by SnookerFan » 16 Oct 2018 Read
So, in 10 or 20 years will the best of the era be able to beat Ronnie prime vs prime?
-
SnookerFan
- Posts: 151098
- Joined: 13 December 2009
- Snooker Idol: Michaela Tabb
- Walk-On: Entry Of The Gladiators
-
by Chalk McHugh » 16 Oct 2018 Read
SnookerFan wrote:So, in 10 or 20 years will the best of the era be able to beat Ronnie prime vs prime?
No. I reckon Ronnie is a once-every-100 years type of player. Or every few hundred years. A genius doesnt come around every era.
-
Chalk McHugh
- Posts: 7908
- Joined: 20 April 2017
- Location: Dublin
- Snooker Idol: Steve Davis and Ronnie
- Highest Break: 32
by Johnny Bravo » 16 Oct 2018 Read
Chalk McHugh wrote:SnookerFan wrote:So, in 10 or 20 years will the best of the era be able to beat Ronnie prime vs prime?
No. I reckon Ronnie is a once-every-100 years type of player. Or every few hundred years. A genius doesn't come around every era.
I agree with this. I do think however that the best in 10 or 20 years will be able to beat most, if not all other top players from this era.
There is one point I would like to make though. In any sport, in order for the standard to go up, the sport has to continually evolve or at least maintain it's current level. That way, more and more players take up the game. They learn from those before them and improve where they can. If money isn't being pumped into the sport, than less and less people will start taking it up, so there is no way to improve.
-
Johnny Bravo
- Posts: 7403
- Joined: 24 November 2016
- Snooker Idol: Ronnie O Sullivan
- Highest Break: 122
by Deewee » 16 Oct 2018 Read
Johnny Bravo wrote: He even said that even if he was in prime again now, he'd have trouble being a top 16 player.
I don't know how he can believe this. He was ranked 15th in 2007 at the age of 50
-
Deewee
- Posts: 1141
- Joined: 03 December 2016
- Highest Break: 26
by SnookerFan » 16 Oct 2018 Read
Deewee wrote:Johnny Bravo wrote: He even said that even if he was in prime again now, he'd have trouble being a top 16 player.
I don't know how he can believe this. He was ranked 15th in 2007 at the age of 50
Modesty?
-
SnookerFan
- Posts: 151098
- Joined: 13 December 2009
- Snooker Idol: Michaela Tabb
- Walk-On: Entry Of The Gladiators
-
by Iranu » 16 Oct 2018 Read
Yeah I think Davis is being humble there. This is a guy whose best days were playing on 80s cloths and yet he made 355 centuries in his career. Considering he's also a tactical master, there's no doubt he'd be a top player if he was in his prime now.
As for the next era, at this rate Ronnie will still be the best of that era if the young'ns don't start breaking through and grabbing the game by the scruff of the neck.
-
Iranu
- Posts: 41501
- Joined: 24 January 2010
- Walk-On: Fort Knox - Noel Gallagher's High Flying Birds
by Deewee » 16 Oct 2018 Read
The 80's also had huge pockets to be fair
-
Deewee
- Posts: 1141
- Joined: 03 December 2016
- Highest Break: 26
by The_Abbott » 18 Oct 2018 Read
Dan-cat wrote:Can't wait to listen to this. Young Dan Cat was devastated when Hendry came along and gradually started to beat the Nugget. I loved the Nugget.
yeah me too. I disliked Hendry winning everything. Dare I say he made it boring for a while in the 90's. But I should blame Jimmy for that......bottled it!
-
The_Abbott
- Posts: 7130
- Joined: 03 May 2017
- Location: Monastery
- Snooker Idol: Retired Snooker Player
- Highest Break: 51
by Dan-cat » 18 Oct 2018 Read
Deewee wrote:The 80's also had huge pockets to be fair
In both senses
-
Dan-cat
- Posts: 31533
- Joined: 20 August 2013
- Location: Shoreditch, London
- Snooker Idol: The Rocket + The Nugget
- Highest Break: 53
- Walk-On: www.instagram.com/dan_cat
-
by Johnny Bravo » 18 Oct 2018 Read
Dan-cat wrote:Deewee wrote:The 80's also had huge pockets to be fair
In both senses
What do you mean ?
-
Johnny Bravo
- Posts: 7403
- Joined: 24 November 2016
- Snooker Idol: Ronnie O Sullivan
- Highest Break: 122
by Dan-cat » 18 Oct 2018 Read
Johnny Bravo wrote:Dan-cat wrote:Deewee wrote:The 80's also had huge pockets to be fair
In both senses
What do you mean ?
