Post a reply

Re: Shanghai Masters Final !!!

Postby Wildey

eraserhead wrote:
Wildey wrote:
eraserhead wrote:Look at the crowds the masters get do you really think players care about winning a best of 21 or would they rather win the masters in a packed ally pally. People rate the international championship on here just because it has longer matches, but hardly anyone actually watches the tournaments.

The Masters gets more than the World Championship so by that logic its obvios the Masters is the one to win infact the German Masters gets more than the Masters even so lets talk about Prestiege here yea.

My point is that it's only people on here who think longer matches equals more prestige. Worlds, UK and masters all have history, are well supported they're the ones players will want to win the most.


The only thing missing from german masters is a bigger prize fund. Loads of the players say it's their favourite venue to play.

Yea they got history but lets be honest thats the only thing plus the name going for the UK Championship its been pulled apart from the once great tournament.

While others has grown this has deminished and they have met in the middle somehere

Re: Shanghai Masters Final !!!

Postby Ck147

WC is the gold standard, don't agree that one now is worth twice what it was 20 years ago, that's like generational discrimination. Different times, different play, it's what it was, etc, etc. As BSP says, impossible argument. If the likes of Davis or Hendry were current players today they would play to today's style and probably win a lot of events.

Re: Shanghai Masters Final !!!

Postby Pink Ball

Ck147 wrote:WC is the gold standard, don't agree that one now is worth twice what it was 20 years ago, that's like generational discrimination. Different times, different play, it's what it was, etc, etc. As BSP says, impossible argument. If the likes of Davis or Hendry were current players today they would play to today's style and probably win a lot of events.

It is, though. In fact it's worth more than that. Hendry got £230,000 for winning in 1999. Judd Trump got £500,000 this year.

Re: Shanghai Masters Final !!!

Postby Badsnookerplayer

Pink Ball wrote:
Badsnookerplayer wrote:Well go on then.

Alrighty then. Let's take for example Hendry and Ding, seeing as Johnny was suggesting on another thread that Ding may be the greater player.

So let's put it into my 'Which-player-is-higher-on-the-all-time-rankings-a-majig':

*bzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz*

Answer: Hendry ranks higher on the all-time list.

Simple.

...and this would be the list that ranks Terry Griffiths higher than Judd Trump?

:chin:

Re: Shanghai Masters Final !!!

Postby Ck147

vodkadiet1 wrote:
Ck147 wrote:
vodkadiet1 wrote:
Ck147 wrote:I don't think the term "triple crown" is meaningless, it has built up meaning over the last 10 or so years, however that happened doesn't matter. I see it as something good, gives us something to compare 'greatness' of the players and gives the players incentive to try and become one of the greatest. They don't all have to be equal, clearly the WC is top, but all prestigious events that the players want to win. Similar to the grand tours in cycling, the 3 biggest events, everyone knows the Tour de France is the main one, but to win all 3 makes you one of the greats as there are only a few who can do it.


Well it is meaningless. It suggests that all that there is an equivalence of importance.

The BBC are now just bunching the 3 events in one and listing players by so called 'triple crown' events.

It implies that a player winning 6 Masters, 6 UK Championships, and 1 World Championship (13) is better than a player who has won 8 World Championships, 2 Masters, and 2 UK Championships (12).

The bunching together of majors works in tennis and golf because the majors in these events are of near enough equal importance. It certainly doesn't work in snooker.

I'm thinking higher level, being a triple crown winner shows you can win the 3 most prestigious events, which vary in format and indicate you can adapt to those formats and maybe a better all round player. Puts you in a different category to players who serially win one of those events and nothing else. A triple crown player who wins more WC's would be higher on the greatness scale than triple crown players who won more Masters.

But then I would consider a 5 time WC only winner greater than someone who has won 1 WC + 2 UK + 2 Masters.

I think I've talked myself into agreeing with you, well done sir!


Minds are like parachutes, they work better when they are open, and your mind is open CK147.

Ha ha, I like to think so, I will take that as a compliment, thank you!

Re: Shanghai Masters Final !!!

Postby Pink Ball

Badsnookerplayer wrote:
Pink Ball wrote:
Badsnookerplayer wrote:Well go on then.

