Wyldecrest Park Welsh Open Final Discussion !!!!!

Caledonian Craig wrote:Centuries and maximums count for far less than title wins. I say this because a good number of players aren't so bothered about them ie Mark Williams who a lot of the time once a frame is won and he runs a little out of position he'll take on a trick shot rather than bother about going full out for a tough pot to make a century hence is relatively low century count but that doesn't make him any less of a player. Tournament wins are the acid test of a player's cueing, temperament, potting, safety, bottle and dedication it tests the lot and far outweighs the importance of centuries.

Exactly. Break-building stats are all well and good but they don't go anyway to showing how great a player is at the actual game of snooker. What having good break building stats means is that you have good cue ball control. It says nothing about your tactical nous.

and for the record early 90's wasn't a weak era...stephen hendry was godlike....just no debate

The standard overall without hendo was lower than todays players no doubt about that

Sonny wrote:

Caledonian Craig wrote:Centuries and maximums count for far less than title wins. I say this because a good number of players aren't so bothered about them ie Mark Williams who a lot of the time once a frame is won and he runs a little out of position he'll take on a trick shot rather than bother about going full out for a tough pot to make a century hence is relatively low century count but that doesn't make him any less of a player. Tournament wins are the acid test of a player's cueing, temperament, potting, safety, bottle and dedication it tests the lot and far outweighs the importance of centuries.

Exactly. Break-building stats are all well and good but they don't go anyway to showing how great a player is at the actual game of snooker. What having good break building stats means is that you have good cue ball control. It says nothing about your tactical nous.

yes sonny your 100% correct.

century records just shows you know your way around the table but thats all.

Sonny wrote:

Sirius B wrote:

Sonny wrote:Those who argue strongest against Higgins in the Ronnie v Higgins comparisons seem to also be the same people who think he should've been banned for life i.e. letting opinion get in the way of reason.
.

no,

i say john is better but i have never commented about bans

...then I guess it needs pointing out to you that you obviously don't fall into the category I was talking about

haha u beat me to that

GJ wrote:The standard overall without hendo was lower than todays players no doubt about that

oh yes the other players standard were lower but it wasn't a weak era

Sonny wrote:

Tubberlad wrote:

Sonny wrote:Those who argue strongest against Higgins in the Ronnie v Higgins comparisons seem to also be the same people who think he should've been banned for life i.e. letting opinion get in the way of reason.

Ronnie is the best artist ever, John Higgins is up there with the very best match snooker players there have ever been and that includes Ronnie and Hendry.

I'm not a fan of his at all, but John Higgins is one of the very finest snooker players there's been, and I'm very grateful to have seen someone that good, along with O'Sullivan & Williams. I still think O'Sullivan is the second best of all time and it's going to be hard for me to change that opinion, though another Higgins world title would probably have me doubting a bit. There's a debate.

That's it mate, it's all opinion. Sometimes snooker boards are just jammed packed with people obsessing about comparing players of different eras and styles and saying who is better. It's all opinion. I just enjoy watching good snooker, I couldn't give a flying rats bottom who people think is better than who.

My own personal opinion is that Hendry in the 90's was the most ruthless winning machine I've ever seen. Higgins is currently doing what Hendry did back then.

I think my main problem with Higgins, and I'm like a broken record with this one, is I don't see him hammering players. He's fantastic at what he does, but I just don't get blown away by it. Ronnie does so much more for me from an enjoyment perspective.

Sonny wrote:

Sirius B wrote:

Sonny wrote:Those who argue strongest against Higgins in the Ronnie v Higgins comparisons seem to also be the same people who think he should've been banned for life i.e. letting opinion get in the way of reason.
.

no,

i say john is better but i have never commented about bans

...then I guess it needs pointing out to you that you obviously don't fall into the category I was talking about

sorry dude, i got all self defense there

Does anyone think that Maguire can come back? Personally i cant.

Tubberlad wrote:

Sonny wrote:

Tubberlad wrote:

Sonny wrote:Those who argue strongest against Higgins in the Ronnie v Higgins comparisons seem to also be the same people who think he should've been banned for life i.e. letting opinion get in the way of reason.

Ronnie is the best artist ever, John Higgins is up there with the very best match snooker players there have ever been and that includes Ronnie and Hendry.

I'm not a fan of his at all, but John Higgins is one of the very finest snooker players there's been, and I'm very grateful to have seen someone that good, along with O'Sullivan & Williams. I still think O'Sullivan is the second best of all time and it's going to be hard for me to change that opinion, though another Higgins world title would probably have me doubting a bit. There's a debate.

That's it mate, it's all opinion. Sometimes snooker boards are just jammed packed with people obsessing about comparing players of different eras and styles and saying who is better. It's all opinion. I just enjoy watching good snooker, I couldn't give a flying rats bum who people think is better than who.

My own personal opinion is that Hendry in the 90's was the most ruthless winning machine I've ever seen. Higgins is currently doing what Hendry did back then.