It was boom time in the game. Loadsa money!
-
Dan-cat
- Posts: 31533
- Joined: 20 August 2013
- Location: Shoreditch, London
- Snooker Idol: The Rocket + The Nugget
- Highest Break: 53
- Walk-On: www.instagram.com/dan_cat
-
by Wildey » 19 Oct 2018 Read
Johnny Bravo wrote:SnookerFan wrote:Despite the debatable bit about Hendry winning prime vs prime, I agree with this bit;
"I was stronger mentally. But he’s more talented than me, making shots left-handed and sinking a 147 in 4½ minutes. My fastest maximum would be over nine minutes.” (Though, it was five and a half, wasn't it?)
It's the same point I was making in another thread a few days ago. Hendry was a greater continual winner, and had a stronger temperament and will to win. Ronnie's has improved, but he struggled a lot of times earlier in his career by just not wanting to be at matches. Hendry would never lose, because he couldn't be bothered.
I also agree with this, but in such a match I am sure Ronnie would be up for it. I simply give Ronnie the edge cause he's a better all round player than Stephen.
But Hendry was being very honest, I respect that.
The only part I don't get from his interview is the part about him mingling with other players. From his perspective, that was a bad thing, but life is also about socializing and having fun, not just about work.
When you go in to a office you dont want to beat your Work Mate.
For him he wanted to stamp on oponement faces and keep them down keep the myth alive.
When Hendry started comentating i knew his days were numbered.
he never even watched snooker when he was at his peak. beat people then walk out in a car and away.
-
Wildey
- Posts: 64455
- Joined: 02 October 2009
- Location: North Wales
- Snooker Idol: Mark Selby
- Highest Break: 25
- Walk-On: the one and only
by snucar » 19 Oct 2018 Read
Excellent listening. A world final clash between these two titans of the game would have been the match of the century!
-
snucar
- Posts: 1805
- Joined: 20 April 2015
- Snooker Idol: Shaun Murphy Mini-Me
- Highest Break: 2
by sas6789 » 22 Oct 2018 Read
Cloud Strife wrote:carayip wrote:https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2018/oct/15/stephen-hendry-yips-snooker-interview
Good Hendry interview this is. At least he’s honest, if anything.
I've read this.
It's a decent interview until he ruined it by saying he would beat Ronnie in a four session match if both were in their prime.
Does the 99 world semi ring any bells?
-
sas6789
- Posts: 456
- Joined: 06 June 2014
by Cloud Strife » 22 Oct 2018 Read
sas6789 wrote:Cloud Strife wrote:carayip wrote:https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2018/oct/15/stephen-hendry-yips-snooker-interview
Good Hendry interview this is. At least he’s honest, if anything.
I've read this.
It's a decent interview until he ruined it by saying he would beat Ronnie in a four session match if both were in their prime.
Does the 99 world semi ring any bells?
It does, as well as the 2004 and 2008 semi-finals.
-
Cloud Strife
- Posts: 18569
- Joined: 28 January 2014
- Location: Antarctica
- Snooker Idol: Roger Federer
- Highest Break: 155
- Walk-On: Don Vedda - buck You
-
by Dan-cat » 22 Oct 2018 Read
I actually think Hendry is right about winning 18-16...
...but I still think Ronnie is the GOAT.
-
Dan-cat
- Posts: 31533
- Joined: 20 August 2013
- Location: Shoreditch, London
- Snooker Idol: The Rocket + The Nugget
- Highest Break: 53
- Walk-On: www.instagram.com/dan_cat
-
by Wildey » 22 Oct 2018 Read
Cloud Strife wrote:sas6789 wrote:Cloud Strife wrote:carayip wrote:https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2018/oct/15/stephen-hendry-yips-snooker-interview
Good Hendry interview this is. At least he’s honest, if anything.
I've read this.
It's a decent interview until he ruined it by saying he would beat Ronnie in a four session match if both were in their prime.
Does the 99 world semi ring any bells?
It does, as well as the 2004 and 2008 semi-finals.
Lets get one thing Straight Hendry did not play in either of thoes Matches so you cant say that both was at their Best by any stretch of anyones imagination.
-
Wildey
- Posts: 64455
- Joined: 02 October 2009
- Location: North Wales
- Snooker Idol: Mark Selby
- Highest Break: 25
- Walk-On: the one and only
by The_Abbott » 22 Oct 2018 Read
Dan-cat wrote:Johnny Bravo wrote:Dan-cat wrote:Deewee wrote:The 80's also had huge pockets to be fair
In both senses
What do you mean ?
It was boom time in the game. Loadsa money!
They even gave away Lada's.
