BetVictor Welsh Open Semi Finals Discussion !!

Cloud Strife wrote:

Wildey wrote:

simplysnooker wrote:IMO if Ding beats Ronnie in the final I put him as favourite at the Crucible

That would be brilliant for the sport.

It would be brilliant for the sport if Ronnie stayed around for another 20 years.

Hear, hear!

Great entrance Ding

If Ronnie can stay at the top of the game for the next decade he will be close to 50 - and I think that will prove, beyond a shadow of a doubt, he is the greatest ever snooker player. I'm sure Stephen Hendry is hoping he doesn't stay around that long!

I think Stephen Hendry will remain the greatest player ever over one decade of the sport. I doubt that feat will ever be surpassed. I don't recall any player having quite the same fear factor as Stephen Hendry at his best. The guy was like a robot. At least Ronnie seems human, Hendry - guy was a machine in human flesh. LOL

How did Perry win the first frame? I just started watching...

Had to pop out for lunch. Have I missed much?

Snooker Overdrive wrote:How did Perry win the first frame? I just started watching...

Perry potted long red at the start then nearly cleared up, just a little safety exchange at the end, looking very good though.

Ding gets on the board. Hopefully he'll settle and play better now.

Wildey wrote:

Snooker Overdrive wrote:I agree with that.

I Dont agree .

Times are changing Past records are still there in the record books if new tournament crops up they are for the future. everyone can have an opinion who the Greatest players are. But how many tournaments they win or centuries they make changes nothing.

Also @Cloud Strife

I don't want to dispute the importance of new tournaments, especially the IC which I consider the 4th most important on the tour. But the World, UK and Masters are just a cut above the rest, despite the recent devaluation of the UK. Ranking events come and go but these 3 have been there for a long time and nearly all players regard them the best tournaments to win. They are the benchmark for all great players. If we start to include more tournaments into the the term "majors" we also inflate the statistics and devaluate great achievements of the past.

Don't think the achievements of the past are devalued. No one says Joe Davis wasn't great because he didn't have a Masters or UK. No one thinks worse of John Spencer or Ray Reardon for not winning a UK. and no one will think worse of Davis, Hendry, or the class of '92 just because they never won the IC.

Greats will be greats.

As far as I'm aware, the term 'Triple Crown' has been used to describe the three most important events in snooker for at least a decade and probably substantially longer. I've heard the term used many times by the current pros or retired pros and it still seems that in terms of established prestige (which tends to require time and usually more than a couple of years) that the 'Triple Crown' events are still undoubtedly the most important to win for almost any snooker pro.


Hoping for a Ding O'Sullivan final here...

I reckon this first semi will go to the wire.

These things aren't unchangeable. Doubt the Masters and UK were considered majors as soon as they came onto the calendar.

Thorne (paraphrasing): ''Amazing to think Robertson could go on to make 100 or more centuries for the season, Ding is on 49 or so and that still puts him miles behind Robertson, and yet he's (Ding) had a better season.''

Case closed.

Anyway, Ding goes ahead with a ton.

Skullman wrote:These things aren't unchangeable. Doubt the Masters and UK were considered majors as soon as they came onto the calendar.

Right. Time is often required before a tournament is seen by the majority as, for example, a Major.

There seems to be a trend to define a player in terms of the number of 'major' title they have won in the similar vein to tennis and golf when in fact there is only one major in snooker. I suspect it's come from Mark Selby fans who believe his three masters titles make up for zero world titles.

NNear wrote:Thorne (paraphrasing): ''Amazing to think Robertson could go on to make 100 or more centuries for the season, Ding is on 49 or so and that still puts him miles behind Robertson, and yet he's (Ding) had a better season.''

Case closed.

What case? No one's saying that all these tons make Robbo the player of the season. Are we not allowed to celebrate achievements apart from tournament wins?

Skullman wrote:

NNear wrote:Thorne (paraphrasing): ''Amazing to think Robertson could go on to make 100 or more centuries for the season, Ding is on 49 or so and that still puts him miles behind Robertson, and yet he's (Ding) had a better season.''

Case closed.

What case? No one's saying that all these tons make Robbo the player of the season. Are we not allowed to celebrate achievements apart from tournament wins?

I am a great celebrator of Robertson's current achievements. Feel free to join me.

NNear wrote:I am a great celebrator of Robertson's current achievements. Feel free to join me.

Will do. Maybe some other time when he's actually playing.

boris_the_butcher wrote:There seems to be a trend to define a player in terms of the number of 'major' title they have won in the similar vein to tennis and golf when in fact there is only one major in snooker. I suspect it's come from Mark Selby fans who believe his three masters titles make up for zero world titles.

Amount of Majors tends to correlate well with overall titles won anyway with some exceptions (Selby has only won 3 rankers as far as I recall).

In tennis, being the world no.1 is valued very very highly. It's interesting to never really see this mentioned in snooker. I think, for example, that Hendry being ranked as the very best of the best for nine years is one of his greatest achievements! By contrast, Ronnie managed five years and John Higgins four.

I guess I expected Ding to play something a bit more aggressive off that blue...

The recent article I read on this site about his style was really interesting and helpful to me in understanding him as a player more. Are there any more articles in the works for other current pros and maybe past pros (would love one for Hendry)?

Ding looks extremely focused right now. I thought this match would be tight but it might just end up being a blow-out.

I think it's because Selby haters dislike giving credit for anything, and admitting it as an achievement would be complimenting him.

More seriously, with rolling rankings, the WN1 spot can change rapidly, although that said, Selby's held it for a year, Robbo's held it for 9 months now. Only Judd's been a fleeting WN1 with a one month tenure.

Unexpected miss from Ding and Perry in. Could still be 2-2 at the MSI.

The 'Majors' thing is a red herring for folk who like to dip their toes into snooker and retain the right to tourist off 'minor' tournaments.

All that matters is is it an open tournament and have all 128 players tried to get to the finals? Ronnie rates the Masters; I don't rate it as highly because it's by invite. Players have to win more rounds to lift an open title so to me, it's worth more. Some tournaments are open but a lot of players won't enter, so they're worth less to me.

Can someone list the 2014 tournaments that are open and for which all or almost all (including Ronnie) entered please?

I think Selby's achievements at the Masters which is a legitimate 'Major' are incredible, to be frank.

He has an iffy record in ranking finals which is something he should look to rectify...


I do wonder if Selby will burn out more quickly than the likes of Robertson, Ding, Trump, because of his style. He seems to have to use up an awful lot of energy to produce a very high level of play. He consistently reaches the latter stages of tournaments but doesn't win with efficiency or in a prolific manner... just saying.


BUT.

What a frame steal this would be for Joe! THAT brown...

I don't see why Chinese tournaments should be discounted just because Ronnie can't be bothered to travel.

But here it is:

German Masters (technically qualifiers started in 2013, but majority of it was it 2014)
Welsh Open
Haikou World Open (same time frame as German Masters, but no Ronnie)
China Open (no Ronnie but he's the only exclusion)

Trumpster wrote:The 'Majors' thing is a red herring for folk who like to dip their toes into snooker and retain the right to tourist off 'minor' tournaments.

Anyway 3-1 Ding. Can see him pulling away now.