I think my main problem with Higgins, and I'm like a broken record with this one, is I don't see him hammering players. He's fantastic at what he does, but I just don't get blown away by it. Ronnie does so much more for me from an enjoyment perspective.

Been a lonnng time since he blew anyone away mind ...

Anyway why does every match like this result in a frickin' GOAT debate, just appreciate the match and the tournament ?

Eirebilly wrote:Does anyone think that Maguire can come back? Personally i cant.

i would like to see mags come back but he isn't getting over the line in frames

It's been a long time since he beat anyone let alone blew anyone away. I didn't start a GOAT debate and I'm not indulging in one.

make that 2 broken records then ...

I'm not the least bit surprised that Higgins came back. If it had gone 8-4 to Maguire, I still would have fancied Higgins.

Higgins is currently the best player of the world by a mile. Only Williams could beat him at the moment in rankers but we all know he also failed just two months ago.

He is the man to beat at the moment - not the World Champion.

Tubberlad wrote:It's been a long time since he beat anyone let alone blew anyone away. I didn't start a GOAT debate and I'm not indulging in one.

I didn't mean you I just mean generally

Bourne wrote:

Tubberlad wrote:

Sonny wrote:

Tubberlad wrote:I'm not a fan of his at all, but John Higgins is one of the very finest snooker players there's been, and I'm very grateful to have seen someone that good, along with O'Sullivan & Williams. I still think O'Sullivan is the second best of all time and it's going to be hard for me to change that opinion, though another Higgins world title would probably have me doubting a bit. There's a debate.

That's it mate, it's all opinion. Sometimes snooker boards are just jammed packed with people obsessing about comparing players of different eras and styles and saying who is better. It's all opinion. I just enjoy watching good snooker, I couldn't give a flying rats bum who people think is better than who.

My own personal opinion is that Hendry in the 90's was the most ruthless winning machine I've ever seen. Higgins is currently doing what Hendry did back then.

I think my main problem with Higgins, and I'm like a broken record with this one, is I don't see him hammering players. He's fantastic at what he does, but I just don't get blown away by it. Ronnie does so much more for me from an enjoyment perspective.

Been a lonnng time since he blew anyone away mind ...

Anyway why does every match like this result in a frickin' GOAT debate, just appreciate the match and the tournament ?

Power Snooker
World Open
Premier League
PTC3
Sky Shootout

great safety mags

Look at his draws though. Look at the players he had to beat to win the Worlds in 09 and on route to the last two UK tournament final.

He won the World title 18-12 and this event last year 9-4, and apart from round 1 has rarely been in trouble this year.

I think its an amazing feat to reach the final given his farther passed away a couple of weeks ago.

Witz78 wrote:

Bourne wrote:

Tubberlad wrote:

Sonny wrote:
That's it mate, it's all opinion. Sometimes snooker boards are just jammed packed with people obsessing about comparing players of different eras and styles and saying who is better. It's all opinion. I just enjoy watching good snooker, I couldn't give a flying rats bum who people think is better than who.

My own personal opinion is that Hendry in the 90's was the most ruthless winning machine I've ever seen. Higgins is currently doing what Hendry did back then.

I think my main problem with Higgins, and I'm like a broken record with this one, is I don't see him hammering players. He's fantastic at what he does, but I just don't get blown away by it. Ronnie does so much more for me from an enjoyment perspective.

Been a lonnng time since he blew anyone away mind ...

Anyway why does every match like this result in a frickin' GOAT debate, just appreciate the match and the tournament ?

Power Snooker
World Open
Premier League
PTC3
Sky Shootout

Last player he beat in a ranker was Ebdon, BO5, and then Robbo killed him in the finals.
Last player Higgins lost to in a ranker was Davis

I wouldn't buy so much into the 90's being a weaker era. In the early 90's you had two legends in Jimmy White and Steve Davis still playing at or very near their peak then from 93 onwards you had Williams, O'Sullivan and Higgins on the scene winning titles and ready to win world titles but couldn't manage it. Why? Stephen Hendry.

From around 2002 Hendry's game has been on a slow decline as it happens to all aging pros and so new kids on the block took over but none of them quite had the total domination of the 2000's that Davis had in the 80's and Hendry in the 90's. People will argue that is because it is a stronger era but really? Ali Carter world no.1 not long ago, Dott making three world finals, Ebdon making and winning world finals etc etc

Reaching 3 world finals is some feat

I just think it's a hell of a compliment to pay someone that the only grumble they have with them is that they win so many matches by a small margin

what a shot mags

and another

Bourne wrote:I just think it's a hell of a compliment to pay someone that the only grumble they have with them is that they win so many matches by a small margin

That ain't my main grumble with Higgins

Go for it Maguire

it really is time Maguire stepped up to the plate in his career and needs a tournament win under his belt - can't see it happening tonight though. Higgins mental toughness will pull him through.

higgins has been in 37 ranking final ronnie 33

williams 26

maguire

hatas

come on magsssssssssssssssssssssss!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!