2019 World Snooker Championship (Mod Note Post One)

zuutroy

Link?

lassykk

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »

The more I think about Cahill and ROS the more worried I get.

I got a horrible feeling watching Hearn address the match in an interview.

Worried about what? Ronnie's state of mind or something else?

Separately, thanks to everyone who posted in here during the tournament. Didn't get to watch as much as I used to in previous years but kept up to speed as best I could via here

Road-Hog

Joe_ Public wrote: »

I dont believe you can talk about century scoring without reference to the table conditions they enjoy now. I dont fully understand why this point isnt fully grasped by people as we hear commentators talk often enough about the "super fine" cloths, faster tables and, latterly, the fact that they might as well be playing on "nine ball" (Stephen Hendry) tables these days. Previous generations played on heavy cloths with heavier balls that made maneuvering of the cue ball and splitting reds a much harder business than it is today. Mentality is definitely part of it to be sure, Hendry was revolutionary in that respect, but i think to compare players now and of the past in terms of century scored is an exercise in false equivalence as those generations simply could not do things the modern player can on what they had to deal with.

I think the Alex Higgins-Judd Trump comparison is very valid in one crucial respect. Higgins was a flamboyant, reckless player in the 70s who frittered several titles away with a cavalier kamikaze approach on the table. Should have won minimum 3 world titles in that period with his talent imo. By the 80s he had resurrected himself as a fine tactical player with a finely tuned safety game that won him a world title, UK title and a few other big prizes. Tragically as we know, a rabble rousing alcoholic had no real business enjoying a sustained run at the top of the game. But i do think something similar faced Trump over the previous 6-7 years in terms of his playing style.

Judd is truly a great player and his final performance was truly magnificent. He got a handy draw through the tournament this year, i thought, but he made the best of that good fortune and i salute him for it. However, it sticks in this craw a bit to hear the likes of the bbc (and barry hearn which is pretty much the same thing) hype the whole thing as the best ever, best ever final, best ever tournament, best ever standard etc etc. I honestly dont know how that best ever narrative squares with the fact that if everything was so truly wonderful, the game itself is declining and there is little talent coming through in the UK, nothing at all in Ireland and the average age of tournament winners has been steadily increasing for a decade. As someone mentioned earlier, this is the elephant in the room they completely ignore.

Anyway, maybe i'm just a cynical old crank unable to appreciate the greatness of all these guys scoring century after century on what are fast becoming glorified pool tables. But i just think it demeans the sport and is disrespectful to the former greats of the game that they are making scoring so much easier and then trying to sell it as some sort of dizzying, spellbinding modern standard. I dont believe that is the case at all.

Are the pockets wider these days also vs what they were in the 70’s/80’s. Mr Higgins used to bring this point up in his latter days as a player.

tanko

Road-Hog wrote: »

Are the pockets wider these days also vs what they were in the 70’s/80’s. Mr Higgins used to bring this point up in his latter days as a player.

They say the pockets aren't wider but
apparently because of the super fine cloths used now, the shape of the pocket jaws have been made straighter so that the cloth doesnt tear when pulled over the cushions.
The corner pockets were like buckets in this years championship, its no surprise there were so many century breaks.
The amount of balls that dropped after hitting the cushion two or three inches from the pockets or after bouncing in the jaws three or four times was a joke.

hetuzozaho

You'd not get a lot done with buckets that size.

Joe_ Public

Road-Hog wrote: »

Are the pockets wider these days also vs what they were in the 70’s/80’s. Mr Higgins used to bring this point up in his latter days as a player.

Honestly cant recall what Alex specifically said about pockets back in the day. But have had several discussions with people about this topic over the past few years and heard differing views. Some people think pockets were fairly generous too up to around late 80s and that, mostly due to a certain Mr Hendry in the 90s, they were stiffened up somewhat a decade later. I dont know how that can or could be verified. I watched snooker during all those periods and the issue of pockets never really occurred to me. All i know is that, unlike now, when i watched snooker back then, i wasn't going "how the f... did that drop?" at least twice every frame!

Holy Diver

I honestly think they need to do something about the pockets at this stage. It was much more exciting 10-15 years back when you had to be absolutely perfect to pot anything along the rail. Unlikely to happen of course as I’m sure it suits the agenda to have centuries being knocked in with gay abandon!

zuutroy

The Nal

One is zoomed in to make it look bigger, one isn't.

Fake pocket news.

mickdw

Look at the taper on the slate on the smaller looking one.

zuutroy

mickdw wrote: »

Look at the taper on the slate on the smaller looking one.

Yea, the zoomed in one is actually the 'smaller' one!

Hotblack Desiato

Impossible to prove any of this without a time machine really.

But IIRC there were a few televised tournaments in the mid 80s (not the Worlds) with larger than standard pockets, and Kirk Stevens (I think) got a 147 on one which was not officially recognised because of the pockets.

Memories are hazy on this so open to correction!

fryup

^^^^^^^^^^^^

bbc's pot black?

