Is the term 'grinder' a compliment or an insult?

Would you feel offended if someone described you as a grinder in pure snooker terms? Or would you see it as some sort of badge of honour?

it depends on the intention of the person saying it, right?

One person could use the word as an insult, another as a compliment.

Personally, I don't think it's a bad thing to be a grinder if it wins you matches. If you win then your strategy is successful.

I don't find it enjoyable to watch though.

When Cliff Thorburn was given the nickname THE Grinder it was a compliment.
Out of all the players of his type he was the pinnacle.
However in the modern game it's a back handed compliment at best and an outright diss at worse.

On a side note, How do you think players feel about be described as solid?
That always seems a half hearted compliment to me.

sundaygirl wrote:On a side note, How do you think players feel about be described as solid?
That always seems a half hearted compliment to me.

I always saw that as a mid-way point.

Solid, but not spectacular.

They'll play a decent game, make it difficult for opponents, feature in the business end a lot of tournaments. But their style of play isn't flashy, or they aren't particularly charismatic.

At the end of the day, there's nothing wrong with that. You're there to win ultimately, not to show off or charge round the table. But people, even commentators, often use it as code to mean; "inferior to the exciting players".

sundaygirl wrote:When Cliff Thorburn was given the nickname THE Grinder it was a compliment.
Out of all the players of his type he was the pinnacle.
However in the modern game it's a back handed compliment at best and an outright diss at worse.

As legend has it Alex Higgins dubbed Thorburn the Grinder in the 70s. Knowing the history between both men id say Alex was a tad derogatory however Thorburn ran with it and it gave Thorburn a identity in some respect.

When most on here Play Snooker they play more the Thorburn way than they do the Ronnie way even if in their heart they think they play like Ronnie.

Another peculiar 'label' is to refer to a player as being 'born with natural talent'.

I remember saying to a very good amateur player that he was 'blessed with natural ability' and should win his game that evening....I got an earful of abuse!
He took it as a 'slight' on all the hours, commitment and graft he'd put in to reach his 100+ break standard!

His 'take' on my supposed compliment was that his prowess was somewhat less-impressive - as his skill had all been 'given to him' by a quirk of genes!

Sometimes you just can't win!

PoolBoy wrote:Another peculiar 'label' is to refer to a player as being 'born with natural talent'.

I remember saying to a very good amateur player that he was 'blessed with natural ability' and should win his game that evening....I got an earful of abuse!
He took it as a 'slight' on all the hours, commitment and graft he'd put in to reach his 100+ break standard!

His 'take' on my supposed compliment was that his prowess was somewhat less-impressive - as his skill had all been 'given to him' by a quirk of genes!

Sometimes you just can't win!

I believe Ronnie once said something similar about being labelled a "genius" - he said it made it sound like he didn't have to work hard or practise.

Iranu wrote:

PoolBoy wrote:Another peculiar 'label' is to refer to a player as being 'born with natural talent'.

I remember saying to a very good amateur player that he was 'blessed with natural ability' and should win his game that evening....I got an earful of abuse!
He took it as a 'slight' on all the hours, commitment and graft he'd put in to reach his 100+ break standard!

His 'take' on my supposed compliment was that his prowess was somewhat less-impressive - as his skill had all been 'given to him' by a quirk of genes!

Sometimes you just can't win!

I believe Ronnie once said something similar about being labelled a "genius" - he said it made it sound like he didn't have to work hard or practise.

And he's right. He's naturally gifted no doubt about it, but he works harder than most players do, he couldn't achieve what he has in his career if only with the "natural ability".

Natural ability is one thing, but you need to master the game in order to be sucessful, otherwise the likes of Lisowski would have won tournaments by now... Naturally gifted he is, but that's only part of it.

regarding the subject, I don't think it's either a compliment or an insult, that's why I didn't vote... it depend which person and how that person says it...

One thing though is that if you can grind to win matches like Selby often does, then that's good... but if you grind and can't win them then that player should look for an alternative...

Andre147 wrote:regarding the subject, I don't think it's either a compliment or an insult, that's why I didn't vote... it depend which person and how that person says it...

One thing though is that if you can grind to win matches like Selby often does, then that's good... but if you grind and can't win them then that player should look for an alternative...

If you Grind and cant win believe me you will get hammered playing another way.


there is a reason you grind......reason is doing the best you can to win that match.....Hendry for example refused to grind on principle and it cost him a lot of matches and tournaments ultimately even during his peak years.

Tough Lines for Robertson.

And Mark King went from the sublime to the ridiculous.

Don´t know if the correct term is "grinder" or possibly a "journeyman" . Either way, it is a possibly to get some nice results and to surprise people. Don´t know either what scores of fans are fancing when following the game. Wasn´t that much surprised when Neil Robertson crashed out. But certainly it was on the cards that Mark King would had been able to continue his form. It is truth that every player has their bogeymen where the odds should be even even if other player would be a top player and other determined as the journeyman. But then again, we are all have own dark side; it is not even possible to scout all these different situations and players. So it is just anyone´s guess. BUT the odds and pre-analysis are good enough when there is just enough effort and motivation putted in. So then it is allright. That´s strange but that´s how it works.

Wildey wrote:

Andre147 wrote:regarding the subject, I don't think it's either a compliment or an insult, that's why I didn't vote... it depend which person and how that person says it...

