Liang Wenbo v Ronnie O'Sullivan

i cant see hawkins beating Higgins some how. higgins is gonna be at least quarter or semifinlist

Sonny wrote:What? To beat Higgins?

yes you heard it here first

Sonny wrote:Definitely. Carter is going home

thats a interesting match but i think carter will have to much for cope it will be 10-8 or 10-7 carter.

Sonny wrote:It's going to be a cracker for sure and I'll be there for the first session. Can't wait!

Sonny - it will be cracking (and I will be there too, both sessions).

So ROS record vs Liang is good, but what has Liang learned from 2008 when ROS picked him off in the 2nd session (by leaving lots of longer range tempters from the side cushion, high level of difficulty). Also he should of learned from the Ding match last year......

..... me thinks Wenny is a very cocky player and will not have learned a jot from those experiences and will make the same mistakes again. Still, at least he has the China Open........

c'mon Ronster

wildJONESEYE wrote:

Sonny wrote:Definitely. Carter is going home

thats a interesting match but i think carter will have to much for cope it will be 10-8 or 10-7 carter.

gonna check the playing schedule out tonight. Carter / Cope could be a right belter. What I have found to to be the case is that some matches you expect to be real close or brilliant and it does not always materialise and others that you think will be crap are actually really good value entertainment........

wildJONESEYE wrote:

TheCleaver wrote:If Liang loses does he miss out on top 16?

Tough draw but will fancy his chances

lets put it this way he is not in a good possition to win another Ranking match this season.

i think there are plenty in striking distance that are in china and the World that will overtake him and he will finish 17 or 18 if he wont beat Ronnie.

yes your right Wild, so many people seem to stupidly think Wenbo is already safe in the top 16 for next season, Wenbo himself said after he qualified for the Worlds that he "was 90% certain" but youd have to assume he wont beat Ronnie plus he wont be playing in China to earn anymore points,

and with the likes of Dott and Cope playing in both remaining tournaments and with winnable games, not to mention the current top 16 players King, Fu and Ebdon potentially having 1,680 and 2,400 points to collect if they ONLY win their round 1 games, theres a lot for Wenbo fans to worry about.

Personally i think this strong R1 match highlights exactly why rolling rankings should be employed for so many reasons.

Ive major concerns the likes of Fu, King and Ebdon( i say this as an Ebdon fan) will survive in the top 16 again by the skin of their teeth, whilst Cope and Wenbo will miss out, despite clearly now being better players.

However i must agree with Monique, i feel this sort of game will suit Ronnie best as he will know he has to start the tournament in top gear.

He must be cursing his luck in the Worlds as that is 4 out of the last 6 years he has drawn the toughest of the quailifiers (Wenbo, Ding, Maguire twice)

Anyway, i shouldnt complain as ill be there to witness this mouthwatering clash.

Witz78 wrote:

wildJONESEYE wrote:

TheCleaver wrote:If Liang loses does he miss out on top 16?

Tough draw but will fancy his chances

lets put it this way he is not in a good possition to win another Ranking match this season.

i think there are plenty in striking distance that are in china and the World that will overtake him and he will finish 17 or 18 if he wont beat Ronnie.

yes your right Wild, so many people seem to stupidly think Wenbo is already safe in the top 16 for next season, Wenbo himself said after he qualified for the Worlds that he "was 90% certain" but youd have to assume he wont beat Ronnie plus he wont be playing in China to earn anymore points,

and with the likes of Dott and Cope playing in both remaining tournaments and with winnable games, not to mention the current top 16 players King, Fu and Ebdon potentially having 1,680 and 2,400 points to collect if they ONLY win their round 1 games, theres a lot for Wenbo fans to worry about.

Personally i think this strong R1 match highlights exactly why rolling rankings should be employed for so many reasons.

Ive major concerns the likes of Fu, King and Ebdon( i say this as an Ebdon fan) will survive in the top 16 again by the skin of their teeth, whilst Cope and Wenbo will miss out, despite clearly now being better players.

However i must agree with Monique, i feel this sort of game will suit Ronnie best as he will know he has to start the tournament in top gear.

He must be cursing his luck in the Worlds as that is 4 out of the last 6 years he has drawn the toughest of the quailifiers (Wenbo, Ding, Maguire twice)

Anyway, i shouldnt complain as ill be there to witness this mouthwatering clash.

4 out of 7 seasons as the first Maguire match was in 04. Also I don't think Wenbo was the toughest draw possible, top 3 yes but over the longer matches I think Cope and Dott are more dangerous (as highlighted in last years championship)

I know what you are saying about the rankings Witz, but depending on what happens in China, Ebbo’s match against Dott could be a winner takes all in terms of being the top 16. We never usually get a match like that were both opponents are after the same

Dotty

have to agree can't see higgins losing

Higgins is strong favourite to reach the final in the top half for me. And if he does I'll just be going like this

Sonny wrote:Higgins is strong favourite to reach the final in the top half for me. And if he does I'll just be going like this

Not if he beats Ding 17-16 in the semi will you

With Fu and King heavy favourites to win their first round matches they would do themselves the power of good in saving their top 16 status. Fu would go ahead of Liang and probably be safe whereas King would be right behind Liang and ahead of Cope. King also has a very nice draw for World Championships so it could be left to whether or not Dott/Ebdon/Hawkins can win a couple of matches in China and a quarter at Sheffield.

