Post a reply

Re: Assuming a prime Stephen Hendry was playing today

Postby Iranu

Johnny Bravo wrote:
Iranu wrote:
Johnny Bravo wrote:Do you a comprehension or a reading problem ?!?

I clearly stated "EARLY 90S".
Since when is 99 in the early 90s ?????

‘99 is a harder era than the early 90s, and look how Hendry managed.

Yes, late 90s was harder indeed than early 90s, but Hendry did not dominate the late 90s one bit.
He was losing way more than he was winning, against the class of 92, especially in big finals.
99 was the exception, not the norm.

And 2010 is so far an exception for Robbo.

Re: Assuming a prime Stephen Hendry was playing today

Postby The_Abbott

The 90's were an odd decade because you had lost all the 80's icons and the class of 92 were still in nappies. Other than Jimmy, Hendry had no real competition. So its hard to judge as the Top 16 is quite strong these days in comparison.

Re: Assuming a prime Stephen Hendry was playing today

Postby sas6789

The_Abbott wrote:The 90's were an odd decade because you had lost all the 80's icons and the class of 92 were still in nappies. Other than Jimmy, Hendry had no real competition. So its hard to judge as the Top 16 is quite strong these days in comparison.

White, Parrot, Doherty, McManus, Ebdon and even Davis in the early to mid 90s i'd say was more than adequate competition

Re: Assuming a prime Stephen Hendry was playing today

Postby Iranu

Johnny Bravo wrote:Robbo's faced way better opposition that Hendry did in the early 90s.
Robbo would totally dominate that era.

Opponents crumbled against Hendry like they do against Ronnie.

How many tournaments has Ronnie won after three rounds of players gifting him chance after chance?

Auras matter. And auras are earned.

Re: Assuming a prime Stephen Hendry was playing today

Postby Pink Ball

He certainly wouldn't do better than he did from 1988 to 1996, but he'd have done a lot better than he did between 1997 and 2004. With the possible exception of Mark Selby, there's been nobody of the quality of the class of '92. Trump has the potential to get to that level but has a lot of work still to do, particularly in the bigger events.

Re: Assuming a prime Stephen Hendry was playing today

Postby Holden Chinaski

Iranu wrote:
Johnny Bravo wrote:Robbo's faced way better opposition that Hendry did in the early 90s.
Robbo would totally dominate that era.

Opponents crumbled against Hendry like they do against Ronnie.

How many tournaments has Ronnie won after three rounds of players gifting him chance after chance?

Auras matter. And auras are earned.

Playing against prime Hendry was a nightmare I think. He showed no fear. It was like he felt no pressure.

Re: Assuming a prime Stephen Hendry was playing today

Postby Pink Ball

Johnny Bravo wrote:
Iranu wrote:
Johnny Bravo wrote:
Iranu wrote:Even if that wasn’t bullocks, how does that affect him bringing his own A game?

It's way easier to play well against weak opposition, there's no pressure on.

So you’re saying Robbo isn’t mentally tough enough to deal with strong opposition. Got it.

Robbo's faced way better opposition that Hendry did in the early 90s.
Robbo would totally dominate that era.

Robertson's an all-time great, but relative to Hendry, he's a bit so-so.

I think your views on Hendry can be summed up as follows: you either dislike him so intensely that you can't accept how good he was; or you just don't know that much about snooker. Neither is good. Hendry has been dethroned as the GOAT but only by one player, Ronnie O'Sullivan. There's a case to be made for John Higgins, but he ultimately has not won enough, even allowing for the significantly higher competition, to prove his point.

Re: Assuming a prime Stephen Hendry was playing today

Postby Johnny Bravo

Iranu wrote:
Johnny Bravo wrote:
Iranu wrote:
Johnny Bravo wrote:Do you a comprehension or a reading problem ?!?

I clearly stated "EARLY 90S".
Since when is 99 in the early 90s ?????

‘99 is a harder era than the early 90s, and look how Hendry managed.

Yes, late 90s was harder indeed than early 90s, but Hendry did not dominate the late 90s one bit.
He was losing way more than he was winning, against the class of 92, especially in big finals.
99 was the exception, not the norm.

And 2010 is so far an exception for Robbo.

What relevance does that have ?!
I never said Robbo is greater, I just said he has a higher peak level.
It does not mean he can reach that level whenever he wants.

Re: Assuming a prime Stephen Hendry was playing today

Postby Johnny Bravo

The_Abbott wrote:The 90's were an odd decade because you had lost all the 80's icons and the class of 92 were still in nappies. Other than Jimmy, Hendry had no real competition. So its hard to judge as the Top 16 is quite strong these days in comparison.

Well said

Re: Assuming a prime Stephen Hendry was playing today

Postby Johnny Bravo

Pink Ball wrote:Robertson's an all-time great, but relative to Hendry, he's a bit so-so.

