Post a reply

Re: Ronnie; I should've worn more

Postby Snooker Overdrive

I only watched snooker since the 2006/07 season so I can't really say if he has underachieved before that. Maybe he should have made another world because he was in a couple of semis and lost them. Since end of 2006 he should have won the 2010 Masters which for me as a Ronnie fan is still the worst defeat I have witnessed. Close to that was the 2009 UK semi final, I still think a lot about that Higgins match and the missed blue in the decider. Ronnie played a terrific tournament (he beat Stevens, Ebdon and Selby 9-3) and I know deep inside that he would have beaten Ding in the final. Also the 2010 and 2011 world quarter finals could have been won by Ronnie. And of course the 2008 Welsh Open final was a bit like the Shanghai Masters final this year - this time Williams instead of Ronnie.

But there were matches Ronnie shouldn't have won - the most important was the 2009 Masters, I re watched the last couple of frames and I still can't believe Selby didn't win this one. Also the 2008 Northern Ireland Trophy could well be Ali Carters if he hadn't missed the match ball in the deciding frame.

So all in all it isn't all bad. Last season was a disappointment but since the Worlds things are going well again and should Ronnie play like this weekend in the big tournaments again he will win more big titles, certainly.

Re: Ronnie; I should've worn more

Postby Wildey

yes i always thought Ronnie should have worn more clothes a wooly jumper a cardigan or maybe a anarak <laugh>

Re: Ronnie; I should've worn more

Postby Witz78

he should have won more without a doubt

the fact he was 25 before he won a world title when the others of his generation Williams and Higgins already had before him is significant, especially Williams who had developed probably about 3 or 4 years after Ronnie but then quickly hut a peak and started winning.

So yeh for me Ronnie should def have won at least 1 world title in the 2nd half of the 90s. He did come close a few times but at that stage he was already being touted as another Jimmy White who would fail to win the big one.

He won in 2001 beating Higgins then by time he won his next one in 2004 the really strong late 90s / early 00s era was coming to an end and with Ronnie now clearly head and shoulders above the rest, with Williams and Higgins dipping in form and Hendrys decline starting, plus the likes of Lee, Hunter, Stevens starting to lose their way, the game was in a transitional phase with new players like Ding, Maguire emerging.

Its this mid 200os era i feel when Ronnie should have kicked on and bagged a good few more.

2005 he blew up v Ebdon from 8-2 up in the QF to lose it 13-11 in an infamous game when the title was all but there for the taking.

2006 semi final 3rd session he had a mare and lost the plot against Dott losing all 8 frames. Think he scratched his head and made it bleed during this session then handed his cue to a boy in the crowd.

In 2007 he narrowly lost a QF to Higgins which marked the start of Higgins comeback to form and the period where he would overtake Ronnie in achievements as well as become something of a nemesis to Ronnie.

Ronnie did bounce back in style in 2008 to claim his 3rd world title aged 32 and i remember at that point there was genuine talk from Ronnie and pundits alike that he could make a late push to challenge Hendrys tally of 7. I was one i must admit who thought by now, 2011 he would prob have won another 2 out of last 3 and been on 5 titles.

It wasnt to be though and his decline since 2008 has been summed up by his collapses to Allen, Selby and Higgins at the WC when a peak Ronnie would have ran away with the matches after getting decent leads in them all. The more comebacks players make against him, the more battle scarred he gets, not to mention an element of decline having set in.

However as hes shown this season in many glimpses, when on form hes still easily among the top 3 or 4 players in the world, so if he knuckles down and remains focused, i see no reason why he wont do a Higgins and have an0ther purple patch of winning big events.

Re: Ronnie; I should've worn more

Postby Tubberlad

Smart wrote:Scratched his head 2005 vs Ebbo. :-D

He should have 5 world titles. 3 is a poor yield. <ok>

1999? Had a change to go 14-12 up against Hendry, didn't take it...
2002? Hot favourite by semi-final stage.
2005? Best player in the world by a mile, led Ebdon 8-2 and blew it.
2006? Hot favourite by semi-final stage again.
2010? Should've beaten Selby, but this was the least clear cut, Robertson or Dott could've beaten him too.

3 is definitely a poor yield considering how good he is :hatoff:

Re: Ronnie; I should've worn more

Postby SnookerFan

Wild wrote:yes i always thought Ronnie should have worn more clothes a wooly jumper a cardigan or maybe a anarak <laugh>


rofl

buck sake I'm turning into you. <doh>

Re: Ronnie; I should've worn more

Postby Bourne

Sonny wrote:Considering his mental game, 3 is about right.

And mentality is more important in a sport like snooker than almost any other, so 3 has to be fair if not an overachievement considering how many good players there've been in the last few years.

