really calming down now I'm in my 30s so maybe there's something there. Can't comprehend how people get their shit sorted by the time they are 20 and just go from strength to strength from there (my sister is one of these people, insane work ethic and absolute clarity of what she wants to do in life (addictions counsellor incidentally   )).

Anyway I've gone a bit there, but I also watched most of the Welsh Open and I get so much joy from watching him play when he's in full flow and I just hope he has a few tournaments left in him, even at the Masters I thought maybe this would be the last time he played like this as he can't do it forever.

Robbo bottled it big time though. Worst bottle job since his Masters final with Murphy where despite Murphy playing well, Robbo didn't put up a fight. 

In fact Murphy might be the biggest threat to Ronnie at the World's, he's comprehensively battered both Selby (twice) and Robbo at the last two tournaments and Robbo will have some scars I would think.

Selby seems like the sort of character to forget (and lets not forget Ronnie also beat Stuart f*cking Bingham in the run up to the World's, an even bigger "wtf" than Joe Johnson's win).

I'm going to stop now, could talk snooker all day and I should probably get on with some stuff  .

Fück me, that's a lot! Still, OP was probably a bit strident so you have a point to prove...

Actually I agree with a lot of that, and I enjoy watching him play in spite of my dislike, but clearly our criteria are different. Obviously you're very much into snooker and actually understand it, so I can respect your opinion more than those who appear to be blinded by the story and the flamboyance and claim the sport will die without him. That's just cult of personality-worship in my view.

I suspect that there is a bit more to Hendry's decline, but he rarely interviews or bothers to "write" any books (I know he has, but decades ago). I recall him saying he'd be angry and sulk for a week after losing, and that children changed all that and affected his practice and so on. I have nothing better to do, but I am not having children for this reason, either they take you away from something else, or you don't allow that and you're thus a terrible parent which is not even a choice (I wonder why sportsmen have them so young to be honest). The yips may well be partly physical too in some cases, I'm not sure it's totally understood. Anyway, even if it's entirely mental, it's not a weakness, unless you also agree that O'Sullivan's use of a psychologist is also weak.

As we have slightly different criteria for greatness, we'll have to disagree. For me, talent and achievement are different and I'll fully agree that O'Sullivan is the more talented, but even you agree he's underachieved. Perhaps my reasons are similar to yours in that I am much closer to Hendry's mindset, so perhaps we appreciate those closer to our own character (I'm no less of a fückup though ). As I said, O'Sullivan is a brilliant player to watch, but I derived no less enjoyment from watching Hendry ruthlessly destroy opponents, or Davis laying a particularly bastardly snooker. That was never boring to me. Interestingly, Hendry had much the same early game as O'Sullivan - little safety, play quickly, pot everything no matter how insanely hard.

I've always played any game with the attitude that whoever I'm playing, I will always be as ruthless as possible, always try to dominate, be cold, calculating, unfair, determined, efficient, cool and unaffected by whatever the opponent does. I can take losing, but I detest it. So you're probably right in that we're attracted to those players with a similar psyche.

They both say each other are the greatest - only a boxer would be so arrogant as to claim to be the best. But I'm still shading it to Hendry on the basis of making better use of his talent, being almost totally uncontroversial and changing how the game is played. And I rate not being a qunt highly. However, it is pretty close even for me, especially after the last couple of years; you're quite entitled to go with O'Sullivan as you have actually argued the point properly . I'm just a little tired of RONNIEGOAT with no reasoning. I know people see him as an anti-establishment maverick, but that's not how I see him.

A lot of players seem to lack belief against him of late and just fold once he's ahead. And if they're ahead, it's like they can't quite believe it, and go to pieces. That and his outstanding recent form may well see him net the World title in a few months. Bingham certainly won't defend it. Maybe it will finally be a Chinese year but your Murphy call is a good one. He's not gone too far recently but neither has he been thrashed out of tournaments for the most part (as far as you can tell, as you know it's hard to follow the minor, untelevised-anywhere tournaments).

Minor untelevised tournaments like the Welsh Open, obviously!

Yeah all fair points. I think a case can be made for either at the moment.

