Holden Chinaski wrote:....Hendry.......He had achieved everything there was to achieve. Broke all the records. There were no more challenges left. Then he started struggling with his long game so he quit
Now you sound like Hendry fans trying to make excuses for his failures. He didn't win a single major title after the age of 30. He was hardly old, wouldn't you say so !!! And if he had achieved all that he wanted, why play on ?!?? Why not retire on a high, like Pete Sampras did ?!???? Why play on for another decade and embarrass yourself ?!!!
I'll tell you why. Cause he was the same bloody player (up until 2006 or so) and still thought he could win a lot more. The thing is the opposition had evolved.
Hendry didn't have the type of opposition and challenge that Ronnie, John Higgins and Mark Williams gave each other over the course of a 25+ years career.
Once the class of 92 came to age, Hendry sort of faded away. When he won his 6th WC, they were only 20 (Ronnie and Higgins) and 21 (Williams). Hendry only won 2 triple crown events after that, 2 out of 18, and to me it’s because those three became better than him, more complete players. They learned from him, adopted his attacking ways, taken on board some of his innovating shots, but they also developed a tactical nous and a safety game that Hendry never really applied himself to.
All three of the class of 92 have a remarkable longevity because all three were able and willing to change and to reinvent themselves. If you look at some of the great sporting figures at this moment in time, you have people like Federer and Valentino Rossi. You can’t sustain a sporting career, winning over decades, without making changes in order to cope with what the passing of time does to you.
Hendry didn’t adapt, be it because he didn’t want to compromise or because he wasn’t able to, only he will know. But it cost him.
Holden Chinaski wrote:But in his prime, he could pot the long ones off the lampshades.
He was indeed a great long potter in his prime, but not the best ever. And he did benefit greatly from the fact that he wasn't punished as heavily as he would be nowadays for a miss.
Holden Chinaski wrote:And he was a master at getting perfect position on the black as well. He didn't chicken out and go back to baulk end. He went for the long ones full-blooded.
[/quote][/quote]
I agree with that, whenever he had an angle to remain near the black, he tried to do it. Players like Judd make it harder for themselves by trying to screw back to baulk in case they miss, it decreases the success percentage. But that is also due to the fact that you get punished far more heavily for a miss nowadays.
Listen to Robbo saying that himself at around the 10:08 mark in this video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=37gL4cdroZg