Cazoo British Open Semi Finals !!!

Of course the Triple Crown is a construct. Do you think it wouldn’t still be the Grand Slam if the BBC had never dropped the Grand Prix? Or if they promoted the Welsh Open from BBC Wales?

That doesn’t mean they aren’t also the tournaments that players value most. Because why wouldn’t they? They’ve had years of being browbeaten into it.

Bottom line is that the players want to win these tournaments the most. This is obvious. Just because the players want to win these the most, and because these tournaments have a long history, is why they are the benchmark. Higgins in that interview in 1999 is saying 'Triple Crown' and I don't think it's because the BBC brainwashed him. Hendry said back in the nineties those 3 events were top of his list and please don't tell me it's because he works for the BBC. There are many examples, as I showed in my previous post, of the top players only mentioning the Triple Crowns when talking about their achievements. This is why I think Triple Crown titles are the benchmark. Maybe the BBC came up with it, but the players seem to agree. The theory that it's a term invented in very recent years, as some have said, has been proven false by players like Hendry, Higgins, and Ronnie.

Ronnie seems to hate the BBC and he keeps talking about the Triple Crown as well.

When Hendon did his research on the term Triple Crown, the earliest mention he found was by John Higgins. If the BBC invented the term, why didn't Hendon find earlier mentions of the term made by the BBC? It seems the players were the first to use this term and the BBC then started using it as well.

Holden Chinaski wrote:When Hendon did his research on the term Triple Crown, the earliest mention he found was by John Higgins. If the BBC invented the term, why didn't Hendon find earlier mentions of the term made by the BBC? It seems the players were the first to use this term and the BBC then started using it as well.

If the BBC used the term Triple Crown while they had four tournaments, they would basically be belittling the fourth one as unimportant.

Holden Chinaski wrote:

HappyCamper wrote:well, if higgins gets to decide these things, he acknowledges that the tour champ is bigger than the uk.

"It has taken over the UK Championship without a shadow of a doubt," insisted Higgins, who is aiming to end a memorable season with victory in Llandudno before he chases a fifth world title next month.

Higgins doesn't get to decide anything. He was just an example of a player talking about Triple Crowns in the nineties, which is something that never happened according to people like Wild.

Hendry has said many times the Triple Crowns were always top of the list. Ronnie and Selby and many more keep saying it as well. If you look at the Twitter profiles of the top players, most of them only mention their Triple Crown titles in their bio.

For example, this is what Mark Selby writes in his bio on Twitter: "4x World Snooker Champion, 3x Masters Champion and 2x UK Champion. Also known as the Jester from Leicester."

And this is what Robbo writes: "Australian Snooker player. 3x player of the season. World Champion, triple crown winner."

Robbo doesn't even mention winning the Tour Championship twice.

buck Twitter yea players pundits alike has bought in to this tripple crown rubbish now Hendry Never mentioned it when he was winning them

There have always been tournaments that players used to Target

World and UK when the UK was longer and meant something but they were never a series of wins back in the day they were stand alone events no conection to one another

lol, twitter bios. that is desperate stuff.

you can find quotes from players saying all bunch of often quite contradictory things. robertson said the china open was bigger than the uk when he won that after they bumped the prize money and match length. fergal o'brien said he had no conception of his masters defeat to hunter being much more important then the british open when he was interviewed by dave hendon (or words to that effect).

the reality is that things change. even if the so called triple crown were established and considered the be all and end all in the nineties it is irrelevant now. then the uk had a different format and the tour champ didn't exist; now in 2022 the uk has a different format and the tour champ does exist.

SnookerFan wrote:

Holden Chinaski wrote:When Hendon did his research on the term Triple Crown, the earliest mention he found was by John Higgins. If the BBC invented the term, why didn't Hendon find earlier mentions of the term made by the BBC? It seems the players were the first to use this term and the BBC then started using it as well.

The BBC do overegg it though.

Irrespective of who said it first, the BBC do hype up the Triple Crown/Majors as the only thing worth winning.

When Ding won the UK Championship last, they were saying it was his first Major in 8 years. Though perhaps true, it felt something 0f a lie of omission. Or at least a deliberate attempt to belittle the other tournaments.

A casual observer might assume that Ding had won nothing for that time, and that wasn't true.

Yea the amount of cash China threw at the Sport and then for the BBC to belittle all that was disrespectful Ive Not thought of the UK as Better than China Open and International open or any of the Chinese Events The UK has lost its status badly over the last 30 years

HappyCamper wrote:lol, twitter bios. that is desperate stuff..

