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 vodkadiet

That really is the GOAT trophy!!

Re: GOAT?

Postby Johnny Bravo

vodkadiet wrote:It wouldn't have mattered would era a prime Hendry had played in, he would have battered them all.

bullocks. :td:
Is that why he only managed to win just 1 major title after the age of 27 ?! :roll:
Which of these statements makes more sense to you ?
a. Hendry suddenly exited his prime aged 27. Mind you, that's very old. <laugh>
b. Hendry simply came up against superior opposition and couldn't dominate anymore. :roll:
Get a grip man, you're starting to make a fool of yourself.

vodkadiet wrote:And secondly if O'Sullivan was the greatest it wouldn't matter what his opposition was. Federer wouldn't have been bothered what era he was playing in. He still would have dominated tennis.

Really ?! That's the dumbest thing I've ever heard. :hmmm:
Yes, Federer might have dominated, but he wouldn't have won as much. Nadal and Djokovic are clearly superior to the likes of Mark Philippoussis, Marat Safin, Andy Roddick, Marcos Baghdatis, Fernando González, Lleyton Hewitt, etc.
And if Nadal wasn't around, Federer would have won the French Open a hell of a lot more than just once. In the same way John Higgins was in Ronnie's way of grabbing more titles.
Opposition fuckin' matters bud. :irk:

vodkadiet wrote:And it isn't as if O'Sullivan has been beaten by nothing but greats at The Crucible. He has lost to players that Hendry would have slaughtered in his prime.

The same can be said about Hendry. Need I remind you that Hendry lost in the first round in 2000 when he was the defending champion ?! :roll:

vodkadiet wrote: O'Sullivan's fans arguments have more holes in them than St. Andrew's golf course.

Nope, yours do. :td:

In the last few posts, you have been schooled by Ash, Dan-Cat and Pinkey, all of whom are objective posters and have given you plenty of valid arguments. Yet you persist to ignore facts. At this moment in time, I'm starting to think you're just trolling.

You want arguments. I'll give you some you can't refute.

First of all, you have to understand that "greatness" has different meanings to different people. I know plenty of people who consider Alex Higgins the greatest cause of what he did for the game, his impact on the sport. And up to a certain extent, I think they have a valid viewpoint. Alex Higgins reached out to the masses and has drawn people to watch or take up the sport. He brought snooker from the shady pubs and murky background into the media spotlight. And he has given joy to many with the crazy shots he used to go for, and he made quite a few of them.

For you, greatness is defined by the numbers of world titles one has won. I won't dispute that, but even by your reasoning, you still have to factor in the opposition one's had to face in order to win those titles, otherwise your assessment is flawed. Heck, by your reasoning, Joe Davis will never be bettered.

No matter which you spin it, the early 90's did not have the highest standard. Just take a look at the the top players from that era, they don't stack up to those from 1997 to around 2007.

And by using your own words, the opposition shouldn't matter and Hendry should have dominated from 1997 to around 2007. Yet he didn't. There is no proof whatsoever that he suddenly exited his prime at the age of just 27. From 1997 to around 2008, Hendry was just as good, but his opposition wasn't, it had improved dramatically.
When Hendry began dominating in the early 90's, he only had to contend with the defense oriented old farts from the 80's and only a couple of good players who, on occasion, could score heavy like him: Jimmy (who was great, but lacked bottle), Davis, Parrott, and that's about it. The class of 92 were still too young and old farts like Taylor, Griffiths and Thorne could barely score 30 points. Even a complete bum like David Roe was a top 16 player.
From 1996 onwards, the class of 92 started to come of age. You also had other great players like Doherty, Hunter, Stevens and Ebdon. Hendry had not declined one bit, he simply couldn't dominate anymore. His true value can be seen in that time span.
From 1997 to 2008, Hendry won 1 world title, reached 2 other finals plus 2 semifinals (where Ronnie, who had by then become an all rounder (except the mental part), completely demolished him). He also lost a Masters final to Willo. And he won around 9 rankers. All in all, it was a decent record, but nothing jaw dropping either.

For most of us however, greatness is determined by a mix of factors, such as: peak form/ability, achievements - meaning titles and records (evaluated by taking into account the opposition one's had to face), longevity and last but not least, impact on the sport.

