Post a reply

Who is the greatest player of all time?

Ronnie’s O’Sullivan
14
54%
Stephen Hendry
9
35%
Steve Davis
2
8%
John Higgins
1
4%
 
Total votes : 26

Re: GOAT?

Postby mick745

People go on about how great O'Sullivan and Higgins were/are but is it really true?

Those two should have totally dominated the sport for 20 years.

Still neither one has overtaken Hendry's tally of ranking titles or world titles despite having much longer careers and many more tournaments in which to do it.

They should have been wn1 & 2 for years. Instead we had one measly world final contested between them way back in 2001.

Only Williams should have been able to touch them and he wasn't winning world titles after 2003.

The question is have they underachieved and why?

Re: GOAT?

Postby vodkadiet

They haven't underachieved. They have won what their ability allowed them to win.

And remember Hendry did it on his own. O'Sullivan has had to acquire the help of all and sundry.

Re: GOAT?

Postby mick745

But to hear the plaudits in the media, commentators and some on here you wonder why they haven't won 20 world titles between them.

Re: GOAT?

Postby Iranu

mick745 wrote:
Still neither one has overtaken Hendry's tally of ranking titles or world titles despite having much longer careers and many more tournaments in which to do it.

Over 27 years, Hendry won the World Championship 7 times.

Over 26 years, Higgins and Ronnie have won the World Title 9 times.

Re: GOAT?

Postby TheRocket

O'Sullivans biggest mistake was that he didnt look for a sports psychologist in his early 20's. He wasted too many opportunites in his 20's and early 30's. That match in 2005 against Ebdon is a prime example when he bottled a 8:2 lead after Ebdons deliberate slow play got to him.

But thats in the past now. Theres nothing he can do about that now. If he wants to be regarded as the undisputed GOAT he has to hurry up and win more World titles. And he still has a chance to do that.

Re: GOAT?

Postby SteveJJ

One area where Ronnie is declining is on pace of play. Slipped from 2nd to 5th over the past couple of weeks on the AST rankings.

Please note: I'm not being entirely serious with this comment but it is interesting that from when the AST ranking lists were brought in up until now there was daylight between Un Nooh, Ronnie and the next.

Re: GOAT?

Postby Dan-cat

SteveJJ wrote:One area where Ronnie is declining is on pace of play. Slipped from 2nd to 5th over the past couple of weeks on the AST rankings.

Please note: I'm not being entirely serious with this comment but it is interesting that from when the AST ranking lists were brought in up until now there was daylight between Un Nooh, Ronnie and the next.


I don't think he's slowed down at all, in say the last two months.

There are some anomaly in the measurements. There was a 5 minute shot in the previous tournament when he was waiting for something to be fixed. Also in the UK he was the only player to stop playing and sometimes return to his chair while people from the other tables took their seats.

Re: GOAT?

Postby Chalk McHugh

It's not just about stats. Has to be more than that. No one has played the game as excitingly and artistic as Ronnie. Hendry was a stone cold killing machine. Unbreakable spirit. Well, until the wheels came off in spectacular fashion and he was done for almost overnight.

Hendry wasn't loved by the masses. Feared. Hated. Respected by all. Loved? No siree.

Ronnie has no equal in providing moments of magic, those iconic memories of 5 minute 147s and almost twice as many maximums as those nearest him.

It's more than just the silverware, which he trumps all in every category bar one (albeit the big one).

It's the 25 year journey. The bursting onto the scene as a fresh faced scallywag with a fear of no one and a magical talent very evident from frame num 1. Cheeky geezer who exuded a certain charm.

The early career off-table misdemeanours and some odd behaviour on it just added to the mystique.

From walking out of that game v Hendry to really knuckling down and leading a better life and doing his upmost to get his mind and body right, we have seen the man blossom and realise his god given talent to the full.

Ronnie loves to please the crowd and win with style. To do otherwise doesn't satisfy him fully. Deep down he knows he's a freak of nature and he loves treating his legion of fans to some beautiful snooker and thats why thousands of us worldwide regard him in such high esteem. Silverware is great. The memories are better. Hendry has his name cemented in history but people will be talking about Ronnie in awe for hundreds of years. What this man has done in this life will echo in eternity. A gift from the gods. A flawed genius, perhaps. A bloody privilege.

Re: GOAT?

