Post a reply

Re: Ronnie O'Sullivan talks retirement

Postby SnookerEd25

SnookerFan wrote:
Juddernaut88 wrote:snookerfan is turning into LDS with some of the essay posts lol


Explaining sense to you mugs takes a lot of words. <ok>


Good post <ok>

Re: Ronnie O'Sullivan talks retirement

Postby PLtheRef

SnookerFan wrote:I just doubt it happens. What's the point to any of it? Higgins World Series event was at a time when there were bugger all other events. That was the point of it. To get playing opportunities. There are plenty of those now. And even that only lasted a couple of seasons.

Also, the TV schedules are packed as it is with snooker. Even if we assume that the TV channels would want to put money up to show what is, essentially, a second Seniors Tour. How enthusiastic are the players that are finished in three or four years time going to be for joining Ronnie's tour, when they can just enter The Seniors anyway? That's already established and already has a structure, television coverage in place and prize money involved. What does Ronnie's new tour idea offer to the has-been players that the Seniors doesn't already offer.

Especially if Ronnie's plan is, as you suggest, to invite the Seniors into his tour. Why go through all that trouble of setting up a new tour and inviting everybody from the Seniors Tour onto it, when the easier thing to do is just have players join The Seniors Tour as and when it's convenient for them?

The only way I can see this happening, is if for some reason The Seniors Tour doesn't exist in four years time and they sort something else out.

Also, I suspect that we're putting more thought into this than Ronnie has himself. It's just something he mentioned in an interview.


I agree. It seems like he is trying to launch a product which already exists. Also, snooker is in a very different shape to what it was when the World Series of Snooker events were launched.

To me, it would suit Ronnie a lot more to have exhibition matches, events similar to how the Snooker Legends evenings ran before evolving into the World Seniors rather than having a competing tour.

I think what would suit Ronnie more is to have format of exhibitions similar to how the Snooker Legends events

Re: Ronnie O'Sullivan talks retirement

Postby SnookerFan

To be fair, I'm sure if he wants to play exhibitions, he can. I'm sure he'd be able to set up some games against Hendry or Jimmy or whoever in some local theatres. People will always turn out to watch Ronnie.

Re: Ronnie O'Sullivan talks retirement

Postby SnookerFan

HappyCamper wrote:wonder if there is a market of people who would pay per view to watch o'sullivan exhibitions on the telly.


If there was, Hearn would've exploited it.

Re: Ronnie O'Sullivan talks retirement

Postby Prop

Ronnie always seems to have these ‘big ideas’ every now and then. Whether it’s a breakaway tour, owning a nursing home (as he mentioned recently), or anything in between, he’s got this longstanding desire to create something of his own outside his snooker career. Which is great in theory - he’s made no secret of the fact his snooker career feels like a drag to him. It’s fair to say he was thrust into snooker at a young age by parents who had the means to facilitate his fast rise to the top, natural talent or not.

Everything is relative. Perhaps snooker is to Ronnie what a steady 9-5 is to the normal man. And nearly every normal man has a moment at least, where they think “sod this, I’m going to start my own business doing XYZ”. The normal man seldom follows it through, but it’s reasonable and common to have those aspirations of starting something they create and direct all by themselves.

Re: Ronnie O'Sullivan talks retirement

Postby KrazeeEyezKilla

SnookerFan wrote:
HappyCamper wrote:wonder if there is a market of people who would pay per view to watch o'sullivan exhibitions on the telly.


If there was, Hearn would've exploited it.


Hearn tried to do PPV for darts in 2004 with Phil Taylor & Andy Fordham. It was a disaster and he's never gone near it again.

Re: Ronnie O'Sullivan talks retirement

Postby Acé

Father time awaits no man no matter how naturally talented they are, in a way he's gone beyond expectations no one would've guessed he would've had a resurgence like he's had since 2012 - present

ROS will likely ride it out to 50 as he's nearly there anyway and call it a day if he can't win tournaments, LOL @ anyone who thinks he's gonna do a Jimmy White and be fine with continuous early losses

Re: Ronnie O'Sullivan talks retirement

Postby SnookerFan

SnookerEd25 wrote:But he’s done plenty PPV with Boxing before & after, surely? :chin:


I've explained this already. The casuals are fooled by it, because boxing is all hype and no sport nowadays.