Ronnie O'Sullivan is the only player in the history of the sport that thicks all those boxes:
- he can play to higher standard than anyone else in the history of the game;
- he has won more majors than Hendry and will probably hold all records when he retires (the number of WC is the only one that he might not get), despite being up against superior opposition;
- he's been playing to the highest standard for over 25 years;
- he has the highest match win percentage of all time with 74.62% (I'm talking about top pros only);
- he has the highest frame win percentage of all time among the top players with 61.1%;
- he is the greatest break-builder of all time and will probably finish his career with over 1000 tons;
- he has the most 147's and the fastest one, a record that will probably never be beat;
- he's a joy to watch, an artist with a cue in his hand;
- he's one of the most loved snooker players of all time and has the largest fan-base, and he's also the reason many watch or have taken up snooker.

And he has done all of that despite the turmoils in his personal life. I've given you more than enough arguments.

At this moment in time, most of the snooker players and experts concur that he is the GOAT.
Higgo, Willo, Selbo, Allen, Robbo, Foulds, Ding, Bingo, Hawk, Jimmy, Trump, Smurf, Kyren, Perry, D. Hendon, - all agree he's the greatest.
And even the man who coined up the phrase that u love to use in all of your posts ("greatness outweighs opinion every time"), Clive Everton, starts his book on Ronnie with the following phrase: "Ronnie O'Sullivan is the finest player in snooker history".........THE END !!! :win:

You have been defeated Mr. Vodka. Now go back to eating sea weed, or grass, or whatever weed u eat. :mosh:

Re: GOAT?

Postby Ash147

Very well said, Johnny. You’ve articulated that better than I could have.

Re: GOAT?

Postby KrazeeEyezKilla

I would generally agree about O'Sullivan being the best player but some of the comparisons are unfair to Hendry. The standard might have been lower in the early 90's but Hendry was the man who exposed this and changed Snooker. It's highly unlikely that coming generation would have been as good without learning from what Hendry and the likes of Davis and White had done previously.

Re: GOAT?

Postby Ash147

KrazeeEyezKilla wrote:I would generally agree about O'Sullivan being the best player but some of the comparisons are unfair to Hendry. The standard might have been lower in the early 90's but Hendry was the man who exposed this and changed Snooker. It's highly unlikely that coming generation would have been as good without learning from what Hendry and the likes of Davis and White had done previously.


That’s definitely true. Hendry modernised the game massively from how it was played in the 80’s, and the players who came through after him all learnt that from having watched him. The long potting, opening the pack from the blue, and making frame winning breaks in one visit, it’s all vital in the modern game.

Re: GOAT?

Postby vodkadiet

Johhny Bravo

Why did you bother?

Most of your post is just a diatribe of drivel. You are conflating issues of what would make someone the best ever player.

All that matters is winning titles, the most important titles.

The World Championship title is light years ahead of The Masters and The UK in terms of importance.

Break building stats are totally overrated. Conditions have changed immeasurably since the early 90s.

One fact that never gets mentioned is that in many frames Hendry never gave his opponents a chance. Contrast that to O'Sullivan's matches where is gifting chances all day long. And this why he has been beaten in the last 5 World Championships but decent players, but certainly not great players, with the exception of Selby.

Hendry cemented his place as the GOAT by dealing with the utmost pressure when breaking the record in 99. O'Sullivan has yet to achieve this. He may well achieve it one day, but as of yet he hasn't even equalled Hendry's record, let alone surpassed it.

I see you have to finish your diatribe by attacking those who defend animal's lives. A person who defends the lives of animals is morally far superior to those who are complicit in their imprisonment, torture, and ultimately their deaths just to satisfy your taste buds. I assume you will challenge this correct assertion by myself.

You are of course entitled to your wrong opinion.

Is your opinion wrong on everything in life?

I don't know if you're a UK resident but if you are I would hazard a guess that you are one of these retarded Brexit voters?

Re: GOAT?

Postby Pink Ball

O’Sullivan is winning far more titles at 43 than Hendry was in his prime.

