Hendry V O'sullivan- Whos the greatest?

Pighead · 03-03-2014 1:02am

stpaddy99 wrote: »

if anyone hasnt seen it please go and watch ronnies 147 in the final frame today to win the welsh open.....the shot he plays on the last red left handed is the best snooker shot ive ever seen
if he keeps this up he may go down as the greatest ever.
absolute genius

Stephen Hendry agrees with you! He tweeted the following after the match:

stephen hendry ‏@SHendry775 2h
Last red best shot I've seen
Time for the rest to step up or give him world title now

stpaddy99 · 03-03-2014 1:09am

Hendry 7 world titles
ronnie 5 so far

hendry 5 UK
Ronnie 4

Hendry 6 masters
Ronnie 5

Hendry 775 centuries
Ronnie 730

ronnie 12 maximums
hendry 11

hendry £10 million prize money
Ronnie £7.6 million

head to head Ronnie 30 - Hendry 21

Ranking titles
Hendry 36
Non ranking 38

Ronnie 26
Non ranking 24

still a fair way to go but if he keeps this up who knows?

stpaddy99 · 03-03-2014 1:11am

Pighead wrote: »

Stephen Hendry agrees with you! He tweeted the following after the match:

stephen hendry ‏@SHendry775 2h
Last red best shot I've seen
Time for the rest to step up or give him world title now

wow thats amazing thanks for that, great minds think alike lol
seriously hendry is the master and if he says that it has to be taken very seriously. that shot in any circumstances was phemoneal, but for a 147? its out of this world

wonderfullife · 03-03-2014 5:23am

I tweeted Hendry a few weeks back and asked him:

"Would you back yourself best-of-35 against Ronnie with both of you at the peak of your powers?"

He replied:

"Yes".

Now, all that means in practice is Hendry at his best feared nobody.

But it also says he thinks he's the best.

The crux of it is this - we'll never know for certain as their careers didn't overlap enough.

They're definitely 2 of the top 5 though.

I could build a very strong case for Joe Davis though.

This was a supremely talented individual. I can't understate how difficult it would have been to make a 147 break in 1955.

Heavy cloths. The modern table usually has a Strachan cloth which weighs 30oz and is sheared using modern methods and can be shaved to within 1/1000th of a millimetre using computers to aide that.

In 1955, when Davis made the first official 147 break, the cloth would have weighed 38oz's with a nap at least 5 times thicker than the modern nap.

I'm sure we've all played on a dodgy snooker table somewhere where you have to literally whack the balls to get any spin or movement. That's the type of cloth Davis played on.

Balls - The composite material used to make snooker balls in the 1940s and 1950s was so much heavier than the modern crystalite ball. Whilst they weren't as heavy as Ivory (which was like 2 stones) they weighed considerably more than the modern ball. Heavier balls meant a few things: 1. needing more power on each shot to achieve similar result to today and 2. Splitting the reds off black or blue much more difficult to do and requiring more power.

Also add in to that fact there was no table heaters.

To make a max in competition in 1955 , and indeed his 146 break in 1947, were monumental achievements.

More over, nearly every modern cue action and technique is textbook Davis.

I firmly believe with his talent, raw ability, dedication and brilliance, he would have been ranked number 1 in the world right now. He could only be as good as his era allowed. Very little competition, massive best-of-75 style matches and exhibtions. He was so far ahead of his time that he had few who he could practice with, let alone beat him.

Comparing eras is notoriously difficult and Ronnie is clearly the most natural genius our era has seen. But, as a snooker anorak, i've seen enough archive footage, testimonials and stories to believe Joe Davis would be at the absolute top of the game were he in his prime today.

My top 5 of all eras would probably look like this:

1. Ronnie
2. Joe Davis
3. Stephen Hendry
4. Steve Davis
5. Ray Reardon

If we are going purely on the modern era then:

1. Ronnie
2. Hendry
3. Davis
4. John Higgins
5. Ding

Ding is controversial given he's not a world champion but he's head and shoulders better than Robertson and Selby in my view (who are less talented but dedicated). Mark Williams would be a candidate given his world titles but he's ruined his legacy in latter years.

stpaddy99 · 03-03-2014 6:13am

wonderfullife wrote: »

I tweeted Hendry a few weeks back and asked him:

"Would you back yourself best-of-35 against Ronnie with both of you at the peak of your powers?"

