Post a reply

Re: Ronnie O'Sullivan: Snooker's Roger Federer

Postby Wildey

SnookerFan wrote:
Juddernaut wrote:O'Sullivan's impact on the Sport has been massive, I don't see how anyone can deny that. It's beyond a joke that he's never even been nominated for SPOTY. Whatever you think of O'Sullivan, Snooker is incredibly lucky to have him.


SPOTY is the joke.

It's just the BBC Sport's Annual Christmas party. They just invite whatever sports people they want to attend.

I have never taken the ignoring of snooker personally.

Honest to god i haven't got a clue who some of those people are my wet Dish cloth got more personality than some they nominate.

Re: Ronnie O'Sullivan: Snooker's Roger Federer

Postby sas6789

Holden Chinaski wrote:Ronnie changed the game as much as Hendry and Davis. Judd wouldn't be the player he is without Ronnie. Same with Selby, Ding, and so much more players. You all know it. You just dislike him. That's OK. People didn't give Davis and Hendry much respect when they were playing either. People like Reardon, Hendry, Everton, give Ronnie the respect he deserves. If you can't see that Ronnie created a new style of playing that influenced new generations, you need to pay more attention.

Ronnie's had a MASSIVE impact on the game and nobody has said he hasn't, but he has not changed the game in the way Hendry and Davis, he does things that nobody else can because of his special talent, (ie playing with the opposite hand like we've never seen before, splitting the pack in ways nobody else can and playing clever cannons during breaks) and that's not the same thing. In golf Seve Ballesteros did thing nobody else could because he had a special unique talent but he did not change the way golf was played.

Re: Ronnie O'Sullivan: Snooker's Roger Federer

Postby Andre147

sas6789 wrote:
Holden Chinaski wrote:Ronnie changed the game as much as Hendry and Davis. Judd wouldn't be the player he is without Ronnie. Same with Selby, Ding, and so much more players. You all know it. You just dislike him. That's OK. People didn't give Davis and Hendry much respect when they were playing either. People like Reardon, Hendry, Everton, give Ronnie the respect he deserves. If you can't see that Ronnie created a new style of playing that influenced new generations, you need to pay more attention.

Ronnie's had a MASSIVE impact on the game and nobody has said he hasn't, but he has not changed the game in the way Hendry and Davis, he does things that nobody else can because of his special talent, (ie playing with the opposite hand like we've never seen before, splitting the pack in ways nobody else can and playing clever cannons during breaks) and that's not the same thing. In golf Seve Ballesteros did thing nobody else could because he had a special unique talent but he did not change the way golf was played.


Yeah shounds about right what you say.

Re: Ronnie O'Sullivan: Snooker's Roger Federer

Postby The_Abbott

Cloud Strife wrote:
SnookerFan wrote:Ding is 2-2 with Duane Jones. These are the stats that should concern Federer.


These are the stats Kei Nishikori should be concerned about.


Japanese tennis player. He's like the Kamui Kobayashi of the sporting world.

Re: Ronnie O'Sullivan: Snooker's Roger Federer

Postby Erza Scarlet

Wildey wrote:
Iranu wrote:
Holden Chinaski wrote:If you think Ronnie had no incredible impact on the game you either haven't been paying attention or you let your dislike of his personality cloud your judgement, in my opinion.

100% untrue in my case, and I don’t disagree he’s had an impact on the game.

that is the mistake thats been made in this discussion we are not talking about a impact made.


Ronnie has made a massive impact but not on how others play the game i dont see a lot out there that can play snooker like Ronnie do you?


Most players play attacking Snooker today and the game has got faster because of Stephen Hendry attacking way of being a winner had Ronnie been on tour earlier than Stephen he probably would have done the same but he wasent.


You guys talking about clever ways of splitting the pack but really Ronnie is out on his own with that because of his unique talent at the end of the day its getting in to the pack at the first opportunity to give yourself best chance to end the frame right there right now and Stephen first brought that in to the game.

Regarding Judd's screw back shots. that's been played for donkeys Judd just plays it better than anyone before him thats not changing anything either hes just good at it.


Actually that does make sense, no one does play like Ronnie since he's unique which got me thinking no one plays like Federer either despite the humoungous impact they've had in their respective sports.

