Post a reply

Number of maxis

Less than 3
0
No votes
3-4
0
No votes
5-6
2
18%
7-8
1
9%
9-10
0
No votes
More than 10
8
73%
 
Total votes : 11

Re: Maximum breaks 2015

Postby vodkadiet

There seems to be 1 a week these days. The game has been dumbed down for breakbuilding purposes, with little attention to tactical play. The short attention span of the public is to blame.

Re: Maximum breaks 2015

Postby Andre147

vodkadiet wrote:There seems to be 1 a week these days. The game has been dumbed down for breakbuilding purposes, with little attention to tactical play. The short attention span of the public is to blame.


No, the main responsibles to blame are Stephen Hendry and Ronnie O'Sullivan. :wave:

Re: Maximum breaks 2015

Postby Snooker Overdrive

vodkadiet wrote:There seems to be 1 a week these days. The game has been dumbed down for breakbuilding purposes, with little attention to tactical play. The short attention span of the public is to blame.


You won't win anything these days without a good tactical game. So at the top level you need the whole package.

Re: Maximum breaks 2015

Postby vodkadiet

Andre147 wrote:
vodkadiet wrote:There seems to be 1 a week these days. The game has been dumbed down for breakbuilding purposes, with little attention to tactical play. The short attention span of the public is to blame.


No, the main responsibles to blame are Stephen Hendry and Ronnie O'Sullivan. :wave:


Thinner cloths, lighter balls, bigger pockets.

Re: Maximum breaks 2015

Postby vodkadiet

I can't people even get excited about a maximum any more.

Re: Maximum breaks 2015

Postby NNear

vodkadiet wrote:
Andre147 wrote:
vodkadiet wrote:There seems to be 1 a week these days. The game has been dumbed down for breakbuilding purposes, with little attention to tactical play. The short attention span of the public is to blame.


No, the main responsibles to blame are Stephen Hendry and Ronnie O'Sullivan. :wave:


Thinner cloths, lighter balls, bigger pockets.


Since what date did these things change?

Are cloths now any different to how they were in 2005? How about 1995?

When did the balls last get lighter and when did the pockets get bigger? I was under the impression and have been told many times that the pockets have become less forgiving than they used to be.

Re: Maximum breaks 2015

Postby vodkadiet

NNear wrote:
vodkadiet wrote:
Andre147 wrote:
vodkadiet wrote:There seems to be 1 a week these days. The game has been dumbed down for breakbuilding purposes, with little attention to tactical play. The short attention span of the public is to blame.


No, the main responsibles to blame are Stephen Hendry and Ronnie O'Sullivan. :wave:


Thinner cloths, lighter balls, bigger pockets.


Since what date did these things change?

Are cloths now any different to how they were in 2005? How about 1995?

When did the balls last get lighter and when did the pockets get bigger? I was under the impression and have been told many times that the pockets have become less forgiving than they used to be.


Incrementally they have changed over the years. I couldn't pin point a date. Just take a look at matches on youtube through the years.

Re: Maximum breaks 2015

Postby NNear

I've done plenty of that and don't see much difference, and certainly can't tell if the balls are lighter now than they were 20 years ago when players were making way less centuries and 147 breaks. The cloths look a similar speed and the pockets look a similar size.

I simply think the main reason for so many big breaks these days is that the more recent generations decided to adopt the apt play-style for the task (of break-building), maybe due to the revelation that was Stephen Hendry and his incredible break-building and due to changes in balls and cloth that -did- happen in the 80's, which caused a paradigm shift that needed some years to really establish itself. As such there are probably generally many more chances for big breaks these days and many more players willing to go for them. Hendry and O'Sullivan probably had less impressive century rates in the earlier to middle 90's because the general play style of the tour didn't lend itself so well to big breaks -- the old vanguard from a bygone era of primarily tactical play on slower cloths with heavier balls were still active on tour. If a player has to play a larger percentage of tactically inclined players over the course of a season, then perhaps the general assumption could be that less centuries will be scored. These days a player generally doesn't play so many tactically inclined/biased players, can look forward to an open game, and score a ton of tons.