Re: Ronnie O'Sullivan talks retirement

Postby Ronnie79

PLtheRef wrote:
SnookerFan wrote:I just doubt it happens. What's the point to any of it? Higgins World Series event was at a time when there were bugger all other events. That was the point of it. To get playing opportunities. There are plenty of those now. And even that only lasted a couple of seasons.

Also, the TV schedules are packed as it is with snooker. Even if we assume that the TV channels would want to put money up to show what is, essentially, a second Seniors Tour. How enthusiastic are the players that are finished in three or four years time going to be for joining Ronnie's tour, when they can just enter The Seniors anyway? That's already established and already has a structure, television coverage in place and prize money involved. What does Ronnie's new tour idea offer to the has-been players that the Seniors doesn't already offer.

Especially if Ronnie's plan is, as you suggest, to invite the Seniors into his tour. Why go through all that trouble of setting up a new tour and inviting everybody from the Seniors Tour onto it, when the easier thing to do is just have players join The Seniors Tour as and when it's convenient for them?

The only way I can see this happening, is if for some reason The Seniors Tour doesn't exist in four years time and they sort something else out.

Also, I suspect that we're putting more thought into this than Ronnie has himself. It's just something he mentioned in an interview.


I agree. It seems like he is trying to launch a product which already exists. Also, snooker is in a very different shape to what it was when the World Series of Snooker events were launched.

To me, it would suit Ronnie a lot more to have exhibition matches, events similar to how the Snooker Legends evenings ran before evolving into the World Seniors rather than having a competing tour.

I think what would suit Ronnie more is to have format of exhibitions similar to how the Snooker Legends events


He said he doesn't want it to be exhibitions he wants it to be a tour of 8 to 12 players who are still too good for the seniors. Imo Ronnie, Higgins and Willo will most likely all be playing in the seniors in 5 years anyway

Re: Ronnie O'Sullivan talks retirement

Postby Ronnie79

KrazeeEyezKilla wrote:
SnookerFan wrote:
HappyCamper wrote:wonder if there is a market of people who would pay per view to watch o'sullivan exhibitions on the telly.


If there was, Hearn would've exploited it.


Hearn tried to do PPV for darts in 2004 with Phil Taylor & Andy Fordham. It was a disaster and he's never gone near it again.


Ah the reason that didn't work out is because Andy Fordham collapsed and had a heart attack during that game and left the area in an ambulance. So does that not tell you why that didn't work ?.

Re: Ronnie O'Sullivan talks retirement

Postby SnookerFan

Ronnie79 wrote:
KrazeeEyezKilla wrote:
SnookerFan wrote:
HappyCamper wrote:wonder if there is a market of people who would pay per view to watch o'sullivan exhibitions on the telly.


If there was, Hearn would've exploited it.


Hearn tried to do PPV for darts in 2004 with Phil Taylor & Andy Fordham. It was a disaster and he's never gone near it again.


Ah the reason that didn't work out is because Andy Fordham collapsed and had a heart attack during that game and left the area in an ambulance. So does that not tell you why that didn't work ?.


Nor really. No disrespect to him, but Andy Fordham was a huge guy at the time Wouldn't that have more to do with a heart attack than anything?

Re: Ronnie O'Sullivan talks retirement

Postby SnookerFan

Dan-cat wrote:The only off putting thing about the seniors is having DT stood by the table commentating. And the shotclock. Oh and the no decider respot thing.


They didn't do most of those in the last one.

Re: Ronnie O'Sullivan talks retirement

Postby Ronnie79

Dan-cat wrote:The only off putting thing about the seniors is having DT stood by the table commentating. And the shotclock. Oh and the no decider respot thing.


The commentating is gone to a commentary box now and they got rid of the re spotted black 2 years ago

Re: Ronnie O'Sullivan talks retirement

Postby Ronnie79

SnookerFan wrote:
Ronnie79 wrote:
KrazeeEyezKilla wrote:
SnookerFan wrote:
HappyCamper wrote:wonder if there is a market of people who would pay per view to watch o'sullivan exhibitions on the telly.


If there was, Hearn would've exploited it.


Hearn tried to do PPV for darts in 2004 with Phil Taylor & Andy Fordham. It was a disaster and he's never gone near it again.


Ah the reason that didn't work out is because Andy Fordham collapsed and had a heart attack during that game and left the area in an ambulance. So does that not tell you why that didn't work ?.


Nor really. No disrespect to him, but Andy Fordham was a huge guy at the time Wouldn't that have more to do with a heart attack than anything?


