Post a reply

Who was the weakest player to become World Champion?

Dennis Taylor
2
9%
Joe Johnson
11
50%
Graeme Dott
2
9%
Neil Robertson
3
14%
Stuart Bingham
4
18%
 
Total votes : 22

Re: Weakest player to win the World Championship

Postby Ash147

Andre147 wrote:
kolompar wrote:
gallantrabbit wrote:Who did he beat and who did JJ beat...?

Johnson beat one of the greatest ever in a world final. Bingham beat Shaun Murphy.


And Bingham beat one of the greatest ever too in the Quarter-Finals... go figure...


Ronnie’s head wasn’t right at that WC, and for the second part of the 2014/15 season. We saw what happened at the 2013 WC when Ronnie played properly against Bingham.

Re: Weakest player to win the World Championship

Postby gallantrabbit

Bless him and his head...not saying Bingham is Ronnie, but he plaed top notch world class snooker that year and you shouldn' discredit him. He's playing in a similar way this week in patches. I think it's a hell of an achievement to do what he's done after years of truly being a journeyman and good luck to him.

Re: Weakest player to win the World Championship

Postby Badsnookerplayer

gallantrabbit wrote:Bless him and his head...not saying Bingham is Ronnie, but he plaed top notch world class snooker that year and you shouldn' discredit him. He's playing in a similar way this week in patches. I think it's a hell of an achievement to do what he's done after years of truly being a journeyman and good luck to him.

This

Re: Weakest player to win the World Championship

Postby gallantrabbit

Badsnookerplayer wrote:
gallantrabbit wrote:Bless him and his head...not saying Bingham is Ronnie, but he plaed top notch world class snooker that year and you shouldn' discredit him. He's playing in a similar way this week in patches. I think it's a hell of an achievement to do what he's done after years of truly being a journeyman and good luck to him.

This


?

Re: Weakest player to win the World Championship

Postby Badsnookerplayer

gallantrabbit wrote:
Badsnookerplayer wrote:
gallantrabbit wrote:Bless him and his head...not saying Bingham is Ronnie, but he plaed top notch world class snooker that year and you shouldn' discredit him. He's playing in a similar way this week in patches. I think it's a hell of an achievement to do what he's done after years of truly being a journeyman and good luck to him.

This


?

Means this is a good post

Re: Weakest player to win the World Championship

Postby rekoons

Badsnookerplayer wrote:
gallantrabbit wrote:Bless him and his head...not saying Bingham is Ronnie, but he plaed top notch world class snooker that year and you shouldn' discredit him. He's playing in a similar way this week in patches. I think it's a hell of an achievement to do what he's done after years of truly being a journeyman and good luck to him.

This

<ok>

Re: Weakest player to win the World Championship

Postby gallantrabbit

Ash147 are you trying to cover yourself from all angles...? Starting to sound like Ronnie himself. If Bingham becomes UK champion he'll have done it by beating Ronnie. Then I guess Ronnie will have been upset because Big Bad Bazza is bullying him...? And if Stuart loses tonight it'll prove the fluke theory???

Re: Weakest player to win the World Championship

Postby Ash147

gallantrabbit wrote:Ash147 are you trying to cover yourself from all angles...? Starting to sound like Ronnie himself. If Bingham becomes UK champion he'll have done it by beating Ronnie. Then I guess Ronnie will have been upset because Big Bad Bazza is bullying him...? And if Stuart loses tonight it'll prove the fluke theory???


No I'm just trying to give my analysis of the situation. Bingham could well win tomorrow, and that wouldn't be a surprise at all.

Re: Weakest player to win the World Championship

Postby Ash147

gallantrabbit wrote:Hmmm strange. Don't understand your thinking but there you go.


He's playing in a weak era against weak opposition. If he managed to beat a well past his best Ronnie, it wouldn't be a surprise.

Re: Weakest player to win the World Championship

Postby Johnny Bravo

Badsnookerplayer wrote:Ronnie used to get battered in the tougher years, but he is doing better now


Ronnie was mentally weaker in the past, that's the main reason for his losses. Had he met Steve Peters earlier (let's say in his late 20's or even early 30's), he would have had 10 world titles by now.

