Post a reply

Could Mark Selby Have Won A World Title From 1997-2005?

Yes
22
69%
No
10
31%
 
Total votes : 32

Re: Could Mark Selby Have Won A World Title From 1997-2005?

Postby Ronnie79

vodkadiet wrote:
Pink Ball wrote:
vodkadiet wrote:He certainly wouldn't have won the title in 1993. Hendry was awesome that year.

Probably the best performance I've seen over the course of an entire championship.


Pink Ball

The funny thing about the culmination of that year's event was that Hendry hadn't played White all season. The last time he had played him just a week after beating him in the 1992 final, when he beat him 9-0 in The Matchroom League Final.

At the end of 1993 final, Hendry had therefore won 37 of the last 42 frames he had played against White.


Hendry didn't play him in the Matchroom League final so how could he beat him 9-0 baffled by that one ?

Re: Could Mark Selby Have Won A World Title From 1997-2005?

Postby sas6789

Ronnie79 wrote:
Pink Ball wrote:
vodkadiet wrote:He certainly wouldn't have won the title in 1993. Hendry was awesome that year.

Probably the best performance I've seen over the course of an entire championship.


Nah Sullivan in 04 tops that hammered Hendry 17-4 in the semis and won final 18-8 best snooker of his career

Don't agree, Hendry in 1993 was the best snooker ever played in a world final IMO.

Re: Could Mark Selby Have Won A World Title From 1997-2005?

Postby TheSaviour

I voted no.

His current supremacy is based more on match playing, man against man. I thought he played his best during the 2014 title. Certainly it was better than the last two times. He has been there for the taking to the likes of John Higgins and Mark Williams. It doesn´t mean they, or some others, would had bottled it, or completely running out of ideas. Mark Selby´s match playing relyes on new ideas. He needs to come with a new ideas against someone likes Higgins or Williams. Which so far he has managed to do. Either way, it doesn´t mean the result would be sure, locked. The results just varies, and that´s great. Some people just have difficulties to digest that fact. But at the same time they are guarding some big facts and trademarks relatively well. So I can forgive to them that. They keep it tight, and no complete rubbish is allowed at all. Not from anyone. It´s not perfect but it is okay.

But his days are numbered right now. Even if it doesn´t look like it. There are just people with more fluent playing, more MOVES, more straighforward approaches which is eventually going to oust him. Even those guardian angels does know that and admits that..

During that 1997-2005 era there were more robotic style of play which ruled the game. Mark would had had difficulties to have success. And didn´t he actually had it also?? He has been professional since 1999. He has developed much, yes. Perhaps the playing conditions were just slightly different back then. Even a tiny difference conditions-wise can have a huge impact. People just fancy to play differently. Essentially it is a game of an extremely small marginals.

His missus looks quite good..
And Mrs Wild, I presume.. rofl rofl rofl rofl

Re: Could Mark Selby Have Won A World Title From 1997-2005?

Postby sas6789

TheSaviour wrote:I voted no.

His current supremacy is based more on match playing, man against man. I thought he played his best during the 2014 title. Certainly it was better than the last two times. He has been there for the taking to the likes of John Higgins and Mark Williams. It doesn´t mean they, or some others, would had bottled it, or completely running out of ideas. Mark Selby´s match playing relyes on new ideas. He needs to come with a new ideas against someone likes Higgins or Williams. Which so far he has managed to do. Either way, it doesn´t mean the result would be sure, locked. The results just varies, and that´s great. Some people just have difficulties to digest that fact. But at the same time they are guarding some big facts and trademarks relatively well. So I can forgive to them that. They keep it tight, and no complete rubbish is allowed at all. Not from anyone. It´s not perfect but it is okay.

But his days are numbered right now. Even if it doesn´t look like it. There are just people with more fluent playing, more MOVES, more straighforward approaches which is eventually going to oust him. Even those guardian angels does know that and admits that..

During that 1997-2005 era there were more robotic style of play which ruled the game. Mark would had had difficulties to have success. And didn´t he actually had it also?? He has been professional since 1999. He has developed much, yes. Perhaps the playing conditions were just slightly different back then. Even a tiny difference conditions-wise can have a huge impact. People just fancy to play differently. Essentially it is a game of an extremely small marginals.

His missus looks quite good..
And Mrs Wild, I presume.. rofl rofl rofl rofl

Talking bullocks as usual I see.