This is down to a combination of things: A) Sullivan is the best player we’ve ever seen and is capable of brilliance when his career should be long over. B) The standard today is the lowest we’ve seen since the early ‘90s, albeit still slightly higher.

Re: GOAT?

Postby Badsnookerplayer

Pink Ball wrote:O’Sullivan is winning far more titles at 43 than Hendry was in his prime.

This is down to a combination of things: A) Sullivan is the best player we’ve ever seen and is capable of brilliance when his career should be long over. B) The standard today is the lowest we’ve seen since the early ‘90s, albeit still slightly higher.

Do you consider his record as a 'drug parakeet' affects his position of GOAT in any way?

Same in cycling with Lance?

Re: GOAT?

Postby vodkadiet

Badsnookerplayer wrote:
Pink Ball wrote:O’Sullivan is winning far more titles at 43 than Hendry was in his prime.

This is down to a combination of things: A) Sullivan is the best player we’ve ever seen and is capable of brilliance when his career should be long over. B) The standard today is the lowest we’ve seen since the early ‘90s, albeit still slightly higher.

Do you consider his record as a 'drug parakeet' affects his position of GOAT in any way?

Same in cycling with Lance?


His disgraceful cheating in Crawley is far more pertinent.

Re: GOAT?

Postby vodkadiet

Pink Ball wrote:O’Sullivan is winning far more titles at 43 than Hendry was in his prime.

This is down to a combination of things: A) Sullivan is the best player we’ve ever seen and is capable of brilliance when his career should be long over. B) The standard today is the lowest we’ve seen since the early ‘90s, albeit still slightly higher.


I have to give it to Pink Ball. He masquerades as someone who doesn't care much for O'Sullivan when he is obviously the biggest 'fanboy' on this are any other forum.

Re: GOAT?

Postby vodkadiet

World titles are the ultimate barometer of greatness. Second to that is time spent as World number 1. Hendry wins on both counts.

Re: GOAT?

Postby Holden Chinaski

If I was Stephen Hendry I'd ask for a restraining order to protect me against Vodkadiet. Never seen such a fanboy. Probably has a room full of Hendry posters and a Ronnie O'Sullivan voodoo doll which he loves to torture. The man is obsessed.

Re: GOAT?

Postby Ash147

Holden Chinaski wrote:If I was Stephen Hendry I'd ask for a restraining order to protect me against Vodkadiet. Never seen such a fanboy. Probably has a room full of Hendry posters and a Ronnie O'Sullivan voodoo doll which he loves to torture. The man is obsessed.


Well said.

Re: GOAT?

Postby Johnny Bravo

vodkadiet wrote:World titles are the ultimate barometer of greatness. Second to that is time spent as World number 1. Hendry wins on both counts.


Titles are evaluated by factoring in the competition one has had to face in order to get them.
Hendry won his against weaker opposition than O'Sullivan.
FACT !
Hendry would not have won half of what he did had he turned pro at the same time as the class of 92.

Re: GOAT?

Postby Dan-cat

Johnny Bravo wrote:
vodkadiet wrote:World titles are the ultimate barometer of greatness. Second to that is time spent as World number 1. Hendry wins on both counts.


Titles are evaluated by factoring in the competition one has had to face in order to get them.
Hendry won his against weaker opposition than O'Sullivan.
FACT !
Hendry would not have won half of what he did had he turned pro at the same time as the class of 92.


And so it rumbles on... hehe. At this point stoking the GOAT debate is VD's second hobby.

Re: GOAT?

Postby vodkadiet

O"Sullivan hasn't proved it on the table and his fans desperation is much in evidence here.

All time hasn't even happened yet. When we know an asteroid is heading on a collision course with Planet Earth then we can also all reconvene. Either that or we can come back in 4000 years to see where snooker is at.

Re: GOAT?

Postby Ash147

vodkadiet wrote:O"Sullivan hasn't proved it on the table and his fans desperation is much in evidence here.

All time hasn't even happened yet. When we know an asteroid is heading on a collision course with Planet Earth then we can also all reconvene. Either that or we can come back in 4000 years to see where snooker is at.


You seem like a man with an incredibly miserable life.

Re: GOAT?