He replied:

"Yes".

Now, all that means in practice is Hendry at his best feared nobody.

But it also says he thinks he's the best.

The crux of it is this - we'll never know for certain as their careers didn't overlap enough.

They're definitely 2 of the top 5 though.

I could build a very strong case for Joe Davis though.

This was a supremely talented individual. I can't understate how difficult it would have been to make a 147 break in 1955.

Heavy cloths. The modern table usually has a Strachan cloth which weighs 30oz and is sheared using modern methods and can be shaved to within 1/1000th of a millimetre using computers to aide that.

In 1955, when Davis made the first official 147 break, the cloth would have weighed 38oz's with a nap at least 5 times thicker than the modern nap.

I'm sure we've all played on a dodgy snooker table somewhere where you have to literally whack the balls to get any spin or movement. That's the type of cloth Davis played on.

Balls - The composite material used to make snooker balls in the 1940s and 1950s was so much heavier than the modern crystalite ball. Whilst they weren't as heavy as Ivory (which was like 2 stones) they weighed considerably more than the modern ball. Heavier balls meant a few things: 1. needing more power on each shot to achieve similar result to today and 2. Splitting the reds off black or blue much more difficult to do and requiring more power.

Also add in to that fact there was no table heaters.

To make a max in competition in 1955 , and indeed his 146 break in 1947, were monumental achievements.

More over, nearly every modern cue action and technique is textbook Davis.

I firmly believe with his talent, raw ability, dedication and brilliance, he would have been ranked number 1 in the world right now. He could only be as good as his era allowed. Very little competition, massive best-of-75 style matches and exhibtions. He was so far ahead of his time that he had few who he could practice with, let alone beat him.

Comparing eras is notoriously difficult and Ronnie is clearly the most natural genius our era has seen. But, as a snooker anorak, i've seen enough archive footage, testimonials and stories to believe Joe Davis would be at the absolute top of the game were he in his prime today.

My top 5 of all eras would probably look like this:

1. Ronnie
2. Joe Davis
3. Stephen Hendry
4. Steve Davis
5. Ray Reardon

If we are going purely on the modern era then:

1. Ronnie
2. Hendry
3. Davis
4. John Higgins
5. Ding

Ding is controversial given he's not a world champion but he's head and shoulders better than Robertson and Selby in my view (who are less talented but dedicated). Mark Williams would be a candidate given his world titles but he's ruined his legacy in latter years.

brilliant post, except for the last bit about ding. he wouldnt make the top 50 imo

otherwise brilliant thread and delighted someone mentioned the enormous changes in the balls and tables and cues which has made the game infinitely easier

Mr. Incognito · 03-03-2014 11:35am

If I had to pick someone to watch- it'd be Ronnie all day long.

If I had to put my life savings on a match between Peak Ronnie and Peak Henry

I'd put it on Henry. Ronnie is naturally more gifted but Henry was an unbelievable player who did everything perfectly combined with an excellent temperament. Ronnie will take on shots Henry never attempted because Henry didn't have to.

I prefer Ronnie as a player and a personality and I would root for him in a match between them, but in tears of dominance and the best all time. I think Henry pips it for me.

Bruthal · 04-03-2014 7:23pm

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

If I had to pick someone to watch- it'd be Ronnie all day long.

If I had to put my life savings on a match between Peak Ronnie and Peak Henry

I'd put it on Henry. Ronnie is naturally more gifted but Henry was an unbelievable player who did everything perfectly combined with an excellent temperament. Ronnie will take on shots Henry never attempted because Henry didn't have to.

I prefer Ronnie as a player and a personality and I would root for him in a match between them, but in tears of dominance and the best all time. I think Henry pips it for me.