With that in mind Liang looks pretty safe.

Ronnie losing to Allen last year wasn't really a surprise to me. Allen was in top form and confident mood, while Ronnie had been up and down from October on. He was extremely inconsistent and extremely low in confidence, not only from one match to the next but even from one session to the next. This had be blatant in his UK matches in particular. And it was the case in the WC again.
This season is a bit different. If you look at it closely, although he's certainly got a couple of heartache defeats and isn't confident, Ronnie has made it to the semis or the final in every tournament he has entered except the GP when he met Higgings in round 2, "thanks to" the random draw. And in ranking events this season he's lost only to one player: John Higgins. With the exception of the PL final, all defeats came in very close matches also: decider in GP, decider in UK, decider in the Masters, 6-4 in the Welsh.
So, surely, Liang is no easy draw, but it isn't a very bad draw neither. It's a guy who plays an open game, someone Ronnie has played and beaten before, including in a final this season and in the WC in 2008. It should be a good match and this being the WC I expect Ronnie to be up for it.

Allen wasn't in top form at all he lost 5-3 to Swail first match of the welsh and he lost 5-3 first match in the china open to pettman so in the run up to the crucible he was struggling.

wildJONESEYE wrote:Allen wasn't in top form at all he lost 5-3 to Swail first match of the welsh and he lost 5-3 first match in the china open to pettman so in the run up to the crucible he was struggling.

Wild, it was pretty obvious from his first round match in the WC that he had hit form. He scored heavily and was very confident. I remember the match, the postmatch, and I remember the reactions of people on forums after it: they all said that with Ronnie's long game almost inexistant he would struggle bit time against THAT Allen. And he did.
He then made 4 centuries in beating Ryan Day and came back from 2-11 to 12-15 against Higgins. He certainly was in top form.

Allen was certainly not struggling in the first round from where I was watching (from inside the Crucible). Wild likes to come out with these guff theories sometimes just to be argumentative

Monique wrote:

wildJONESEYE wrote:Allen wasn't in top form at all he lost 5-3 to Swail first match of the welsh and he lost 5-3 first match in the china open to pettman so in the run up to the crucible he was struggling.

Wild, it was pretty obvious from his first round match in the WC that he had hit form. He scored heavily and was very confident. I remember the match, the postmatch, and I remember the reactions of people on forums after it: they all said that with Ronnie's long game almost inexistant he would struggle bit time against THAT Allen. And he did.
He then made 4 centuries in beating Ryan Day and came back from 2-11 to 12-15 against Higgins. He certainly was in top form.

in beating Bingham Ronnie made 3 centuries 140,104,103 and 2 90s 94 and 97 and you was not surprised that the Masters Champion lost to Allen ?????

Sonny wrote:Allen was certainly not struggling in the first round from where I was watching (from inside the Crucible). Wild likes to come out with these guff theories sometimes just to be argumentative

NO im pointing out between both of them Allen was struggling more than Ronnie in anyones book.

beating Bingham Ronnie made 3 centuries 140,104,103 and 2 90s 94 and 97

but your forgetting his head was right then but a few days later it wasnt

yes and people think Allen having seen him against bingham or seen the scores was more confident than Ronnie......come on get real.

wildJONESEYE wrote:yes and people think Allen having seen him against bingham or seen the scores was more confident than Ronnie......come on get real.

your spot on mate i think some need to take their blinkers off

I'm not convinced by this theory that Ronnie's "lack of form" is the beginning of the end. He won the Shanghai Masters this year, and on getting to The Masters final (asgain) he came within a gnat's sausage of winning it. Other then that, it only seems to be Higgins who keeps beating him. And Ronnie has made it close on all occasions, even in that memorable match where Higgins made a strong start and almost had him beat in the UK. (And remember Ronnie beat Higgins 6-1 in Shanghai.)

Ronnie may have been slightly off form, by his amazingly high standards and will probably not be world number 1, but I can't see that a trophy and an agonisingly close Masters final mean that he will 'never play in a final again' which I have seen predicted here.

He may have a tough route in the worlds this year, but even if he doesn't win, I can see him having enough to get past Liang Wenbo. And certainly having enough to win trophies again.

wildJONESEYE wrote:yes and people think Allen having seen him against bingham or seen the scores was more confident than Ronnie......come on get real.