AllForIt

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

Impossible to prove any of this without a time machine really.

But IIRC there were a few televised tournaments in the mid 80s (not the Worlds) with larger than standard pockets, and Kirk Stevens (I think) got a 147 on one which was not officially recognised because of the pockets.

Memories are hazy on this so open to correction!

Memory works. I'm sure anyone who watched in the 90's remembers that if a ball hit the cush first down the side or bottom rails (because that's where the TV cameras were well positioned for a perfect view) the ball would not drop. You knew it was missed before the ball stopped rolling. Nowadays you see the red hitting the cush first and still going in way too often. It's easy to see how this change makes century breaks totals higher as it's those reds near the cushion that are most difficult to pot.

champchamp

AllForIt wrote: »

Memory works. I'm sure anyone who watched in the 90's remembers that if a ball hit the cush first down the side or bottom rails (because that's where the TV cameras were well positioned for a perfect view) the ball would not drop. You knew it was missed before the ball stopped rolling. Nowadays you see the red hitting the cush first and still going in way too often. It's easy to see how this change makes century breaks totals higher as it's those reds near the cushion that are most difficult to pot.

100%. Once the ball touched the cushion first it would never drop. We used to laugh at 9 ball pool because the ball could hit the cushion 3 or 4 inches before the pocket and still drop. This year's worlds was diminished for me because of this, there were reds hitting the cushion an inch or two before the pocket and still somehow dropping. It's a joke.

zuutroy

I was watching a bit of old school snooker last night and the only comparable shot I came across was this one (Time not embedding right, go to 25:50). I have a feeling it would've dropped this year

Hotblack Desiato

zuutroy wrote: »

I have a feeling it would've dropped this year

Don't think it would have dropped this year at that pace.

volono

don't think it would have dropped either as he didn't strike it properly but back then you could be there all afternoon and you wouldn't of potted it, nowadays you'd have a chance. Any remember Binghams brown was it? this year on the 147 attempt, alot more difficult and nearly dropped. There's no doubt in my mind the cut of the pockets have gotten slightly easier like others have said. Some of the balls that managed to drop this year, the last number of years actually were ridiculous . It has been consciously done by Barry Hearn to make it more visually entertaining of course imo. Another century etc., what ruins it for me is that the top players are all extremely good amongst them and they don't miss much anyway. Its the long shots to get them in that have become that bit easier

zuutroy

I see Ronnie in the Telegraph today saying he won't play any Triple Crowns next year :rolleyes:

Nice way for him to get some column inches with his new book out. Interesting interview nonetheless. He alludes to having 'done something' with a mate a few days before his WC defeat but wouldn't expand.

You have to register to read it:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/snooker/2019/05/23/exclusive-ronnie-osullivan-interview-dont-want-play-world-championship/

spurshero

zuutroy wrote: »

I see Ronnie in the Telegraph today saying he won't play any Triple Crowns next year :rolleyes:

Nice way for him to get some column inches with his new book out. Interesting interview nonetheless. He alludes to having 'done something' with a mate a few days before his WC defeat but wouldn't expand.

You have to register to read it:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/snooker/2019/05/23/exclusive-ronnie-osullivan-interview-dont-want-play-world-championship/

Used to like Ronnie . But hate the way he now goes on as if the game and fans owe him . He has made millions from the game it owes him nothing . He’s like a big child with the it’s my ball syndrome . If he dosent want to play anymore don’t but stop going on about it

Sandor Clegane

spurshero wrote: »

Used to like Ronnie . But hate the way he now goes on as if the game and fans owe him . He has made millions from the game it owes him nothing . He’s like a big child with the it’s my ball syndrome . If he dosent want to play anymore don’t but stop going on about it

He does want to play, this is just attention seeking.

He does this all the time. He generally sulks after a loss, comes out with stuff like not wanting to play etc... all of this is so he can hear fans say don't go and we need you and love you, the game needs you and blah blah blah...

He's been at this for years.

Joe_ Public

zuutroy wrote: »

I see Ronnie in the Telegraph today saying he won't play any Triple Crowns next year :rolleyes:

Nice way for him to get some column inches with his new book out. Interesting interview nonetheless. He alludes to having 'done something' with a mate a few days before his WC defeat but wouldn't expand.

You have to register to read it:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/snooker/2019/05/23/exclusive-ronnie-osullivan-interview-dont-want-play-world-championship/

Might have to go and register and have a look. Typical trouble with ronnie interviews is that he says something ridiculous like the above which is barely worth quoting and it's all any of the papers focus on and the interesting stuff he does actually talk about gets ignored or pushed to the margins. Same as when he had that lively discussion with Steve Davis at the Masters. He made a few thought-provoking comments in that interview but all they focussed on was the stupid throwaway remark he made about a breakaway tour.

