D4P wrote:Prop wrote:Exactly. This idea of Ronnie being under less pressure than in some other point in recent history [insert season to support flawed argument] to win the Worlds is completely missing the point. He’ll always be under huge pressure to win another. Whether he’s had a great season, a crap one, or somewhere in between.
I am distinguishing between "pressure Ronnie feels to equal/pass Hendry's WC record" and "pressure Ronnie feels as the favorite to win the WC, because of having had a great season".
There's nothing Ronnie can do to decrease the first type of pressure, but he does have some degree of control over the second, and his season thus far has (arguably) served to reduce the second type of pressure...
I’m not sure about the 37 rankers thing. It was never part of the conversation, and seems a bit irrelevant in context of what everyone has been discussing.
As for the Worlds - which was the focus of this discussion - yes, of course having a relatively unsuccessful season would lift external pressures somewhat (bookie odds, BBC fanfare etc), and I dare say within his own mind Ronnie would in that situation heap less of his own expectations aloft his shoulders.
The thing is, none of that translates into him realistically and genuinely being more likely to win the Worlds. If you allow me to simplify your argument for a moment for the sake of discussion, you’re effectively saying that a Ronnie playing crap snooker over the last few months is more likely to win the Worlds than a Ronnie that’s been playing brilliant snooker over the last few months. It doesn’t make sense. Nor do ‘patterns’ or ‘omens’. I’m not citing you directly in saying that, but it’s worth stating to the general audience here.
ETA: I misread what you were saying about Hendry. I thought you were talking about the the ranking title record rather than WC record. So disregard my first sentence there, apologies.