Alrighty then. Let's take for example Hendry and Ding, seeing as Johnny was suggesting on another thread that Ding may be the greater player.

So let's put it into my 'Which-player-is-higher-on-the-all-time-rankings-a-majig':

*bzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz*

Answer: Hendry ranks higher on the all-time list.

Simple.

...and this would be the list that ranks Terry Griffiths higher than Judd Trump?

:chin:

Couldn't be, as Judd Trump is 10th in my all-time list and Terry Griffiths is 18th.

Re: Shanghai Masters Final !!!

Postby Ck147

Pink Ball wrote:
Ck147 wrote:WC is the gold standard, don't agree that one now is worth twice what it was 20 years ago, that's like generational discrimination. Different times, different play, it's what it was, etc, etc. As BSP says, impossible argument. If the likes of Davis or Hendry were current players today they would play to today's style and probably win a lot of events.

It is, though. In fact it's worth more than that. Hendry got £230,000 for winning in 1999. Judd Trump got £500,000 this year.

In money terms yes, I thought we were talking about something else, but you make a good point!

Re: Shanghai Masters Final !!!

Postby Andre147

vodkadiet1 wrote:Of course The Masters and The UK are huge events, albeit the UK has been devalued since the shortening of frames. I would say The Masters is more prestigious than The UK now.

I believe O'Sullivan's attitude has let him down. He doesn't appear to want to fight for another world title and it was the 2014 final that caused his uncertainty.

He said before the first round of this year's World Championship "I would rather lose in the first round than get all the way to the final and then lose."


Couldn't agree more.

Albeit in 2016 and 2017 he was actually playing well.

Re: Shanghai Masters Final !!!

Postby Ck147

Are we having bit of a break here? Hope so, I was enjoying Total Recall on ITV4 (original and better Arnie one).

Re: Shanghai Masters Final !!!

Postby Ck147

Badsnookerplayer wrote:
Ck147 wrote:Are we having bit of a break here? Hope so, I was enjoying Total Recall on ITV4 (original and better Arnie one).

Stick around

Wasn't that Predator? Anyway, Arnie just saved Mars, good for him.
I'll be back...probably tomorrow...night night.

Re: Shanghai Masters Final !!!

Postby vodkadiet1

Andre147 wrote:
vodkadiet1 wrote:Of course The Masters and The UK are huge events, albeit the UK has been devalued since the shortening of frames. I would say The Masters is more prestigious than The UK now.

I believe O'Sullivan's attitude has let him down. He doesn't appear to want to fight for another world title and it was the 2014 final that caused his uncertainty.

He said before the first round of this year's World Championship "I would rather lose in the first round than get all the way to the final and then lose."


Couldn't agree more.

Albeit in 2016 and 2017 he was actually playing well.


That match with Hawkins was one of the best matches ever played at The Crucible.

Re: Shanghai Masters Final !!!

Postby Cloud Strife

Ck147 wrote:Are we having bit of a break here? Hope so, I was enjoying Total Recall on ITV4 (original and better Arnie one).


Class film. Arnold at his best.

Re: Shanghai Masters Final !!!

Postby Cloud Strife

Pink Ball wrote:
Ck147 wrote:WC is the gold standard, don't agree that one now is worth twice what it was 20 years ago, that's like generational discrimination. Different times, different play, it's what it was, etc, etc. As BSP says, impossible argument. If the likes of Davis or Hendry were current players today they would play to today's style and probably win a lot of events.

It is, though. In fact it's worth more than that. Hendry got £230,000 for winning in 1999. Judd Trump got £500,000 this year.


In real terms, no. Taking inflation into account, there isn't a great deal of difference between Hendry's cheque from 1999 and Trump's cheque in 2019.

Re: Shanghai Masters Final !!!

Postby Badsnookerplayer

Cloud Strife wrote:
Pink Ball wrote:
Ck147 wrote:WC is the gold standard, don't agree that one now is worth twice what it was 20 years ago, that's like generational discrimination. Different times, different play, it's what it was, etc, etc. As BSP says, impossible argument. If the likes of Davis or Hendry were current players today they would play to today's style and probably win a lot of events.