I think your views on Hendry can be summed up as follows: you either dislike him so intensely that you can't accept how good he was; or you just don't know that much about snooker. Neither is good. Hendry has been dethroned as the GOAT but only by one player, Ronnie O'Sullivan. There's a case to be made for John Higgins, but he ultimately has not won enough, even allowing for the significantly higher competition, to prove his point.

Hendry is clearly greater, nobody's disputing that.
My point is Robbo has a higher peak form due to his superior safety play.

Re: Assuming a prime Stephen Hendry was playing today

Postby Wildey

Johnny Bravo wrote:
Badsnookerplayer wrote:Robbo would not live with a prime Hendry.

Good player mind

Robbo is superior to any version of Hendry

so predictably wrong

Re: Assuming a prime Stephen Hendry was playing today

Postby Prop

Iranu wrote:Selby is the only player from the last 20 years who would be a great in any era.


Hot take. I’d probably give Ronnie that mantle way before Selby.

Re: Assuming a prime Stephen Hendry was playing today

Postby Iranu

Prop wrote:
Iranu wrote:Selby is the only player from the last 20 years who would be a great in any era.


Hot take. I’d probably give Ronnie that mantle way before Selby.

Ronnie’s not from the last 20 years!

(I know Selby turned pro in 99 but in terms of becoming an established player)

Re: Assuming a prime Stephen Hendry was playing today

Postby Prop

Iranu wrote:
Prop wrote:
Iranu wrote:Selby is the only player from the last 20 years who would be a great in any era.


Hot take. I’d probably give Ronnie that mantle way before Selby.

Ronnie’s not from the last 20 years!

(I know Selby turned pro in 99 but in terms of becoming an established player)


Ahh I get ya! I see what you’re saying now.

Re: Assuming a prime Stephen Hendry was playing today

Postby Wildey

In time all great players will be forgotten how good they were by future generations who likes to rubbish them against today standards.the fact is we dont know nobody does everyone can look brilliant with chances gallore what i will say without a doubt every single match Hendry has played on his comeback he had chances to win and he didnt really take them at only 25% his best he would have beaten them. Obviously, he would have had to be close to 80 or above to compete with the likes of Ronnie and Co.


Would Paul Hunter had been any good against say Judd Trump?

Re: Assuming a prime Stephen Hendry was playing today

Postby Sickpotter

Wildey wrote:

Would Paul Hunter had been any good against say Judd Trump?


I think he'd have no difficulty coping with Trump, he managed to make some incredible comebacks in the Masters against the likes of ROS.

Tragic loss, would've loved to see where his career would've ended up....virtual certainty he would've been on the all time greats list.

IMO prime Hendry had unshakable confidence in his game and a desire to win that would've had him with a similar streak at #1 now. So many more events available now I think he'd have had a title and century count far beyond what he did achieve. I think he'd be the first winner of all 4 nations cups such was his desire to win. :hatoff:

Absolutely fearless under the most extreme pressure......

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1BGxhNou420&t=143s[/youtube]

Re: Assuming a prime Stephen Hendry was playing today

Postby shanew48

Sickpotter wrote:
Wildey wrote:

Would Paul Hunter had been any good against say Judd Trump?


I think he'd have no difficulty coping with Trump, he managed to make some incredible comebacks in the Masters against the likes of ROS.

Tragic loss, would've loved to see where his career would've ended up....virtual certainty he would've been on the all time greats list.

IMO prime Hendry had unshakable confidence in his game and a desire to win that would've had him with a similar streak at #1 now. So many more events available now I think he'd have had a title and century count far beyond what he did achieve. I think he'd be the first winner of all 4 nations cups such was his desire to win. :hatoff:

Absolutely fearless under the most extreme pressure......

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1BGxhNou420&t=143s[/youtube]


Just imagine how many ranking events Hendry would have ended up with if between 1988 and and 1996 there had been 20 + tournaments to go at + the masters wasn't classed as a ranking event back then so add 5 more on for them he would have notched up an unassailable amount of ranking event victory's which would most probably still be a record to this day.

Yes Hunter came back very well for those masters victory's but the concerning part is going behind by so far on multiple occasions, so if he had given peak Trump a 7-2 lead would Trump give it up? has he lost a lead that big in a TC final ever? I don't believe he has but happy to be corrected.

Re: Assuming a prime Stephen Hendry was playing today

Postby shanew48

Sickpotter wrote:
Wildey wrote:

Would Paul Hunter had been any good against say Judd Trump?


I think he'd have no difficulty coping with Trump, he managed to make some incredible comebacks in the Masters against the likes of ROS.

Tragic loss, would've loved to see where his career would've ended up....virtual certainty he would've been on the all time greats list.