Yes Wild, people having seen him play against Bingham will have known, as I did, that he was struggling. His long potting success was down to less than 25%. Which means he had to rely on the other guy to give him occasions because he could not create them for himself. Bingham did let him in and once he was in, his breakbuilding was deadly as ever. But when you know you depend on the other guy to give you occasions, your are not confident and he wasn't.
Allen did not give him those occasions, except in the first session. Ronnie was very fortunate to come out of that one level.
I think it's a few of you who should take the blinkers out. Yes Ronnie's standard is still extremely high. His breakbuilding is still deadly. His tactical/safety game is top draw - as good as Higgins certainly. But his long game let him down and that is a major problem. And, yes, it does undermine his confidence.

Monique wrote:

wildJONESEYE wrote:yes and people think Allen having seen him against bingham or seen the scores was more confident than Ronnie......come on get real.

Yes Wild, people having seen him play against Bingham will have known, as I did, that he was struggling. His long potting success was down to less than 25%. Which means he had to rely on the other guy to give him occasions because he could not create them for himself. Bingham did let him in and once he was in, his breakbuilding was deadly as ever. But when you know you depend on the other guy to give you occasions, your are not confident and he wasn't.
Allen did not give him those occasions, except in the first session. Ronnie was very fortunate to come out of that one level.
I think it's a few of you who should take the blinkers out. Yes Ronnie's standard is still extremely high. His breakbuilding is still deadly. His tactical/safety game is top draw - as good as Higgins certainly. But his long game let him down and that is a major problem. And, yes, it does undermine his confidence.

monique monique monique

he was not strugling more than Allen was he he had a masters title behind him going to sheffield = more confidence than Allen that is the thing not as much confidence as is possible for Ronnie.

bottom line was he went in to that second round with 2 tournament wins plus the league that season he had just produced brilliant breaks in the last 3 frames against bingham scoring 94,103 and 97 without bingham scoring a point so if anyone had confidence in that match it was Ronnie not Allen.

What is your point wild? Allen was playing well, Ronnie ran out of frames before he could get a big enough lead and took his opponent too lightly. Game over. Nothing to do with previous results whatsoever.

Sonny wrote:What is your point wild? Allen was playing well, Ronnie ran out of frames before he could get a big enough lead and took his opponent too lightly. Game over. Nothing to do with previous results whatsoever.

point is monique said

"Ronnie losing to Allen last year wasn't really a surprise to me. Allen was in top form and confident mood, while Ronnie had been up and down from October on. He was extremely inconsistent and extremely low in confidence"

considering the season both had how the hell did Allen have more confidence than Ronnie

wildJONESEYE wrote:

Monique wrote:

wildJONESEYE wrote:yes and people think Allen having seen him against bingham or seen the scores was more confident than Ronnie......come on get real.

Yes Wild, people having seen him play against Bingham will have known, as I did, that he was struggling. His long potting success was down to less than 25%. Which means he had to rely on the other guy to give him occasions because he could not create them for himself. Bingham did let him in and once he was in, his breakbuilding was deadly as ever. But when you know you depend on the other guy to give you occasions, your are not confident and he wasn't.
Allen did not give him those occasions, except in the first session. Ronnie was very fortunate to come out of that one level.
I think it's a few of you who should take the blinkers out. Yes Ronnie's standard is still extremely high. His breakbuilding is still deadly. His tactical/safety game is top draw - as good as Higgins certainly. But his long game let him down and that is a major problem. And, yes, it does undermine his confidence.

monique monique monique

he was not strugling more than Allen was he he had a masters title behind him going to sheffield = more confidence than Allen that is the thing not as much confidence as is possible for Ronnie.

Wild, he was struggling much more than Allen. He was not at all confident. He has said so in almost every postmatch since October and it is NOT playing mind games or being disrespectfull to his opponent. That's how he felt because he couldn't find consistency and his long game let him down. The Masters was three month before. Meanwhile he had lost in round 2 in the Welsh and in the quarters in China.
Allen on the other hand was extremely confident after his first round match. Go and listen to his postmatch again. Go and listen again to the interview he gave to betfred.

how was he struggling more than Allen i dont get that he won tournaments Allen hadn't ....

the best tournament by a mile Allen had leading up to the Worlds was the masters a tournament Ronnie won and then in Sheffield first round

Ronnie 50+=6 100+=3
Allen 50+=6 100+=1

so really it does not add up how Ronnie was struggling more than Allen.

Allen
welsh open= last 32
china open= last 32

Ronnie
welsh open= last 16
china open=quarter final

where does it say Ronnie was struggling more than Allen ???????????

Sonny wrote:What is your point wild? Allen was playing well, Ronnie ran out of frames before he could get a big enough lead and took his opponent too lightly. Game over. Nothing to do with previous results whatsoever.

Sonny, I don't think Ronnie took Allen too lightly. None of them played well in the first session. Both played well in the second session that Ronnie won 5-3. He entered the third session with a 2 frame lead and was outplayed. Allen won that session 6-2. When a player takes his opponent lightly he usually finds himself trailing and with too much to do. This wasn't the case here. Allen was excellent in the third session and Ronnie wasn't on his game when he needed to be. That's all.