And getting back to the topic, I can't believe what I'm seeing with the votes so far. How on Earth can u people vote for Robbo and Bingo as weaker players than Denis Taylor ? :hmmm: :dizzy:

If they were to play a million matches against him, Bingo and Robbo would win a million times. Taylor is a joke compared to them. There are even amateurs nowadays that are better than he ever was. He has made 79 tons in his entire career. Even guys like Ian McCulloch, Rod Lawler and Gerard Greene have made more tons.
I know, the cloths were heavier back in the 80's and tons are not all that matter, but still, there is no way Taylor was a better player than Robbo or Bingo. :|

Re: Weakest player to win the World Championship

Postby gallantrabbit

Johnny Bravo wrote:
Badsnookerplayer wrote:Ronnie used to get battered in the tougher years, but he is doing better now


Ronnie was mentally weaker in the past, that's the main reason for his losses. Had he met Steve Peters earlier (let's say in his late 20's or even early 30's), he would have had 10 world titles by now.

And getting back to the topic, I can't believe what I'm seeing with the votes so far. How on Earth can u people vote for Robbo and Bingo as weaker players than Denis Taylor ? :hmmm: :dizzy:

If they were to play a million matches against him, Bingo and Robbo would win a million times. Taylor is a joke compared to them. There are even amateurs nowadays that are better than he ever was. He has made 79 tons in his entire career. Even guys like Ian McCulloch, Rod Lawler and Gerard Greene have made more tons.
I know, the cloths were heavier back in the 80's and tons are not all that matter, but still, there is no way Taylor was a better player than Robbo or Bingo. :|


Agree 100%.

Re: Weakest player to win the World Championship

Postby kolompar

Johnny Bravo wrote:
Badsnookerplayer wrote:Ronnie used to get battered in the tougher years, but he is doing better now


Ronnie was mentally weaker in the past, that's the main reason for his losses. Had he met Steve Peters earlier (let's say in his late 20's or even early 30's), he would have had 10 world titles by now.

And getting back to the topic, I can't believe what I'm seeing with the votes so far. How on Earth can u people vote for Robbo and Bingo as weaker players than Denis Taylor ? :hmmm: :dizzy:

If they were to play a million matches against him, Bingo and Robbo would win a million times. Taylor is a joke compared to them. There are even amateurs nowadays that are better than he ever was. He has made 79 tons in his entire career. Even guys like Ian McCulloch, Rod Lawler and Gerard Greene have made more tons.
I know, the cloths were heavier back in the 80's and tons are not all that matter, but still, there is no way Taylor was a better player than Robbo or Bingo. :|

How many do you think Bingham would have made in the '80s? He made only 115 in his first 15 seasons, he could only make more once they opened up the pockets and there were significantly more tournaments to play in.

Re: Weakest player to win the World Championship

Postby Johnny Bravo

kolompar wrote:
Johnny Bravo wrote:
Badsnookerplayer wrote:Ronnie used to get battered in the tougher years, but he is doing better now


Ronnie was mentally weaker in the past, that's the main reason for his losses. Had he met Steve Peters earlier (let's say in his late 20's or even early 30's), he would have had 10 world titles by now.

And getting back to the topic, I can't believe what I'm seeing with the votes so far. How on Earth can u people vote for Robbo and Bingo as weaker players than Denis Taylor ? :hmmm: :dizzy:

If they were to play a million matches against him, Bingo and Robbo would win a million times. Taylor is a joke compared to them. There are even amateurs nowadays that are better than he ever was. He has made 79 tons in his entire career. Even guys like Ian McCulloch, Rod Lawler and Gerard Greene have made more tons.
I know, the cloths were heavier back in the 80's and tons are not all that matter, but still, there is no way Taylor was a better player than Robbo or Bingo. :|

How many do you think Bingham would have made in the '80s? He made only 115 in his first 15 seasons, he could only make more once they opened up the pockets and there were significantly more tournaments to play in.


He was nowhere near as good in his early days as he is now. He has improved a lot.