Or Nadal lol who's probably the most unique one with his buggy whip forehand. Although that style can't be copied imo

Re: Ronnie O'Sullivan: Snooker's Roger Federer

Postby Ck147

Dan-cat wrote:
Pink Ball wrote:Ace is snooker’s Gunter Parche


Is he the guy that runs the coffee shop in friends who is in love with Rachel?

Yes, thanks, I knew I'd seen him in something but couldn't quite place him

Re: Ronnie O'Sullivan: Snooker's Roger Federer

Postby lhpirnie

Andre147 wrote:
sas6789 wrote:
Holden Chinaski wrote:Ronnie changed the game as much as Hendry and Davis. Judd wouldn't be the player he is without Ronnie. Same with Selby, Ding, and so much more players. You all know it. You just dislike him. That's OK. People didn't give Davis and Hendry much respect when they were playing either. People like Reardon, Hendry, Everton, give Ronnie the respect he deserves. If you can't see that Ronnie created a new style of playing that influenced new generations, you need to pay more attention.

Ronnie's had a MASSIVE impact on the game and nobody has said he hasn't, but he has not changed the game in the way Hendry and Davis, he does things that nobody else can because of his special talent, (ie playing with the opposite hand like we've never seen before, splitting the pack in ways nobody else can and playing clever cannons during breaks) and that's not the same thing. In golf Seve Ballesteros did thing nobody else could because he had a special unique talent but he did not change the way golf was played.


Yeah shounds about right what you say.

In terms of 'special unique talent', part of that is Ronnie's very unusual cue-action, which probably gives him more feel and allows him to play certain shots that others cannot. There aren't any players who have taken up this technique (it's highly discouraged in the coaching manual), I can only think of a couple of young Chinese players who come close. Of course, Ronnie has brought the game forward in many ways, but not so much technically.

Re: Ronnie O'Sullivan: Snooker's Roger Federer

Postby SnookerFan

Cloud Strife wrote:
Iranu wrote:
Andre147 wrote:Federer is the ultimate pro, very rarely does something bad.

O'Sullivan on the other hand is a genius, and like all geniuses sometimes doesn't behave properly or is misunderstood.

I think this is a dangerous precedent and risks giving so-called geniuses carte blanche to act like awful people because “it’s just part of who they are.”


I don't know about carte blanche, but I do believe "geniuses" should be given some extra room to manoeuvre when it comes to their conduct. They are not like normal people, so it's abit difficult to try and hold them to the same standards.


I am a genius when it comes to picking awesome movies to watache.

Re: Ronnie O'Sullivan: Snooker's Roger Federer

Postby Cloud Strife

SnookerFan wrote:
Cloud Strife wrote:
Iranu wrote:
Andre147 wrote:Federer is the ultimate pro, very rarely does something bad.

O'Sullivan on the other hand is a genius, and like all geniuses sometimes doesn't behave properly or is misunderstood.

I think this is a dangerous precedent and risks giving so-called geniuses carte blanche to act like awful people because “it’s just part of who they are.”


I don't know about carte blanche, but I do believe "geniuses" should be given some extra room to manoeuvre when it comes to their conduct. They are not like normal people, so it's abit difficult to try and hold them to the same standards.


I am a genius when it comes to picking awesome movies to watache.


Are you as good as Federer, though?

Re: Ronnie O'Sullivan: Snooker's Roger Federer

Postby SnookerFan

Cloud Strife wrote:
SnookerFan wrote:
Cloud Strife wrote:
Iranu wrote:
Andre147 wrote:Federer is the ultimate pro, very rarely does something bad.

O'Sullivan on the other hand is a genius, and like all geniuses sometimes doesn't behave properly or is misunderstood.

I think this is a dangerous precedent and risks giving so-called geniuses carte blanche to act like awful people because “it’s just part of who they are.”


I don't know about carte blanche, but I do believe "geniuses" should be given some extra room to manoeuvre when it comes to their conduct. They are not like normal people, so it's abit difficult to try and hold them to the same standards.


I am a genius when it comes to picking awesome movies to watache.


Are you as good as Federer, though?


At tennis? No.

At watching Killer Klowns From Outer Space?

Well, I don't know how you'd measure that. But yes.