Post a reply

Re: Pink Ball's Top 10 Players of All-Time

Postby Johnny Bravo

Badsnookerplayer wrote:I agree with lots you say Johnny but I disagree in this instance. I think Hendry would have had the better of Ding 7 or 8 times out of ten. Ding is a great player of the current era, but Hendry was a better player IMO


I also tend to think Hendry would win more, but not cause he's a better player, but cause he's stronger mentally.

Re: Pink Ball's Top 10 Players of All-Time

Postby Ck147

Johnny Bravo wrote:
Badsnookerplayer wrote:I agree with lots you say Johnny but I disagree in this instance. I think Hendry would have had the better of Ding 7 or 8 times out of ten. Ding is a great player of the current era, but Hendry was a better player IMO


I also tend to think Hendry would win more, but not cause he's a better player, but cause he's stronger mentally.

Yep, Hendry was a machine.

Re: Pink Ball's Top 10 Players of All-Time

Postby Holden Chinaski

Pink Ball wrote:Johnny, I like you. But how anyone could even countenance the idea of Selby, let alone Ding or Robertson, being better than Hendry is beyond my capabilities as a mere human being.

Indeed.

Re: Pink Ball's Top 10 Players of All-Time

Postby Ash147

Ding has a more polished all round game than Hendry did. Where Hendry was superior was his break building, long potting and mental fortitude, which were the three things that made him so successful.

Re: Pink Ball's Top 10 Players of All-Time

Postby SnookerFan

Ash147 wrote:Ding has a more polished all round game than Hendry did. Where Hendry was superior was his break building, long potting and mental fortitude, which were the three things that made him so successful.


The mental fortitude thing is key, for me.

I like Ding but his head has definitely dropped on many occasions when he is losing.

Saying that, Ding did come across a lot of mental scars after that *Ronnie* match. So I'm not making out that he's some mental midget. But he does, shall we say, lose his way sometimes in matches if things are going against him.

Re: Pink Ball's Top 10 Players of All-Time

Postby Ash147

SnookerFan wrote:
Ash147 wrote:Ding has a more polished all round game than Hendry did. Where Hendry was superior was his break building, long potting and mental fortitude, which were the three things that made him so successful.


The mental fortitude thing is key, for me.

I like Ding but his head has definitely dropped on many occasions when he is losing.

Saying that, Ding did come across a lot of mental scars after that *Ronnie* match. So I'm not making out that he's some mental midget. But he does, shall we say, lose his way sometimes in matches if things are going against him.


He does seem to look disinterested a lot of the time. It's almost as if his heart isn't in it anymore.

Re: Pink Ball's Top 10 Players of All-Time

Postby SnookerFan

Ash147 wrote:He does seem to look disinterested a lot of the time. It's almost as if his heart isn't in it anymore.


I think he's always had that. When he's on he's on, when he can't be bothered he's not there.

It's just more frequent now that he's not bothered.

Re: Pink Ball's Top 10 Players of All-Time

Postby Johnny Bravo

PinkBall wrote:Johnny, I like you. But how anyone could even countenance the idea of Selby, let alone Ding or Robertson, being better than Hendry is beyond my capabilities as a mere human being.


Pinkey, I wasn't commenting as to who is the greater player, my point was strictly related to who has the higher A game.
As Ash pointed out, Ding is a far better all rounder than Hendry.
Ash147 wrote:Ding has a more polished all round game than Hendry did. Where Hendry was superior was his break building, long potting and mental fortitude, which were the three things that made him so successful.


Ding can match or at least get close to Hendry's scoring power, but at the same time he is vastly superior in terms of tactical and safety play.

As SF pointed out, it is very plausible that Hendry is more likely to beat Ding simply cause he's mentally stronger, but my point was just about who has the better A game.

Re: Pink Ball's Top 10 Players of All-Time

Postby Iranu

Holden Chinaski wrote:Also, Hendry's long game was amazing. Maybe the greatest long potter ever.

Yeah I was gonna say this. Ding may have the superior safety game but Hendry’s long potting was way stronger than Ding’s is.

If excellent safety play could stop Hendry he wouldn’t have won so many tournaments in the 80s or toppled Davis off the top of the game.

Re: Pink Ball's Top 10 Players of All-Time

Postby Dan-cat

Iranu wrote:
Holden Chinaski wrote:Also, Hendry's long game was amazing. Maybe the greatest long potter ever.

Yeah I was gonna say this. Ding may have the superior safety game but Hendry’s long potting was way stronger than Ding’s is.