Re: Maximum breaks 2015

Postby vodkadiet

NNear wrote:I've done plenty of that and don't see much difference, and certainly can't tell if the balls are lighter now than they were 20 years ago when players were making way less centuries and 147 breaks. The cloths look a similar speed and the pockets look a similar size.

I simply think the main reason for so many big breaks these days is that the more recent generations decided to adopt the apt play-style for the task (of break-building), maybe due to the revelation that was Stephen Hendry and his incredible break-building and due to changes in balls and cloth that -did- happen in the 80's, which caused a paradigm shift that needed some years to really establish itself. As such there are probably generally many more chances for big breaks these days and many more players willing to go for them. Hendry and O'Sullivan probably had less impressive century rates in the earlier to middle 90's because the general play style of the tour didn't lend itself so well to big breaks -- the old vanguard from a bygone era of primarily tactical play on slower cloths with heavier balls were still active on tour. If a player has to play a larger percentage of tactically inclined players over the course of a season, then perhaps the general assumption could be that less centuries will be scored. These days a player generally doesn't play so many tactically inclined/biased players, can look forward to an open game, and score a ton of tons.


The style of play is a major factor, but conditions have changed. I have spoken to a few players about this and it is what they have told me. The problem I have is that someone like Steve Davis is trying to inform the public that the standard is better because there are more big breaks. What absolute rubbish! It is like saying the standard of tennis is better because there are more aces. The man is so obsessed with rubbishing previous eras that he has taken to blatant lying to convince the public that we are living in an era of snooker like we have never seen before.

In fact at times when I listen to Steve Davis, he talks so much nonsense that I think he must have just swallowed a scrabble board!

Re: Maximum breaks 2015

Postby NNear

I do agree with you fundamentally in that we both perceive a change in style rather than assuming that change equals evolution or superiority. However, the top players currently have learned lessons from the great tacticians and break-builders of the past and tend to have high calibre and thoroughly rounded games: Ding, Robertson, Selby and others.

I do think the talk of improved standards are over the top. Ronnie said in a recent interview that he doesn't believe the top players from today are better than the top players from the 90's, and he's probably right. There is probably more depth though, or at least more apt depth due to not having to traverse a sudden change in tour playing conditions (in that any changes that have occurred since the 90's have been gradual and difficult to perceive).

Re: Maximum breaks 2015

Postby vodkadiet

NNear wrote:I do agree with you fundamentally in that we both perceive a change in style rather than assuming that change equals evolution or superiority. However, the top players currently have learned lessons from the great tacticians and break-builders of the past and tend to have high calibre and thoroughly rounded games: Ding, Robertson, Selby and others.

I do think the talk of improved standards are over the top. Ronnie said in a recent interview that he doesn't believe the top players from today are better than the top players from the 90's, and he's probably right. There is probably more depth though, or at least more apt depth due to not having to traverse a sudden change in tour playing conditions (in that any changes that have occurred since the 90's have been gradual and difficult to perceive).


The problem is the players don't have to think much these days. The conditions, and in particular the lack of different playing styles means it is all about 'smash the balls open and clear up'. It would be been interesting to see how some of today's younger players would had coped with the different playing styles and different conditions. They certainly wouldn't have been making lots of big breaks. A lot would have come unstuck and struggled to cope with the different tactics. Their temperaments would have been tested fully.

Re: Maximum breaks 2015

Postby shankly

I know it's a bit of a daft idea, but I would be interested to see what would happen if the cloth was shaved to random thicknesses, to the extent that players would have to alter shot choices and such. You'd have to adapt to the conditions quickly not knowing beforehand what sort of table you'll get, and have enough shots in your arsenal to cope with slow and fast conditions.

Re: Maximum breaks 2015

Postby vodkadiet

shankly wrote:I know it's a bit of a daft idea, but I would be interested to see what would happen if the cloth was shaved to random thicknesses, to the extent that players would have to alter shot choices and such. You'd have to adapt to the conditions quickly not knowing beforehand what sort of table you'll get, and have enough shots in your arsenal to cope with slow and fast conditions.


Good idea. Like tennis has different surfaces. It is a far better idea than shot clocks.

