by Roland » 22 Oct 2012 Read
Monique wrote:@wild If you look at Hendry, he was always playing his own game, going for his shots and trying to make things happen rather than trying to prevent them to happen for his opponent. That's what being positive means. And, yes, towards the end of his career it cost him sometimes, but he stayed true to himself to the last ball.
Selby when confident plays that way as well, and he did today. When he does he's awesome to watch because he's got a very creative mind. But in other occasions, when he doubts himself, he's doing just the opposite: he's trying mainly to prevent his opponent to play and that's what I call being negative.
When you look at Selby's ability, you wonder why he's only won two ranking events in his career. He should have won a lot more, but to win, you have to "play to win", not to play to prevent your opponent to win because ultimately you have to pot them balls…
It's called having a snooker brain Monique. Anyone wishing to learn when to attack and when to defend in the context of a match could do a lot worse than study Mark Selby.
And you can keep quoting Dott and Selby himself in those two examples until you're blue in the face but it doesn't change anything. Selby was referring to a spell he suffered about a year ago which he's now out of, and Dott was being the wee frustrated little dynamo we all know he is. See how wound up he got by McCulloch, would you use that knowledge if you knew it would get to him?
-
Roland
- Site Admin
- Posts: 18267
- Joined: 29 September 2009
- Location: Cannonbridge, Snooker Island
- Snooker Idol: Selby Ding Kyren Luca
- Highest Break: 102
- Walk-On: Bal Sagoth
-
by Wildey » 22 Oct 2012 Read
if i was showing a young player how to play id never show them videos of Hendry because he was consistent playing that Attacking but if someone tried to copy him which is happening in snooker today unfortunately they come unstuck and Lose against Tough hard Matchplayers.
-
Wildey
- Posts: 64329
- Joined: 02 October 2009
- Location: North Wales
- Snooker Idol: Mark Selby
- Highest Break: 25
- Walk-On: the one and only
by Witz78 » 22 Oct 2012 Read
Sonny wrote:Monique wrote:@wild If you look at Hendry, he was always playing his own game, going for his shots and trying to make things happen rather than trying to prevent them to happen for his opponent. That's what being positive means. And, yes, towards the end of his career it cost him sometimes, but he stayed true to himself to the last ball.
Selby when confident plays that way as well, and he did today. When he does he's awesome to watch because he's got a very creative mind. But in other occasions, when he doubts himself, he's doing just the opposite: he's trying mainly to prevent his opponent to play and that's what I call being negative.
When you look at Selby's ability, you wonder why he's only won two ranking events in his career. He should have won a lot more, but to win, you have to "play to win", not to play to prevent your opponent to win because ultimately you have to pot them balls…
It's called having a snooker brain Monique. Anyone wishing to learn when to attack and when to defend in the context of a match could do a lot worse than study Mark Selby.
And you can keep quoting Dott and Selby himself in those two examples until you're blue in the face but it doesn't change anything. Selby was referring to a spell he suffered about a year ago which he's now out of, and Dott was being the wee frustrated little dynamo we all know he is. See how wound up he got by McCulloch, would you use that knowledge if you knew it would get to him?
sometimes you have to make things happen though and Selbys on the extreme of erring towards more negative than positive, as opposed to being the fine line of the attack / defence balance you suggest.
-
Witz78
- Posts: 15036
- Joined: 02 February 2010
by Wildey » 22 Oct 2012 Read
Witz78 wrote:Sonny wrote:Monique wrote:@wild If you look at Hendry, he was always playing his own game, going for his shots and trying to make things happen rather than trying to prevent them to happen for his opponent. That's what being positive means. And, yes, towards the end of his career it cost him sometimes, but he stayed true to himself to the last ball.
Selby when confident plays that way as well, and he did today. When he does he's awesome to watch because he's got a very creative mind. But in other occasions, when he doubts himself, he's doing just the opposite: he's trying mainly to prevent his opponent to play and that's what I call being negative.
When you look at Selby's ability, you wonder why he's only won two ranking events in his career. He should have won a lot more, but to win, you have to "play to win", not to play to prevent your opponent to win because ultimately you have to pot them balls…
It's called having a snooker brain Monique. Anyone wishing to learn when to attack and when to defend in the context of a match could do a lot worse than study Mark Selby.