If excellent safety play could stop Hendry he wouldn’t have won so many tournaments in the 80s or toppled Davis off the top of the game.


Davis had excellent safety.

Re: Pink Ball's Top 10 Players of All-Time

Postby Ash147

Dan-cat wrote:
Iranu wrote:
Holden Chinaski wrote:Also, Hendry's long game was amazing. Maybe the greatest long potter ever.

Yeah I was gonna say this. Ding may have the superior safety game but Hendry’s long potting was way stronger than Ding’s is.

If excellent safety play could stop Hendry he wouldn’t have won so many tournaments in the 80s or toppled Davis off the top of the game.


Davis had excellent safety.


Exactly. That was Iranu's point.

Re: Pink Ball's Top 10 Players of All-Time

Postby Johnny Bravo

Holden Chinaski wrote:Also, Hendry's long game was amazing. Maybe the greatest long potter ever.

Hendry was indeed a great long potter, but the likes of Trump and Robertson exceed him.
Even Smurf beats him at certain types of long pots, where his magnificent cue action can be seen.

Dan-cat wrote:
Iranu wrote:
Holden Chinaski wrote:Also, Hendry's long game was amazing. Maybe the greatest long potter ever.

Yeah I was gonna say this. Ding may have the superior safety game but Hendry’s long potting was way stronger than Ding’s is.
If excellent safety play could stop Hendry he wouldn’t have won so many tournaments in the 80s or toppled Davis off the top of the game.


Davis had excellent safety.

That is true, Davis had a great safety game. However, the reason why Hendry still dominated the early 90's despite the fact that a few clearly outmatched him in the safety department is cause he was such a heavy scorer compared to them.
So even if they got in first, very rarely they were capable of winning the frame in one visit and thus punishing his mistakes.
That is not the case anymore nowadays. Most top players are more than capable of winning frames in one visit, and they do that far more often than the top guys in the early 90's.

Re: Pink Ball's Top 10 Players of All-Time

Postby Holden Chinaski

Johnny Bravo wrote:
Holden Chinaski wrote:Also, Hendry's long game was amazing. Maybe the greatest long potter ever.

Hendry was indeed a great long potter, but the likes of Trump and Robertson exceed him.
Even Smurf beats him at certain types of long pots, where his magnificent cue action can be seen..

I don't agree with that, but we've had this discussion before. Trump can screw back and do crazy stuff, but Hendry was the better long potter in my opinion. Hendry knocked the long ones in under pressure and always had perfect position. No need to screw back when you get position on the black.

Re: Pink Ball's Top 10 Players of All-Time

Postby Ash147

Holden Chinaski wrote:
Johnny Bravo wrote:
Holden Chinaski wrote:Also, Hendry's long game was amazing. Maybe the greatest long potter ever.

Hendry was indeed a great long potter, but the likes of Trump and Robertson exceed him.
Even Smurf beats him at certain types of long pots, where his magnificent cue action can be seen..

I don't agree with that, but we've had this discussion before. Trump can screw back and do crazy stuff, but Hendry was the better long potter in my opinion. Hendry knocked the long ones in under pressure and always had perfect position. No need to screw back when you get position on the black.


This.

Re: Pink Ball's Top 10 Players of All-Time

Postby Iranu

Smurph a better long potter than Hendry?

Come on now.

Smurph’s a good long potter but he’s seriously overrated in that department, in my opinion.

He’s also terrible at long pots that are frame ball (or effectively frame ball) which Hendry was so adept at.

Re: Pink Ball's Top 10 Players of All-Time

Postby Badsnookerplayer

When people look at players from a bygone era, they often underestimate their ability.

There were some phenomenal players right through from the early days. What they didn't have was the chance to play some of the shots the modern players do owing to the different table and ball specifications

These guys probably had an even better knowledge of certain lines and shots than modern players owing to their pedigree in billiards.

Re: Pink Ball's Top 10 Players of All-Time

Postby Johnny Bravo

Pink Ball wrote:I’m not convinced Johnny understands how good Hendry was. That is to say he was thunderbastardly good.


I have seen him play, I think he is vastly overrated in terms of how good he was at his peak.
That's not to say he isn't a great player, just not as good as he is portrayed or as some of you regard him.

Re: Pink Ball's Top 10 Players of All-Time

Postby Badsnookerplayer

Johnny Bravo wrote:
Pink Ball wrote:I’m not convinced Johnny understands how good Hendry was. That is to say he was thunderbastardly good.


I have seen him play, I think he is vastly overrated in terms of how good he was at his peak.
That's not to say he isn't a great player, just not as good as he is portrayed or as some of you regard him.

