ATWSC Semi Final: Stephen Hendry v Ronnie O'Sullivan

badtemperedcyril wrote:

Pink Ball wrote:Yes, Hendry was a great family man.

Not really our place to comment on.

Yeah, you're right.

Anyway, O'Sullivan has 10 votes so far, Hendry has five. This is pretty much the final, in my eyes. Should be a good contest.

Three days, four hours and six minutes left to vote.

Pink Ball wrote:

badtemperedcyril wrote:

Pink Ball wrote:Yes, Hendry was a great family man.

Not really our place to comment on.

Yeah, you're right.

Anyway, O'Sullivan has 10 votes so far, Hendry has five. This is pretty much the final, in my eyes. Should be a good contest.

Three days, four hours and six minutes left to vote.

Please, sir. May I have some more time?

Cloud Strife wrote:Please, sir. May I have some more time?

He really is desperate to drag it out for as long as humanly possible isn't he

Votes and answers in posts doesn't make sense wtf happened when the votes system was working there was 30+ votes

there's half votes in the answers

forum should have an option to make the votes PUBLIC so you can see who voted in the polls, really old forum this is

I don't generally consider myself qualified to vote in this sort of thread. But I will make an exception here and pitch a vote for Stephen Hendry. I thought this fantasy tournament was supposed to be pitting the players against each other at their best, no? Pink Ball keeps harping on about Stephen being nothing special after 27 years old. Well, then why has Ray Reardon made it as far as he did? After 80 years old, he couldn't hold a candle to most of these guys! As I see it, the thing is (or was, as it were, (could I get anymore forms of the verb "to be" in a single sentence?)) Stephen Hendry at his best was always there, every frame. Ronnie shows up whenever he can be bothered. And that seems to be most often in Semi-Finals and Finals (so good chance that he will pull off the win in this semi-final as well). His "best" is certainly not in every frame. The intimidation factor alone in the early rounds and the shorter formats have often seemed to be enough to get him through to those SFs where he will finally shine....for a number of frames at least. A single frame Pot Black? 50/50 between these two. Best of 9 or 11? Probably ROS Unless Stephen can keep him off the table. But in a Best of 35, Stephen Hendry will be there, in the trench, for up to 35 frames. Ronnie? Will show up for maybe half of them. A good session or two. And that is often enough against most opponents. It has been said before, Stephen Hendry is (was) consistency. Over 35 frames, I give it to him.

Acé wrote:Votes and answers in posts doesn't make sense wtf happened when the votes system was working there was 30+ votes

there's half votes in the answers

forum should have an option to make the votes PUBLIC so you can see who voted in the polls, really old forum this is

If you don't like the format, don't post, simple.

O'Sullivan at his best beats Hendry at his best.

Would be close though

acesinc wrote:I don't generally consider myself qualified to vote in this sort of thread. But I will make an exception here and pitch a vote for Stephen Hendry. I thought this fantasy tournament was supposed to be pitting the players against each other at their best, no? Pink Ball keeps harping on about Stephen being nothing special after 27 years old. Well, then why has Ray Reardon made it as far as he did? After 80 years old, he couldn't hold a candle to most of these guys! As I see it, the thing is (or was, as it were, (could I get anymore forms of the verb "to be" in a single sentence?)) Stephen Hendry at his best was always there, every frame. Ronnie shows up whenever he can be bothered. And that seems to be most often in Semi-Finals and Finals (so good chance that he will pull off the win in this semi-final as well). His "best" is certainly not in every frame. The intimidation factor alone in the early rounds and the shorter formats have often seemed to be enough to get him through to those SFs where he will finally shine....for a number of frames at least. A single frame Pot Black? 50/50 between these two. Best of 9 or 11? Probably ROS Unless Stephen can keep him off the table. But in a Best of 35, Stephen Hendry will be there, in the trench, for up to 35 frames. Ronnie? Will show up for maybe half of them. A good session or two. And that is often enough against most opponents. It has been said before, Stephen Hendry is (was) consistency. Over 35 frames, I give it to him.

Hendry wasn't not at his best after 27. That's a myth. He was just far, far less successful. There's a difference. His best was, more often than not, no longer good enough.

I can’t go along with that at all. Hendry still scored well but he’d lost his killer instinct when he was in his 30’s. Also, when he started having coaching from Terry Griffiths, changed his cue action to a long flowing action with a long pause, unlike the shorter crisp action he’d had in his pomp. Thereafter, his long game was always suspect, as was his ability to dispatch pressure balls. That’s my take on it anyway.

ronnie

Pink Ball wrote:Hendry wasn't not at his best after 27. That's a myth. He was just far, far less successful. There's a difference. His best was, more often than not, no longer good enough.

Fair enough. I am not wise enough to judge that I agree or disagree, but your explanation for the rationale of your vote is plausible.

acesinc wrote:

Pink Ball wrote:Hendry wasn't not at his best after 27. That's a myth. He was just far, far less successful. There's a difference. His best was, more often than not, no longer good enough.

Fair enough. I am not wise enough to judge that I agree or disagree, but your explanation for the rationale of your vote is plausible.

It’s also rubbish.

SnookerFan wrote:

LDS wrote:

Cloud Strife wrote:Please, sir. May I have some more time?

He really is desperate to drag it out for as long as humanly possible isn't he

Start the whole tournament again.

Yep. Re-rack it all

Ronnie O'Sullivan

The problem with trying to pick a winner between two great players is that it just can't be judged over one match. They beat each other depending on who is in form on a particular day, run of the balls and so on.

I think O'Sullivan at his best is the better player. I haven't checked head to head but he lost several times to Hendry. And other way around also. Certainly the 2 best players I've seen. I wouldn't call it over 1 match, albeit a make believe one.

Hendry being past his best by 27 is worse for his case than having to deal with stronger opposition is.

At 27 Hendry was still in his absolute prime. He won all 3 triple crown events in 1996 as a 27 year old. At 28 it all started to change though unfortunately :(

Juddernaut88 wrote:At 27 Hendry was still in his absolute prime. He won all 3 triple crown events in 1996 as a 27 year old. At 28 it all started to change though unfortunately :(

Surely that would just be reduced motivation more than lost skill per-se, just a desire to scale back the 110% lifestyle and get a bit of regular life into the mix?

LDS wrote:

Juddernaut88 wrote:At 27 Hendry was still in his absolute prime. He won all 3 triple crown events in 1996 as a 27 year old. At 28 it all started to change though unfortunately :(

Surely that would just be reduced motivation more than lost skill per-se, just a desire to scale back the 110% lifestyle and get a bit of regular life into the mix?

His 1st son Blaine was born at the end of 1996 so maybe him becoming a father changed things a little in terms of not practicing 4+ hours a day etc.
I just wish he would have won the world title in 2002 and won a few more UK championships.

Hendry

Peak Hendry beats anybody for me, yeah his record later on is disappointing but at his peak he was devastating.

He had almost every record in the bag and you wouldnt be human if the desire and motivation didnt drop off. Any pro sportsman will tell you how important every single % point is to win at the highest level. Hendry dropping 10% was enough with ROS, MJW, Higgins around. Then around 2004 he dropped 25% and it was truley game over.

It's definately around 2004 when Hendry started to decline, not this bull that it started after 1996. He was winning a ranker every season (apart from 2001) until 2004, and then that's when the first worrying signs started to appear.

But after 2004 he still reached a WC Semi, UK Final and won a final ranker in 2005, but he wasn't same player.

I actually do believe that someone who cried over losing to Robert Milkins in 2012 had lost all motivation by 27.

O'Sullivan wins by 18 frames to 11 and advances to the final.