Postby Pink Ball

vodkadiet wrote:
Pink Ball wrote:O’Sullivan is winning far more titles at 43 than Hendry was in his prime.

This is down to a combination of things: A) Sullivan is the best player we’ve ever seen and is capable of brilliance when his career should be long over. B) The standard today is the lowest we’ve seen since the early ‘90s, albeit still slightly higher.


I have to give it to Pink Ball. He masquerades as someone who doesn't care much for O'Sullivan when he is obviously the biggest 'fanboy' on this are any other forum.

Easy for Sullo.

Re: GOAT?

Postby Pink Ball

Badsnookerplayer wrote:
Pink Ball wrote:O’Sullivan is winning far more titles at 43 than Hendry was in his prime.

This is down to a combination of things: A) Sullivan is the best player we’ve ever seen and is capable of brilliance when his career should be long over. B) The standard today is the lowest we’ve seen since the early ‘90s, albeit still slightly higher.

Do you consider his record as a 'drug parakeet' affects his position of GOAT in any way?

Same in cycling with Lance?

Weed didn’t help O’Sullivan, nor would it have helped Armstrong. He’d have stopped for munchies on Ventoux.

Re: GOAT?

Postby Alex0paul

Johnny Bravo wrote:
vodkadiet wrote:World titles are the ultimate barometer of greatness. Second to that is time spent as World number 1. Hendry wins on both counts.


Titles are evaluated by factoring in the competition one has had to face in order to get them.
Hendry won his against weaker opposition than O'Sullivan.
FACT !
Hendry would not have won half of what he did had he turned pro at the same time as the class of 92.


Remind me when Hendry has to face Martin O’Donnnell and Tom Ford in the latter stages of a major?

Re: GOAT?

Postby Holden Chinaski

Neal Foulds just said he almost never saw Jimmy White practice when Jimmy was in his prime. Jimmy himself has admitted he was addicted to various hard drugs in those days and loved to party too much as well... So Hendry played a drug addict who hardly ever used to practice in four World finals.

Also, Ronnie has nothing left to prove. He has beaten the greats. Been there, done that.

When Ronnie was just 17 years old, he beat Hendry in a UK Championship final. He beat Hendry again in the 1997 UK final. In 2001, Ronnie beat John Higgins in a World Final. Ronnie also destroyed Stephen Hendry in the 2004 and 2008 semi finals of the World Championship.
Ronnie has also beaten John Higgins in two Masters finals and he beat Mark Selby in two Masters finals as well.

Ronnie has nothing left to prove.

Re: GOAT?

Postby Alex0paul

Why does anyone care who the greatest of all time is? What difference does it make to your lives?

Re: GOAT?

Postby Holden Chinaski

Alex0paul wrote:Why does anyone care who the greatest of all time is? What difference does it make to your lives?

It's chimpanzee behaviour. Chimps always need to know who the alpha is...

Re: GOAT?

Postby vodkadiet

The usual garbage from O'Sullivan fans. He has been slogging round green baizes for over a quarter of a decade and he has failed miserably to match Hendry's 7 World crowns.

It will be interesting to see the reaction on here after another failed attempt at The Crucible in 2019.

7 > 5

Re: GOAT?

Postby vodkadiet

I still haven't seen the official GOAT trophy?

Where is it?

It is like looking for the 'Giant Spaghetti Monster' in the sky (A.K.A. God).

Re: GOAT?

Postby Pink Ball

vodkadiet wrote:I still haven't seen the official GOAT trophy?

Where is it?

If it exists, then it’s in Ronnie O’Sullivan’s house.

Re: GOAT?

Postby Badsnookerplayer

Pink Ball wrote:
vodkadiet wrote:I still haven't seen the official GOAT trophy?

Where is it?

If it exists, then it’s in Ronnie O’Sullivan’s house.

Probably.

Lance still has his seven yellow jerseys on his wall.

Re: GOAT?

Postby vodkadiet

Pink Ball wrote:
vodkadiet wrote:I still haven't seen the official GOAT trophy?

Where is it?

If it exists, then it’s in Ronnie O’Sullivan’s house.


And there is a 'Giant Spaghetti Monster' in the sky looking down on everyone....


   

cron