I think a lot of the lower ranked players have lost before they've even started but then the same could be said about Hendry in the 90s, they both have the same aura of invincibility about them (despite Ronnie having currently achieved less) when it comes to lower ranked players. Higher ranked players too of course, Jimmy White imploded in most of his finals against him, but then so has every opponent Ronnie has faced, Higgins and Selby aside (won one, lost one).

That pink in 2014 still haunts me, but what I like is that since then he seems to have got the measure of Selby, I know they've only played twice but when interviewed I think he views Selby differently now, as in his tactical and some would say slow play (I actually like Selby and really wanted him to beat Higgins in their final, stayed up very late and enjoyed every minute of it) isn't a tactic he only uses against Ronnie, it's just the way he plays.

Might seem minor but I feel like a psychological edge has been lost by Selby and that Ronnie is up for the challenge as opposed to being frustrated by Selby, as has shown in their last two meetings. Selby didn't play badly in either but was blown away.

I'm tempted to put a couple of bets on complete outsiders, I know it doesn't happen every year but I don't think Robertson will win, unless he gets a good draw. He blows away the lower players but the last two finals I've seen him against top players (Murphy and ROS) he has bottled it big time and not even put up a fight. Beating Liang Wenbo in a final is a bit different to beating a Selby, Murphy or ROS.

To be honest, as long as it's anyone but Higgins, Murphy or Bingham (nice bloke but for him to be the one to break the "crucible curse" would just be ridiculous) I won't mind. Higgins is a top player but will always have an asterisk by his name. I'm all for giving people second chances but not when they admit no wrong doing.

Murphy I just cannot stand. 

Interestingly I used to an intense dislike of Hendry whilst he was playing and delighted in his decline in the 2000s, particularly the demolition job Ronnie did on him in their last two world semis. I remember upon hearing he was going to be part of the BBC commentary team being absolutely gutted that I'd still be seeing his smug face forever more but he actually seems like a pretty decent bloke and he's one of my favourite commentators now and has won me over.

I thought the opposite - that he'd never be a success as a commentator/pundit due to his boring, dour personality, and I didn't think it was a good idea, but actually he's not bad. One of the most wooden to start with, but grown into it.

I've seen him called Slowby, but don't let your opponent get to the table if you don't like his style! Perhaps he's viewing it as a different challenge. He's quicker than Ebdon was - hilarious that he was at that (shitty) one-frame shootout.

I'm still uncertain what to make of the Higgins incident. It's still an asterisk next to four world titles, even if he did throw the other however-many.

I've never placed a bet but I'd put it on O'Sullivan. The only reason against it is that he himself said two weeks is a long time, but he can play rubbish for the first week and still win anyway.

He's certainly the man to beat. Nearly went out in the first round of the Masters of course but as mentioned previously he has the best record of any top player in final frame deciders (which is why it annoys me when it seems to be a generally held opinion that he doesn't have any bottle because it just isn't true, he's just human). But that's the only time he's really been tested in the past two tournaments. He was 3 frames down to Robertson but Robertson did a Jimmy White after that, had good chances in the balls in many of the 7 frames in a row he lost.

Don't know if you've seen this but it gives an interesting insight in to him, found it quite inspirational too but then that's mainly due to similar circumstances in my own life:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HbIs8jb-Ryc

Also makes a mockery of all the ignorant folk who say "He's just naturally talented, he doesn't even have to practice". The guy practices obsessively and has done since he was a teen, when you hear him talk about how he watched Steve Davis videos and copied every single aspect of his play, the way he stood, the way he walked, everything, I think that puts it all to rest. Funniest moment is an interview when he's 10 and he is asked how big he wants to be (implying how big in snooker) and he answers "About 5"10".

And it's a shame about Higgins really. His argument does actually sound convincing, if you're in a hotel room in Russia with people who you genuinely believe could threaten you then if you fear for your safety and it's easier to lie and then get the f*ck out as opposed to take the moral high ground, wouldn't you? Should be noted that apparently he didn't throw the frames he agreed to in that meeting either and I don't think there's a player on the circuit who didn't support him. 