IMO prime Hendry had unshakable confidence in his game and a desire to win that would've had him with a similar streak at #1 now. So many more events available now I think he'd have had a title and century count far beyond what he did achieve. I think he'd be the first winner of all 4 nations cups such was his desire to win. :hatoff:

Can't agree that it's a virtual certainty that he would have ended up an all time great as he did metaphorically go missing for 2 or 3 seasons at a time without winning anything, not really a career trait that tends to players ended up on the ATG list unless you're like Hendry and have 7 years of almost total dominance, in that case you can have a mediocre few years (by the standards of winning almost everything for the previous 7 years) and still end up being considered right an ATG

Absolutely fearless under the most extreme pressure......

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1BGxhNou420&t=143s[/youtube]

Re: Assuming a prime Stephen Hendry was playing today

Postby shanew48

Sickpotter wrote:
Wildey wrote:

Would Paul Hunter had been any good against say Judd Trump?


I think he'd have no difficulty coping with Trump, he managed to make some incredible comebacks in the Masters against the likes of ROS.

Tragic loss, would've loved to see where his career would've ended up....virtual certainty he would've been on the all time greats list.

IMO prime Hendry had unshakable confidence in his game and a desire to win that would've had him with a similar streak at #1 now. So many more events available now I think he'd have had a title and century count far beyond what he did achieve. I think he'd be the first winner of all 4 nations cups such was his desire to win. :hatoff:

Absolutely fearless under the most extreme pressure......

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1BGxhNou420&t=143s[/youtube]



Can't agree that it's a virtual certainty that he would have ended up an all time great as he did metaphorically go missing for 2 or 3 seasons at a time without winning anything, not really a career trait that tends to players ended up on the ATG list unless you're like Hendry and have 7 years of almost total dominance, in that case you can have a mediocre few years (by the standards of winning almost everything for the previous 7 years) and still end up being considered right an ATG

Re: Assuming a prime Stephen Hendry was playing today

Postby Dragonfly

shanew48 wrote:
Sickpotter wrote:
Wildey wrote:

Would Paul Hunter had been any good against say Judd Trump?


I think he'd have no difficulty coping with Trump, he managed to make some incredible comebacks in the Masters against the likes of ROS.

Tragic loss, would've loved to see where his career would've ended up....virtual certainty he would've been on the all time greats list.

IMO prime Hendry had unshakable confidence in his game and a desire to win that would've had him with a similar streak at #1 now. So many more events available now I think he'd have had a title and century count far beyond what he did achieve. I think he'd be the first winner of all 4 nations cups such was his desire to win. :hatoff:

Absolutely fearless under the most extreme pressure......

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1BGxhNou420&t=143s[/youtube]



Can't agree that it's a virtual certainty that he would have ended up an all time great as he did metaphorically go missing for 2 or 3 seasons at a time without winning anything, not really a career trait that tends to players ended up on the ATG list unless you're like Hendry and have 7 years of almost total dominance, in that case you can have a mediocre few years (by the standards of winning almost everything for the previous 7 years) and still end up being considered right an ATG


I don't know if Hunter would have went on to become an all time great. But of course he would have beaten Trump on occasion. He obviously would have lost to him on other occasions.

Same with Hendry. Some days he would hammer Trump. Some days the roles reversed. Great players beat each other.

Re: Assuming a prime Stephen Hendry was playing today

Postby Johnny Bravo

shanew48 wrote:Just imagine how many ranking events Hendry would have ended up with if between 1988 and and 1996 there had been 20 + tournaments to go at + the masters wasn't classed as a ranking event back then so add 5 more on for them he would have notched up an unassailable amount of ranking event victory's which would most probably still be a record to this day.

The Masters ain't classed as a ranking event nowadays either, so wtf are you talking about ?!?
And yes, Hendry would have probably won a few more events, but not much more. The class of 92 was getting the better of him on most occasions, especially in finals.

Re: Assuming a prime Stephen Hendry was playing today

Postby Johnny Bravo

Sickpotter wrote:IMO prime Hendry had unshakable confidence in his game and a desire to win that would've had him with a similar streak at #1 now. So many more events available now I think he'd have had a title and century count far beyond what he did achieve. I think he'd be the first winner of all 4 nations cups such was his desire to win. :hatoff:

Confidence don't mean anything if your opponent plays at a higher level than you.
As for winning all 4 nations cup events, don't be silly, NOBODY in history can do that. It's impossible since all it takes is 1 match where you play bad or your opponent plays his skin out, and the matches are so short.

Re: Assuming a prime Stephen Hendry was playing today

Postby shanew48

Johnny Bravo wrote:
shanew48 wrote:Just imagine how many ranking events Hendry would have ended up with if between 1988 and and 1996 there had been 20 + tournaments to go at + the masters wasn't classed as a ranking event back then so add 5 more on for them he would have notched up an unassailable amount of ranking event victory's which would most probably still be a record to this day.

The Masters ain't classed as a ranking event nowadays either, so wtf are you talking about ?!?
And yes, Hendry would have probably won a few more events, but not much more. The class of 92 was getting the better of him on most occasions, especially in finals.


Did the CO92 get the better of him on most occasions between 1992 and 1996? I don't think the stats back that up but as always happy to be corrected.