It is, though. In fact it's worth more than that. Hendry got £230,000 for winning in 1999. Judd Trump got £500,000 this year.


In real terms, no. Taking inflation into account, there isn't a great deal of difference between Hendry's cheque from 1999 and Trump's cheque in 2019.

Incorrect - it is a little over £400 000 in today's terms.

Re: Shanghai Masters Final !!!

Postby Ash147

vodkadiet1 wrote:
Andre147 wrote:
vodkadiet1 wrote:Of course The Masters and The UK are huge events, albeit the UK has been devalued since the shortening of frames. I would say The Masters is more prestigious than The UK now.

I believe O'Sullivan's attitude has let him down. He doesn't appear to want to fight for another world title and it was the 2014 final that caused his uncertainty.

He said before the first round of this year's World Championship "I would rather lose in the first round than get all the way to the final and then lose."


Couldn't agree more.

Albeit in 2016 and 2017 he was actually playing well.


That match with Hawkins was one of the best matches ever played at The Crucible.


I still have no idea how Hawkins won that match. Ronnie made 12 breaks over 50, including 4 centuries. He outscored Hawkins by almost 300 points. That was, and remains to this day, Ronnie's best performance at the WC since he got to the final in 2014.

The thing that made it worse was that Hawkins went on to get slapped around by Fu in the next round.

Re: Shanghai Masters Final !!!

Postby SnookerFan

Ash147 wrote:
vodkadiet1 wrote:
Andre147 wrote:
vodkadiet1 wrote:Of course The Masters and The UK are huge events, albeit the UK has been devalued since the shortening of frames. I would say The Masters is more prestigious than The UK now.

I believe O'Sullivan's attitude has let him down. He doesn't appear to want to fight for another world title and it was the 2014 final that caused his uncertainty.

He said before the first round of this year's World Championship "I would rather lose in the first round than get all the way to the final and then lose."


Couldn't agree more.

Albeit in 2016 and 2017 he was actually playing well.


That match with Hawkins was one of the best matches ever played at The Crucible.


I still have no idea how Hawkins won that match. Ronnie made 12 breaks over 50, including 4 centuries. He outscored Hawkins by almost 300 points. That was, and remains to this day, Ronnie's best performance at the WC since he got to the final in 2014.

The thing that made it worse was that Hawkins went on to get slapped around by Fu in the next round.


Wasn't there a match one year between Ronnie and Mark Williams where Mark scored something like three times as many points, and potted maybe double the amount of balls but lost the match by a wide margin?

It was because every frame Mark Williams one was a century, and every frame Ronnie won was by a point or two.

Re: Shanghai Masters Final !!!

Postby Iranu

Ash147 wrote:
vodkadiet1 wrote:
Andre147 wrote:
vodkadiet1 wrote:Of course The Masters and The UK are huge events, albeit the UK has been devalued since the shortening of frames. I would say The Masters is more prestigious than The UK now.

I believe O'Sullivan's attitude has let him down. He doesn't appear to want to fight for another world title and it was the 2014 final that caused his uncertainty.

He said before the first round of this year's World Championship "I would rather lose in the first round than get all the way to the final and then lose."


Couldn't agree more.

Albeit in 2016 and 2017 he was actually playing well.


That match with Hawkins was one of the best matches ever played at The Crucible.


I still have no idea how Hawkins won that match. Ronnie made 12 breaks over 50, including 4 centuries. He outscored Hawkins by almost 300 points. That was, and remains to this day, Ronnie's best performance at the WC since he got to the final in 2014.

The thing that made it worse was that Hawkins went on to get slapped around by Fu in the next round.

He lost because his safety was absolutely awful.

I seem to remember he caught the middle pocket jaws several times on safety shots.

Re: Shanghai Masters Final !!!

Postby Ash147

SnookerFan wrote:Wasn't there a match one year between Ronnie and Mark Williams where Mark scored something like three times as many points, and potted maybe double the amount of balls but lost the match by a wide margin?

It was because every frame Mark Williams one was a century, and every frame Ronnie won was by a point or two.


Ronnie has only ever won one match against Williams without outscoring him, which was the 2010 Masters semi-final. Ronnie scored 513 points and Williams 634.

Re: Shanghai Masters Final !!!

Postby TheRocket

That Hawkins match was a true sickener. How on bucking earth can you score 12 60+ breaks in a bo25 and still lose. Yes not 50 but it was even 60. Everytime ROS had a scoring opportunity he won the frame in one visit.

I bet my house on it that Ronnie would have won the World title that year. Fu was his next opponent, then Selby whom he had already beaten twice that season and Selby was playing badly. In the final Ding.

Re: Shanghai Masters Final !!!

Postby Ash147

TheRocket wrote:That Hawkins match was a true sickener. How on bucking earth can you score 12 60+ breaks and still lose. Yes not 50 but it was even 60. Everytime ROS had a scoring opportunity he won the frame in one visit.

I bet my house on it that Ronnie would have won the World title that year. Fu was his next opponent, then Selby whom he had already beaten twice that season and Selby was playing badly. In the final Ding.


I do think 2016 was the best chance he had at winning the WC since 2014. Both years he had won the Masters and the Welsh Open, and was in great form coming into the tournament. Losing to Hawkins in 2016 was worse than losing to Bingham in 2015.

Re: Shanghai Masters Final !!!

Postby Cloud Strife

Hawkins is probably the biggest killjoy in snooker history. Many a World Championship he has ruined over the years with his 'beastmode' bullocks. I really do dislike the bald mug.

Re: Shanghai Masters Final !!!

Postby TheRocket

Ash147 wrote:
TheRocket wrote:That Hawkins match was a true sickener. How on bucking earth can you score 12 60+ breaks and still lose. Yes not 50 but it was even 60. Everytime ROS had a scoring opportunity he won the frame in one visit.

I bet my house on it that Ronnie would have won the World title that year. Fu was his next opponent, then Selby whom he had already beaten twice that season and Selby was playing badly. In the final Ding.


I do think 2016 was the best chance he had at winning the WC since 2014. Both years he had won the Masters and the Welsh Open, and was in great form coming into the tournament. Losing to Hawkins in 2016 was worse than losing to Bingham in 2015.


Without a doubt. And I said it before this years World Championship. If he could somehow get to that 2016 level again he'd win the World title. He was a 40 year old man in 2016.

Next year he'll be 44. Does the old man stll have the capability to reach 2016 level? Not sure but we'll see.

Re: Shanghai Masters Final !!!

Postby Ash147

Cloud Strife wrote:Hawkins is probably the biggest killjoy in snooker history. Many a World Championship he has ruined over the years with his 'beastmode' bullocks. I really do dislike the bald mug.


Indeed. He also ruined the 2016 Masters final, which should have been contested between Ronnie and Judd.

Re: Shanghai Masters Final !!!

Postby Cloud Strife

Badsnookerplayer wrote:Barry is a frequent visitor to my snooker club.

Other elite professionals that use it include Mavis, Georgiou and Gerard Greene.


Ironic use of the word 'elite'?

Re: Shanghai Masters Final !!!

Postby Iranu

Cloud Strife wrote:
Badsnookerplayer wrote:Barry is a frequent visitor to my snooker club.

Other elite professionals that use it include Mavis, Georgiou and Gerard Greene.


Ironic use of the word 'elite'?

Two ranking finalists and a ranking winner <ok>

Re: Shanghai Masters Final !!!

Postby SnookerFan

Iranu wrote:
Cloud Strife wrote:
Badsnookerplayer wrote:Barry is a frequent visitor to my snooker club.

Other elite professionals that use it include Mavis, Georgiou and Gerard Greene.


Ironic use of the word 'elite'?

Two ranking finalists and a ranking winner <ok>


It'd be more ironic if we referred to Cloud Strife as an elite poster.

Re: Shanghai Masters Final !!!

Postby Ash147

SnookerFan wrote:
Iranu wrote:
Cloud Strife wrote:
Badsnookerplayer wrote:Barry is a frequent visitor to my snooker club.

Other elite professionals that use it include Mavis, Georgiou and Gerard Greene.


Ironic use of the word 'elite'?

Two ranking finalists and a ranking winner <ok>


It'd be more ironic if we referred to Cloud Strife as an elite poster.


He's an elite troll.


   

cron