Re: Ronnie; I should've worn more

Postby SnookerFan

Tubberlad wrote:
Smart wrote:Scratched his head 2005 vs Ebbo. :-D

He should have 5 world titles. 3 is a poor yield. <ok>

1999? Had a change to go 14-12 up against Hendry, didn't take it...
2002? Hot favourite by semi-final stage.
2005? Best player in the world by a mile, led Ebdon 8-2 and blew it.
2006? Hot favourite by semi-final stage again.
2010? Should've beaten Selby, but this was the least clear cut, Robertson or Dott could've beaten him too.

3 is definitely a poor yield considering how good he is :hatoff:


He had a change? Was that when he put on the wolly jumpers?

Re: Ronnie; I should've worn more

Postby SnookerFan

My hilarious gags aside, the comments about the mental side of his game are correct.

I think Ronnie complaining about how much he won is a bit rich. He might've won the UK Championship in 2006 if he hadn't have walked out on a match. And how many times has he conceded when there was balls on the table for which he could win? Or just taken on reckless shots when he's not trying? Or threatened to quit because he doesn't like the game any more?

I might even controversially suggest that Ronnie was as much to blame for being knocked out by Ebdon in 2005 then his opponent. Okay, Ebdon's slow play rattled him. But he had run up a big lead in that match. Even if Ebdon was playing slow on purpose, it was only effective because Ronnie let it be. He seemed to feel the pressure and fold, whereby others might have kept their head.

This isn't a vodkadiet style rant, somebody will remind me, as if it was needed, that Ronnie suffers from mental problems. But the fact that he has underachieved is in part down to his attitude towards the game, no matter what those reasons for him having the attitude are.

Re: Ronnie; I should've worn more

Postby Casey

I think most players will feel they could have won more, but at Sonny says, the mental side of the game is just as important and that's why Ronnie had made 3 finals - the same as Dott, Ebdon and Doherty.

Re: Ronnie; I should've worn more

Postby N_Castle07

3 is a good tally but I agree he could have won more. 1999 & 2002 spring to mind. Having said that he has also won a few majors which could of gone the other way, I remember one year when he won the masters Doherty got an awful kick on MATCH BALL Ronnie went on to win the match and the event. Snooker like many sports is full of if's and but's I think he needs to forget about the past and focus on the future. Ronnie and Higgins are still good enough to win another world title.

Re: Ronnie; I should've worn more

Postby Wildey

Bourne wrote:
Sonny wrote:Considering his mental game, 3 is about right.

And mentality is more important in a sport like snooker than almost any other


thats spot on .

its all in the mind they all got talent or they wouldn't be there and considering Ronnies fragile mentality his talent alone has carried him through more than any other player.

Re: Ronnie; I should've worn more

Postby Tubberlad

Three World Titles does not tell the story of Ronnie O'Sullivan. So much better than that. It says it all about his mentality though.

Re: Ronnie; I should've worn more

Postby GJ

SHOULD HAVE

COULD HAVE

WOULD HAVE

ALL

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

Re: Ronnie; I should've worn more

Postby Bourne

Robbo shouldn't have won 1 considering the odds suggested he got a 1 in a 100,000 lucky draw :limp: :john:

Re: Ronnie; I should've worn more

Postby GJ

Bourne wrote:Robbo shouldn't have won 1 considering the odds suggested he got a 1 in a 100,000 lucky draw :limp: :john:



:weeds: :wave:

Re: Ronnie; I should've worn more

Postby Bourne

GJ wrote:
Bourne wrote:Robbo shouldn't have won 1 considering the odds suggested he got a 1 in a 100,000 lucky draw :limp: :john:



:weeds: :wave:

Am only messing bro :afro:

Re: Ronnie; I should've worn more

Postby PLtheRef

Ronnie should certainly have won a lot more from the game, - truthfully, he doesnt deserve more than he has won, but he

He was the last of the 92 brigade to win the title and when he'd played John and Mark he'd wound up being defeated, John in particular when he beat Ronnie 17-9 in 1998 when you would have expected him to win the title by then. - Given what Ronnie achieved when very young many didnt expect it to win the title at the late age of 25.

The ones which got away
2002 when his mouth got the better of him, from the moment he made his comments about Stephen it said that being honest it showed that Stephen was the first player that really worried him. Had he kept quiet, he could have beaten him quite easily and you'd have made him favourite for the final.

In 2005, he should never have let slip the 8-2 lead against Peter, no matter hw

Truthfully, we could go on about what trophies Ronnie let get away for a long time, given his abilities which he
has demonstrated in the years where he has took the titles so comfortably, namely 2004 and 2008.

TBH, The best thing Ronnie could have done whch he didnt do was take the year off which he planned ahead of the 2005/06 season. That season he won nothing minus the Premier League he won nothing, two contrasting defeats against John Higgins that season immediately set back Ronnie to an extent that against John in particular, Ronnie's not recovered.

