Post a reply

Crucible Classics #1

Postby Pink Ball

At the top of my countdown is... well, you probably saw it coming a mile away:

1. 1985 Final: Dennis Taylor 18-17 Steve Davis
50(50)-88; 0-93(87); 2-49; 38-65; 1-95(55); 6-85(66); 20-83(58); 0-121(64,57); 59-49; 27-76(57); 63-48; 75(61)-27; 99(98)-19; 71(70)-1; 100(56)-0; 77-48; 68(53)-25; 43-72; 58-66; 80-45; 73(57)-2; 80(55)-1; 56-64; 46-58; 13-86(86); 82(61)-43; 17-78(66); 84(70)-29; 72(57)-4; 83(79)-29; 6-66; 0-81; 75-47; 71(57)-24; 66-62


Match progress: 0-1, 0-2, 0-3, 0-4, 0-5, 0-6, 0-7, 0-8, 1-8, 1-9, 2-9, 3-9, 4-9, 5-9, 6-9, 7-9, 8-9, 8-10, 8-11, 9-11, 10-11, 11-11, 11-12, 11-13, 11-14, 12-14, 12-15, 13-15, 14-15, 15-15, 15-16, 15-17, 16-17, 17-17, 18-17

Don't bother posting your memories/observations of this Crucible Classic. They're done to death by now.

Re: Crucible Classics #1

Postby HappyCamper

this happened a year before i was born, i remember nothing.

Re: Crucible Classics #1

Postby Ck147

I was 12, my first big memory of snooker, remember staying up late to watch this, like a good few million did. Snooker at its peak. Wonder if we'll ever see something like that in the UK again.

Re: Crucible Classics #1

Postby Iranu

Watching how cavalier Dennis was with trying to pot the black, I don’t see how he can criticise a player for taking any pot on on a final black.

Re: Crucible Classics #1

Postby Ck147

Iranu wrote:Watching how cavalier Dennis was with trying to pot the black, I don’t see how he can criticise a player for taking any pot on on a final black.

How did your double zoom date go? Did you score?

Re: Crucible Classics #1

Postby Andre147

Yes this has been discussed to death.

The standard of the final was awful to say the least, but there couldn't have been more drama.

Re: Crucible Classics #1

Postby Iranu

Ck147 wrote:
Iranu wrote:Watching how cavalier Dennis was with trying to pot the black, I don’t see how he can criticise a player for taking any pot on on a final black.

How did your double zoom date go? Did you score?

It was with my girlfriend and my sister and her boyfriend. It was really fun, it’s the second one we’ve done during lockdown. It generally involves alcohol and quizzing. I was dying this afternoon.

Re: Crucible Classics #1

Postby Iranu

Would this be #1 if Davis had won?

Not just in terms of your list, Pink, but generally. It would have had the same number of viewers, the same late night finish, the same drama and tension. But somehow I don’t think it would be so revered.

Re: Crucible Classics #1

Postby Andre147

Davis winning would have been more of the same story, similar to Hendry winning in 1994.

The fact Taylor won completed the fairytail story.

Re: Crucible Classics #1

Postby Iranu

Andre147 wrote:Davis winning would have been more of the same story, similar to Hendry winning in 1994.

The fact Taylor won completed the fairytail story.

Yeah that’s true.

In some ways, Joe Johnson can feel slightly aggrieved that his 1986 win is largely forgotten compared to 1985, when it was probably a much bigger story in terms of being a shock result, and maybe even a fairytale story being a local Yorkshire lad etc.

Crazy that Johnson came closer than anyone else except Ken Doherty. And it wouldn’t even have been that much of a story in terms of the ‘curse’ as it hadn’t even been around for a decade.

Does anyone know when the Crucible Curse became a “thing” that people talked about?

Re: Crucible Classics #1

Postby mick745

Andre147 wrote:Davis winning would have been more of the same story, similar to Hendry winning in 1994.

The fact Taylor won completed the fairytail story.


Agree. It would have just been put down as another routine Davis win, too close for comfort but a hattrick of wins for him. Taylor would have dined out on the plucky underdog who came so close.

Was a long match, viewers in 2020 would have found it pretty dull.

Re: Crucible Classics #1

Postby KrazeeEyezKilla

I've been dipping in and out of the stream of this on youtube today. Interesting to watch particularly the football results and the cuts away to Des Lynham.

Re: Crucible Classics #1

Postby vodkadiet1

I wanted Davis to win. I didn't want a massacre. The semis were both over a session early and the final looked like going the same way. In the end I would rather Davis had won 18-0 than Taylor win. I enjoyed the drama but not the result.

Re: Crucible Classics #1

Postby Empire State Human

That's my channel, and yeah, sorry about that. Don't know why youtube suddenly nuked it. It was timed perfectly* so that the winning ball went in at 20 past midnight too. :(

*by sheer fluke, but would've been cool had it worked.

Re: Crucible Classics #1

Postby SnookerEd25

That's what I figured. I was going to pick it up now for the final frame but no matter, I'll just go back and watch from about 5PM this afternoon, when I left off.

Many thanks for all the vids you've been uploading over the last couple of weeks - thoroughly enjoyed them

<ok>

Re: Crucible Classics #1

Postby Empire State Human

The shot that sticks out for me is the final red that Davis missed at 17-15 with a chance to make it 18-15. (11 hrs 29 mins in the video.) Far easier than the final black - it's an unbelievable miss. And then, a few minutes later, the green which Davis pots and somehow finishes snookered behind the blue. From that moment you got the feeling it wasn't to be.

"The standard of the final was awful to say the least"

For a while, it was generally believed that the standard was pretty good. Half centuries in half of the frames was considered decent. But yeah, even today when Davis was talking to Hendry in that Instagram chat he said that the standard was garbage. And it was, by today's standards.

Re: Crucible Classics #1

Postby Empire State Human

Apologies for double posting, but when I put this into the previous message I couldn't get past the spam filter for some reason.

"Does anyone know when the Crucible Curse became a “thing” that people talked about?"

Not 100% but I believe the original Crucible Curse was that there was no second time winner. The first six years had six different champions - Spencer, Reardon, Griffiths, Thorburn, Davis, Higgins ... so it was assumed it was impossible to win it twice. But then Davis did win it twice, and then defended the following year, so the 'curse' had to go through the rather awkward modification - 'no first time winner successfully defended', etc.

Which isn't much of a curse anyway, since it means you've won it. More interesting is if the curse was something like, if you don't win your second crucible final you never win it. (Adds a bit more pressure to someone's second final and is currently true - hence, White, Stevens, Carter.)

Re: Crucible Classics #1

Postby mick745

Empire State Human wrote:That's my channel, and yeah, sorry about that. Don't know why youtube suddenly nuked it. It was timed perfectly* so that the winning ball went in at 20 past midnight too. :(

*by sheer fluke, but would've been cool had it worked.


I have watched almost all the videos you have posted over the last fortnight - thoroughly enjoyed watching all the old games. Thank you for all your hard work.

Re: Crucible Classics #1

Postby SnookerEd25

I watched a lot of the '85 final yesterday expecting the standard to be poor, as that is the perceived wisdom these days but in fact I really enjoyed it. There was a lot of tactical stuff going on and, while there were no centuries, there were plenty of 50+s (Taylor had 13, Davis 9) and lots of frames in the balance right down to the colours which I find far more entertaining than a one-sided final, even if the standard is lauded as the best ever. Hence, give me 1985 over 2019 every time.


   

cron