And you can keep quoting Dott and Selby himself in those two examples until you're blue in the face but it doesn't change anything. Selby was referring to a spell he suffered about a year ago which he's now out of, and Dott was being the wee frustrated little dynamo we all know he is. See how wound up he got by McCulloch, would you use that knowledge if you knew it would get to him?
sometimes you have to make things happen though and Selbys on the extreme of erring towards more negative than positive, as opposed to being the fine line of the attack / defence balance you suggest.
rubbish
-
Wildey
- Posts: 64329
- Joined: 02 October 2009
- Location: North Wales
- Snooker Idol: Mark Selby
- Highest Break: 25
- Walk-On: the one and only
by Witz78 » 22 Oct 2012 Read
Wild WC wrote:Witz78 wrote:Sonny wrote:Monique wrote:@wild If you look at Hendry, he was always playing his own game, going for his shots and trying to make things happen rather than trying to prevent them to happen for his opponent. That's what being positive means. And, yes, towards the end of his career it cost him sometimes, but he stayed true to himself to the last ball.
Selby when confident plays that way as well, and he did today. When he does he's awesome to watch because he's got a very creative mind. But in other occasions, when he doubts himself, he's doing just the opposite: he's trying mainly to prevent his opponent to play and that's what I call being negative.
When you look at Selby's ability, you wonder why he's only won two ranking events in his career. He should have won a lot more, but to win, you have to "play to win", not to play to prevent your opponent to win because ultimately you have to pot them balls…
It's called having a snooker brain Monique. Anyone wishing to learn when to attack and when to defend in the context of a match could do a lot worse than study Mark Selby.
And you can keep quoting Dott and Selby himself in those two examples until you're blue in the face but it doesn't change anything. Selby was referring to a spell he suffered about a year ago which he's now out of, and Dott was being the wee frustrated little dynamo we all know he is. See how wound up he got by McCulloch, would you use that knowledge if you knew it would get to him?
sometimes you have to make things happen though and Selbys on the extreme of erring towards more negative than positive, as opposed to being the fine line of the attack / defence balance you suggest.
rubbish
rubbish
Selbys more negative than positive, of that there can be no debate so take the blinkers off, or lay your cards on the table as to what THE REAL AGENDA of suggesting otherwise is..............
-
Witz78
- Posts: 15036
- Joined: 02 February 2010
by Wildey » 22 Oct 2012 Read
as i said Rubbish
just people been jumping on the bandwagon ever since Ronnie said it.
-
Wildey
- Posts: 64329
- Joined: 02 October 2009
- Location: North Wales
- Snooker Idol: Mark Selby
- Highest Break: 25
- Walk-On: the one and only
by Roland » 22 Oct 2012 Read
Witz is just wumming as usual.
I think the red he took on in the final to middle pocket shows exactly why he's a positive player and why those who say he's negative genuinely don't have a clue what they're talking about.
-
Roland
- Site Admin
- Posts: 18267
- Joined: 29 September 2009
- Location: Cannonbridge, Snooker Island
- Snooker Idol: Selby Ding Kyren Luca
- Highest Break: 102
- Walk-On: Bal Sagoth
-
by SnookerFan » 22 Oct 2012 Read
Sonny wrote:Witz is just wumming as usual.
I think the red he took on in the final to middle pocket shows exactly why he's a positive player and why those who say he's negative genuinely don't have a clue what they're talking about.
That was an immense shot, especially considering how his opponent only needed one frame to win the match.
-
SnookerFan
- Posts: 149897
- Joined: 13 December 2009
- Snooker Idol: Michaela Tabb
- Walk-On: Entry Of The Gladiators
-
by Witz78 » 22 Oct 2012 Read
Id call it a desperation, point of no return, nothing to lose shot tbh
And im not WUM at all, not my style.
Its just convenient for yous to say that as i have a different opinion to the majority, and so yous dont have to address my arguments.
And the old 'dont have a clue about snooker' line is bullocks.
Selbys not a positive player, perhaps at times but bulk of time hes cautious. Daft too as he has all the skills and would have won far more if he was more positive.
