BetVictor Welsh Open Final Discussion !!!

masterdoctorgenius wrote:when is the next tournament.

cant quickly enough forget this tournament. will remember that yellow

mantorok wrote:Why is it that last year's final thread was up to 24 pages and this years is nearly over and is only at 4 pages here on SI? lol

ttol wrote:Finals like this are all Hearn's fault. Too much tampering, shortening the rounds from best of 9s to 7s and the 128 format has killed this tournament.

ttol wrote:Finals like this are all Hearn's fault. Too much tampering, shortening the rounds from best of 9s to 7s and the 128 format has killed this tournament.

Snooker Overdrive wrote:Well done John Higgins, congratulations to your 26th ranking title!

masterdoctorgenius wrote:when is the next tournament.

cant quickly enough forget this tournament. will remember that yellow

vodkadiet wrote:

Snooker Overdrive wrote:This got to be John Higgins's easiest final since he played Billy Snaddon in the 1999 China International.

No, that the was 2005 Grand Prix final against Ronnie O'Sullivan.

ttol wrote:Finals like this are all Hearn's fault. Too much tampering, shortening the rounds from best of 9s to 7s and the 128 format has killed this tournament.

McChazzz wrote:Ok, as many points as I can make:

1) "Beating those players means nothing" - no, it definitely means something. It may not mean much, but it means that we're dealing with a player who is capable of beating top sixteen opposition. This isn't Lee Page in the final, this is a player slowly approaching the upper echelons of the game.

2) "A final is a different ball game" - Absolutely, and I wouldn't dispute that. Then again, a one table ranking semi-final was also meant to be breaking new ground for Woollaston, and he seemed to cope with that ok tonight. At the end of the day, it's still just snooker, albeit over more frames and with more pressure.

3) "Woollaston didn't play that well to beat MJW, he choked badly, he was a tad lucky MJW didn't take advantage of his chokes in the decider." - You and I must have been watching different matches, my friend! He made five 50+ breaks (strong scoring from anyone in a best of eleven), potted a fantastic green to go 2-0 up, and responded to losing two frames after the interval with two of his own to go 5-3 up. Yes, pressure told as he approached the finishing line, but he still won. He really only gave MJW one clear chance in the decider, and when MJW choked straight back (because hey, experienced players feel pressure too!), he closed it out with a sixty break.

4) "...him beating Higgins here would have to be regarded as one of the biggest upsets of all time in snooker." - No it wouldn't. Based on bookmakers odds, it would barely make the top fifty upsets this season! Just because the setting is a final doesn't make it astronomically more unlikely that Woollaston will win. It makes it more unlikely, but I'm saying everyone in this thread is wildly over-estimating how much so.

5) "Most of those opponents were over best of 7, while best of 17 is [a] completely different game" - It's different, but not completely so. Higgins' win probability has been set at 67%, while in a best of seven it would be about 60%. It's a difference, but it's not 99.99% as seems to be the general feeling! If you can beat top players in best of seven, you won't be far off beating them in a best of nine, and so on. He just beat a top player in a best of eleven - why is doing it in a Bo17 so different?

6) Not a lot of love for the die analogy, but I'm just quoting the odds; if you disagree with me, Coral out there will take your money at 8/15, etc etc. To say "a die is not mentally weak" wildly misses the point (and where was this mental weakness tonight?) - it's a way of comparing something you're familiar with the odds of (rolling a large number on a die) with something you all seem to have a poor grasp of the odds of (Ben's winning chances).

Just for fun, here's how I see the outcomes of that fictional die roll...

1 - Higgins comes out in the same form he showed early against Brecel, blitzes him early with power scoring and trademark steals, and Woollaston never recovers. Higgins wins 9-2 or 9-3, and everyone in this thread pats each other on the back, telling me how wrong I was.

2 - Higgins is more like the player in his match against Maguire, but Woollaston is a shadow of his previous performances and trails 6-2/7-1 going into the evening session without making a break over 30. With the pressure off he adds some respectability to the scoreline, but loses 9-4 or 9-5. Everyone in this thread pats each other on the back, telling me how wrong I was.

3 - Both players play roughly to their average strength, with Higgins being the better player and doing enough to win 9-6 or 9-7. Everyone in this thread pats each other on the back, telling me how wrong I was and making pains to point out that even if it had got close, Woollaston couldn't have won due to Higgins' experience/his mental weakness, etc.