-
The_Abbott
- Posts: 7130
- Joined: 03 May 2017
- Location: Monastery
- Snooker Idol: Retired Snooker Player
- Highest Break: 51
by Dan-cat » 22 Oct 2018 Read
Iranu wrote:Yeah I think Davis is being humble there. This is a guy whose best days were playing on 80s cloths and yet he made 355 centuries in his career. Considering he's also a tactical master, there's no doubt he'd be a top player if he was in his prime now.
As for the next era, at this rate Ronnie will still be the best of that era if the young'ns don't start breaking through and grabbing the game by the scruff of the neck.
Yeah Davis is. He played one-visit snooker when at is his best. I remember Dennis Taylor saying 'if you missed against Steve you sat back in your chair and got ready for the next frame.'
-
Dan-cat
- Posts: 31533
- Joined: 20 August 2013
- Location: Shoreditch, London
- Snooker Idol: The Rocket + The Nugget
- Highest Break: 53
- Walk-On: www.instagram.com/dan_cat
-
by SnookerFan » 22 Oct 2018 Read
Cloud Strife wrote:sas6789 wrote:Cloud Strife wrote:carayip wrote:https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2018/oct/15/stephen-hendry-yips-snooker-interview
Good Hendry interview this is. At least he’s honest, if anything.
I've read this.
It's a decent interview until he ruined it by saying he would beat Ronnie in a four session match if both were in their prime.
Does the 99 world semi ring any bells?
It does, as well as the 2004 and 2008 semi-finals.
Hendry wasn't in his prime in 2008.
-
SnookerFan
- Posts: 151098
- Joined: 13 December 2009
- Snooker Idol: Michaela Tabb
- Walk-On: Entry Of The Gladiators
-
by Wildey » 22 Oct 2018 Read
SnookerFan wrote:Cloud Strife wrote:sas6789 wrote:Cloud Strife wrote:carayip wrote:https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2018/oct/15/stephen-hendry-yips-snooker-interview
Good Hendry interview this is. At least he’s honest, if anything.
I've read this.
It's a decent interview until he ruined it by saying he would beat Ronnie in a four session match if both were in their prime.
Does the 99 world semi ring any bells?
It does, as well as the 2004 and 2008 semi-finals.
Hendry wasn't in his prime in 2008.
Hendry was not in his prime in 2002 either Ronnies Coment inspired him to beat him in that Match. For me that is the World Championship that got away for Ronnie.
-
Wildey
- Posts: 64455
- Joined: 02 October 2009
- Location: North Wales
- Snooker Idol: Mark Selby
- Highest Break: 25
- Walk-On: the one and only
by TheRocket » 22 Oct 2018 Read
The 2004 O'Sullivan was stronger than any version of Hendry. It was the year he worked with Reardon and his allround game was on a completely different level than anything we've seen from him in 1999-2002.
In the pre-Reardon era he was just a heavy scorer.
He absolutely destroyed Hendry 17:4 in that semfinal. And even if you say Hendry wasnt in his prime he was still far too good to lose that heavy.
Hendry had actually even beaten O'Sullivan in the British Open final and UK semi that season. Both very high quality matches.
-
TheRocket
- Posts: 16433
- Joined: 23 September 2012
- Snooker Idol: Federer-ROS-Messi
by Wildey » 22 Oct 2018 Read
TheRocket wrote:The 2004 O'Sullivan was stronger than any version of Hendry. It was the year he worked with Reardon and his allround game was on a completely different level than anything we've seen from him in 1999-2002.
In the pre-Reardon era he was just a heavy scorer.
He absolutely destroyed Hendry 17:4 in that semfinal. And even if you say Hendry wasnt in his prime he was still far too good to lose that heavy.
Hendry had actually even beaten O'Sullivan in the British Open final and UK semi that season. Both very high quality matches.
But Hendry did not perform at all in that 2004 Semi.
Apart from 1 session where Ronnie was flying Hendry had plenty of chances in the other 2 session Hendry lost that Match in the 1st session he let Ronnie have a 6-1 lead where it could have easily had a lead of 4-3 had he been anywhere near his best form then from 6-1 Ronnie is tough to peg back especially the way he played in the second session of that Match.
You could argue Ronnie is too good to lose 6-1 to Mark Davis but it happened and it happens just because he won other matches that season doesent mean anything.
Hendry's long potting was the problem not his breakbuilding back then he would stil go for shots and missed more than he got leaving Ronnie bang in the balls.
-
Wildey
- Posts: 64455
- Joined: 02 October 2009
- Location: North Wales
- Snooker Idol: Mark Selby
- Highest Break: 25
- Walk-On: the one and only