-
Witz78
- Posts: 15036
- Joined: 02 February 2010
by Roland » 22 Oct 2012 Read
Oh you wind up bastard! Haha. Monique will buy you a drink at the Crucible for that.
-
Roland
- Site Admin
- Posts: 18267
- Joined: 29 September 2009
- Location: Cannonbridge, Snooker Island
- Snooker Idol: Selby Ding Kyren Luca
- Highest Break: 102
- Walk-On: Bal Sagoth
-
by SnookerFan » 22 Oct 2012 Read
Sonny wrote:Oh you wind up bastard! Haha. Monique will buy you a drink at the Crucible for that.
He'd probably try to chat her up.
-
SnookerFan
- Posts: 149897
- Joined: 13 December 2009
- Snooker Idol: Michaela Tabb
- Walk-On: Entry Of The Gladiators
-
by Wildey » 22 Oct 2012 Read
Selby wins only because he resorts to cheating and slow down tactics vs Selby dont win enough because he resorts to slow down tactics and Bogs himself Down
thoes 2 Arguments been banded about this Morning on Different Forums.
Dam if he does and Dam if he dont
-
Wildey
- Posts: 64329
- Joined: 02 October 2009
- Location: North Wales
- Snooker Idol: Mark Selby
- Highest Break: 25
- Walk-On: the one and only
by Roland » 22 Oct 2012 Read
SnookerFan wrote:Sonny wrote:Oh you wind up bastard! Haha. Monique will buy you a drink at the Crucible for that.
He'd probably try to chat her up.
-
Roland
- Site Admin
- Posts: 18267
- Joined: 29 September 2009
- Location: Cannonbridge, Snooker Island
- Snooker Idol: Selby Ding Kyren Luca
- Highest Break: 102
- Walk-On: Bal Sagoth
-
by Smart » 22 Oct 2012 Read
SnookerFan wrote:Sonny wrote:Witz is just wumming as usual.
I think the red he took on in the final to middle pocket shows exactly why he's a positive player and why those who say he's negative genuinely don't have a clue what they're talking about.
That was an immense shot, especially considering how his opponent only needed one frame to win the match.
Selby fan-boy
-
Smart
- Posts: 25364
- Joined: 03 October 2009
- Location: Siberia
- Snooker Idol: JOE JOGIA
- Highest Break: 3
- Walk-On: http://snookerydookery.freeforums.net/
-
by Monique » 22 Oct 2012 Read
Roland, I will admit without restriction that Selby wasn't negative at any moment of this final, quite the opposite given that he wasn't at his best and still went for at least a couple of very hard shots, and I will even admit that he has not been his (former) negative self for about a season, maybe a season and a half. But when Dotty made his comment, when Mark wrote his blog, and when others (hum …
) said he was, he truly was and in my opinion it didn't help his tally.
As for the "hard match players" wild is always waffling about, he tells me when one of this kind last won an event of some importance. I'm not counting in players like Higgins, Selby or Ronnie who are all capable of playing the hard matchplay way when needed, but are also capable and willing to attack when the opportunity is there. Playing defensively isn't the way winners play nowadays, not in any sport. It brings you consistency but rarely wins. For me a prime example of this is Caroline Wozniacki who has been number 1 for quite a while but is yet to win a grand slam.
-
Monique
- Posts: 4597
- Joined: 02 February 2010
- Location: Brussels
- Snooker Idol: Ronnie
- Highest Break: 25
- Walk-On: Kodachrome (Paul Simon)
-
by SnookerFan » 23 Oct 2012 Read
Monique wrote:Roland, I will admit without restriction that Selby wasn't negative at any moment of this final, quite the opposite given that he wasn't at his best and still went for at least a couple of very hard shots, and I will even admit that he has not been his (former) negative self for about a season, maybe a season and a half. But when Dotty made his comment, when Mark wrote his blog, and when others (hum …
) said he was, he truly was and in my opinion it didn't help his tally.
As for the "hard match players" wild is always waffling about, he tells me when one of this kind last won an event of some importance. I'm not counting in players like Higgins, Selby or Ronnie who are all capable of playing the hard matchplay way when needed, but are also capable and willing to attack when the opportunity is there. Playing defensively isn't the way winners play nowadays, not in any sport. It brings you consistency but rarely wins. For me a prime example of this is
Caroline Wozniacki who has been number 1 for quite a while but is yet to win a grand slam.
