Will Ronnie ever win another world title ?

vodkadiet wrote:O'Sullivan only managed to beat Hendry at The Crucible after Hendry was well past his best. It was an even match before that and Hendry won 3 out of 3.

How old was Hendry in 2004? I think he was 35. It's not like he was 45 or something... Ronnie did beat Hendry in a UK final when Ronnie was just 17 years old and Hendry was well in his prime. Ronnie did it again in 1997 and Higgins did as well in 1996.

In his losses since 2014 he lost too many key frames.

Vs Selby to go 11-5 and 12-11 up
Vs Bingham after being 3-5 down he was about to go 9-7 but missed a sitter of a frameball
Vs Hawkins he lost all the close frames
Vs Ding he was 0-3 down and about to go 4-3 but missed again frameball and lost the frame on the RSB

Vs Ali he had some unfortunate kicks, could have 8-8. but to miss a sitter of a blue to only be 10-11 behind was key.

Holden Chinaski wrote:

vodkadiet wrote:O'Sullivan only managed to beat Hendry at The Crucible after Hendry was well past his best. It was an even match before that and Hendry won 3 out of 3.

How old was Hendry in 2004? I think he was 35. It's not like he was 45 or something... Ronnie did beat Hendry in a UK final when Ronnie was just 17 years old and Hendry was well in his prime. Ronnie did it again in 1997 and Higgins did as well in 1996.

Hendry beat Higgins in 96.

Anyway, The World Championship is the ultimate test.

O'Sullivan's longevity outweighs Hendry's by a mile. But it is what you win in your career that counts. It isn't the gap between your first and last title.

But in the end you can't compare different era's. The competition is not the same. Ronnie, Higgins and Williams are very unlucky to be born in the same year.

You can only really compare Ronnie to players like Higgins and Williams.... They play in the same era against the same opponents. And Ronnie has won the most.

I think Ronnie can win another but I can't imagine him equalling or surpassing Hendry's 7 WC titles. I'm not sure Ronnie is that concerned if he wins more WC titles. He seems in a good place mentally and I think he treats snooker as a semi-profession, not a full-on year profession so I get the impression he can live without more WC wins.

Holden Chinaski wrote:But in the end you can't compare different era's. The competition is not the same. Ronnie, Higgins and Williams are very unlucky to be born in the same year.

You can only really compare Ronnie to players like Higgins and Williams.... They play in the same era against the same opponents. And Ronnie has won the most.

I agree that O'Sullivan is better than Higgins and Williams. If Higgins wins this week then that is open to debate.

vodkadiet wrote:

Holden Chinaski wrote:But in the end you can't compare different era's. The competition is not the same. Ronnie, Higgins and Williams are very unlucky to be born in the same year.

You can only really compare Ronnie to players like Higgins and Williams.... They play in the same era against the same opponents. And Ronnie has won the most.

I agree that O'Sullivan is better than Higgins and Williams. If Higgins wins this week then that is open to debate.

You've got to be kidding me. Your hatred for Ronnie is too much. Even if Higgins wins the world championship he would only have the same amount of world titles Ronnie has and Ronnie still has more ranking titles, 5 more Masters titles and 3 more UK titles. How would it be open for debate?

Holden Chinaski wrote:

vodkadiet wrote:

Holden Chinaski wrote:But in the end you can't compare different era's. The competition is not the same. Ronnie, Higgins and Williams are very unlucky to be born in the same year.

You can only really compare Ronnie to players like Higgins and Williams.... They play in the same era against the same opponents. And Ronnie has won the most.

I agree that O'Sullivan is better than Higgins and Williams. If Higgins wins this week then that is open to debate.

You've got to be kidding me. Your hatred for Ronnie is too much. Even if Higgins wins the world championship he would only have the same amount of world titles Ronnie has and Ronnie still has more ranking titles, 5 more Masters titles and 3 more UK titles. How would it be open for debate?

But Hendry has more World titles than both yet you don’t think he’s the greatest? Can’t have criteria for one and not the other

Alex0paul wrote:

Holden Chinaski wrote:

vodkadiet wrote:

Holden Chinaski wrote:But in the end you can't compare different era's. The competition is not the same. Ronnie, Higgins and Williams are very unlucky to be born in the same year.

You can only really compare Ronnie to players like Higgins and Williams.... They play in the same era against the same opponents. And Ronnie has won the most.

I agree that O'Sullivan is better than Higgins and Williams. If Higgins wins this week then that is open to debate.

You've got to be kidding me. Your hatred for Ronnie is too much. Even if Higgins wins the world championship he would only have the same amount of world titles Ronnie has and Ronnie still has more ranking titles, 5 more Masters titles and 3 more UK titles. How would it be open for debate?

But Hendry has more World titles than both yet you don’t think he’s the greatest? Can’t have criteria for one and not the other

Ronnie and Higgins played in the same era, so its a fairer comparison. Hendry did not.

Why is that so difficult to understand?

Alex0paul wrote:

Holden Chinaski wrote:

vodkadiet wrote:

Holden Chinaski wrote:But in the end you can't compare different era's. The competition is not the same. Ronnie, Higgins and Williams are very unlucky to be born in the same year.

You can only really compare Ronnie to players like Higgins and Williams.... They play in the same era against the same opponents. And Ronnie has won the most.

I agree that O'Sullivan is better than Higgins and Williams. If Higgins wins this week then that is open to debate.