One thing though is that if you can grind to win matches like Selby often does, then that's good... but if you grind and can't win them then that player should look for an alternative...

If you Grind and cant win believe me you will get hammered playing another way.


there is a reason you grind......reason is doing the best you can to win that match.....Hendry for example refused to grind on principle and it cost him a lot of matches and tournaments ultimately even during his peak years.

But in the end, Hendry still won more than anyone else and did so playing the game the way he loved. For some people it's about honor. They don't just want to to win, they want to win in a certain way. Other players make grinding their style, and that's ok. But it's not a way to go for people like Hendry or Ronnie.

Of course it's an insult.
It's not all about winning, the way you win is very important imo.
If all the players were grinders, and there would be no attacking and/or flashy players, snooker (and any other sport) would be dead.
People play money to see a show, not to be bored to death.
I understand some players grinding it out when their A game is not working, but to do it all the time is just WRONG.
I wouldn't go to watch a Slowby match even if he payed me.

Compliment

Insult.

Defensive playing isn't something that 90% of the people who watch sport like to watch. It's not just Snooker, you get it in Tennis too and many other sports. It's good and all that your fav can win titles but the most important thing is to get enjoyment out of it because that's what our eyes see, we don't want to get bored out of our minds, we are spectators at the end of the day.

Again...using the Tennis example, you have Federer then you have Djokovic/Murray. In that sport Federer is far more popular and enjoyable to watch than Djokovic or Murray even though they win much more than Federer does these days and that's what made Federer the most popular and watchable Tennis player because he plays offensive Tennis.

And in Snooker, you get that with Ronnie.

Every sport has a player that has that "It" factor and a few others don't...just the way sport is.

Erza Scarlet wrote:Defensive playing isn't something that 90% of the people who watch sport like to watch.

That's a shame really. Defensive playing can be high quality as well (I find it fascinating to watch) but some people just don't care for it.

I agree with Andre about the term Grinder; it can be an insult sometimes, but at other times it's a distinctive word for a person's style of play and shows they are an expert in the safety department.

Clara8633 wrote:

Erza Scarlet wrote:Defensive playing isn't something that 90% of the people who watch sport like to watch.

That's a shame really. Defensive playing can be high quality as well (I find it fascinating to watch) but some people just don't care for it.

I agree with Andre about the term Grinder; it can be an insult sometimes, but at other times it's a distinctive word for a person's style of play and shows they are an expert in the safety department.

Agreed. It's subjective and it's neither positive or negative. It just depends on what you look for in a player.

Offensive play can be beautiful, but it can also be boring. Using Ezra's tennis example: I'm a big Federer fan, but when he is winning a match easily I sometimes find myself tuning out. When things go a little bit too predictable and too easy, it's just not as interesting as when a player has to work hard to figure things out.

I usually like my tennis players to be on the offense, but in general I want my favorite players to do the best they can to win the match. If that means they have to be on the defense, win ugly or grind it out, so be it. I think it shows strength of character to overcome difficult situations.

I hate it when I see a player just tank the match because he feels he is being outplayed. You will never see that with Selby. If things aren't going his way, he works hard to find a way.

Clara8633 wrote:

Erza Scarlet wrote:Defensive playing isn't something that 90% of the people who watch sport like to watch.

That's a shame really. Defensive playing can be high quality as well (I find it fascinating to watch) but some people just don't care for it.

I agree with Andre about the term Grinder; it can be an insult sometimes, but at other times it's a distinctive word for a person's style of play and shows they are an expert in the safety department.

I don't mind defensive play, what I have a problem with is deliberate slow play and spoiling tactics.

Ebdon against Ronnie at the 2005 WC being the prime example.

Cloud Strife wrote:

Clara8633 wrote:

Erza Scarlet wrote:Defensive playing isn't something that 90% of the people who watch sport like to watch.

That's a shame really. Defensive playing can be high quality as well (I find it fascinating to watch) but some people just don't care for it.

I agree with Andre about the term Grinder; it can be an insult sometimes, but at other times it's a distinctive word for a person's style of play and shows they are an expert in the safety department.

I don't mind defensive play, what I have a problem with is deliberate slow play and spoiling tactics.

Ebdon against Ronnie at the 2005 WC being the prime example.

You mean gamesmanship? I don't like it either. Though sometimes it's tough to say when it's gamesmanship and when it's just the player taking his time to find his footing in the match when things are not going well.

I can't really comment on the Ebdon v Ronnie WC match. Saw only a tiny bit of it. Though what I saw showed Ebdon playing slooow as hell!

Clara8633 wrote:
That's a shame really. Defensive playing can be high quality as well (I find it fascinating to watch) but some people just don't care for it.

I agree with Andre about the term Grinder; it can be an insult sometimes, but at other times it's a distinctive word for a person's style of play and shows they are an expert in the safety department.

I like it when it's a mix package but if a player has a natural style that caters for that play then I definitely tune out. LIke...Ebdon could have 10 world titles and be the GOAT but I'd never ever watch him play!

i love gamesmanship its a important part of sport

Erza Scarlet wrote:Ebdon could have 10 world titles and be the GOAT but I'd never ever watch him play!

Find some footage of a pony-tailed Peter Ebdon circa 1992. You'll be surprised...