Possibly what you would be putting your life savings on is which ronnie turns up. In my opinion, at his very best, no one who ever played would beat him.

Bruthal · 04-03-2014 7:27pm

stpaddy99 wrote: »

if anyone hasnt seen it please go and watch ronnies 147 in the final frame today to win the welsh open.....the shot he plays on the last red left handed is the best snooker shot ive ever seen
if he keeps this up he may go down as the greatest ever.
absolute genius

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aVfUhWjkp0A

Bruthal · 04-03-2014 9:06pm

stpaddy99 wrote: »

brilliant post, except for the last bit about ding. he wouldnt make the top 50 imo

10 or so ranking titles, 3 as a teenager, 5 maximums, 300+ centuries. Not bad for a player never making it inside the top 50.

stpaddy99 · 04-03-2014 9:18pm

what a priveliege it is to have watched these 2 legends in their prime....its also superb to hear how magnanimous both men are. I think ronnie gets a hard time for his attitude. hes an incredible sportsman who struggled with his dad being locked away. A word too for the legendary ray reardon who isnpired ronnie to win his first few titles with hi sold school coaching, his humour his warmth and immense experience. ray reardon is a giant in the game and better still,a true gentleman

Arthur Daley · 04-03-2014 9:46pm

Bruthal wrote: »

Possibly what you would be putting your life savings on is which ronnie turns up. In my opinion, at his very best, no one who ever played would beat him.

Yes, Ronnie at his best, will take Hendry 9 times out of ten, anyway.

Honourable mention to Jimmy at his peak, surely. He lived with Hendry at his peak in the 92 and 94 finals, but just fell short getting over the line. Also was damn close in 84 world final against Davis at the top of his game.

stpaddy99 · 04-03-2014 9:50pm

Bruthal wrote: »

10 or so ranking titles, 3 as a teenager, 5 maximums, 300+ centuries. Not bad for a player never making it inside the top 50.

fair point, I was a bit hasty with my argument. hed be top 20 but thats all at present. if he wins the world who knows.

stpaddy99 · 04-03-2014 9:54pm

Arthur Daley wrote: »

Yes, Ronnie at his best, will take Hendry 9 times out of ten, anyway.

Honourable mention to Jimmy at his peak, surely. He lived with Hendry at his peak in the 92 and 94 finals, but just fell short getting over the line. Also was damn close in 84 world final against Davis at the top of his game.

they met 51 times ronnie won 30. so thats 59%. your 9 out of 10 therefore is clearly an exaggeration.
agreed about whirlwind white, absolute legend...over 300 centuries, 28 titles (10 ranking) won the UK and the masters too..147 at the worlds ....plus his 6 world championship runners ups is an incredible achievement in itself

Bruthal · 04-03-2014 10:09pm

Arthur Daley wrote: »

Honourable mention to Jimmy at his peak, surely. He lived with Hendry at his peak in the 92 and 94 finals, but just fell short getting over the line. Also was damn close in 84 world final against Davis at the top of his game.

Once he had not won it before, the pressure mounted each time he made another final. Id say had he won it in 92 when well ahead, he might well not have cracked on that black in 94.

kryogen · 04-03-2014 11:54pm

Imo Ronnie is the best that has ever picked up a cue, but he needs to go and get the world titles to cement that in the record books, as of right now Hendry is the most impressive player and he deserves the high regard he is held in. He earned it by putting the titles on the board.

Ronnie needs to do the same so there is no doubt. In my mind there is none, but that wont be enough for everyone

Tiger Woods is the greatest golfer of all time, but it he still has someone elses record hanging over him in debates at times.

walshb · 17-04-2014 11:14pm

For records and statistics I would say Hendry reigns supreme, but for pure talent and overall skill it has to be Ronnie. An effortless potting machine. Comes more naturally to him than any other player ever. Both on their best form I would back Ronnie 7/10 times.

tomdempsey200 · 17-04-2014 11:20pm

peak Ronnie v peak Hendry

I reckon Ronnie would thrash him

matban · 17-04-2014 11:22pm

I think Hendry set the bar

O'Sullivan vaulted over it

stpaddy99 · 17-04-2014 11:24pm

walshb wrote: »