You've got to be kidding me. Your hatred for Ronnie is too much. Even if Higgins wins the world championship he would only have the same amount of world titles Ronnie has and Ronnie still has more ranking titles, 5 more Masters titles and 3 more UK titles. How would it be open for debate?

But Hendry has more World titles than both yet you don’t think he’s the greatest? Can’t have criteria for one and not the other

Checkmate!!

Alexopaul did you read any of my posts? I said you can only really compare Ronnie to players like Higgins and Williams as they had the same opponents. You can't compare the different era's in my opinion. Hendry was great but he did not have the same competition.

This is my last post in this thread. This debate is useless.

Anyone who loses to David Gray at The Crucible is immediately disqualified from ever being considered the G.O.A.T.

snucar wrote:

Holden Chinaski wrote:This debate is useless.

+1

+2

vodkadiet wrote:Anyone who loses to David Gray at The Crucible is immediately disqualified from ever being considered the G.O.A.T.

Exactly

Holden Chinaski wrote:Alexopaul did you read any of my posts? I said you can only really compare Ronnie to players like Higgins and Williams as they had the same opponents. You can't compare the different era's in my opinion. Hendry was great but he did not have the same competition.

This is my last post in this thread. This debate is useless.

He was just too good for his competition though.

snucar wrote:

SnookerFan wrote:Seema Jaswal is the greatest, imo.

Seema is great but Mark Johnston Allen is the GOAT.

H2H

Steve Davis vs MJA: 0-1

Stephen Hendry vs MJA:0-3

ROS vs MJA:1-2

Facts!

hahah. Brilliant stats Snucar.

Holden Chinaski wrote:Alexopaul did you read any of my posts? I said you can only really compare Ronnie to players like Higgins and Williams as they had the same opponents. You can't compare the different era's in my opinion. Hendry was great but he did not have the same competition.

This is my last post in this thread. This debate is useless.

Responding to the original question.....

Yes I think ROS can win another one, although being realistic it prob is going to get harder every year as he gets older....

but I see nothing much in terms of players who can dominate.... take selby out of the tournament and i think its open season for a few players. If there were another 3-4 players who were as consistant as selby id say ronnie doesnt have much of a chance.....but i cant say that.

In terms of the era thing Its a really hard one....and i dont really know the answer.

With players like bingham and hawkins who have been pro for like 20 odd years....how come they just started being contenders like 6 years ago or watever?

Players like dott, mcmanus and another load still being competative when lets be honest....they really shouldnt be.

Then the fact we have ROS, HIGGINS AND MJW pretty much coming into the tournament as favorites to win it....we all know how good they are but comon.....thats not right.

Its obv guessing and opinion...but i recon if you take higgins from 1999 he would destroy higgins of 2018 and the same for the other two.

Im just not convinced about the standard being so amazingly high.

Hendry turning pro in 1992 wouldnt have 7 world titles.....but say 95-2005 (imaginging he still only has around 10 prime years) i think he would have more worlds than the other 92ers.

The John Higgins who destroyed O'Sullivan and then beat peak Doherty in 1998 was the best player ever; barring Hendry at his peak.

freakmoomin wrote:Its obv guessing and opinion...but i recon if you take higgins from 1999 he would destroy higgins of 2018 and the same for the other two.

I don't agree. ROS wasn't at his best in 1999. A 2012-2013 ROS would beat any other version of himself. He was also great before that, but wasn't as strong mentally.

freakmoomin wrote:Hendry turning pro in 1992 wouldnt have 7 world titles.....but say 95-2005 (imaginging he still only has around 10 prime years) i think he would have more worlds than the other 92ers.

No way. He'd have 3 at best. Although he was a great potter and breakbuilder, he doesn't have the safety and tactical game to beat ROS and Higgo.

Johnny Bravo wrote:

freakmoomin wrote:Its obv guessing and opinion...but i recon if you take higgins from 1999 he would destroy higgins of 2018 and the same for the other two.

I don't agree. ROS wasn't at his best in 1999. A 2012-2013 ROS would beat any other version of himself. He was also great before that, but wasn't as strong mentally.

freakmoomin wrote:Hendry turning pro in 1992 wouldnt have 7 world titles.....but say 95-2005 (imaginging he still only has around 10 prime years) i think he would have more worlds than the other 92ers.

No way. He'd have 3 at best. Although he was a great potter and breakbuilder, he doesn't have the safety and tactical game to beat ROS and Higgo.

Did he not beat Higgins, World Champion at the time 13-4 just days before retiring?

Alex0paul wrote:

Johnny Bravo wrote:

freakmoomin wrote:Its obv guessing and opinion...but i recon if you take higgins from 1999 he would destroy higgins of 2018 and the same for the other two.

I don't agree. ROS wasn't at his best in 1999. A 2012-2013 ROS would beat any other version of himself. He was also great before that, but wasn't as strong mentally.

freakmoomin wrote:Hendry turning pro in 1992 wouldnt have 7 world titles.....but say 95-2005 (imaginging he still only has around 10 prime years) i think he would have more worlds than the other 92ers.

No way. He'd have 3 at best. Although he was a great potter and breakbuilder, he doesn't have the safety and tactical game to beat ROS and Higgo.

Did he not beat Higgins, World Champion at the time 13-4 just days before retiring?

Higgins played very poor that match. And I never said he can't ever beat them, my point is that they'd beat him more often.

vodkadiet wrote:The John Higgins who destroyed O'Sullivan and then beat peak Doherty in 1998 was the best player ever; barring Hendry at his peak.

A week in May ain't a career.