Postby mick745

It is entirely possible of course that in years to come many players of Ronnie's ability may emerge. Just like we look back at snooker played 50 to 100 years ago as being more primitive then in 50 years from now frames where 100+ breaks aren't made may be the exception. We always think that the greatest of all time won't,t be surpassed until the next one comes along. In any sport.

Re: GOAT?

Postby Erza Scarlet

mick745 wrote:Still neither one has overtaken Hendry's tally of ranking titles or world titles despite having much longer careers and many more tournaments in which to do it.



Ronnie doesn't play the full schedule. His ranking tournament schedule is just like Hendry's so the number of ranking tournaments doesn't apply to him. He's also played in less tournaments with 313 tournaments vs Hendry's 376. Despite playing is less tournaments he's only 2 ranking tournaments behind Hendry. Ronnie has the better strike rate.

27 seasons - Hendry 36 ranking titles, 7 World Titles, 18 Triple Crown events.
27 seasons (Ronnie's only played half of the 27th season) - Ronnie 34 ranking titles, 5 World Titles, 19 Triple Crown events.

Difference isn't even big as you seem to think.

Re: GOAT?

Postby Dan-cat

Erza Scarlet wrote:
mick745 wrote:Still neither one has overtaken Hendry's tally of ranking titles or world titles despite having much longer careers and many more tournaments in which to do it.



Ronnie doesn't play the full schedule. His ranking tournament schedule is just like Hendry's so the number of ranking tournaments doesn't apply to him. He's also played in less tournaments with 313 tournaments vs Hendry's 376. Despite playing is less tournaments he's only 2 ranking tournaments behind Hendry. Ronnie has the better strike rate.

27 seasons - Hendry 36 ranking titles, 7 World Titles, 18 Triple Crown events.
27 seasons (Ronnie's only played half of the 27th season) - Ronnie 34 ranking titles, 5 World Titles, 19 Triple Crown events.

Difference isn't even big as you seem to think.


Great post. Love it.

Also:

Ronnie O'Sullivan: 935 (75.1%) of 1245 matches won
Stephen Hendry: 875 (68.9%) of 1270 matches won

75.1% > 68.9%

Re: GOAT?

Postby Erza Scarlet

Dan-cat wrote:Great post. Love it.

Also:

Ronnie O'Sullivan: 935 (75.1%) of 1245 matches won
Stephen Hendry: 875 (68.9%) of 1270 matches won

75.1% > 68.9%


Yep. Underrated stat that one!

Re: GOAT?

Postby TheRocket

mick745 wrote:It is entirely possible of course that in years to come many players of Ronnie's ability may emerge. Just like we look back at snooker played 50 to 100 years ago as being more primitive then in 50 years from now frames where 100+ breaks aren't made may be the exception. We always think that the greatest of all time won't,t be surpassed until the next one comes along. In any sport.


Those players would have to play like a computer then though. I've seen Ronnie playing perfect snooker over multi session matches. Pot success 98% and winning all of his 10 frames in one visit in a bo19 match. Is it humanly possible to get to an even higher level? I don't know.

There is always a limit. We're not machines at the end of the day. You look at other sports and I don't know if there'll ever be another Federer. Or anyone who will play better tennis on clay than Nadal did.

Re: GOAT?

Postby Erza Scarlet

Chalk McHugh wrote:It's not just about stats. Has to be more than that. No one has played the game as excitingly and artistic as Ronnie. Hendry was a stone cold killing machine. Unbreakable spirit. Well, until the wheels came off in spectacular fashion and he was done for almost overnight.

Hendry wasn't loved by the masses. Feared. Hated. Respected by all. Loved? No siree.

Ronnie has no equal in providing moments of magic, those iconic memories of 5 minute 147s and almost twice as many maximums as those nearest him.

It's more than just the silverware, which he trumps all in every category bar one (albeit the big one).

It's the 25 year journey. The bursting onto the scene as a fresh faced scallywag with a fear of no one and a magical talent very evident from frame num 1. Cheeky geezer who exuded a certain charm.

The early career off-table misdemeanours and some odd behaviour on it just added to the mystique.

From walking out of that game v Hendry to really knuckling down and leading a better life and doing his upmost to get his mind and body right, we have seen the man blossom and realise his god given talent to the full.