Re: Weakest player to win the World Championship

Postby Holden Chinaski

kolompar wrote:How many do you think Bingham would have made in the '80s? He made only 115 in his first 15 seasons, he could only make more once they opened up the pockets and there were significantly more tournaments to play in.

Is that when Hendry started to miss the long pots? When they opened up the pockets? :chin:

Re: Weakest player to win the World Championship

Postby kolompar

Holden Chinaski wrote:
kolompar wrote:How many do you think Bingham would have made in the '80s? He made only 115 in his first 15 seasons, he could only make more once they opened up the pockets and there were significantly more tournaments to play in.

Is that when Hendry started to miss the long pots? When they opened up the pockets? :chin:

No, that was earlier. It's when Ronnie started to get them <ok>

Re: Weakest player to win the World Championship

Postby Holden Chinaski

kolompar wrote:
Holden Chinaski wrote:
kolompar wrote:How many do you think Bingham would have made in the '80s? He made only 115 in his first 15 seasons, he could only make more once they opened up the pockets and there were significantly more tournaments to play in.

Is that when Hendry started to miss the long pots? When they opened up the pockets? :chin:

No, that was earlier. It's when Ronnie started to get them <ok>

Wow, I didn't know they opened up the pockets in 1992.

Re: Weakest player to win the World Championship

Postby Andre147

If you think pockets are big today, check those from the 80s... I've seen countless YT maches from that period when they appear to be missed by miles and yet still fall in...

The main difference is cloths were much thicker, hence breaks were hard to be made.

So it's 50/50 between now and then... cloths now much thinner, but pockets back then even bigger.

Re: Weakest player to win the World Championship

Postby Badsnookerplayer

Andre147 wrote:If you think pockets are big today, check those from the 80s... I've seen countless YT maches from that period when they appear to be missed by miles and yet still fall in...

The main difference is cloths were much thicker, hence breaks were hard to be made.

So it's 50/50 between now and then... cloths now much thinner, but pockets back then even bigger.

Is there any evidence for this other than seeing old matches on telly?

I mean the pockets, not cloths.

Is there a definitive source that can prove sizes of pockets were different in different eras.

The main difference I recall is on the heavier cloths having to play slightly to the far jaw in the middles when playing slow against the nap.

The club tables I play on are definitely easier than in the 80s.

Re: Weakest player to win the World Championship

Postby Andre147

Badsnookerplayer wrote:
Andre147 wrote:If you think pockets are big today, check those from the 80s... I've seen countless YT maches from that period when they appear to be missed by miles and yet still fall in...

The main difference is cloths were much thicker, hence breaks were hard to be made.

So it's 50/50 between now and then... cloths now much thinner, but pockets back then even bigger.

Is there any evidence for this other than seeing old matches on telly?

I mean the pockets, not cloths.

Is there a definitive source that can prove sizes of pockets were different in different eras.

The main difference I recall is on the heavier cloths having to play slightly to the far jaw in the middles when playing slow against the nap.

The club tables I play on are definitely easier than in the 80s.


there's isn't scientific evidence, just those seen from the footage of the 80s... it's even more of a joke than today.

But like I said nowadays it's bad enough.

Re: Weakest player to win the World Championship

Postby Badsnookerplayer

Andre147 wrote:
Badsnookerplayer wrote:
Andre147 wrote:If you think pockets are big today, check those from the 80s... I've seen countless YT maches from that period when they appear to be missed by miles and yet still fall in...

The main difference is cloths were much thicker, hence breaks were hard to be made.

So it's 50/50 between now and then... cloths now much thinner, but pockets back then even bigger.

Is there any evidence for this other than seeing old matches on telly?

I mean the pockets, not cloths.

Is there a definitive source that can prove sizes of pockets were different in different eras.

The main difference I recall is on the heavier cloths having to play slightly to the far jaw in the middles when playing slow against the nap.

The club tables I play on are definitely easier than in the 80s.


there's isn't scientific evidence, just those seen from the footage of the 80s... it's even more of a joke than today.

But like I said nowadays it's bad enough.

There must be some evidence - like Clive Everton or someone would know.

I'll do my best


   

cron