Re: Maximum breaks 2015

Postby Andre147

vodkadiet wrote:
shankly wrote:I know it's a bit of a daft idea, but I would be interested to see what would happen if the cloth was shaved to random thicknesses, to the extent that players would have to alter shot choices and such. You'd have to adapt to the conditions quickly not knowing beforehand what sort of table you'll get, and have enough shots in your arsenal to cope with slow and fast conditions.


Good idea. Like tennis has different surfaces. It is a far better idea than shot clocks.


The worst thing they did in Tennis was blue clay rofl pmsl What were they thinking? I think it only lasted one year, Federer won that tournament if I'm not mistaken.

Different surfaces in Snooker? I dont know how that would work out, shot clocks arent bad as long as its just for tin pot and fun events like Shootout. Serious events like Masters, ranking ones, CoC and so on should never have shot clocks.

Re: Maximum breaks 2015

Postby vodkadiet

Andre147 wrote:
vodkadiet wrote:
shankly wrote:I know it's a bit of a daft idea, but I would be interested to see what would happen if the cloth was shaved to random thicknesses, to the extent that players would have to alter shot choices and such. You'd have to adapt to the conditions quickly not knowing beforehand what sort of table you'll get, and have enough shots in your arsenal to cope with slow and fast conditions.


Good idea. Like tennis has different surfaces. It is a far better idea than shot clocks.


The worst thing they did in Tennis was blue clay rofl pmsl What were they thinking? I think it only lasted one year, Federer won that tournament if I'm not mistaken.

Different surfaces in Snooker? I dont know how that would work out, shot clocks arent bad as long as its just for tin pot and fun events like Shootout. Serious events like Masters, ranking ones, CoC and so on should never have shot clocks.


I am old enough to remember green clay!!! 90 minutes per set!!!! >-(

Re: Maximum breaks 2015

Postby Andre147

vodkadiet wrote:
Andre147 wrote:
vodkadiet wrote:
shankly wrote:I know it's a bit of a daft idea, but I would be interested to see what would happen if the cloth was shaved to random thicknesses, to the extent that players would have to alter shot choices and such. You'd have to adapt to the conditions quickly not knowing beforehand what sort of table you'll get, and have enough shots in your arsenal to cope with slow and fast conditions.


Good idea. Like tennis has different surfaces. It is a far better idea than shot clocks.


The worst thing they did in Tennis was blue clay rofl pmsl What were they thinking? I think it only lasted one year, Federer won that tournament if I'm not mistaken.

Different surfaces in Snooker? I dont know how that would work out, shot clocks arent bad as long as its just for tin pot and fun events like Shootout. Serious events like Masters, ranking ones, CoC and so on should never have shot clocks.


I am old enough to remember green clay!!! 90 minutes per set!!!! >-(


I know, like in Snooker, I'm a bit of an historian so I like to know my history and also love to watch Tennis great old matches, like Grass for instance at the US Open when Arthur Ashe won it.

Those were the days werent it... Best Tennis match for me is the McEnroe v Borg at Wimbledon 1980, with Nadal v Federer 2008 Final on level terms with that one.

The Jimmy Connors matches ar US Open were also great ones, as were the many matches between Andre Agassi and Sampras. Behind Snooker, Tennis is my favourite sport.

Re: Maximum breaks 2015

Postby vodkadiet

Andre147 wrote:
vodkadiet wrote:
Andre147 wrote:
vodkadiet wrote:
shankly wrote:I know it's a bit of a daft idea, but I would be interested to see what would happen if the cloth was shaved to random thicknesses, to the extent that players would have to alter shot choices and such. You'd have to adapt to the conditions quickly not knowing beforehand what sort of table you'll get, and have enough shots in your arsenal to cope with slow and fast conditions.


Good idea. Like tennis has different surfaces. It is a far better idea than shot clocks.


The worst thing they did in Tennis was blue clay rofl pmsl What were they thinking? I think it only lasted one year, Federer won that tournament if I'm not mistaken.