For records and statistics I would say Hendry reigns supreme, but for pure talent and overall skill it has to be Ronnie. An effortless potting machine. Comes more naturally to him than any other player ever. Both on their best form I would back Ronnie 7/10 times.

good post. theve had some awesome battles and I pretty agree with your appraisal......im delighted and somewhat amazed Ronnie has nearly fulfilled his monumental talent. for years it seemed to be wasted, but 5 world titles etc is a massive achievement. even with his genius it still takes years and years of hard work dedication preparation etc etc

Nuts102 · 18-04-2014 2:14pm

stpaddy99 wrote: »

good post. theve had some awesome battles and I pretty agree with your appraisal......im delighted and somewhat amazed Ronnie has nearly fulfilled his monumental talent. for years it seemed to be wasted, but 5 world titles etc is a massive achievement. even with his genius it still takes years and years of hard work dedication preparation etc etc

It has to be Ronnie in fairness. He said before the masters for the first time in years he practiced properly for a few weeks. Then he wins the masters dropping only a few frames it was fantastic. If he had Hendry' dedication he would have a few more world's.

seanhynes · 18-04-2014 10:19pm

Fully convinced ronnie will do five in a row and bow out at the top on 8 world titles.he'd be 40 then I can defo see him hanging up his cue when he gets that elusive 8th title, his attitude to the game is very refreshing the last year or so,seeing his programme on Eurosport I don't think iv seen him as hungry for more success

cack_handed · 19-04-2014 11:28am

Greatest snooker players of all time:

1. Ronnie O'Sullivan (right-handed)
2. Stephen Hendry
3. Steve Davis.
4. Alex Higgins
5. Ronnie O'Sullivan (left-handed)

Nuts102 · 24-04-2014 9:31am

cack_handed wrote: »

Greatest snooker players of all time:

1. Ronnie O'Sullivan (right-handed)
2. Stephen Hendry
3. Steve Davis.
4. Alex Higgins
5. Ronnie O'Sullivan (left-handed)

Yes Ronnie with his bad hand is better than the likes of Higgins and Williams who are multiple world champions, what a load of tripe.

walshb · 26-04-2014 4:52pm

And, as good as Alex was, he wouldn't stand a chance against the best players today or in recent years. The games skill level has improved so very much.

tomdempsey200 · 26-04-2014 5:28pm

how do pockets balls table and equipment compare for the 70s 80s 90s and 00s

who's got the advantage esp. with regard to pockets

walshb · 26-04-2014 5:34pm

tomdempsey200 wrote: »

how do pockets balls table and equipment compare for the 70s 80s 90s and 00s

who's got the advantage esp. with regard to pockets

Forget the pockets and balls. When you're tanked up with gargle they're the least of your worries.

badabing106 · 26-04-2014 9:02pm

I think Hendry would have the edge at the world championships. O Sullivan would not have had the discipline or the mental strength to cope with Hendry when things were not going his way

Bruthal · 26-04-2014 9:29pm

walshb wrote: »

Forget the pockets and balls. When you're tanked up with gargle they're the least of your worries.

I used to find being tanked up, and having empty pockets were directly related

tomdempsey200 · 26-04-2014 9:34pm

badabing106 wrote: »

I think Hendry would have the edge at the world championships. O Sullivan would not have had the discipline or the mental strength to cope with Hendry when things were not going his way

they played I think a half a dozen major finals at hendrys peak in the 90s

ronnie won all but 1 including masters and UK

world's maybe a different outcome but hendry had weak competition in the finals which flattered him

walshb · 27-04-2014 5:59pm

badabing106 wrote: »

I think Hendry would have the edge at the world championships. O Sullivan would not have had the discipline or the mental strength to cope with Hendry when things were not going his way

He did get the better of Ronnie a couple of times, but he also got crushed in a semi, 17-4 a few years back. I still maintain that Ronnie is better no matter what the venue when both at their best.

Hendry V O'sullivan- Whos the greatest?

Comments