vodkadiet wrote:The record books don't lie.
If O'Sullivan was the greatest he would have won more World titles than anyone else in the modern era.
I don't even think Hendry is that great. He is just the best of what there has been so far. Snooker hasn't had a truly great player as of yet. Not in comparison to other sports.
Compare any snooker player to Jahangir Khan, who went unbeaten for five and a half years.
I couldn't care less about these lists posters are drawing up to fit their biased agenda. It is World titles that count.
I’d like you to enlighten me on what my biased agenda could be? I don’t care for either O’Sullivan or Hendry, but probably prefer Hendry. When he was on four world titles, I declared Hendry the best ever as he was playing against a higher caliber opponent to Davis in the ‘80s.
O’Sullivan came far closer to dominance in his prime than Hendry did. Hendry was not good enough.
You have allowed your judgement to be clouded by nostalgia, a big weakness of yours, and a strong dislike of O’Sullivan. I am cold, emotionless, calculating when it comes to this stuff. You need to be.
I say that as someone who holds you in high regard. We all have our weaknesses. Mine is that I’m a hammer.