Games Ronnie has mentally lost down the years

Can i ask one simple Question?

How come when Ronnie beats a player hes a Genius and when another Player beats Ronnie its because Ronnies head wasn't right.

Sometimes other players are ill, got a headake or got other things on their minds....Life problems isn't exclusively Ronnies.

He wasn't playing well enough because he was placed under extreme pressure from Ronnie. I don't see what's hard to understand about that? What would satisfy you? Every frame a century break until a showdown finale? Not likely.

As for your question, Ronnie has lost plenty of times when his head was straight. But he has lost a lot of them when it wasn't, and we all know it. I have never made excuses for the times when he was outplayed, and nor has anyone else I know. Sometimes Ronnie has deserved to lose because of poor attitude or rebelling (just the other week at German qualifiers for example) or just simply being the worse player on the day. He may be the greatest and a genius, but he can't bring his A game to every match. He is human.

The thing is, you will have to come to terms that this isn't the same Ronnie as before. It's Ronnie 3.0. World Champion, who defended it too, and now Masters winner as well to go with it. He is 38 and playing at his best. That should be applauded, not explained away with crap excuses.

Anyway... we are going kinda off topic.

The ones I can remember him losing because of lack of mental composure are:

Dott semi at WC (this one was the very worst).
Selby at Masters final
Selby at Welsh Open
Against Higgins at Grand Prix and a few other places I can't recall
Infamous cheating by Peter Ebdon. Although Ebdon should have had the frame docked. Ref didn't have balls.

Ronnie has Outplayed Selby plenty of times and put him under pressure however When Selby is playing well he can withstand that onslaught and come back to win.

in the masters he was struggling for form so he made it easy for Ronnie.

Wildey wrote:Ronnie has Outplayed Selby plenty of times and put him under pressure however When Selby is playing well he can withstand that onslaught and come back to win.

in the masters he was struggling for form so he made it easy for Ronnie.

You must have been watching a different match to me. Also, Selby couldn't withstand the onslaught, because he didn't.

edwards2000 wrote:

Wildey wrote:Ronnie has Outplayed Selby plenty of times and put him under pressure however When Selby is playing well he can withstand that onslaught and come back to win.

in the masters he was struggling for form so he made it easy for Ronnie.

You must have been watching a different match to me. Also, Selby couldn't withstand the onslaught, because he didn't.

he wasn't playing on top of his form was he

god sakes im stating facts thats been doing the rounds all season Selby playing at sub standard form there's nothing new in that anyone who knows anything at all about snooker knows im right.

Wildey wrote:god sakes im stating facts thats been doing the rounds all season Selby playing at sub standard form there's nothing new in that anyone who knows anything at all about snooker knows im right.

Well, I know snooker, and I say you aren't. The reason I disagree with you is because I don't think you are understanding the reasons Selby didn't play to his best standard. He was being completely outplayed. It's a bit arrogant of you to simply state that your opinion is absolute, too. You didn't state ANY facts. You stated an opinion that seems to be at odds with what I watched and how human psychology works.

edwards2000 wrote:

Wildey wrote:god sakes im stating facts thats been doing the rounds all season Selby playing at sub standard form there's nothing new in that anyone who knows anything at all about snooker knows im right.

Well, I know snooker, and I say you aren't. The reason I disagree with you is because I don't think you are understanding the reasons Selby didn't play to his best standard. He was being completely outplayed. It's a bit arrogant of you to simply state that your opinion is absolute, too. You didn't state ANY facts. You stated an opinion that seems to be at odds with what I watched and how human psychology works.

ive forgotten more about snooker than you will ever know so don't give me that bullocks.

Classing Selby's 2010 Masters win in this topic is complete bull.

Sonny wrote:Classing Selby's 2010 Masters win in this topic is complete bull.

Exactly. O'Sullivan lost that match because Selby was the better player that day.

Alpha wrote:

Sonny wrote:Classing Selby's 2010 Masters win in this topic is complete bull.

Exactly. O'Sullivan lost that match because Selby was the better player that day.

Ronnie was flying at the start of that match with a 86, 122 and 101 to lead 4-1 just like this year the difference in 2010 Selby could respond immediately Making a 83 and 112 himself without Ronnie potting a ball. Selby just not in that sort of form at the moment and a 10-4 defeat highlighted that.

Sonny wrote:Classing Selby's 2010 Masters win in this topic is complete bull.

Can you quote some stats to back up that opinion?

Wildey, Selby obviously haven't played the standard of 09 or 10 but one thing needs to be said. You know very well that the way Selby played at this years Masters has been his usual standard for the last 1,5-2 years. And he even won the UK and Masters last season with that kind of form.

He can beat his opponents with pure mental strength and allround game, despite not playing at his best, like Higgins did all the time. He's still stronger than 95 % of his opponents.

Nevertheless, against any other opponent, he still had a good chance to win the final but not against the current O'Sullivan and that's why Ronnie totally destroyed him. Therefore the statement of Selby having played bad makes no sense here because as I said, the reality is that he hasn't played any different the last 1,5-2 years, It's still good enough to beat most of the players but not current Ronnie O'Sullivan.

TheRocket wrote:Wildey, Selby obviously haven't played the standard of 09 or 10 but one thing needs to be said. You know very well that the way Selby played at this years Masters has been his usual standard for the last 1,5-2 years. And he even won the UK and Masters last season with that kind of form.

He can beat his opponents with pure mental strength and allround game, despite not playing at his best, like Higgins did all the time. He's still stronger than 95 % of his opponents.