The question was asked why hearn's ppv darts did not work out, that is the simple honest answer

Re: Ronnie O'Sullivan talks retirement

Postby KrazeeEyezKilla

I always guessed that the Taylor-Fordham match didn't get great numbers although thinking about it the Darts PPV idea became redundant the minute Barney joined the PDC as there were no real big PDC V BDO matches anymore.

Re: Ronnie O'Sullivan talks retirement

Postby Andre147

Prop wrote:Ronnie always seems to have these ‘big ideas’ every now and then. Whether it’s a breakaway tour, owning a nursing home (as he mentioned recently), or anything in between, he’s got this longstanding desire to create something of his own outside his snooker career. Which is great in theory - he’s made no secret of the fact his snooker career feels like a drag to him. It’s fair to say he was thrust into snooker at a young age by parents who had the means to facilitate his fast rise to the top, natural talent or not.

Everything is relative. Perhaps snooker is to Ronnie what a steady 9-5 is to the normal man. And nearly every normal man has a moment at least, where they think “sod this, I’m going to start my own business doing XYZ”. The normal man seldom follows it through, but it’s reasonable and common to have those aspirations of starting something they create and direct all by themselves.


This pretty much sums it up.

He wants these new ideas to keep himself interested in the game, but deep down he knows it wont be possible nor he's really willing to make such effort. His breakaway tour talk was another example.

I'm sure he'll come up with other ideas in the future, but no real intention to actually commit to them.

Re: Ronnie O'Sullivan talks retirement

Postby Muller

SnookerFan wrote:
Dan-cat wrote:Boxing isn't a sport anymore? What are you on about.


If you followed boxing, you'd know exactly what I meant. It's something that's complained about quite often among boxing fans.

It's more of a business than a sport. It's all politics. People with popularity that can draw a crowd get title shots that they don't necessarily deserve, people with decent resumes who don't have big fan-bases or who can't draw money are more likely to be ignored. There have been cases of a person who is #1 contender being paid to stand aside for a while, because the governing bodies or the promoters want to set up a fight that would sell more than one featuring the number one contender to the title.

There's countless boxers out there, who have spent most of their careers fighting journeymen, or just flat out fight garbage fighters, just to build up an undefeated record in the hope a big name will fight them and they'll be able to cash in. Often the bigger a name, the more risk averse they are. More interested in fighting people with positive records, than take any real risks at losing. (Or at least their promoters think that way.) I'm generalising, not everybody is like that. But there's far too much of it about these days, to the point it barely resembles an actual sport any more.

In short, it started becoming less of a sport and more of a business when they started to expand the amount of governing bodies there are. If there's several governing bodies, and consequently, several world titles per weight, nobody is governing with the sport's best interest at heart. They're governing the sport based on how much money can be made for their organisation.

Boxing is a funny one in that it aims itself at casual fans and not hardcore fans. A casual fan is more likely to buy a PPV because Sky tells them it's a good fight. A knowledgeable fan will be able to determine whether a PPV is worthy watching or not. Sky don't like that. They like people who can be persuaded to watch/pay for boxing irrespective of the quality of the fight. And let's not forget governing bodies bringing out things like silver titles, platinum titles, diamond titles. Basically brand new titles that had never existed before. They then ask if any promoters want to pay the fees to the governing bodies, so they can promote the young lad they look after vs a journeyman as being for 'a vacant title'. It sounds impressive, even if the title didn't exist last week and will often get vacated a few days after somebody wins it. As long as the majority fall for it, it won't stop.

It's not all like that. But a sport with several governing bodies, basically stops acting in the interest of the sport and starts acting in the interest of lining their pockets.

Sorry, that's a Zebra post. But, the discussion of why boxing is more of a business/con trick for casual fans than an actual sport could probably fill a book.



Totally agree with this. I was a huge boxing fan for many years, built up a collection of VHS tapes and DVDs and through most of the 1980s and into the 90s built up a collection of magazines. I also still have a number of books on it. It was probably my favourite sport ahead of snooker, darts and even (Welshman) rugby.

But I gradually fell out of love with it over the years, accelerating from the mid 2000s.
I was turned off by the multiple (and often meaningless) titles, Pay For View and the increased trash talk. It has got to the point where I can no longer watch it at all. At one time that would have been unthinkable.

So, no it is no longer a sport.