Bloody hell, not her again. They keep banging on about her on thesnookerforum when discussing Selby. I'd not heard of her last week, and now I'm sick of hearing her name.
-
SnookerFan
- Posts: 149897
- Joined: 13 December 2009
- Snooker Idol: Michaela Tabb
- Walk-On: Entry Of The Gladiators
-
by Wildey » 23 Oct 2012 Read
yup its as if Caroline Wozniacki is a sporting swear word or something.
she earned her dues working hard won tournaments Grand Slam occupies 8 weeks out of 52 in a year.....suerly being WN 1 is more than just Grand Slam or they might aswll cancel other events and let the players have a Rodney Walker style Holiday.
Caroline Wozniacki is a dane so shes great in my book
-
Wildey
- Posts: 64329
- Joined: 02 October 2009
- Location: North Wales
- Snooker Idol: Mark Selby
- Highest Break: 25
- Walk-On: the one and only
by hitman_ronnie1 » 24 Oct 2012 Read
Wild WC wrote:yup its as if Caroline Wozniacki is a sporting swear word or something.
she earned her dues working hard won tournaments Grand Slam occupies 8 weeks out of 52 in a year.....suerly being WN 1 is more than just Grand Slam or they might aswll cancel other events and let the players have a Rodney Walker style Holiday.
Caroline Wozniacki is a dane so shes great in my book
out the top 10 now is pushniacki.
-
hitman_ronnie1
- Posts: 243
- Joined: 18 July 2011
- Snooker Idol: the rocket
- Highest Break: 27
- Walk-On: atomic punk - van halen
by SnookerFan » 24 Oct 2012 Read
Tennis.
-
SnookerFan
- Posts: 149897
- Joined: 13 December 2009
- Snooker Idol: Michaela Tabb
- Walk-On: Entry Of The Gladiators
-
by hitman_ronnie1 » 24 Oct 2012 Read
SnookerFan wrote:Tennis.
the analogy would be this.
ronnie o sullivan is the serena williams of the snooker world.
although when he does decide to play he's not as dominant these days.
wozniacki is shaun murphy but without the double weirdness factor & the blonde hair.
-
hitman_ronnie1
- Posts: 243
- Joined: 18 July 2011
- Snooker Idol: the rocket
- Highest Break: 27
- Walk-On: atomic punk - van halen
by SnookerFan » 24 Oct 2012 Read
hitman_ronnie1 wrote:the analogy would be this.
ronnie o sullivan is the serena williams of the snooker world.
although when he does decide to play he's not as dominant these days.
wozniacki is shaun murphy but without the double weirdness factor & the blonde hair.
You clown.
You just think anybody who isn't Ronnie is 'double weird'. You're the only person I've ever heard use that term.
-
SnookerFan
- Posts: 149897
- Joined: 13 December 2009
- Snooker Idol: Michaela Tabb
- Walk-On: Entry Of The Gladiators
-
by Wildey » 24 Oct 2012 Read
hitman_ronnie1 wrote:Wild WC wrote:yup its as if Caroline Wozniacki is a sporting swear word or something.
she earned her dues working hard won tournaments Grand Slam occupies 8 weeks out of 52 in a year.....suerly being WN 1 is more than just Grand Slam or they might aswll cancel other events and let the players have a Rodney Walker style Holiday.
Caroline Wozniacki is a dane so shes great in my book
out the top 10 now is pushniacki.
But she wasent and she was a worthy no 1.
in the workplace you dont get promotion without putting the Work in that's the same principle as Rankings.
-
Wildey
- Posts: 64329
- Joined: 02 October 2009
- Location: North Wales
- Snooker Idol: Mark Selby
- Highest Break: 25
- Walk-On: the one and only
by hitman_ronnie1 » 24 Oct 2012 Read
Wild WC wrote:hitman_ronnie1 wrote:Wild WC wrote:yup its as if Caroline Wozniacki is a sporting swear word or something.
she earned her dues working hard won tournaments Grand Slam occupies 8 weeks out of 52 in a year.....suerly being WN 1 is more than just Grand Slam or they might aswll cancel other events and let the players have a Rodney Walker style Holiday.