I grew up watching him Johnny and I was never a great fan of his as a person. I was a Jimmy fan amongst others.

But I have to say that Hendry was frighteningly and depressingly good.

Re: Pink Ball's Top 10 Players of All-Time

Postby Pink Ball

Johnny Bravo wrote:
Pink Ball wrote:I’m not convinced Johnny understands how good Hendry was. That is to say he was thunderbastardly good.


I have seen him play, I think he is vastly overrated in terms of how good he was at his peak.
That's not to say he isn't a great player, just not as good as he is portrayed or as some of you regard him.

Then I'm afraid I can't take what you say about snooker too seriously, my friend.

Re: Pink Ball's Top 10 Players of All-Time

Postby Johnny Bravo

Pink Ball wrote:
Johnny Bravo wrote:
Pink Ball wrote:I’m not convinced Johnny understands how good Hendry was. That is to say he was thunderbastardly good.


I have seen him play, I think he is vastly overrated in terms of how good he was at his peak.
That's not to say he isn't a great player, just not as good as he is portrayed or as some of you regard him.

Then I'm afraid I can't take what you say about snooker too seriously, my friend.


Pinkey, I'll make a football analogy so u can understand better.

Imagine 2 football teams playing each other.
Team A scores roughly 4 goals a match on average. At the same time it receives 3.
Team B scores roughly 3 games a match. However, it only receives 1.
Who is more likely to win, team A or team B ?!?

Re: Pink Ball's Top 10 Players of All-Time

Postby Holden Chinaski

Johnny Bravo wrote: Imagine 2 football teams playing each other.
Team A scores roughly 4 goals a match on average. At the same time it receives 3.
Team B scores roughly 3 games a match. However, it only receives 1.
Who is more likely to win, team A or team B ?!?

The team that has Stephen Hendry in it.

Re: Pink Ball's Top 10 Players of All-Time

Postby Johnny Bravo

Holden Chinaski wrote:
Johnny Bravo wrote: Imagine 2 football teams playing each other.
Team A scores roughly 4 goals a match on average. At the same time it receives 3.
Team B scores roughly 3 games a match. However, it only receives 1.
Who is more likely to win, team A or team B ?!?

The team that has Stephen Hendry in it.


<laugh>

Don't think so mate.

Re: Pink Ball's Top 10 Players of All-Time

Postby Pink Ball

Johnny Bravo wrote:
Pink Ball wrote:
Johnny Bravo wrote:
Pink Ball wrote:I’m not convinced Johnny understands how good Hendry was. That is to say he was thunderbastardly good.


I have seen him play, I think he is vastly overrated in terms of how good he was at his peak.
That's not to say he isn't a great player, just not as good as he is portrayed or as some of you regard him.

Then I'm afraid I can't take what you say about snooker too seriously, my friend.


Pinkey, I'll make a football analogy so u can understand better.

Imagine 2 football teams playing each other.
Team A scores roughly 4 goals a match on average. At the same time it receives 3.
Team B scores roughly 3 games a match. However, it only receives 1.
Who is more likely to win, team A or team B ?!?

Hendry.

Re: Pink Ball's Top 10 Players of All-Time

Postby Johnny Bravo

Badsnookerplayer wrote:I think johnny knows a lot about snooker but is looking at Hendry through ros tinted spectacles.


Look, the main point I'm trying to make is that he never was a complete player.
His offense may have been world class, but how can he win when his defense was just average ?!

Re: Pink Ball's Top 10 Players of All-Time

Postby Badsnookerplayer

Johnny Bravo wrote:
Badsnookerplayer wrote:I think johnny knows a lot about snooker but is looking at Hendry through ros tinted spectacles.


Look, the main point I'm trying to make is that he never was a complete player.
His offense may have been world class, but how can he win when his defense was just average ?!

Well it is about style of play.

Hendry won because his mentality was frightening.

His long potting and scoring put real pressure on his opponents safety and to be fair his safety was not too shabby either.

The game has changed a lot since Hendry's prime but I am convinced he would have battered opponents in any era.

Re: Pink Ball's Top 10 Players of All-Time

Postby Pink Ball

Johnny Bravo wrote:
Badsnookerplayer wrote:I think johnny knows a lot about snooker but is looking at Hendry through ros tinted spectacles.


Look, the main point I'm trying to make is that he never was a complete player.
His offense may have been world class, but how can he win when his defense was just average ?!

Because his long potting was arguably the greatest I’ve ever seen as well. I’ve never seen a better player at turning a half or even a quarter-chance of an opener into ‘frame won’,