Different surfaces in Snooker? I dont know how that would work out, shot clocks arent bad as long as its just for tin pot and fun events like Shootout. Serious events like Masters, ranking ones, CoC and so on should never have shot clocks.


I am old enough to remember green clay!!! 90 minutes per set!!!! >-(


I know, like in Snooker, I'm a bit of an historian so I like to know my history and also love to watch Tennis great old matches, like Grass for instance at the US Open when Arthur Ashe won it.

Those were the days werent it... Best Tennis match for me is the McEnroe v Borg at Wimbledon 1980, with Nadal v Federer 2008 Final on level terms with that one.

The Jimmy Connors matches ar US Open were also great ones, as were the many matches between Andre Agassi and Sampras. Behind Snooker, Tennis is my favourite sport.


Tennis was better years ago when the surfaces were different. I liked the Lendl, Becker, Ebderg, Wilander era. I preferred tennis to snooker at one point, but now the game is too predictable. Not even single handed backhand players, and particularly not enough net players. Edberg vs Chang 1992 US semi was my favourite match, followed by Sampras vs Agassi 2000 Australian Open semi.

Re: Maximum breaks 2015

Postby NNear

Andre147 wrote:
vodkadiet wrote:
shankly wrote:I know it's a bit of a daft idea, but I would be interested to see what would happen if the cloth was shaved to random thicknesses, to the extent that players would have to alter shot choices and such. You'd have to adapt to the conditions quickly not knowing beforehand what sort of table you'll get, and have enough shots in your arsenal to cope with slow and fast conditions.


Good idea. Like tennis has different surfaces. It is a far better idea than shot clocks.


The worst thing they did in Tennis was blue clay rofl pmsl What were they thinking? I think it only lasted one year, Federer won that tournament if I'm not mistaken.

Different surfaces in Snooker? I dont know how that would work out, shot clocks arent bad as long as its just for tin pot and fun events like Shootout. Serious events like Masters, ranking ones, CoC and so on should never have shot clocks.



There was nothing wrong with the blue clay, except it made the ball easier to see for the viewers (according to majority opinion at the time). They made mistakes with the application of the clay to the surface which had nothing to do with the colour of the clay itself. Nadal and Djokovic kicked up a needless fuss and made grand presumptions about the clay behaving weirdly because it was blue/pink/green/black rather than red/orange. It was pretty pathetic from them, as they threw their toys out the pram. They have a history of complaining about surfaces though. For example, Nadal was displeased that the AO was sped up just a touch in I think it was 2014, questioning why the organisers had done this, rather than just getting on with the business and appreciating the fact that the slowed conditions of the tour over the last several years have increasingly fit inside his own wheelhouse.

The greediest champions want everything their way, though.

Re: Maximum breaks 2015

Postby NNear

shankly wrote:I know it's a bit of a daft idea, but I would be interested to see what would happen if the cloth was shaved to random thicknesses, to the extent that players would have to alter shot choices and such. You'd have to adapt to the conditions quickly not knowing beforehand what sort of table you'll get, and have enough shots in your arsenal to cope with slow and fast conditions.


I don't think this is a daft idea, but rather a good idea.

I'd like to see fast/medium/slow cloth tournaments. Why not trial it in some PTCs to see what effects it has on the game...

This will probably never happen though, as Snooker has always been severely streamlined and consistent in self contained periods (changes obviously happened over time). Tennis is the odd one out really when you think about the big sports in general.

Re: Maximum breaks 2015

Postby vodkadiet

NNear wrote:
Andre147 wrote:
vodkadiet wrote:
shankly wrote:I know it's a bit of a daft idea, but I would be interested to see what would happen if the cloth was shaved to random thicknesses, to the extent that players would have to alter shot choices and such. You'd have to adapt to the conditions quickly not knowing beforehand what sort of table you'll get, and have enough shots in your arsenal to cope with slow and fast conditions.


Good idea. Like tennis has different surfaces. It is a far better idea than shot clocks.


The worst thing they did in Tennis was blue clay rofl pmsl What were they thinking? I think it only lasted one year, Federer won that tournament if I'm not mistaken.

