Start winning at 18, or you'll never be a great?

So you think a 5 time world champ would rate below a 0 time world champ in the legend status ?

Hard to take your argument seriously when you've clearly got a bias against Robbo

Jimmy White was a wonderful player, and still ranks comfortably ahead of Robertson for me in the all time standing. However, I think given time he can put this in it's place and overtake him.

GrumpyMrDavros wrote:

thetubberlad wrote:

wildLOVESWAGNER wrote:witz

if he wins another 5 WC he will pass water all over Jimmy as a Legend.

1 UK ,1 Masters and 6 WC Finals

compared to Robbo 6 Times World Champion.

dont ruin a good argument talking balls ffs.

Absolutely spot on

If I could make a prediction at this stage, I reckon Robbo will win around 11 or 12 rankers, including two worlds. Legend written all over if he manages that.

It would hardly qualify him as a legend though . By that time Ronnie will have effectively retired , Higgins would be way past his best and I can't see the likes of Ding , McGuire , Murphy etc exactly dominating the next ten years and lets get things in to perspective

Dott has made three finals , one it once as have Ebdon and Doherty . They did it during or just after the most competitive of era the game will ever see but are they legends in the way Reardon , Davis , Hendry and perhaps White were ? Probably not

at last theres someone else out there who sees things in black and white without needing to tow the party line A great comparison youve made with the cases of Dott, Doherty and Ebdon who have achieved more than Robbo and in a harder era but dont quite qualify as true greats.

Tubber seems to think one more worlds (in a very transitional phase of snooker) would be enough for Robbo to be classed as a legend / great of the game.

Ok, maybe when i said if he won 5 Worlds he still wouldnt i was exaggerating but IMO even if he did do that, he wouldnt be close to Jimmy

Just because I'm disagreeing with you doesn't mean I'm towing a party line. I'm very honest in what I write.

Is it really a transitional phase for snooker? O'Sullivan is still playing pretty well, Higgins was playing the best snooker in the world until the World Championship, Murphy has been around a few years, as have Ding and Selby. Williams is moving back up, Carter is playing well, Allen has a lot of potential, Trump has a lot of potential. We have the potential for a pretty strong era ahead, it just won't be early noughties standard, that's all.

If Robertson wins two or three world titles, and twelve or so rankers, yeah, I'll definitely put him ahead of White. I have no bad feeling towards White, I count him as one of my heroes, a wonderful snooker player and a great guy who did so, so much for the game. But the reality is, Robertson is capable of overtaking him. It won't happen today or tomorrow, but Robertson is good enough.

Thats a first

me towing the party Line.

bucking hell

robbo will be ahead of choker white very soon when he adds to his world title

poor old jimmy will always be stuck on 0 world titles

witz

GJtheaussiestud wrote:robbo will be ahead of choker white very soon when he adds to his world title

poor old jimmy will always be stuck on 0 world titles

witz

In defence of White he made his first world semi in 1983 . His last WC semi was in 1994 . Ten years after that he won his last ranking tournament . He was unlucky to come in to the game during Davis and Hendry being at their peaks and one can't help wondering how he would have done if he was born 15 years later ?

GrumpyMrDavros wrote:

GJtheaussiestud wrote:robbo will be ahead of choker white very soon when he adds to his world title

poor old jimmy will always be stuck on 0 world titles

witz

In defence of White he made his first world semi in 1983 . His last WC semi was in 1994 . Ten years after that he won his last ranking tournament . He was unlucky to come in to the game during Davis and Hendry being at their peaks and one can't help wondering how he would have done if he was born 15 years later ?

Not better, probably worse. He would have come across Hendry, still very much there (in1998 he was only 29) and the trio ROS-Higgins-Williams.

Monique wrote:

GrumpyMrDavros wrote:

GJtheaussiestud wrote:robbo will be ahead of choker white very soon when he adds to his world title

poor old jimmy will always be stuck on 0 world titles

witz

In defence of White he made his first world semi in 1983 . His last WC semi was in 1994 . Ten years after that he won his last ranking tournament . He was unlucky to come in to the game during Davis and Hendry being at their peaks and one can't help wondering how he would have done if he was born 15 years later ?

Not better, probably worse. He would have come across Hendry, still very much there (in1998 he was only 29) and the trio ROS-Higgins-Williams.

i think hes showed enough against young players this past season to suggest he would have had a equal career if not better definitely not worst.

I do think it's unfair the way White is regarded as a choker over that miss in the 94 Final just because Hendry went and punished him for it. In the last few years we've had finals that have been full of easy misses and wasted chances, the difference is that the other player wasn't taking advantage.

With Trump the big reason people have a go at him is probably because he qualified for the World Championship at such a young age. If he was good enough at 17 then he shouldn't be missing out at 18, 19 or 20. Someone like Robertson could be called a late developer but it's harder to say that about Trump.

wildLOVESWAGNER wrote:

Monique wrote:

GrumpyMrDavros wrote:

GJtheaussiestud wrote:robbo will be ahead of choker white very soon when he adds to his world title

poor old jimmy will always be stuck on 0 world titles

witz

In defence of White he made his first world semi in 1983 . His last WC semi was in 1994 . Ten years after that he won his last ranking tournament . He was unlucky to come in to the game during Davis and Hendry being at their peaks and one can't help wondering how he would have done if he was born 15 years later ?