Why is that desperate? It is the only place where we can find bio's written by the players themselves. And it seems all the top players define their careers there by saying how many Triple Crowns they have. Even if they have won multiple Tour Championships they don't seem to care enough to mention that. But they all mention the Triple Crowns. Just an observation that seems telling.

Wildey wrote:Hendry Never mentioned it when he was winning them

OK so I guess Hendry was lying when he said his whole career he had three events he valued most (Worlds, UK, and Masters). Or maybe he has brain damage and doesn't remember.

SnookerFan wrote:For me, The Crucible is the only irrefutable major in the sport.

Everything other tournament is debatable, and depends on an individual's opinion of what makes a major prestigious

Agreed.

Twitter bios are marketing.

Neil Robertson also described the CoC as snooker’s fourth major. His opinion seems to change based on which tournament he won most recently.

Holden Chinaski wrote:

Wildey wrote:Hendry Never mentioned it when he was winning them

OK so I guess Hendry was lying when he said his whole career he had three events he valued most (Worlds, UK, and Masters). Or maybe he has brain damage and doesn't remember.

Hendry lying or misremembering are both very conceivable.

And given the state of his comeback I wouldn’t totally rule out brain damage either.

Iranu wrote:

Holden Chinaski wrote:

Wildey wrote:Hendry Never mentioned it when he was winning them

OK so I guess Hendry was lying when he said his whole career he had three events he valued most (Worlds, UK, and Masters). Or maybe he has brain damage and doesn't remember.

Hendry lying or misremembering are both very conceivable.

And given the state of his comeback I wouldn’t totally rule out brain damage either.

I have the impression that Hendry is a guy who always speaks his mind and he seems to remember every little detail of every match. But I guess when he talks about the Triple Crowns he becomes a different person and all of a sudden tries to say what the BBC wants or just doesn't remember which tournaments were priority for him...

Holden Chinaski wrote:

HappyCamper wrote:lol, twitter bios. that is desperate stuff..

Why is that desperate? It is the only place where we can find bio's written by the players themselves. And it seems all the top players define their careers there by saying how many Triple Crowns they have. Even if they have won multiple Tour Championships they don't seem to care enough to mention that. But they all mention the Triple Crowns. Just an observation that seems telling.

what makes you think they're written by the players themselves and not their publicist or manager say.

it's part of marketing, and it makes sense to include what the wst and bbc are pushing. pr follows pr.

Holden Chinaski wrote:I have the impression that Hendry is a guy who always speaks his mind and he seems to remember every little detail of every match. But I guess when he talks about the Triple Crowns he becomes a different person and all of a sudden tries to say what the BBC wants or just doesn't remember which tournaments were priority for him...

I didn’t say he is lying or misremembering, I’m saying it’s possible.

There’s a difference between speaking your mind about what’s happening right now and accurately remembering how you felt about things 30 years ago. The human memory is notoriously unreliable, it’s far from impossible that he’s projecting his current opinions on the TC to his prime playing days.

The impression that I have of Hendry is that he absolutely wanted to win every match and every tournament he played in no matter what it was.

Don’t forget the history of the UK and Masters were a fraction of what they are now when Hendry was winning them. When he won his first UK Championship the tournament was only a few years older than the Champion of Champions is today.

HappyCamper wrote:

Holden Chinaski wrote:

HappyCamper wrote:lol, twitter bios. that is desperate stuff..

Why is that desperate? It is the only place where we can find bio's written by the players themselves. And it seems all the top players define their careers there by saying how many Triple Crowns they have. Even if they have won multiple Tour Championships they don't seem to care enough to mention that. But they all mention the Triple Crowns. Just an observation that seems telling.

what makes you think they're written by the players themselves and not their publicist or manager say.

it's part of marketing, and it makes sense to include what the wst and bbc are pushing. pr follows pr.

There are so many examples of the players saying Triple Crown titles are important. The Twitter bio's are just one example.

This interview with Selby is another example:

"Judd Trump is a great, says Mark Selby, but to become an all-time great he has to start winning more of the feted Triple Crown events.
And the Jester from Leicester says that although Trump has established himself as a great, to be considered an all-time great, he has to fatten out his Triple Crown collection."
"... maybe another couple of Triple Crown wins, victories at the UK Championship or the Masters. They are the big titles that everyone remembers and judges you on.”

https://www.eurosport.co.uk/snooker/wor ... tory.shtml

Holden Chinaski wrote:There are so many examples of the players saying Triple Crown titles are important. The Twitter bio's are just one example.