Re: Could Mark Selby Have Won A World Title From 1997-2005?

Postby vodkadiet

Ronnie79 wrote:
vodkadiet wrote:
Pink Ball wrote:
vodkadiet wrote:He certainly wouldn't have won the title in 1993. Hendry was awesome that year.

Probably the best performance I've seen over the course of an entire championship.


Pink Ball

The funny thing about the culmination of that year's event was that Hendry hadn't played White all season. The last time he had played him just a week after beating him in the 1992 final, when he beat him 9-0 in The Matchroom League Final.

At the end of 1993 final, Hendry had therefore won 37 of the last 42 frames he had played against White.


Hendry didn't play him in the Matchroom League final so how could he beat him 9-0 baffled by that one ?


Okay, it was the semi final: http://cuetracker.net/head-to-head/jimm ... hen-hendry

Re: Could Mark Selby Have Won A World Title From 1997-2005?

Postby vodkadiet

sas6789 wrote:
Ronnie79 wrote:
Pink Ball wrote:
vodkadiet wrote:He certainly wouldn't have won the title in 1993. Hendry was awesome that year.

Probably the best performance I've seen over the course of an entire championship.


Nah Sullivan in 04 tops that hammered Hendry 17-4 in the semis and won final 18-8 best snooker of his career

Don't agree, Hendry in 1993 was the best snooker ever played in a world final IMO.



Absolutely.

Hendry won every match very easily that year. Contrast to O'Sullivan who only beat Andy Hicks 13-11 in the second round in 2004.

Re: Could Mark Selby Have Won A World Title From 1997-2005?

Postby Truth

Selby today would be too strong for Hendry of 1993. On average, scoring wise, Hendry of 92-93 was almost identical to Selby 16-17:

World Championship centuries 93 vs 17: Hendry 8, Selby 8.
Season centuries 92-93 vs 16-17: Hendry 42, Selby 56.
Av Season centuries per frame 92-93 vs 16-17: Hendry 12.42, Selby 12.59.

So on this I think it is reasonable to assume that the two would be well matched in terms of break building. Both guys have/had a rock solid temperament, although I think Selby's has stood more scrutiny against tougher competition. However, as we all know, Selby is in a different universe to Hendry tactically, so it is safe to conclude that most of the scrappier frames would go to him. Where is Hendry's advantage? I don't see it.


On the original topic – absolutely, I don't see why Selby couldn't have won at least a couple of World Championships 97-05. Lets not forget that even the Hendry, Higgins, O'Sullivan and Williams combo were not all consistently good during that period. Higgins even enjoyed a 3 year ranking tournament drought 01-04, many people had written him off long before his 07 win.

Re: Could Mark Selby Have Won A World Title From 1997-2005?

Postby Wildey

Truth wrote:Selby today would be too strong for Hendry of 1993. On average, scoring wise, Hendry of 92-93 was almost identical to Selby 16-17:

World Championship centuries 93 vs 17: Hendry 8, Selby 8.
Season centuries 92-93 vs 16-17: Hendry 42, Selby 56.
Av Season centuries per frame 92-93 vs 16-17: Hendry 12.42, Selby 12.59.

So on this I think it is reasonable to assume that the two would be well matched in terms of break building. Both guys have/had a rock solid temperament, although I think Selby's has stood more scrutiny against tougher competition. However, as we all know, Selby is in a different universe to Hendry tactically, so it is safe to conclude that most of the scrappier frames would go to him. Where is Hendry's advantage? I don't see it.


On the original topic – absolutely, I don't see why Selby couldn't have won at least a couple of World Championships 97-05. Lets not forget that even the Hendry, Higgins, O'Sullivan and Williams combo were not all consistently good during that period. Higgins even enjoyed a 3 year ranking tournament drought 01-04, many people had written him off long before his 07 win.

Stephen Hendry won more frames in one visit than Selby does.

You win frames with 80s and 90s as well as centuries

you have to remember Steve Davis was a master tactician and Hendry nullified that to an extent with a long pot followed by a frame winning break no matter how good your tactics are if your in your seat you cant mess up the table.

Re: Could Mark Selby Have Won A World Title From 1997-2005?