But the video isn't pretty viewing even with all of the above in mind... But then again it was a NOTW sting and they were the lowest of the low.


Booked a ticket for 2nd round of the crucible this year, went once in 2008, was treated to a final frame decider and by f*ck it was tense, Jamie Cope and Ebdon I believe it was. Can't really describe how tense it feels being there as opposed to watching it on the TV, amazing how the players hold it together and you understand when under that pressure how Davis could miss that cut in 1985 or how Hendry could miss that respotted black in 1998 in the Masters. The tension is insane, and that's just as a spectator.

Anyway the draw hasn't been decided yet but where my seat is situated I should have a view of two tables so assuming he gets past the first round I make that a 1 in 4 chance of seeing a bit of ROS, probably only a few years of him left at his prime and I'd like to see him in tournament play as haven't seen him live before. Unfortunately I did book the final session of the match so if it is his match I hope he doesn't play too well or there might not be a final session   .

And I initially thought the same about Hendry which is why I was dismayed at his inclusion but (as with Davis) being one of the game's greats his knowledge is pretty much second to none and it's always funny if he disagrees with the likes of Thorne or Taylor and is inevitably proven right time after time.

Taylor is the worst commentator, always calls the situation wrong and then has to correct himself "Oh no I think he can't see the red, oh wait yes he can" "Oh no the white is going straight in the middle is it, no it's not it's fine". Wait until the balls have stopped moving to call it man!

Bring back Klam!

Aye hope all ok

Hello Lara Lara Laughs, horace and all other posters

Poster Klamsson recently requested to be deleted. I urged him to reconsider but he declined. It appeared to be merely a matter of lack of visits and loss of interest.

Regards

Fromage

Frenchy Cheesey Qunty Person

Can I request that horace be deleted?

Thank you for the update..

embee wrote:Frenchy Cheesey Qunty Person

Can I request that horace be deleted?

Must be hard to be a WASP and Tiger fan of the die hard persuasion

Cheer up Embee. There is always next year/decade/century.

I will be here to cheer on their achievements..

And I thought it was Smerky (half-)back ...

Shame about the Klam. Beginning of the End???

skully wrote:Shame about the Klam. Beginning of the End???

Aye re the klam. Hope he returns. Hope it is not the end. Even Mudge seems to be away atm.

Hope it is not all Skullys fault, though it may be. Personally I blame the BNLG. He hs responsibility to spare, given he takes none for the WASPs failure.

Finally find someone on here who is as big a fan of snooker as me and wants to chat about it and he leaves   .

Still, much more importantly I hope he is okay and if you're reading this Klam, all the best mate.

Crying shame really. Especially after a brief period of posting. Oh well. Another bites the dust.

Gah, I was thinking about posting a pretty substantial reply on this thread but didn't get around to it. I hope lack of interest in conversation starters such as this wasn't one of the reasons why he left. I know he'd mentioned experiences with depression in the past so hope it's nothing to do with that and he is ok.

I don't see why you'd delete though. Why not just leave it and come back when you feel like it. I don't care how small and quiet we get, I hope people will still come here forever.

Such a shame. So many have gone now. Facebook killed the forum scene it seems, bar some of the huge ones. I'm not even on fb anymore and haven't been for years and years. Damn facebook destroying communities like a digital Thatcher.

Not dead yet. People come and go.

As a now predominantly English and Australian forum, it is not surprising that activity peaks during Ashes series and other series involving our countries, and wanes when there is no decent cricket on. Taipan, furry and trike, and Bucky still carry the flag bravely for other countries!

It kills me that merlin is probably knee-deep in ridiculous arguments on facebook when he could be knee-deep in them here. Has Planetpakistan gone now too?

I particularly miss peterg and ten years after's posts. They were brilliant, both of them.

I'm with LLL. I can't quite understand why Klam would want to be deleted when he can just be dormant and come back if his enthusiasm rises.

I do remember him changing his ID to include weird characters (letters with dots and slashes) and going "Doh!!" at the difficulty in typing his new ID. Perhaps he is looking for a clean slate if he comes back?