Caroline Wozniacki is a dane so shes great in my book
out the top 10 now is pushniacki.
But she wasent and she was a worthy no 1.
in the workplace you dont get promotion without putting the Work in that's the same principle as Rankings.
worthy to an extent.
serena williams picks & chooses and generally dominates when she does play.
she's not world no1.
a good no1 wins slams as well like the current no1 azarenka.
who's better than pushniacki ever was.
if stephen hendry was in his early 20's now we'd be slagging him rotten if he weren't delivering in the big tournaments.
-
hitman_ronnie1
- Posts: 243
- Joined: 18 July 2011
- Snooker Idol: the rocket
- Highest Break: 27
- Walk-On: atomic punk - van halen
by hitman_ronnie1 » 24 Oct 2012 Read
SnookerFan wrote:hitman_ronnie1 wrote:the analogy would be this.
ronnie o sullivan is the serena williams of the snooker world.
although when he does decide to play he's not as dominant these days.
wozniacki is shaun murphy but without the double weirdness factor & the blonde hair.
You clown.
You just think anybody who isn't Ronnie is 'double weird'. You're the only person I've ever heard use that term.
nonsense.
most of the players on the tour i can stomach.
murphy is just a little weed of a man.
-
hitman_ronnie1
- Posts: 243
- Joined: 18 July 2011
- Snooker Idol: the rocket
- Highest Break: 27
- Walk-On: atomic punk - van halen
by Wildey » 24 Oct 2012 Read
Selby is Getting slagged However he is still the rightfull No 1 because he puts in the Hours and Consistent with it.
-
Wildey
- Posts: 64329
- Joined: 02 October 2009
- Location: North Wales
- Snooker Idol: Mark Selby
- Highest Break: 25
- Walk-On: the one and only
by KrazeeEyezKilla » 24 Oct 2012 Read
If I was a big Selby fan I'd be desperate to see off the top of the rankings. His form has dipped in the last year he's been at No.1. All it's done is put more pressure on him by having to live up to the status of World No.1 without the confidence or aura that comes with winning major titles. Before the expansion of the tour Selby was a player who seemed to find his best form at the Majors and his ranking was much lower than he should have been. He's now the opposite. If the rankings were done over a year he wouldn't be at the top. No player has been clearly been the best over the last two years but O'Sullivan was the best player of last season and Higgins for the season before. They would have kept the No.1 spot between them with maybe Trump or Williams having a brief run at the top.
-
KrazeeEyezKilla
- Posts: 4024
- Joined: 16 November 2009
- Location: Ireland
- Highest Break: 26
- Walk-On: Dazz Band - Let It All Blow
by SnookerFan » 24 Oct 2012 Read
To be honest, I'd be more interested in the Ronnie vs Hendry debate at this point.
-
SnookerFan
- Posts: 149897
- Joined: 13 December 2009
- Snooker Idol: Michaela Tabb
- Walk-On: Entry Of The Gladiators
-
by Wildey » 24 Oct 2012 Read
why do people bucking criticize him then hes a deserving no 1 case and debate close
-
Wildey
- Posts: 64329
- Joined: 02 October 2009
- Location: North Wales
- Snooker Idol: Mark Selby
- Highest Break: 25
- Walk-On: the one and only
by Wildey » 24 Oct 2012 Read
-
Wildey
- Posts: 64329
- Joined: 02 October 2009
- Location: North Wales
- Snooker Idol: Mark Selby
- Highest Break: 25
- Walk-On: the one and only
by Wildey » 24 Oct 2012 Read
Jewell wrote:You've given a very good description of yourself in that post. It's time for you to take a long hard look in the mirror before you embarass yourself any further.
What you on ?
Did i start selby not worthy no 1 ?
Did i DID I
DID I DID Iyou and your idiotic cronies are the embarrassment not only to the Site or the Sport but to yourself.
-
Wildey
- Posts: 64329
- Joined: 02 October 2009
- Location: North Wales
- Snooker Idol: Mark Selby
- Highest Break: 25
- Walk-On: the one and only