Postby Pink Ball

Truth wrote:Selby today would be too strong for Hendry of 1993. On average, scoring wise, Hendry of 92-93 was almost identical to Selby 16-17:

World Championship centuries 93 vs 17: Hendry 8, Selby 8.
Season centuries 92-93 vs 16-17: Hendry 42, Selby 56.
Av Season centuries per frame 92-93 vs 16-17: Hendry 12.42, Selby 12.59.

So on this I think it is reasonable to assume that the two would be well matched in terms of break building. Both guys have/had a rock solid temperament, although I think Selby's has stood more scrutiny against tougher competition. However, as we all know, Selby is in a different universe to Hendry tactically, so it is safe to conclude that most of the scrappier frames would go to him. Where is Hendry's advantage? I don't see it.


On the original topic – absolutely, I don't see why Selby couldn't have won at least a couple of World Championships 97-05. Lets not forget that even the Hendry, Higgins, O'Sullivan and Williams combo were not all consistently good during that period. Higgins even enjoyed a 3 year ranking tournament drought 01-04, many people had written him off long before his 07 win.

I think Selby's game is very like Steve Davis', and when Hendry came along, Davis, who was tactically far superior to Hendry, had no answers. I don't see why Selby would have an edge over him.

As for the 1997-2005 period, the big four and their excellent supporting cast might not all have been in excellent form at the same time, but Selby would have had to work as hard to win one World Title then as he's had to to win three in today's era. To say he would have won at least a couple of World titles is the height of optimism. I don't think he would have been a multiple World Champion then.

Selby is a great player, but standards have slipped and they continue to slip. Ronnie O'Sullivan and John Higgins are still world beaters today even though they passed their prime a good many years ago.

Re: Could Mark Selby Have Won A World Title From 1997-2005?

Postby Truth

Wildey wrote:
Truth wrote:Selby today would be too strong for Hendry of 1993. On average, scoring wise, Hendry of 92-93 was almost identical to Selby 16-17:

World Championship centuries 93 vs 17: Hendry 8, Selby 8.
Season centuries 92-93 vs 16-17: Hendry 42, Selby 56.
Av Season centuries per frame 92-93 vs 16-17: Hendry 12.42, Selby 12.59.

So on this I think it is reasonable to assume that the two would be well matched in terms of break building. Both guys have/had a rock solid temperament, although I think Selby's has stood more scrutiny against tougher competition. However, as we all know, Selby is in a different universe to Hendry tactically, so it is safe to conclude that most of the scrappier frames would go to him. Where is Hendry's advantage? I don't see it.


On the original topic – absolutely, I don't see why Selby couldn't have won at least a couple of World Championships 97-05. Lets not forget that even the Hendry, Higgins, O'Sullivan and Williams combo were not all consistently good during that period. Higgins even enjoyed a 3 year ranking tournament drought 01-04, many people had written him off long before his 07 win.

Stephen Hendry won more frames in one visit than Selby does.

You win frames with 80s and 90s as well as centuries

you have to remember Steve Davis was a master tactician and Hendry nullified that to an extent with a long pot followed by a frame winning break no matter how good your tactics are if your in your seat you cant mess up the table.


The stats I've shown indicate that there is no evidence to support the theory that Hendry in 93 would outscrore Selby of today. If Hendry wasn't better at making 100s, then why would he have been any better at 60s, 70s, 80s, 90s etc? You mention he generally bested Davis, but that doesn't really apply here, as Davis didn't have anywhere near the scoring power of Selby. Davis wasn't IMO quite as mentally tough as Selby too. Effectively, Selby combines Hendryesque scoring and temperament with Davis level tactical play – no weaknesses.

Re: Could Mark Selby Have Won A World Title From 1997-2005?

Postby sas6789

Truth wrote:Selby today would be too strong for Hendry of 1993. On average, scoring wise, Hendry of 92-93 was almost identical to Selby 16-17:

World Championship centuries 93 vs 17: Hendry 8, Selby 8.
Season centuries 92-93 vs 16-17: Hendry 42, Selby 56.
Av Season centuries per frame 92-93 vs 16-17: Hendry 12.42, Selby 12.59.

So on this I think it is reasonable to assume that the two would be well matched in terms of break building. Both guys have/had a rock solid temperament, although I think Selby's has stood more scrutiny against tougher competition. However, as we all know, Selby is in a different universe to Hendry tactically, so it is safe to conclude that most of the scrappier frames would go to him. Where is Hendry's advantage? I don't see it.