Different surfaces in Snooker? I dont know how that would work out, shot clocks arent bad as long as its just for tin pot and fun events like Shootout. Serious events like Masters, ranking ones, CoC and so on should never have shot clocks.[/quote

There was nothing wrong with the blue clay, except it made the ball easier to see for the viewers (according to majority opinion at the time). They made mistakes with the application of the clay to the surface which had nothing to do with the colour of the clay itself. Nadal and Djokovic kicked up a needless fuss and made grand presumptions about the clay behaving weirdly because it was blue/pink/green/black rather than red/orange. It was pretty pathetic from them, as they threw their toys out the pram. They have a history of complaining about surfaces though. For example, Nadal was displeased that the AO was sped up just a touch in I think it was 2014, questioning why the organisers had done this, rather than just getting on with the business and appreciating the fact that the slowed conditions of the tour over the last several years have increasingly fit inside his own wheelhouse.

The greediest champions want everything their way, though.


If you ever saw Kent Carlsson playing on green clay you wouldn't watch tennis again. It was awful. They used to call Nadal a moonballer but this guy took it to another level. They complained about Wilander vs Vilas in The French Open 1982 Final but every match Carlsson played was like this!

Re: Maximum breaks 2015

Postby vodkadiet

NNear wrote:
shankly wrote:I know it's a bit of a daft idea, but I would be interested to see what would happen if the cloth was shaved to random thicknesses, to the extent that players would have to alter shot choices and such. You'd have to adapt to the conditions quickly not knowing beforehand what sort of table you'll get, and have enough shots in your arsenal to cope with slow and fast conditions.


I don't think this is a daft idea, but rather a good idea.

I'd like to see fast/medium/slow cloth tournaments. Why not trial it in some PTCs to see what effects it has on the game...

This will probably never happen though, as Snooker has always been severely streamlined and consistent in self contained periods (changes obviously happened over time). Tennis is the odd one out really when you think about the big sports in general.


See how many centuries there are with 1980s conditions. These modern day players wouldn't know how to cope.

Re: Maximum breaks 2015

Postby NNear

I'm pretty sure the players of today would know how to cope with the changed conditions. There would be less centuries but as a group of players they are inherently better break-builders than the players from the 80's because that is the prevailing archetype. The players generally have solid and well rounded games today and therefore have good tactics, but it's certainly arguable as to whether they are tactically as good as the players from the 80's. Someone like Mark Selby would probably thrive on slow cloths as he has the patience and pure tactical ability to utilise the bias of the table but like Steve Davis he's also a very competent break-builder and has a terrific temperament, so he has the whole package to deal with the conditions. In the 80's though you had many more let's say Mark Selby types who, especially in harder scoring conditions, would be more than capable of undermining the fluency and attack of the less patient break-builders and players of today.


I've only seen Kent Carlsson in retrospect and have to say that I find his style is unpleasant, though I think some overly patient and less proactive players can be great fun to watch such as Mečíř, who was as smooth as a cat with some of the finest anticipation in history as you probably well know.

Re: Maximum breaks 2015

Postby vodkadiet

NNear wrote:I'm pretty sure the players of today would know how to cope with the changed conditions. There would be less centuries but as a group of players they are inherently better break-builders than the players from the 80's because that is the prevailing archetype. The players generally have solid and well rounded games today and therefore have good tactics, but it's certainly arguable as to whether they are tactically as good as the players from the 80's. Someone like Mark Selby would probably thrive on slow cloths as he has the patience and pure tactical ability to utilise the bias of the table but like Steve Davis he's also a very competent break-builder and has a terrific temperament, so he has the whole package to deal with the conditions. In the 80's though you had many more let's say Mark Selby types who, especially in harder scoring conditions, would be more than capable of undermining the fluency and attack of the less patient break-builders and players of today.


I've only seen Kent Carlsson in retrospect and have to say that I find his style is unpleasant, though I think some overly patient and less proactive players can be great fun to watch such as Mečíř, who was as smooth as a cat with some of the finest anticipation in history as you probably well know.


Miloslav was fantastic. Mats Wilander said of him "When I play him, I just feel like a spectator". He could have achieved much more. He just hated the limelight.