Post a reply

Is Stephen Maguire an underachiever?

yes
6
86%
no
1
14%
 
Total votes : 7

Re: Do you think Stephen Maguire has underachieved?

Postby TheRocket

Prop wrote:No. He got what he deserved. Talent alone doesn’t give you the right to titles.

And if Mags has underachieved, it must mean other players have overachieved. Who are they?


You could maybe argue Dott or Johnson have overachieved but yeah its a tough one.

Re: Do you think Stephen Maguire has underachieved?

Postby Iranu

Juddernaut88 wrote:Yep he has underachieved. Defintely should have won more titles.

Based on what? His breakbuilding and long potting is good but his safety game is average and his temperament is poor.

Sometimes it seems like players are expected to win 15+ events as soon as they’ve won a few.

Is Maguire really much better than Allen, or Lee? I’m not so sure.

Re: Do you think Stephen Maguire has underachieved?

Postby TheRocket

Iranu wrote:
Juddernaut88 wrote:Yep he has underachieved. Defintely should have won more titles.

Based on what? His breakbuilding and long potting is good but his safety game is average and his temperament is poor.

Sometimes it seems like players are expected to win 15+ events as soon as they’ve won a few.

Is Maguire really much better than Allen, or Lee? I’m not so sure.


definitely better than Lee imo. Allen is a close one but some would say Allen has also underachieved.

Re: Do you think Stephen Maguire has underachieved?

Postby Prop

TheRocket wrote:
Prop wrote:No. He got what he deserved. Talent alone doesn’t give you the right to titles.

And if Mags has underachieved, it must mean other players have overachieved. Who are they?


You could maybe argue Dott or Johnson have overachieved but yeah its a tough one.


That’s true.

I suppose the distinction is to ask whether a player could have won more, or whether they should have won more.

Re: Do you think Stephen Maguire has underachieved?

Postby Andre147

I believe he has.

His main career failure was not winning the world title in 2007, he himself has said this.

Had he won that, I'm fairly sure his career would be crowned with a lot more titles. It wasn't to be though.

Re: Do you think Stephen Maguire has underachieved?

Postby orky

There is a case for this question to be asked about nearly every top player but yep, Maguire IMO is an underachiever. 2007 was important because he would have had too much for an up and coming Selby in the final and with that win he defo would have won a few more majors, if not necessarily at the Crucible. He could have been in the Parrott Ebdon Doherty bracket. Also if he'd have won in 2007, his temperament would have been better, no doubt in my mind.

Re: Do you think Stephen Maguire has underachieved?

Postby SnookerFan

TheRocket wrote:
Prop wrote:No. He got what he deserved. Talent alone doesn’t give you the right to titles.

And if Mags has underachieved, it must mean other players have overachieved. Who are they?


You could maybe argue Dott or Johnson have overachieved but yeah its a tough one.


To be fair, you can't really blame Mags for not winning The Crucible in 1986. He would only have been five years old.

Re: Do you think Stephen Maguire has underachieved?

Postby Iranu

orky wrote:There is a case for this question to be asked about nearly every top player but yep, Maguire IMO is an underachiever. 2007 was important because he would have had too much for an up and coming Selby in the final and with that win he defo would have won a few more majors, if not necessarily at the Crucible. He could have been in the Parrott Ebdon Doherty bracket. Also if he'd have won in 2007, his temperament would have been better, no doubt in my mind.

To be honest I could see Maguire doing even less between 2007 and now if he’d won the Worlds in 2007. He’s not exactly the most committed as it is, if he’d already achieved the pinnacle I could easily see him not winning anything for the next 14 years!

Re: Do you think Stephen Maguire has underachieved?

Postby TheRocket

When Mags and Murphy came through and they kinda did at the same time Mags looked like the more talented player to me. Amazing how things have turned out with Murphy clearly being the more successful player.

Re: Do you think Stephen Maguire has underachieved?

Postby SnookerEd25

TheRocket wrote:When Mags and Murphy came through and they kinda did at the same time Mags looked like the more talented player to me. Amazing how things have turned out with Murphy clearly being the more successful player.


Well, Maguire hardly dedicated himself to his craft - by his own admission. Murphy clearly does his talking on the table; I mean - you never hear a peep out of him between matches do you? :chin: