Post a reply

Re: Ronnie’s the GOAT, But Not the GOAT You Were Looking For

Postby Cloud Strife

Iranu wrote:
Cloud Strife wrote:After today, I would have to agree with Vodkadiet TBH. The gap of 2 between 7 and 5 is just too much to ignore. Doesn't really matter what the competition was, that is neither here nor there. Fact is Hendry has more world titles than Ronnie does, that is the bottom line.

And I think Ronnie would say the same. He'll be the first one to admit he's bottled it at the Crucible many times when it looked like he could challenge Hendry's record.

One match shouldn’t change your opinion of who the GOAT is, Cloud.

I know why you say it but in reality nothing’s changed in the last two days.


It's not just one match though, is it? It's the last 6 years. I always felt Ronnie would win a few more times at the Crucible, so for me Hendry's record was a moot one, Ronnie was always going to beat it, as far as I was concerned. Now that hope has been extinguished, it has allowed me to look at the GOAT debate in a new light.

PS - I think it's a good thing if people change their minds or opinion on something, it shows flexibility. If more people did it the world would be a far better place. Too many people are stubborn when it comes to their own viewpoint and are unwilling to take on other differing views. Not having a go at you, just speaking generally. :-)
Last edited by Cloud Strife on 23 Apr 2019, edited 1 time in total.

Re: Ronnie’s the GOAT, But Not the GOAT You Were Looking For

Postby Erza Scarlet

Iranu wrote:I just don’t see how this one result changes the equation.

Both players had the same numbers of world titles two days ago.


Makes me appreciate Hendry's 7 more I think. We can talk about competition all day but it's not like Ronnie has been beaten by world beaters in the last 2 years.

Re: Ronnie’s the GOAT, But Not the GOAT You Were Looking For

Postby Ash147

Iranu wrote:I just don’t see how this one result changes the equation.

Both players had the same numbers of world titles two days ago.


I think more people are finally realising that Ronnie will never win another World Title. I was one of those who believed he would win one more, but every year after 2014 I had less and less hope. This was the final nail in the coffin for me.

Re: Ronnie’s the GOAT, But Not the GOAT You Were Looking For

Postby Wildey

Ash147 wrote:
Iranu wrote:I just don’t see how this one result changes the equation.

Both players had the same numbers of world titles two days ago.


I think more people are finally realising that Ronnie will never win another World Title. I was one of those who believed he would win one more, but every year after 2014 I had less and less hope. This was the final nail in the coffin for me.

Never say Never with Ronnie seriously i see it from a totally different viewpoint to his fans.


I Never expected Hendry to do no 7 his form was dipping i could not see that coming. somehow he lifted himself off the floor for one more tilt at it and then got tantalizingly close to no 8 in 2002 age 33 .


Ronnie has never reached that point yet his performance level is as good if not better than any other player on tour.

Re: Ronnie’s the GOAT, But Not the GOAT You Were Looking For

Postby Holden Chinaski

Wildey wrote:
Ash147 wrote:
Iranu wrote:I just don’t see how this one result changes the equation.

Both players had the same numbers of world titles two days ago.


I think more people are finally realising that Ronnie will never win another World Title. I was one of those who believed he would win one more, but every year after 2014 I had less and less hope. This was the final nail in the coffin for me.

Never say Never with Ronnie seriously i see it from a totally different viewpoint to his fans.


I Never expected Hendry to do no 7 his form was dipping i could not see that coming. somehow he lifted himself off the floor for one more tilt at it and then got tantalizingly close to no 8 in 2002 age 33 .


Ronnie has never reached that point yet his performance level is as good if not better than any other player on tour.

Good post Wild. <ok>

Re: Ronnie’s the GOAT, But Not the GOAT You Were Looking For

Postby Chalk McHugh

Ronnie is the greatest man to pick up a cue for me. Regardless of having less world championships than the King of the Crucible. It's not something i get worked up about. I couldn't thank Ronnie enough for the enjoyment he's given me and so many others for over 25 years. My life would have been all the poorer if he wasn't around. He's outrageously gifted. A gift from the gods. I still get goosebumps watching old clips of him. Hendry was a stone cold killing machine but Ronnie is from another planet.

Re: Ronnie’s the GOAT, But Not the GOAT You Were Looking For

Postby Holden Chinaski

Chalk McHugh wrote:Ronnie is the greatest man to pick up a cue for me. Regardless of having less world championships than the King of the Crucible. It's not something i get worked up about. I couldn't thank Ronnie enough for the enjoyment he's given me and so many others for over 25 years. My life would have been all the poorer if he wasn't around. He's outrageously gifted. A gift from the gods. I still get goosebumps watching old clips of him. Hendry was a stone cold killing machine but Ronnie is from another planet.

:hatoff: <ok>

Re: Ronnie’s the GOAT, But Not the GOAT You Were Looking For

Postby Snooker Overdrive

I finished watching the session. Surely it's got to be one of Ronnie's - maybe even the worst - defeat at the Crucible. It was just sickening to watch. Had he played anywhere near his B-game he would have won this match comfortably. Well he even should have (and nearly did) won this match with his C-game.

He couldn't pot a ball for patches of the game. In the end he hit the balls a bit better but his attitude still wasn't right. He rushed into shots, took too many risks and didn't play the proper shots.

This performance is just such a shocker after the season he's had. Unfortunately the pressure got to him big time. He must have felt this was finally going to be his year and this expectation crippled him. The Crucible is turning from a snooker haven (2012-2013) into snooker hell for Ronnie O'Sullivan.

Re: Ronnie’s the GOAT, But Not the GOAT You Were Looking For

Postby Pink Ball

Holden Chinaski wrote:
Ash147 wrote:
Holden Chinaski wrote:
Ash147 wrote:Hendry is the GOAT. 7>5.

I often say left wing and right wing people are equally idiotic and are the same in many ways. You prove this because you remind me of Vodka.


I'm not right wing. I'm a Libertarian. <doh>

A youtube libertarian, like so many these days.. You come across as a right-libertarian.

Ash has been here six months and I’m still none the wiser as to what a libertarian is. But I now know I don’t want to be one.

Re: Ronnie’s the GOAT, But Not the GOAT You Were Looking For

Postby vodkadiet1

All this talk of O'Sullivan being The GOAT is only talk until he equals Hendry's 7 World Titles.

As for calling The Masters and The UK majors that is rubbish. Snooker only has one major. It isn't golf or tennis.


The Masters and The UK are the next best but they are not on an equal standing with The Worlds.


And century breaks also don't matter otherwise Anthony Hamilton would be an all time great.

Re: Ronnie’s the GOAT, But Not the GOAT You Were Looking For

Postby masterdoctorgenius

vodkadiet1 wrote:All this talk of O'Sullivan being The GOAT is only talk until he equals Hendry's 7 World Titles.

As for calling The Masters and The UK majors that is rubbish. Snooker only has one major. It isn't golf or tennis.


The Masters and The UK are the next best but they are not on an equal standing with The Worlds.


And century breaks also don't matter otherwise Anthony Hamilton would be an all time great.


The UK and the Masters are widely regarderd as majors by the pros.

Re: Ronnie’s the GOAT, But Not the GOAT You Were Looking For

Postby Johnny Bravo

Although I've lost hope ROS will ever win another WC, I still consider him the GOAT and I'll explain why.

At this point in time, I think everyone on this forum agrees that Ronnie can play the game to a higher standard than every other player in history.
That makes him the BEST ever.

However, that's not the same with being the GREATEST.
Greatness is defined by a mix of factors, out of which achievements is the most important one.
So, judging by this criteria, it would seem that Hendry is the greatest.

However, that is not the case. And the reason I say that is very simple. 7 might be bigger than 5, but Hendry only won 7 cause he faced weaker competition. Had he turned pro at the same time as the class of 92, he would never have won more than 3 or 4 WC.

Holden makes a very good point in his boxing example. Marciano has an impecable record and he retired undefeated, yet he never faced the type of opposition Ali, Foreman or Tyson did.

As great as he was, if Marciano would have fought Ali, he wouldn't have laid a glove on him. Ali would have outpointed him all night.
And had Marciano fought Tyson or Foreman, in the best case scenario he would have ended up in intensive care. Worst case, he ends up in the morgue.

ROS is the GOAT. He can play to a higher standard than anyone else, he's still the best player in the world in his 40's and he holds all the records, bar the WC titles.
His Crucible failures in recent years have made us Ronnetes very sad, but that doesn't change his status.

ROS is the GOAT. Simple as that.

Re: Ronnie’s the GOAT, But Not the GOAT You Were Looking For

Postby vodkadiet1

Johnny Bravo wrote:Although I've lost hope ROS will ever win another WC, I still consider him the GOAT and I'll explain why.

At this point in time, I think everyone on this forum agrees that Ronnie can play the game to a higher standard than every other player in history.
That makes him the BEST ever.

However, that's not the same with being the GREATEST.
Greatness is defined by a mix of factors, out of which achievements is the most important one.
So, judging by this criteria, it would seem that Hendry is the greatest.

However, that is not the case. And the reason I say that is very simple. 7 might be bigger than 5, but Hendry only won 7 cause he faced weaker competition. Had he turned pro at the same time as the class of 92, he would never have won more than 3 or 4 WC.

Holden makes a very good point in his boxing example. Marciano has an impecable record and he retired undefeated, yet he never faced the type of opposition Ali, Foreman or Tyson did.

As great as he was, if Marciano would have fought Ali, he wouldn't have laid a glove on him. Ali would have outpointed him all night.
And had Marciano fought Tyson or Foreman, in the best case scenario he would have ended up in intensive care. Worst case, he ends up in the morgue.

ROS is the GOAT. He can play to a higher standard than anyone else, he's still the best player in the world in his 40's and he holds all the records, bar the WC titles.
His Crucible failures in recent years have made us Ronnetes very sad, but that doesn't change his status.

ROS is the GOAT. Simple as that.



Said the biggest fanboy ever!


You need the titles and some titles are bigger than others.


:-D

Re: Ronnie’s the GOAT, But Not the GOAT You Were Looking For

Postby vodkadiet1

masterdoctorgenius wrote:
vodkadiet1 wrote:All this talk of O'Sullivan being The GOAT is only talk until he equals Hendry's 7 World Titles.

As for calling The Masters and The UK majors that is rubbish. Snooker only has one major. It isn't golf or tennis.


The Masters and The UK are the next best but they are not on an equal standing with The Worlds.


And century breaks also don't matter otherwise Anthony Hamilton would be an all time great.


The UK and the Masters are widely regarderd as majors by the pros.


So the UK or The Masters is equal to The World Championships?

Is winning The Italian Open in tennis equal to winning The French Open?

Re: Ronnie’s the GOAT, But Not the GOAT You Were Looking For

Postby Johnny Bravo

vodkadiet1 wrote:
Said the biggest fanboy ever!

You need the titles and some titles are bigger than others.

:-D


U are right, but Hendry only has those titles cause he faced weaker opposition. I will admit though that he had a much better attitude than ROS, he never "threw" a match away at the Crucible, meaning he always gave it his everything.
But that doesn't make him the GOAT.

Re: Ronnie’s the GOAT, But Not the GOAT You Were Looking For

Postby Johnny Bravo

vodkadiet1 wrote:So the UK or The Masters is equal to The World Championships?

Is winning The Italian Open in tennis equal to winning The French Open?


You're comparing apples to oranges.

The Australian Open and US Open are not quite as prestigious as Wimblendon and Rolland Garros, yet they are all count the same, all are counted as majors.

Re: Ronnie’s the GOAT, But Not the GOAT You Were Looking For

Postby Koninkaulus

Johnny Bravo wrote:
vodkadiet1 wrote:So the UK or The Masters is equal to The World Championships?

Is winning The Italian Open in tennis equal to winning The French Open?


You're comparing apples to oranges.

The Australian Open and US Open are not quite as prestigious as Wimblendon and Rolland Garros, yet they are all count the same, all are counted as majors.


There is virtually no difference in prestige between the four Grand Slam tournaments and hasn't been for decades. If you insist on finding the slightest differences, the US Open would be marginally ahead of Roland Garros. Again, this is basically negligible.

In snooker, there is one massive tournament and a bunch of smaller ones. Almost all of the other ranking tournaments are closer to the UK in terms of prestige than the UK is to the World Championship. The Masters is nowhere close either.

In fact, Vodkadiet's analogy was perfectly valid. There is one tournament clearly above the rest in snooker whereas tennis has four. The Italian Open is a Masters 1000 tournament, which is exactly the level of the UK Championship in relation to the World Championship.
Last edited by Koninkaulus on 24 Apr 2019, edited 2 times in total.

Re: Ronnie’s the GOAT, But Not the GOAT You Were Looking For

Postby D4P

To me, the most underrated and underdiscussed stat in Snooker is career match win%, which is a stat that Ronnie dominates:

1. Ronnie: 75.1%
2. J. Higgins 69.2%
3. Hendry 68.9%
4. Selby 68.1%
5. Williams 64.3%
etc.

Ronnie's lead over everyone (including Hendry) is already massive, but becomes even more impressive when you consider:

1. Ronnie is now roughly the age at which Hendry retired, which means that their career win percentages are both measured at roughly age 43.

2. Ronnie is almost universally considered to be an "underachiever", which means that most people (implicitly) think his career win% should be even higher than it already is. Put another way, Ronnie has a massive lead in win% despite walking out on matches, giving up, playing kamikaze, having a bad attitude, etc. etc. etc. He is so much better than everyone else that he has dominated them in spite of not giving anywhere close to 100% effort for his entire career. (Not to mention that most people think he "should" have more titles to his credit too, including WSCs. The reason that he doesn't have more titles isn't that he wasn't good enough to win them: It's that he didn't really care enough to put out the effort, and/or that he was distracted by his mental health struggles, family circumstances, etc.).

But I didn't really intend for this thread to revert into a generic "Who's the GOAT" discussion, since those discussions aren't really ever going to change anyone's mind...

Re: Ronnie’s the GOAT, But Not the GOAT You Were Looking For

Postby Johnny Bravo

Koninkaulus wrote:
Johnny Bravo wrote:
vodkadiet1 wrote:So the UK or The Masters is equal to The World Championships?

Is winning The Italian Open in tennis equal to winning The French Open?


You're comparing apples to oranges.

The Australian Open and US Open are not quite as prestigious as Wimblendon and Rolland Garros, yet they are all count the same, all are counted as majors.


There is virtually no difference in prestige between the four Grand Slam tournaments and hasn't been for decades. If you insist on finding the slightest differences, the US Open would be marginally ahead of Roland Garros. Again, this is basically negligible.

In snooker, there is one massive tournament and a bunch of smaller ones. Almost all of the other ranking tournaments are closer to the UK in terms of prestige than the UK is to the World Championship. The Masters is nowhere close either.


But aren't Wimblendon and Rolland Garros a lot older and therefore slightly more prestigious ?! :chin:

As 4 the WC, of course it's more important than the Masters and the UK, but the latter also count as majors.
Anyway, Hendry would have never won 7 had he turned pro at the same time as the class of 92, therefore his achievements are not as relevant if u look at things from that perspective. IMO he would have had 3 or 4 WC at best.

ROS is the GOAT, despite the fact that sometimes he can be a disappointment to us Ronnetes with his stupid behaviour and lack of focus on a match.

Re: Ronnie’s the GOAT, But Not the GOAT You Were Looking For

Postby Chalk McHugh

D4P wrote:To me, the most underrated and underdiscussed stat in Snooker is career match win%, which is a stat that Ronnie dominates:

1. Ronnie: 75.1%
2. J. Higgins 69.2%
3. Hendry 68.9%
4. Selby 68.1%
5. Williams 64.3%
etc.

Ronnie's lead over everyone (including Hendry) is already massive, but becomes even more impressive when you consider:

1. Ronnie is now roughly the age at which Hendry retired, which means that their career win percentages are both measured at roughly age 43.

2. Ronnie is almost universally considered to be an "underachiever", which means that most people (implicitly) think his career win% should be even higher than it already is. Put another way, Ronnie has a massive lead in win% despite walking out on matches, giving up, playing kamikaze, having a bad attitude, etc. etc. etc. He is so much better than everyone else that he has dominated them in spite of not giving anywhere close to 100% effort for his entire career. (Not to mention that most people think he "should" have more titles to his credit too, including WSCs. The reason that he doesn't have more titles isn't that he wasn't good enough to win them: It's that he didn't really care enough to put out the effort, and/or that he was distracted by his mental health struggles, family circumstances, etc.).

But I didn't really intend for this thread to revert into a generic "Who's the GOAT" discussion, since those discussions aren't really ever going to change anyone's mind...



+1.

Re: Ronnie’s the GOAT, But Not the GOAT You Were Looking For

Postby Koninkaulus

Johnny Bravo wrote:
Koninkaulus wrote:
Johnny Bravo wrote:
vodkadiet1 wrote:So the UK or The Masters is equal to The World Championships?

Is winning The Italian Open in tennis equal to winning The French Open?


You're comparing apples to oranges.

The Australian Open and US Open are not quite as prestigious as Wimblendon and Rolland Garros, yet they are all count the same, all are counted as majors.


There is virtually no difference in prestige between the four Grand Slam tournaments and hasn't been for decades. If you insist on finding the slightest differences, the US Open would be marginally ahead of Roland Garros. Again, this is basically negligible.

In snooker, there is one massive tournament and a bunch of smaller ones. Almost all of the other ranking tournaments are closer to the UK in terms of prestige than the UK is to the World Championship. The Masters is nowhere close either.


But aren't Wimblendon and Rolland Garros a lot older and therefore slightly more prestigious ?! :chin:


The US Open is older than Roland Garros, and they both started being regarded as majors (alongside the Aussie Open) in the 1920s. The US Open also has the most prize money on offer. Both of these points I find rather irrelevant, to be fair.

The only arguments you can really make are that Wimbledon is by a small margin the most prestigious because it has the longest history of being a "major", and that the Australian Open is by an equally small margin the least prestigious for having been snubbed by many top players more recently than the other three. In the last several decades, all these perceived differences in prestige have pretty much faded away (apart from a tiny bit of nostalgia regarding Wimbledon), whereas in snooker the divide between the WC and the UK/Masters has only grown, even if they were never close to being on the same level to begin with.

Re: Ronnie’s the GOAT, But Not the GOAT You Were Looking For

Postby SavoMilosevic

Had Hendry turned pro in 92, O'Sullivan could have had fewer than 5 WC. That argument works both ways really, as Hendry has beaten him enough times at the Crucible at his prime and post prime.

Also, ROS not giving 100% is not really an excuse, as part of each player's greatness is the ability to stay focused and motivated, deal with the pressure, etc.

I actually think Higgins and Williams are the real underachievers here, as they lifted their foot off the gas for a good 8-10 years after their first/second world title, while Ronnie never had a season without showing his class at least at patches.

Re: Ronnie’s the GOAT, But Not the GOAT You Were Looking For

Postby Ck147

SavoMilosevic wrote:Had Hendry turned pro in 92, O'Sullivan could have had fewer than 5 WC. That argument works both ways really, as Hendry has beaten him enough times at the Crucible at his prime and post prime.

Also, ROS not giving 100% is not really an excuse, as part of each player's greatness is the ability to stay focused and motivated, deal with the pressure, etc.

I actually think Higgins and Williams are the real underachievers here, as they lifted their foot off the gas for a good 8-10 years after their first/second world title, while Ronnie never had a season without showing his class at least at patches.


Agree and think your definition of greatness is a good one, spans all disciplines.

Re: Ronnie’s the GOAT, But Not the GOAT You Were Looking For

Postby TheRocket

There are no underachievers. Everything happens for a reason.

Williams is a great player but he is not in the O'Sullivan/Hendry bracket.

Higgins is a great matchplayer but he's not capable to wipe out his opponents the way O'Sullivan or Hendry could. He always has to go through a tough battle to win matches.

And with Ronnie its the mental side of the game which has been his biggest weakness. Thats why he's still stuck on 5 world titles.

Re: Ronnie’s the GOAT, But Not the GOAT You Were Looking For

Postby Dan-cat

D4P wrote:In the Bible’s New Testament, we are told the story of a man named Jesus who a few thousand years ago claimed to be the messiah and savior who would liberate the Jews and set them free from their captors. But the Jews largely rejected him because he didn’t fit their picture of what a savior should look and act like. He served others rather than requiring others to serve him. He didn’t fight against his enemies, but instead loved and prayed for them. He didn’t physically free the Jews, but instead offered them spiritual salvation. In short, he wasn’t the savior they were looking for.

In today’s world of sports, fans don’t look for a savior so much as they look for a GOAT, a player that checks all their boxes for being dubbed the Greatest of All-Time. In the sport of snooker, fans expect the GOAT to act a certain way and to achieve certain things. The GOAT should take interviews seriously and give responses that are respectful, polished, and filtered. The GOAT should avoid controversy and negative publicity. The GOAT should take every match seriously and try his hardest to win. The GOAT should be excited when he wins and disappointed when he loses. The GOAT should play in most of the events during the year and should always give 100% to every event he plays in. The GOAT should have more tournaments wins in his career than other players and above all, the GOAT should win the most World Snooker Championships (WSCs).

Ronnie O’Sullivan might not check any of those boxes or meet any of those expectations. Yet, there are many people in the sport who consider him to be the GOAT. How can that be? If Ronnie is the GOAT, he’s a bit like Jesus: He’s not the GOAT snooker fans were looking for.

If Ronnie has a defining characteristic, it is a need for autonomy. He needs to feel like he is living life according to his own rules and standards. He needs to decide for himself whether to give serious responses to interview questions or whether to talk instead like a robot or a bushman from Down Under. He needs to decide for himself whether his performance in a match was brilliant or rubbish. He needs to decide for himself whether he wants to give 100% or whether he’s just not in the mood to try his hardest. He needs to set his own tournament schedule to fit his lifestyle, rather than chasing Ranking Points from here to Timbuktu and back every week. And he needs to decide for himself which events he thinks are important and worthy of his time and effort, rather than being told by WorldSnooker or the fans that such and such event is the most important and counts more than any other.

When Ronnie is told that the WSC is the most important event and that every snooker player should want to win the WSC more than any other event, there is a fundamental part of Ronnie’s brain that rebels. He will decide which events are most important to him, thank you very much. He won’t be told by someone else which events he should value the most.

And therein lies the catch for Ronnie and his fans who want him to be considered the GOAT of snooker: Whenever Ronnie thinks about winning the WSC, he also thinks about how he has to conform to external expectations by investing 17 days’ worth of hard work into winning an event that other people think is important but that he has never really enjoyed or cared as much about as other people have. Trying to win the WSC makes Ronnie feel like he’s being bossed or controlled by other people, which is something that Ronnie simply won’t tolerate. He would rather quit and give up than be controlled by someone else.

All of which means that when Ronnie shows up at the WSC, he faces a conflict between wanting to win the event that he is playing in vs. not wanting to conform to the expectations that other people place on him. I think it’s fair to say that, more often than not throughout his career, Ronnie has chosen to avoid conforming even if it meant losing. And Ronnie has been happy making that choice.

Which leaves Ronnie fans in a bit of a quandary. We want him to win WSCs, and we want him to be unanimously considered the GOAT. But he simply refuses to conform to our expectations of what the GOAT should look like, which can leave us frustrated and disappointed.

The bottom line is that if you are going to be a Ronnie fan and if you want to be happy rather than frustrated and disappointed, you need to accept him as he is, rather than expecting him to be something he’s not. He’s never going to care about the WSC as much as everyone else does, and he’s probably never going to win it as many times as Hendry/Davis/Reardon have done. And he’s not going to care about that. You probably shouldn’t care about it, either.

In my opinion, Ronnie is the GOAT. He’s just not the GOAT that many people were looking for.


This is a great piece of writing.