Nevertheless, against any other opponent, he still had a good chance to win the final but not against the current O'Sullivan and that's why Ronnie totally destroyed him. Therefore the statement of Selby having played bad makes no sense here because as I said, the reality is that he hasn't played any different the last 1,5-2 years, It's still good enough to beat most of the players but not current Ronnie O'Sullivan.

Agree but Ronnie playing like he was during that Week the Selby of the last 2 years did not stand much of a chance unless he upped his game and he didnt.

Thats a compliment to Ronnie because he Blew away the Last 16 conceding only 7 frames.

Wildey, when your opponent is 5-0 up on you in the snooker club, I want you to remember this thread.

edwards2000 wrote:Wildey, when your opponent is 5-0 up on you in the snooker club, I want you to remember this thread.

Selby was rubbish to trail 5-0 anyone with a quarter brain knows that......

First frame Selby missed 2 gettable long reds in the first 5 minute of the final by a country mile had he got them the story of the first 5 frames would have been different.

it wasn't as if Selby was shut out because he wasn't.

Wow. "Donkey doo"? Really? Ronnie was flawless for most of that match, mate. Anyway, I'm done talking to a goal post (and simultaneous know-it-all). You'll just have to learn to accept that Ronnie won. Devaluing a performance like that is disgraceful, Wildey. And it's humouress to note that in one of your posts above, you are attacking people who devalue Ronnie's opponents. Why the double standard?

In fact, I've been through a couple of your posts and it's a familiar theme with you to downplay Ronnie's achievements and victories by attacking his opponent. Final question... when was the last time Ronnie's opponent DID turn up, in your honest fact?

(ps that lion avatar does not make you a bad-ass).

I think what some are alluding to is that when your opponent doesn't make the most of the chances you give them you feed off that and your opponent wilts because of it.

Had Selby made those makable reds Ronnie left in the first frame (which were balls an in form player would make), Ronnie might have been put under some pressure.

ROS was brilliant but it can also be said that Selby didn't play his best and failed to exert any pressure. That doesn't devalue how ROS played IMO, you can only play whomever is put in front of you.

Sickpotter wrote:(which were balls an in form player would make)

I have to disagree. It was the start of the frame. Any pro is capable of missing a long red or two. After that, Ronnie didn't give him a sniff. It's not fair to say Selby played bad because of a few misses, when his opponent played almost flawlessly.

Sickpotter wrote:I think what some are alluding to is that when your opponent doesn't make the most of the chances you give them you feed off that and your opponent wilts because of it.

Had Selby made those makable reds Ronnie left in the first frame (which were balls an in form player would make), Ronnie might have been put under some pressure.

ROS was brilliant but it can also be said that Selby didn't play his best and failed to exert any pressure. That doesn't devalue how ROS played IMO, you can only play whomever is put in front of you.

Exactly.

And reading these posts I come to 2 conclusions:

Firstly Selby lost that match because like Wild said he just hasn't been playing well enough for the past 2 or 3 years to be able to withstand that snooker from Ronnie. If it was a Selby from the 2010 Masters for instance, might not have won the match but would certainly take his chances better and the macth would have been a lot closer.

Secondly, that Ronnie onslaught from the start put Selby in even more pressure to perform, and that was highlighted as I said by the fact he hasn't been playing well enough to compete against Ronnie's A game. Credit to Ronnie though because as he said he knew full well he had to make an impressive start because if things went close the advantage was with Selby I think. Some of the key frames in that final were the 4th when Selby should have really won that, and that type of frame favoured him, but in the end he didn't win it, and the one with the respotted black because Ronnie should have never been given the chance to take it to a respotted black and win that frame.

But one thing is for sure I think: this is mentally wise the strongest Ronnie ever, and even if things had gotten close in that final he said he was well prepared for it and certainly wouldn't have lost because of his mental status or for going for reckless shots. Selby was simply outplayed from the off and couldn't really compete from there.

Hey, Wildey.... you still haven't answered my question ;0

edwards2000 wrote:Hey, Wildey.... you still haven't answered my question ;0

what question?

Wildey wrote:

edwards2000 wrote:Hey, Wildey.... you still haven't answered my question ;0

what question?

It's right there, above.

Edwards wrote:Final question... when was the last time Ronnie's opponent DID turn up, in your honest fact?

I think it is funny people are arguing about what form Selby was in as if that would of made a difference. Playing the way Ronnie was and with his new found mental strength there is currently no one who could of beaten Ronnie playing. With Hendry retired and Higgins and Williams on the slide there is no one even close to Ronnies standard so I don't know what point Wildey is trying to make Selby will never beat Ronnie in that form now he has sorted his head out and I think Ronnie was just trying to make a point like Hendry said that if Ronnies on form the others might as well go home as they are not even close to his standard and if anyone thinks they are they don't really know much about snooker.

edwards2000 wrote:

Wildey wrote:

edwards2000 wrote:Hey, Wildey.... you still haven't answered my question ;0

what question?

It's right there, above.

Edwards wrote:Final question... when was the last time Ronnie's opponent DID turn up, in your honest fact?

plenty of times but Selby didn't on sunday any fool knows that.

he was missing pots all over the place.

can i ask you a question how many times has Ronnie turned up and lost?

That's not the question I asked, Wildey. And you can't answer a question with a question.

I asked you when specifically was the last time an opponent turned up against Ronnie. Who was that opponent and in what tournament? Don't be a politician, answer the question.