Ronnie loves to please the crowd and win with style. To do otherwise doesn't satisfy him fully. Deep down he knows he's a freak of nature and he loves treating his legion of fans to some beautiful snooker and thats why thousands of us worldwide regard him in such high esteem. Silverware is great. The memories are better. Hendry has his name cemented in history but people will be talking about Ronnie in awe for hundreds of years. What this man has done in this life will echo in eternity. A gift from the gods. A flawed genius, perhaps. A bloody privilege.


Higgins described Ronnie perfectly here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uh7tQPV13U4

"Crowd on his side and the ability and the single mindedness of Hendry and Davis. He's the full package"

Re: GOAT?

Postby Dan-cat

Chalk McHugh wrote:It's not just about stats. Has to be more than that. No one has played the game as excitingly and artistic as Ronnie. Hendry was a stone cold killing machine. Unbreakable spirit. Well, until the wheels came off in spectacular fashion and he was done for almost overnight.

Hendry wasn't loved by the masses. Feared. Hated. Respected by all. Loved? No siree.

Ronnie has no equal in providing moments of magic, those iconic memories of 5 minute 147s and almost twice as many maximums as those nearest him.

It's more than just the silverware, which he trumps all in every category bar one (albeit the big one).

It's the 25 year journey. The bursting onto the scene as a fresh faced scallywag with a fear of no one and a magical talent very evident from frame num 1. Cheeky geezer who exuded a certain charm.

The early career off-table misdemeanours and some odd behaviour on it just added to the mystique.

From walking out of that game v Hendry to really knuckling down and leading a better life and doing his upmost to get his mind and body right, we have seen the man blossom and realise his god given talent to the full.

Ronnie loves to please the crowd and win with style. To do otherwise doesn't satisfy him fully. Deep down he knows he's a freak of nature and he loves treating his legion of fans to some beautiful snooker and thats why thousands of us worldwide regard him in such high esteem. Silverware is great. The memories are better. Hendry has his name cemented in history but people will be talking about Ronnie in awe for hundreds of years. What this man has done in this life will echo in eternity. A gift from the gods. A flawed genius, perhaps. A bloody privilege.


Yes Chalky. I'd like to buy you a pint for that post. Brilliantly put.

Re: GOAT?

Postby Dan-cat

TheRocket wrote:
mick745 wrote:It is entirely possible of course that in years to come many players of Ronnie's ability may emerge. Just like we look back at snooker played 50 to 100 years ago as being more primitive then in 50 years from now frames where 100+ breaks aren't made may be the exception. We always think that the greatest of all time won't,t be surpassed until the next one comes along. In any sport.


Those players would have to play like a computer then though. I've seen Ronnie playing perfect snooker over multi session matches. Pot success 98% and winning all of his 10 frames in one visit in a bo19 match. Is it humanly possible to get to an even higher level? I don't know.

There is always a limit. We're not machines at the end of the day. You look at other sports and I don't know if there'll ever be another Federer. Or anyone who will play better tennis on clay than Nadal did.


I can't see anyone ever playing the game to the level of Ronnie with such style. Would love to be proved wrong.

Re: GOAT?

Postby Lou147

Hendry could stay at his peak for a thousand years and not make a maxi in 5 minutes. I think some snooker fans sometimes forget just how amazing a feat it is

Re: GOAT?

Postby Chalk McHugh

Lou147 wrote:Hendry could stay at his peak for a thousand years and not make a maxi in 5 minutes. I think some snooker fans sometimes forget just how amazing a feat it is


Anytime i watch it i get goosebumps. One of the greatest moments of my life. Haha sad i know. It is what it is.

Re: GOAT?

Postby rekoons

Erza Scarlet wrote:
mick745 wrote:Still neither one has overtaken Hendry's tally of ranking titles or world titles despite having much longer careers and many more tournaments in which to do it.



Ronnie doesn't play the full schedule. His ranking tournament schedule is just like Hendry's so the number of ranking tournaments doesn't apply to him. He's also played in less tournaments with 313 tournaments vs Hendry's 376. Despite playing is less tournaments he's only 2 ranking tournaments behind Hendry. Ronnie has the better strike rate.

27 seasons - Hendry 36 ranking titles, 7 World Titles, 18 Triple Crown events.
27 seasons (Ronnie's only played half of the 27th season) - Ronnie 34 ranking titles, 5 World Titles, 19 Triple Crown events.

Difference isn't even big as you seem to think.


does this already include the fact he only played the worlds in the 12/13 season?
And wasn't he also nicked a tournament win because of pot use (don't remember which one, but it was against ken doherty iirc, also not sure if it was ranking or minor...)