On the original topic – absolutely, I don't see why Selby couldn't have won at least a couple of World Championships 97-05. Lets not forget that even the Hendry, Higgins, O'Sullivan and Williams combo were not all consistently good during that period. Higgins even enjoyed a 3 year ranking tournament drought 01-04, many people had written him off long before his 07 win.

Hendry of 93 would have totaly DESTROYED Selby in any of his 3 world finals, I've no idea what planet your from. Where is Hendry's advantage? He's a much stronger break builder and long potter, that's his advantage.

Re: Could Mark Selby Have Won A World Title From 1997-2005?

Postby Truth

Pink Ball wrote:I think Selby's game is very like Steve Davis', and when Hendry came along, Davis, who was tactically far superior to Hendry, had no answers. I don't see why Selby would have an edge over him.

As for the 1997-2005 period, the big four and their excellent supporting cast might not all have been in excellent form at the same time, but Selby would have had to work as hard to win one World Title then as he's had to to win three in today's era. To say he would have won at least a couple of World titles is the height of optimism. I don't think he would have been a multiple World Champion then.

Selby is a great player, but standards have slipped and they continue to slip. Ronnie O'Sullivan and John Higgins are still world beaters today even though they passed their prime a good many years ago.


Height of optimism? Even Doherty managed to reach 3 finals in that period and win one. I think my suggestion that a prime Selby could expect a couple (matching O'Sullivan's and Williams's total 97-05) to be quite cautious. I agree that Selby's style is like Steve Davis, but he is unquestionably far superior at building big breaks. Hendry's main advantage against Davis would effectively be cancelled out against Selby.

The reason that O'Sullivan and Higgins are currently competing well is because they are still capable of playing to their highest standard on their day. Higgins is back to #2, and if we look at his season's performances he has generally played very well. The standard he produced against Allen recently would have been a creditable performance at any point in his career. Higgins hasn't been quite at his 98 level, but on average he has looked superior to when he was in his late 20s (many had written him off then), which is why it's problematic using age as a gauge for ability. Snooker isn't like football or tennis, where pace and stamina are detrimental and it's literally impossible for over 40s to compete with young players. One of the main reasons that older players lose their edge is that they stop practising and lack the hunger.

I assume that when you suggest that the standards have slipped, you are only referring to Higgins and O'Sullivan, because across the rankings the standards have been much higher in recent years. Last season Ding knocked in 15 century breaks on his way to the final, and he had to play in the qualifiers to reach the crucible! I think this notion of slipping standards is seeing the past through rose tinted spectacles.

Re: Could Mark Selby Have Won A World Title From 1997-2005?

Postby Truth

sas6789 wrote:Hendry of 93 would have totaly DESTROYED Selby in any of his 3 world finals, I've no idea what planet your from. Where is Hendry's advantage? He's a much stronger break builder and long potter, that's his advantage.


Planet earth apparently, as cuetracker shows no advantage for him in the break building department. Hendry was relatively more impressive in 93, but the competition back then was a joke compared to today. Hendry was effectively a 21st century player up against competition barely better than the 80s.

Re: Could Mark Selby Have Won A World Title From 1997-2005?

Postby Truth

sas6789 wrote:In fact Selby might not even see a forth session against the 1993 Hendry.


So Hendry of 93 would have beaten Selby today by 18-6 or more? Hmm ok... in that case Selby would have ABSOLUTELY DESTROYED Hendry 18-0. You see anyone can make ridiculous proclamations, I even wrote mine in capitals to give it more weight. :)

Re: Could Mark Selby Have Won A World Title From 1997-2005?

Postby Truth

Snooker-Fan2016 wrote:
Truth wrote:Selby today would be too strong for Hendry of 1993.

<laugh> <laugh> <laugh> You obviously haven't seen the 93 final othweise you wouldn't say such a stupid thing.


I watched almost the whole tournament at the time, and it was entirely forgettable if you weren't rooting for Hendry to win. Mcmanus and White were the only vague threats in his draw, and White simply didn't turn up in the final. I was hoping that Davis would have beaten McManus and had the chance of playing Hendry later, as Steve had come into some fine form recently after acquiring the services of Frank Callan to help sort a problem with his cue action. Davis had just won 3 tournaments coming into the 93 WC (defeating Hendry 10-4 in one), and indeed he went on to become provisional #1 late the following season.