4 - Both players play roughly to their average strength, but Woollaston holds a slender lead with just a few frames to go before losing tragically in a decider after numerous twitches. Everyone in this thread pats each other on the back and offers me more advice on how a die cannot see the winning line.

5 - Both players play roughly to their average strength, but Woollaston gets an early lead and doesn't relinquish it, winning either 9-7 or 9-8. Everyone in this thread bemoans how lucky Woollaston was, pointing out every Higgins miss (and ignoring that you only have to play better than the opponent that shows up) and saying how he should really retire as to lose to this guy is a disgrace.

6 - Higgins looks like the player who hadn't made a semifinal for ages, missing simple balls and playing loose safety, while Woollaston looks like the player who knocked out four top twenty players en route to the final (and who Carter called "unplayable for three frames"). Woollaston wins 9-5, and everyone says that such a freak result could never have been foreseen, just like Murphy 10-2 Robertson in the Masters final.

Skullman wrote:

ttol wrote:Finals like this are all Hearn's fault. Too much tampering, shortening the rounds from best of 9s to 7s and the 128 format has killed this tournament.

Top players make the finals in PTCs, so you can't really blame the format for this final. More like the other players just played crap all at the same time. Happened before Hearn came in, and will happen after he's gone.

Holden Chinaski wrote:

vodkadiet wrote:

Snooker Overdrive wrote:This got to be John Higgins's easiest final since he played Billy Snaddon in the 1999 China International.

No, that the was 2005 Grand Prix final against Ronnie O'Sullivan.

Same year Ronnie won his easiest Masters final against Higgins.

Snooker Overdrive wrote:John was very calm and reserved in his interview there. Especially after Rob asked him about his Crucible ambitions. I don't think he expects to win the Worlds again.

Andy Spark wrote:

mantorok wrote:Why is it that last year's final thread was up to 24 pages and this years is nearly over and is only at 4 pages here on SI? lol

Because this years final was extremely boring.

Snooker Overdrive wrote:John was very calm and reserved in his interview there. Especially after Rob asked him about his Crucible ambitions. I don't think he expects to win the Worlds again.

masterdoctorgenius wrote:

Snooker Overdrive wrote:John was very calm and reserved in his interview there. Especially after Rob asked him about his Crucible ambitions. I don't think he expects to win the Worlds again.

down playing the chances can be very dangerous for others. now every1 he will face in the next months knows he is a ranking event winner and have some extra pressure.

if higgins reaches the QF stage at the Worlds i make him the favourite to win the whole thing. every time he reached the QF since 2007 he went on to win the tournament.

masterdoctorgenius wrote:

Snooker Overdrive wrote:John was very calm and reserved in his interview there. Especially after Rob asked him about his Crucible ambitions. I don't think he expects to win the Worlds again.

down playing the chances can be very dangerous for others. now every1 he will face in the next months knows he is a ranking event winner and have some extra pressure.

if higgins reaches the QF stage at the Worlds i make him the favourite to win the whole thing. every time he reached the QF since 2007 he went on to win the tournament.

masterdoctorgenius wrote:

Snooker Overdrive wrote:John was very calm and reserved in his interview there. Especially after Rob asked him about his Crucible ambitions. I don't think he expects to win the Worlds again.

down playing the chances can be very dangerous for others. now every1 he will face in the next months knows he is a ranking event winner and have some extra pressure.

if higgins reaches the QF stage at the Worlds i make him the favourite to win the whole thing. every time he reached the QF since 2007 he went on to win the tournament.

Snooker Overdrive wrote:I'm not that surprised Higgins won another ranking title even though he was mostly rubbish these last 2 years. I've always said that he will be the new Peter Ebdon, winning a title out of nowhere every once in a while. The draw opened up and he hit good form at the same moment. It had to happen sometime, all his quality doesn't just vanish.

He played extremely well against Luca who really pushed him yesterday. He did what he had to today. All in all a good win.

Andre147 wrote:

masterdoctorgenius wrote:so cruel. a fluke decided this match

Even if Ben had leveled at 4-4 Higgins would still win this title, the only major diference would be the Final result could have been diferent, say 9-6 for example.

Snooker Overdrive wrote:I'm not that surprised Higgins won another ranking title even though he was mostly rubbish these last 2 years. I've always said that he will be the new Peter Ebdon, winning a title out of nowhere every once in a while. The draw opened up and he hit good form at the same moment. It had to happen sometime, all his quality doesn't just vanish.

He played extremely well against Luca who really pushed him yesterday. He did what he had to today. All in all a good win.