Re: Ronnie; I should've worn more

Postby SnookerFan

To be fair another example of Ronnie just verbalising whatever comes into his head. He was also the one who always said that he didn't care how many trophies he won, he cared more about entertaining the fans. Now suddenly he's saying he could and should have won more.

Skilled though he is, Ronnie's chat does become very :zzz: at times.

Re: Ronnie; I should've worn more

Postby Andre147

Definately, Ronnie should have won more by now at this stage of his career... But, the thing is, would it be the same Ronnie O´Sullivan we all know? probably not, or maybe yes, I don´t really know, but, apart from that, his attitude towards the game is what led him to not win some more titles...
As many of you said earlier, I think in 2002 and also 2006 he definately had a golden chance to win the worlds, and, by some coincidence, both finals would have been against ebdon... if he indeed had reached the final in 2006, that match from 2005 at the Crucible against him would definately spring to mind, but they already had played that season, in the Masters 2006.. but 2002 and 2006 would have been his certainly.... he would now be at least with 5 worlds, which would be very good, not saying 3 isn´t, but, given his natural talent and those atributes associated with it, he should have won those... he whould have won 5 by now.... still, as Sonny also said, it´s a mental game, and, as Ronnie has also stated many times, the format of the Worlds is not suited for his type of game, hence the 3 world....
But all this ifs, and shoulds, and so on... really don´t lead us anywhere, do they...? I personaly think that the loss from Ronnie at the Masters 2010 against his "best mate" :love: :john: Selby really really hurt him, and from that point on he hasn´t been the same player since then... don´t get me wrong, he can still play his best snooker in patches, like in that ptc final and the others ptcs he won, but still that loss hurt him, and that was evidenced by the fact that he walked out of the arena as soon has he received his cheque rofl and didn´t give aa donkey doo about selby...
Still, this season he has impressed me and I think most of his fans too, and his game is coming back toghther again, so I think, and would love also, that he could possibly win maybe another world, uk or even Masters title, it´s all up to him really, and if keeps his interest in the game, there´s no reason why he can´t do it, because, as we´ve already seen, when he is playing at his best, right now very few players can match him, but, the point is, those very few are the ones that can prevent him from winning titles in the future, I hope not, bu we shall see what the future has to offer :john:

Re: Ronnie; I should've worn more

Postby Roland

It's also worth noting that he's not finished yet and as long as he stays sharp he'll be a contender at the Crucible for the next 10 years if he wants it.

Re: Ronnie; I should've worn more

Postby mishcka

Sonny wrote:It's also worth noting that he's not finished yet and as long as he stays sharp he'll be a contender at the Crucible for the next 10 years if he wants it.

:hatoff: nice one :D!

Re: Ronnie; I should've worn more

Postby SnookerFan

Sonny wrote:It's also worth noting that he's not finished yet and as long as he stays sharp he'll be a contender at the Crucible for the next 10 years if he wants it.


Yes. And, he certainly looks like he's trying in PTCs now.

Nothing is certain with Ronnie, as he could burn his toast the first morning of the UK and throw a tantrum during his match. But, the fact he's turning up in the smaller tournaments and winning is a good sign for him now.

Re: Ronnie; I should've worn more

Postby Roland

And another thing - all this talk of how many titles he's won and underachieving and all the rest, it's nonsense really at the end of the day because his place in history is more than assured and that's what it's all about.

Re: Ronnie; I should've worn more

Postby Witz78

Bourne wrote:As much for his infamy than his talent <ok>



rubbish

Take Alex for example, he was an inferior player to Ronnie and had far more infamy off the table, but even hell primarily be remembered as an exciting snooker talent,

Re: Ronnie; I should've worn more

Postby Smart

Witz78 wrote:
Bourne wrote:As much for his infamy than his talent <ok>



rubbish

Take Alex for example, he was an inferior player to Ronnie and had far more infamy off the table, but even hell primarily be remembered as an exciting snooker talent,


Not sure about that, Higgins will be remembered for drinking, headbutting and being banned moreso than playing quick snooker. People tend to focus on the bad, than the good from my experience. :gag:

Re: Ronnie; I should've worn more

Postby Bourne

Smart wrote:
Witz78 wrote:
Bourne wrote:As much for his infamy than his talent <ok>



rubbish

Take Alex for example, he was an inferior player to Ronnie and had far more infamy off the table, but even hell primarily be remembered as an exciting snooker talent,


Not sure about that, Higgins will be remembered for drinking, headbutting and being banned moreso than playing quick snooker. People tend to focus on the bad, than the good from my experience. :gag:

:spot on:

Ronnie's career, if it ended tomorrow, would be about what-ifs IMO