Anyway, I'm not debating whether Hendry was a better break builder in 92/93 or the 93 World Championship than Selby this past season, because the statistics show that both players were virtually identical in terms of WC centuries (8), and season frames/centuries (12.5). If someone wants to put forward some lucid comments then that's great, but I'm not really interested in baseless contradiction or wobbly lipped retorts based on nostalgic memories. There is no need to get upset as I agree that Hendry is an all time great.

Re: Could Mark Selby Have Won A World Title From 1997-2005?

Postby PoolBoy

Truth wrote:
Snooker-Fan2016 wrote:
Truth wrote:Selby today would be too strong for Hendry of 1993.

<laugh> <laugh> <laugh> You obviously haven't seen the 93 final othweise you wouldn't say such a stupid thing.


I watched almost the whole tournament at the time, and it was entirely forgettable if you weren't rooting for Hendry to win. Mcmanus and White were the only vague threats in his draw, and White simply didn't turn up in the final. I was hoping that Davis would have beaten McManus and had the chance of playing Hendry later, as Steve had come into some fine form recently after acquiring the services of Frank Callan to help sort a problem with his cue action. Davis had just won 3 tournaments coming into the 93 WC (defeating Hendry 10-4 in one), and indeed he went on to become provisional #1 late the following season.

Anyway, I'm not debating whether Hendry was a better break builder in 92/93 or the 93 World Championship than Selby this past season, because the statistics show that both players were virtually identical in terms of WC centuries (8), and season frames/centuries (12.5). If someone wants to put forward some lucid comments then that's great, but I'm not really interested in baseless contradiction or wobbly lipped retorts based on nostalgic memories. There is no need to get upset as I agree that Hendry is an all time great.


THE all-time great!
Selby has some way to go, before he's knocking-on-the-door of the 'big 4'!...

Re: Could Mark Selby Have Won A World Title From 1997-2005?

Postby Iranu

Truth: in terms of breakbuilding, are you taking into account the relative number of tournaments?

Number of centuries alone is irrelevant, centuries per frame played is what really determines the better breakbuilder.

Re: Could Mark Selby Have Won A World Title From 1997-2005?

Postby Truth

PoolBoy wrote:
Truth wrote:THE all-time great!
Selby has some way to go, before he's knocking-on-the-door of the 'big 4'!...


I'm guessing your big 4 would be Hendry, Davis, O'Sullivan and Higgins. Obviously Selby is some distance behind the aforementioned in terms of titles. Williams is debatable. He is obviously well ahead of Selby in terms of ranking tournament wins, but Selby has more World Championships, Triple Crown events and a far more convincing reign as #1 (6 consecutive end seasons).

Re: Could Mark Selby Have Won A World Title From 1997-2005?

Postby Truth

Iranu wrote:Truth: in terms of breakbuilding, are you taking into account the relative number of tournaments?

Number of centuries alone is irrelevant, centuries per frame played is what really determines the better breakbuilder.


Yes. This is why I quoted the frames/centuries, which is a better indicator in terms of frequency, and for this stat both players are virtually identical at 12.5. Selby has actually scored more centuries in 16/17 (56) than Hendry in 92/93 (42), but that's over more frames. The 12.5 frequency was incredible back in 93, no one was close to this level. These days 12.5 is impressive, but not out of the ordinary.

Re: Could Mark Selby Have Won A World Title From 1997-2005?

Postby Pink Ball

Truth wrote:
Iranu wrote:Truth: in terms of breakbuilding, are you taking into account the relative number of tournaments?

Number of centuries alone is irrelevant, centuries per frame played is what really determines the better breakbuilder.


Yes. This is why I quoted the frames/centuries, which is a better indicator in terms of frequency, and for this stat both players are virtually identical at 12.5. Selby has actually scored more centuries in 16/17 (56) than Hendry in 92/93 (42), but that's over more frames. The 12.5 frequency was incredible back in 93, no one was close to this level. These days 12.5 is impressive, but not out of the ordinary.

It's out of the ordinary when you're playing on tables that don't have buckets for pockets.

Re: Could Mark Selby Have Won A World Title From 1997-2005?

Postby Iranu

chengdufan wrote:
Iranu wrote:Of course he could. At the very least he'd have destroyed Shaun Murphy with a session to spare in 2005.

:goodpost:

<laugh>

Murphy’s safety is a lot better now than in 2005, in fairness. And Selby’s not at the level of 2017.