Re: GOAT?

Postby Chalk McHugh

rekoons wrote:
Erza Scarlet wrote:
mick745 wrote:Still neither one has overtaken Hendry's tally of ranking titles or world titles despite having much longer careers and many more tournaments in which to do it.



Ronnie doesn't play the full schedule. His ranking tournament schedule is just like Hendry's so the number of ranking tournaments doesn't apply to him. He's also played in less tournaments with 313 tournaments vs Hendry's 376. Despite playing is less tournaments he's only 2 ranking tournaments behind Hendry. Ronnie has the better strike rate.

27 seasons - Hendry 36 ranking titles, 7 World Titles, 18 Triple Crown events.
27 seasons (Ronnie's only played half of the 27th season) - Ronnie 34 ranking titles, 5 World Titles, 19 Triple Crown events.

Difference isn't even big as you seem to think.


does this already include the fact he only played the worlds in the 12/13 season?
And wasn't he also nicked a tournament win because of pot use (don't remember which one, but it was against ken doherty iirc, also not sure if it was ranking or minor...)


Irish Masters. Due to smoking a little pot, the giggling Dubliner stole the pot, so to speak. Robbed was the Rocket.

Re: GOAT?

Postby Pink Ball

mick745 wrote:People go on about how great O'Sullivan and Higgins were/are but is it really true?

Those two should have totally dominated the sport for 20 years.

Still neither one has overtaken Hendry's tally of ranking titles or world titles despite having much longer careers and many more tournaments in which to do it.

They should have been wn1 & 2 for years. Instead we had one measly world final contested between them way back in 2001.

Only Williams should have been able to touch them and he wasn't winning world titles after 2003.

The question is have they underachieved and why?

They couldn’t dominate as they were around at the same time. And the same time as Williams, Doherty, Hunter, Lee, Stevens, Ebdon...

Dominating was much tougher than just having to see to Parrott and White.

Re: GOAT?

Postby Holden Chinaski

Pink Ball wrote:They couldn’t dominate as they were around at the same time. And the same time as Williams, Doherty, Hunter, Lee, Stevens, Ebdon...

Dominating was much tougher than just having to see to Parrott and White.

Indeed. Great post.

Re: GOAT?

Postby Pink Ball

From 27, Hendry’s major-winning days were all but over because those fine players had come along. Never mind dominate.

Re: GOAT?

Postby Ash147

It was near on impossible for any player to dominate in the early 2000’s. The quality at the top of the game was the best you’ll ever see. That’s why Hendry couldn’t dominate like the did before, the players that came through after the late 90’s were a big step up from what he was used to.

Re: GOAT?

Postby Andre147

Pink Ball wrote:From 27, Hendry’s major-winning days were all but over because those fine players had come along. Never mind dominate.


Yeah I find it very funny when people say Hendry was past his best after that. It's no coincidence that was the period when a certain trio started to dominate the sport.

Re: GOAT?

Postby Pink Ball

Ash147 wrote:It was near on impossible for any player to dominate in the early 2000’s. The quality at the top of the game was the best you’ll ever see. That’s why Hendry couldn’t dominate like the did before, the players that came through after the late 90’s were a big step up from what he was used to.

Dominate like he used to? He won one major. That was it.

Re: GOAT?

Postby Ash147

Pink Ball wrote:
Ash147 wrote:It was near on impossible for any player to dominate in the early 2000’s. The quality at the top of the game was the best you’ll ever see. That’s why Hendry couldn’t dominate like the did before, the players that came through after the late 90’s were a big step up from what he was used to.

Dominate like he used to? He won one major. That was it.


I probably worded my original post poorly, but I meant that he went from dominating the game, to not dominating at all. And that wasn’t a slow decline, it was when a great group of players peaked around the early 2000’s and started to get the better of Hendry.

Re: GOAT?

Postby Ash147

Andre147 wrote:
Pink Ball wrote:From 27, Hendry’s major-winning days were all but over because those fine players had come along. Never mind dominate.


Yeah I find it very funny when people say Hendry was past his best after that. It's no coincidence that was the period when a certain trio started to dominate the sport.


This exactly. Not just the class of 92, but the likes of Hunter, Doherty, Ebdon, Stevens, etc. Hendry wasn’t used to that depth of strong opposition.