Star Xing Pai Haikou World Open Final Discussion!!

Sickpotter wrote:Again with the "let's compare incomperable eras" garbage? Sure are a dog with a bone Witz

I doubt Hendry has ever layed claim to "inventing" the blue into the pack shot. Hendry had a tremendous arrogance about him while at his best but not that much

Silly claim to say the least, as many have noted the shot's been played for years. I wonder when it was first suggested and by whom?

Anyone know?

hendry played it differently from what went before him.

Hendry was good for all the 90s as he was still winning tournaments, including the Worlds in 1999. When he was at his best, he was the best. Hendry's dominanace didn't end because the likes of Higgins, Ronnie, MJW, Stevens etc came of age, its just that he wasn't playing as well as used to. His game didn't have that much longevity.

Skullman wrote:Hendry was good for all the 90s as he was still winning tournaments, including the Worlds in 1999. When he was at his best, he was the best. Hendry's dominanace didn't end because the likes of Higgins, Ronnie, MJW, Stevens etc came of age, its just that he wasn't playing as well as used to. His game didn't have that much longevity.

you say that but he holds all the records for longjevity.

No 1
top 4
top 8
top 16

what hendry had was imense concentration for the time he was the best that he became burnt out

Skullman wrote:Hendry was good for all the 90s as he was still winning tournaments, including the Worlds in 1999. When he was at his best, he was the best. Hendry's dominanace didn't end because the likes of Higgins, Ronnie, MJW, Stevens etc came of age, its just that he wasn't playing as well as used to. His game didn't have that much longevity.

True, its the same for Williams - are people going to say he went into decline because the likes of Robbo, Selby, Murphy and Maguire came to the top?

Didn't think so.

Wild wrote:

Skullman wrote:Hendry was good for all the 90s as he was still winning tournaments, including the Worlds in 1999. When he was at his best, he was the best. Hendry's dominanace didn't end because the likes of Higgins, Ronnie, MJW, Stevens etc came of age, its just that he wasn't playing as well as used to. His game didn't have that much longevity.

you say that but he holds all the records for longjevity.

No 1
top 4
top 8
top 16

what hendry had was imense concentration for the time he was the best that he became burnt out

He was no1, top 4 etc for the longest time, but was he playing his best snooker for all that time? Hendry was so good, I think he could still be in the top4/8/16 even when he started declining a bit.

Skullman wrote:

Wild wrote:

Skullman wrote:Hendry was good for all the 90s as he was still winning tournaments, including the Worlds in 1999. When he was at his best, he was the best. Hendry's dominanace didn't end because the likes of Higgins, Ronnie, MJW, Stevens etc came of age, its just that he wasn't playing as well as used to. His game didn't have that much longevity.

you say that but he holds all the records for longjevity.

No 1
top 4
top 8
top 16

what hendry had was imense concentration for the time he was the best that he became burnt out

He was no1, top 4 etc for the longest time, but was he playing his best snooker for all that time? Hendry was so good, I think he could still be in the top4/8/16 even when he started declining a bit.

his best years was 1989-1997 but in that time the level of snooker he played at would have dominated any era against anyone thats ever played obviously he wouldnt have won as much but he would have still won more than anyone else.

when you play at the level he did consistantly something had to give you just cant carry on that focus....theres no doubt after blaine was born he took his foot off the gaz and there after went steadily in to decline a slow decline but decline all the same.

Wild wrote:

Skullman wrote:

Wild wrote:

Skullman wrote:Hendry was good for all the 90s as he was still winning tournaments, including the Worlds in 1999. When he was at his best, he was the best. Hendry's dominanace didn't end because the likes of Higgins, Ronnie, MJW, Stevens etc came of age, its just that he wasn't playing as well as used to. His game didn't have that much longevity.

you say that but he holds all the records for longjevity.

No 1
top 4
top 8
top 16

what hendry had was imense concentration for the time he was the best that he became burnt out

He was no1, top 4 etc for the longest time, but was he playing his best snooker for all that time? Hendry was so good, I think he could still be in the top4/8/16 even when he started declining a bit.

his best years was 1989-1997 but in that time the level of snooker he played at would have dominated any era against anyone thats ever played obviously he wouldnt have won as much but he would have still won more than anyone else.

when you play at the level he did consistantly something had to give you just cant carry on that focus....theres no doubt after blaine was born he took his foot off the gaz and there after went steadily in to decline a slow decline but decline all the same.

Is Gaz another snooker player? I'm suprised that he tolerated Hendry standing on him for so long. Or did he justmake a run for it when Stephen went to the hospital to see his kid being born ?

Wild wrote:

Skullman wrote:

Wild wrote:

Skullman wrote:Hendry was good for all the 90s as he was still winning tournaments, including the Worlds in 1999. When he was at his best, he was the best. Hendry's dominanace didn't end because the likes of Higgins, Ronnie, MJW, Stevens etc came of age, its just that he wasn't playing as well as used to. His game didn't have that much longevity.

you say that but he holds all the records for longjevity.

No 1
top 4
top 8
top 16

what hendry had was imense concentration for the time he was the best that he became burnt out

He was no1, top 4 etc for the longest time, but was he playing his best snooker for all that time? Hendry was so good, I think he could still be in the top4/8/16 even when he started declining a bit.

his best years was 1989-1997 but in that time the level of snooker he played at would have dominated any era against anyone thats ever played obviously he wouldnt have won as much but he would have still won more than anyone else.

when you play at the level he did consistantly something had to give you just cant carry on that focus....theres no doubt after blaine was born he took his foot off the gaz and there after went steadily in to decline a slow decline but decline all the same.

so what your saying is that had he been one of the class of 92, then hed have won far less than he did cos it was a stronger era

Witz78 wrote:

Wild wrote:

Skullman wrote:

Wild wrote:

Skullman wrote:Hendry was good for all the 90s as he was still winning tournaments, including the Worlds in 1999. When he was at his best, he was the best. Hendry's dominanace didn't end because the likes of Higgins, Ronnie, MJW, Stevens etc came of age, its just that he wasn't playing as well as used to. His game didn't have that much longevity.

you say that but he holds all the records for longjevity.

No 1
top 4
top 8
top 16

what hendry had was imense concentration for the time he was the best that he became burnt out

He was no1, top 4 etc for the longest time, but was he playing his best snooker for all that time? Hendry was so good, I think he could still be in the top4/8/16 even when he started declining a bit.

his best years was 1989-1997 but in that time the level of snooker he played at would have dominated any era against anyone thats ever played obviously he wouldnt have won as much but he would have still won more than anyone else.

when you play at the level he did consistantly something had to give you just cant carry on that focus....theres no doubt after blaine was born he took his foot off the gaz and there after went steadily in to decline a slow decline but decline all the same.

so what your saying is that had he been one of the class of 92, then hed have won far less than he did cos it was a stronger era

but he would have still won more than Higgins,Williams or Ronnie because he was a better player than they was.