This interview with Selby is another example:

"Judd Trump is a great, says Mark Selby, but to become an all-time great he has to start winning more of the feted Triple Crown events.
And the Jester from Leicester says that although Trump has established himself as a great, to be considered an all-time great, he has to fatten out his Triple Crown collection."
"... maybe another couple of Triple Crown wins, victories at the UK Championship or the Masters. They are the big titles that everyone remembers and judges you on.”

https://www.eurosport.co.uk/snooker/wor ... tory.shtml

Mark Selby and Neil Robertson are examples of players who’ve spent the vast majority of their careers having the notion of the Triple Crown forced down their throats... is it any wonder Selby’s referring to it here?

Iranu wrote:Mark Selby and Neil Robertson are examples of players who’ve spent the vast majority of their careers having the notion of the Triple Crown forced down their throats... is it any wonder Selby’s referring to it here?

Well the top players all seem to have this notion. So just because all the best players want to win these tournaments the most, and because it's been this way for a long time, this is exactly why these tournaments show who the best players are. Why is it there are many top players who seem to not perform their best in the Triple Crowns? Because they know they are such a big deal and they have trouble dealing with the pressure!

Maybe the BBC has had a big role in this. I don't really care. The players seem to all agree that these tournaments matter most, and when you read interviews it seems it's been that way for a long time, and that's what I find important. Guys like Judd Trump like to say the other tournaments are just as important, but it seems to me he says that because he's not good enough to dominate in the Triple Crowns while greats such as Ronnie are capable of doing that.

Holden Chinaski wrote:

Iranu wrote:Mark Selby and Neil Robertson are examples of players who’ve spent the vast majority of their careers having the notion of the Triple Crown forced down their throats... is it any wonder Selby’s referring to it here?

Well the top players all seem to have this notion. So just because all the best players want to win these tournaments the most, and because it's been this way for a long time, this is exactly why these tournaments show who the best players are. Why is it there are many top players who seem to not perform their best in the Triple Crowns? Because they know they are such a big deal and they have trouble dealing with the pressure!

Maybe the BBC has had a big role in this. I don't really care. The players seem to all agree that these tournaments matter most, and when you read interviews it seems it's been that way for a long time, and that's what I find important. Guys like Judd Trump like to say the other tournaments are just as important, but it seems to me he says that because he's not good enough to dominate in the Triple Crowns while greats such as Ronnie are capable of doing that.

I pretty much agree with you. My only point is that the Triple Crown itself as a name and an achievement is a construct. Particularly this attempt to turn it into a ‘Series’.

Jimmy White doesn’t regret not winning the Triple Crown, he regrets not winning the World Title.

Iranu wrote:

Holden Chinaski wrote:

Iranu wrote:Mark Selby and Neil Robertson are examples of players who’ve spent the vast majority of their careers having the notion of the Triple Crown forced down their throats... is it any wonder Selby’s referring to it here?

Well the top players all seem to have this notion. So just because all the best players want to win these tournaments the most, and because it's been this way for a long time, this is exactly why these tournaments show who the best players are. Why is it there are many top players who seem to not perform their best in the Triple Crowns? Because they know they are such a big deal and they have trouble dealing with the pressure!

Maybe the BBC has had a big role in this. I don't really care. The players seem to all agree that these tournaments matter most, and when you read interviews it seems it's been that way for a long time, and that's what I find important. Guys like Judd Trump like to say the other tournaments are just as important, but it seems to me he says that because he's not good enough to dominate in the Triple Crowns while greats such as Ronnie are capable of doing that.

I pretty much agree with you. My only point is that the Triple Crown itself as a name and an achievement is a construct. Particularly this attempt to turn it into a ‘Series’.

Jimmy White doesn’t regret not winning the Triple Crown, he regrets not winning the World Title.

I agree with that. The Worlds is of course the most important one. Everybody agrees with that. And the Triple Crown is indeed just a made up name for something that's not official. But at the end of the day, it seems obvious that almost all of the players want to win these 3 tournaments more than all the others. They all keep mentioning that and Hendry has said it was that way for him even in the nineties. So just because the best players desperately want these titles, is why I find the Triple Crown titles important. If a player has won a lot of these tournaments, it means a lot.

If you go back far enough everything is a construct.