Not better, probably worse. He would have come across Hendry, still very much there (in1998 he was only 29) and the trio ROS-Higgins-Williams.

i think hes showed enough against young players this past season to suggest he would have had a equal career if not better definitely not worst.

Which "young players"? Any of them near to the standard of the big four? I don't think so. MrGrumpy said "15 years later". That brings him right in the strongest era snooker has known, 1996-2005. Yes, he would have been worse. I don't think he would even have made a single WC final.

I agree with mon, Ronnie would have beaten him every match.

Bourne wrote:I agree with mon, Ronnie would have beaten him every match.

Don't be stupid. Hendry, Higgins, Williams and Ronnie would have barred him. The four of them. Not to mention Ebdon and Doherty. Both maybe not as scintillating as Jimmy but with a much better work ethic and willpower.

Monique wrote:

GrumpyMrDavros wrote:

GJtheaussiestud wrote:robbo will be ahead of choker white very soon when he adds to his world title

poor old jimmy will always be stuck on 0 world titles

witz

In defence of White he made his first world semi in 1983 . His last WC semi was in 1994 . Ten years after that he won his last ranking tournament . He was unlucky to come in to the game during Davis and Hendry being at their peaks and one can't help wondering how he would have done if he was born 15 years later ?

Not better, probably worse. He would have come across Hendry, still very much there (in1998 he was only 29) and the trio ROS-Higgins-Williams.

Well he thrashed hendry in 98.

As regards to Dohert and Robbo. They have both won 5 rankers and 1 world title

Guys its all speculation we do not know how Successful Jimmy would have been this Decade its just Persanal Opinion and no Proof to go by.

i think Jimmy at his best was as good as anyone like Sonny Said but he was at the right place at the wrong time so often.

wildLOVESWAGNER wrote:Guys its all speculation we do not know how Successful Jimmy would have been this Decade its just Persanal Opinion and no Proof to go by.

i think Jimmy at his best was as good as anyone like Sonny Said but he was at the right place at the wrong time so often.

Exactly my point . He'd have turned pro in 1995 at 19 and still merely been 29 in 2005 , When he was 29 in 1990 he made several consecutive WC finals in amongst winningother ranking tournaments . I wasn't purposely opening the can of worms about standards in different eras , though if you compare an on form Jimmy White in the 1990s compared to the rather dire finals we've had between Dott and Ebdon and this years final ....

I think many here are underestimating Jimmy's ability.

Jimmy in his prime has had to deal with 3 legends....Alex Higgins, Steve Davis and Stephen Hendry and he still managed a very respectable title haul.

IMO Jimmy was instrumental in the development of the modern day aggressive style of play. He played that way during an era that didn't favor that playing style at all and did quite well.

Jimmy and Ronnie often practice together and there are many tales of the two just trading centuries. The best I had heard of is a best of 9 match going to Jimmy. Jimmy had 5 tons, Ronnie 4. That's phenominal play by any standards and this happened while he was well past his prime.

White is just plain unlucky not two have 2, perhaps even 3 World titles to his name.

Throughout all his heartbreaking final loses and many career up and downs Jimmy has remained one of the classiest acts the game has ever seen. Longevity in the game, impecabble sportsmanship, pure dedication to the game and fans he loves, 6 world finals + 10 ranking titles cements Jimmy in Legend status as far as I'm concerned.

We may never know for sure how Jimmy would've fared if he was just hitting his prime now but knowing Jimmy's game and today's players I'd bet my house he'd win at least one WC if not multiple.

sickpotter, I don't underestimate Jimmy's ability. He's a tremendous player on his day, who can execute shots others don't. At times it's very clear how the fact that he was also a good billiards player enriches his snooker "weaponry". He's wonderful to watch when in the zone and the passion he still has for the game worth the uttermost respect.
What I doubt though is that Jimmy in another era would have been any different than the Jimmy we know. Jimmy was and still is a maverick. He lived a life that was very full but certainly not disciplined. THAT was his undoing on many occasions, not his lack of ability. And the more professional the game became, the bigger the the handicap.
That hasn't changed and that's why I think he would certainly not win more today than he did in the past.
Actually I think Jimmy would have won more if he had come into the game 10 years before, not 15 years later. And he would have been a booster just like Alex was.

Monique

you BADLY underestimate Steve Davis and Stephen Hendry then because they were his Undoing more than anything else.

wildLOVESWAGNER wrote:Monique

you BADLY underestimate Steve Davis and Stephen Hendry then because they were his Undoing more than anything else.