This is it

It's the reason I dislike him so much. The greatest snooker player I've ever seen but an awful pain in the arse

zuutroy

Joe_ Public wrote: »

Might have to go and register and have a look. Typical trouble with ronnie interviews is that he says something ridiculous like the above which is barely worth quoting and it's all any of the papers focus on and the interesting stuff he does actually talk about gets ignored or pushed to the margins. Same as when he had that lively discussion with Steve Davis at the Masters. He made a few thought-provoking comments in that interview but all they focussed on was the stupid throwaway remark he made about a breakaway tour.

I can post the text if you like, but I thought that was against the rules these days?

This is it wrote: »

It's the reason I dislike him so much. The greatest snooker player I've ever seen but an awful pain in the arse

I've often thought about it. Its tough to imagine the pressure of essentially carrying a sport on your shoulders, and that's going to be amplified ten-fold for someone who's had a chaotic enough life even before his fame. With Ronnie it comes out in threats to quit, stupid accents in interviews and all the carry on. Snooker like all individual sports requires the mental resolve to reach the peak, but another type of mental reserve to deal with the adulation and expectations of being a great, and Ronnie really doesn't have that. Same thing happened to Tiger but he acted it out in different ways.
I like the bit in the interview where he differentiates himself from Davis and Hendry by saying that they competed with everyone else, and he competes with himself. I still think that all of the stuff about 'I just show up coz I like playing and I don't care if I lose' is just deflection and he'd love that the be the case but he still really burns to cement his position as 'the best ever'. The reaction when he won the UK was not one of a man who just plays for fun.

In other news, two lads in Q school today played a 6 hour best of 7 match! The winner Lucas Kleckers had to immediately play his next match for a tour card and is currently 3-1 down.

Joe_ Public

zuutroy wrote: »

I can post the text if you like, but I thought that was against the rules these days?



I've often thought about it. Its tough to imagine the pressure of essentially carrying a sport on your shoulders, and that's going to be amplified ten-fold for someone who's had a chaotic enough life even before his fame. With Ronnie it comes out in threats to quit, stupid accents in interviews and all the carry on. Snooker like all individual sports requires the mental resolve to reach the peak, but another type of mental reserve to deal with the adulation and expectations of being a great, and Ronnie really doesn't have that. Same thing happened to Tiger but he acted it out in different ways.
I like the bit in the interview where he differentiates himself from Davis and Hendry by saying that they competed with everyone else, and he competes with himself. I still think that all of the stuff about 'I just show up coz I like playing and I don't care if I lose' is just deflection and he'd love that the be the case but he still really burns to cement his position as 'the best ever'. The reaction when he won the UK was not one of a man who just plays for fun.

In other news, two lads in Q school today played a 6 hour best of 7 match! The winner Lucas Kleckers had to immediately play his next match for a tour card and is currently 3-1 down.

Cheers, i'll go register anyway, only take a couple of minutes.

I agree about the UK, his reaction after winning was very revealing, even a bit surprising. Was refreshing to see how much it clearly meant to him. Personally, i find him a fascinating subject psychologically while others just instantly zone away from him. Will never fathom him i guess, why he says all those stupid things and what purpose they serve? No idea, but i also know he can be very interesting and thought provoking when he wants to be.

6 hours for a bo7 match is just ridiculous, guess it shows whats at stake for these guys.

zuutroy

Joe_ Public wrote: »

6 hours for a bo7 match is just ridiculous, guess it shows whats at stake for these guys.

Yep...there were 13 centuries in the first 90 matches!

Joe_ Public

zuutroy wrote: »

Yep...there were 13 centuries in the first 90 matches!

Could be tight tables...but still! There was a guy playing in World Championship qualifiers with a career high break of 60 so just goes to show how sharply the standard tends to drop once you start going down the rankings.

I see Cork lad Ross Bulman was just one match away from getting his tour card, good going for a 17 year old. I was looking out for Aaron Hill but seemed to be a bit unlucky to meet a decent chinese player earlier on. The lad who beat Kleckers, Jamie O'Neill, was a guy i heard a lot about around 10-12 years ago as being a serious talent but dont think he ever had the temperament to go with it.

waynescales1

Unlucky for the BBC, he's not competing in any of their events. They won't like that.

Loafing Oaf

Sandor Clegane wrote: »

He does want to play, this is just attention seeking.

He does this all the time. He generally sulks after a loss, comes out with stuff like not wanting to play etc... all of this is so he can hear fans say don't go and we need you and love you, the game needs you and blah blah blah...

He's been at this for years.

I basically only pay attention to snooker round the World Championship, but for people who have followed the sport year round for a long time, this stuff must get really tiresome. You just know he will keep coming back even after he's long past his best. Can see him in 15 years trying and failing to qualify like Jimmy White.

Inviere

waynescales1 wrote: »

Unlucky for the BBC, he's not competing in any of their events. They won't like that.

I'll believe it when I see it. I don't tend to listen to anything Ronnie says these days. And sure if he doesn't turn up, whatever, if Trump maintains his form it's a higher standard than Ronnie has been at anyway.