No Wild, I don't. But even them didn't win all the time. Nobody does. Parrot won a WC during Hendry's dominance - beating Jimmy - and I rate Jimmy as a player as better, pure ability wise, than him. And Hendry was still winning a lot during the "big four" time, he made 24 ranking finals and won 11, but he couldn't dominate anymore. Titles were shared and not because he was past it - at 27-33 he certainly wasn't and the way he won the 1999 WC and reached the 2002 final proves it - but because there were several other players who were his match. You are deluded and you want to be deluded.
Jimmy should have won at least one WC against Hendry and I'm sure you know it. But not after he went on a bender in the night between the second and third session, no way... that "incident" perfectly illustrates my point. I will never brand Jimmy a choker but I will certainly brand him a maverick and I think himself would agree.

point i was making i dont think anyone Today plays the game any better than Jimmy did in the early 80s(82 time).

his lack off success if you can call it lack of success in the 80s was down to the type of players he had to play real tough Grinders...

if Jimmy was a young Player of 21 or 22 with how the game is played today he would find it easier and to his liking than he did in the 80s at that age.

thats not to say standards are higher or lower just different.

GJtheaussiestud wrote:robbo will be ahead of choker white very soon when he adds to his world title

poor old jimmy will always be stuck on 0 world titles

witz

Now that's unfair

Jimmy did choke in 1994, certainly, and 1992 aswell, but it doesn't make him a bad player. In fact, he was an exceptional player who was unluck to come up against the best man to ever pick up a cue.

To be honest, White came agonisingly close in 1992 and 1994, he played fantastically. There is no way Robertson would have come as close as that, no way at all.

Robertson has a long way to go to overtake Jimmy, World title or no World title. But he is capable of doing it, that's my point, and I think he CAN. But for the time being, Jimmy is well and truly in charge

I don't like people disrespecting a man who has done more for the game than arguably anyone besides Alex Higgins, we have a lot to thank White for...

Jimmy

Players miss easy balls..its facts of life as a snooker player

just because they miss easy balls in a decider what makes that a choke.

in 1994 he missed 1 black Last night Robbo missed frame ball black and then Collapsed was that a choke ?

in 1992 the way Hendry played from 14-10 down anyone would choke under that sustained break building pressure.

I'm not best placed to judge because this is before my time but it's slightly harsh to say a player's a choker for missing one important ball but I think for someone who makes 6 finals you'd have thought they'd have been able to convert at least one of those into a win somewhere down the line and he had no better chance than that frame against Hendry but, to put it bluntly, the pressure got to him, there can be no other reason for him missing that.

I'm not criticising White. He's a hero of mine, and he was by far the best to never win the World, and better than most who did. Including Robbo

i just dont understand the definition of choking because balls are always missed 1,2,3 or 35th frame.

for me choking is if instead of taking on the correct shot you choke it for a safer option and it costs you.

all players miss important balls.

Monique wrote:What I doubt though is that Jimmy in another era would have been any different than the Jimmy we know. Jimmy was and still is a maverick. He lived a life that was very full but certainly not disciplined. THAT was his undoing on many occasions, not his lack of ability. And the more professional the game became, the bigger the the handicap.
That hasn't changed and that's why I think he would certainly not win more today than he did in the past.
Actually I think Jimmy would have won more if he had come into the game 10 years before, not 15 years later. And he would have been a booster just like Alex was.

Good point Mon the mental/professional discipline has always been an issue for Jimmy and it would currently, like it did in the 80's, lessen his title haul.

That said, I think his playing style would hold up better against the current playing style and conditions vs. those of the 80's. which would allow him to pick up more titles.....not as many as his talent should net him but more than he picked up against the 80's crowd.

wildLOVESWAGNER wrote:i just dont understand the definition of choking because balls are always missed 1,2,3 or 35th frame.

for me choking is if instead of taking on the correct shot you choke it for a safer option and it costs you.

all players miss important balls.

I think this is the perfect example of someone underestimating the amount of pressures in these World finals, it doesn't get any tougher than a deciding frame to become world champ ...

Bourne wrote:I'm not best placed to judge because this is before my time but it's slightly harsh to say a player's a choker for missing one important ball but I think for someone who makes 6 finals you'd have thought they'd have been able to convert at least one of those into a win somewhere down the line and he had no better chance than that frame against Hendry but, to put it bluntly, the pressure got to him, there can be no other reason for him missing that.

Spot on, look at this years World final and there were many easier balls missed. Are we to say Dott and Robbo are chockers?

Well precisely regarding the conditions, I'm not sure.
In his autobiography book Jimmy talks about the conditions and one of the things he says is that the faster, thinner cloth has indeed changed the way the game is played, making the split easier and cue ball control harder and thus favouring the best "breakbuilders". But he also highlights something that in his eyes is certainly a "negative". He says that the thinner cloth isn't "taking" the effects (spin, side) the way the thicker slower cloth did and thus makes it impossible, or at least very difficult, to play a whole range of shots at which he excelled and that younger players from today never play. He also stresses that the fact that most players today concentrate just on one cue sport reinforces that trend. He borrowed some of his trademarks shots from his experience in billiards.
I know this is now going slightly off topic ... I hope you don't mind.