Printable View
I think the standard is pretty high , there was a night there i think it was Ebdon v Selby and O'Sullivan v Robertson and the play that was being produced by all those players was sensational. Theres lots of fantastic players out there , I think Matthew Stevens would be a worthy champion he always seems there or there abouts and i hope he gets one World title before he retires.Quote:
Originally Posted by paul_oshea
TELEVISED 147
wasnt the 1st televised one ronnie o'sullivan a good few yrs back??... late 90's early 00's??
ya sorry spose i should have said it slightly differently.
were the top 3/4 players better than the top 3/4 now. even o'sullivan seemed a lot better years ago. I mean you see different names every year appearing around the latter stages of the crucible, there is obviously fiercer competition, but fiercer competition doesn't mean a better standard. You watch more snooker than I do, i'd say so you are in a better position, I just think the top 3/4 in the early 90s were better thanthe top 3/4 now. I could be wrong though.
And yesterdays session was only one bit I am really commenting on, though I noticed stevens missing a lot of easy pots, but he is known for being uncomfortable when he is ahead.
First televised one was by Cliff Thorburn (I think) in the 80s.Quote:
Originally Posted by gilberto_eire
You could have a point Paul, but the stats don't back you up in terms of centuries, maximums etc. No doubting that Hendry or davis at their peak would still be winners whatever the year.
When O'Sullivan wants to be, he's easily the best. His performance in the Master's final against Ding was probably the best exhibition of snooker you'll see.
I think its far better to have 10-16 quality players all capable of winning major tournaments, and all playing to a high standard.
PS Thorburn was the first
maybe then they just held their nerve better and it didnt take as many attempts, I am not necessarily talking big breaks etc, but I always felt ( from memory, but again thinks always seem better in the past :) ) those around then wouldnt need another chance, once you messed up that was it, now it seems in any frame you can have at least 3 or 4 attempts at winning the frame again. Like you dont need centuries to win frames necessarily.
just checked wiki not to prove anyone wrong out of curiousity and the 1st proper televised was steve davis in 1982 at some crap tournament(lada classic) and then a yr later cliff done it in a proper tournament(WSC)!!
Point on the Beeb there that Matthew Stevens will probably have to qualify next year, which is indicative of the quality in the game at present.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dodge
The top players at their peaks - Davis, Hendry, White, Alex Higgins - would be top players now as well, I'd say. But the strength in depth in snooker is phenomenal. How many sports have such a wide spread of people winning titles (five different World Champions in the last five years, and still two of the four left who haven't won)? And all while the number of century breaks keeps rocketing up tournament after tournament.
Edit - here's the total of Crucible centuries by year going back to 1990. 1987 was the last year without a 140 break; it happened six times in the previous 11 years. There were 18 centuries in 1990; Stephen Hendry alone got 16 in 2002.
in terms of people entering etc, has that list increased relative to the number of centuries etc?
There's only ever 32 people entering.
Qualifying doesn't count.
i know there is 32.
stu, thats what i mean though, qualifying etc, could be greater numbers playing snooker nowadays, which would obviouslly add to the competition and greater level of players at a certain level.
btw thats nto really to do with my original point, definately a greater number of players at a certain level/standard nowadays.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gilberto_eire
wrong........think it was cliff thorburn
and jimmy white got one as well in the 80's, me thinks, one of the best things i have ever seen in sport, electric
about the standard of the snooker, for years it has taken a dip but i have to say that in my opinion this years snooker has been great stuff
hope higgins gets it, great all round player
by the way, hate it that the BBC NEVER mention alex higgins, wan kers
A huge afternoon session from the boy Selby should make it interesting tonight. From looking all over at 12-4 he's brought it back to 12-10 so I'd imagine it could be a late one. Starting back at 8. Higgins is still strong favourite at 2/5, Selby 7/4.
couldnt stay up after a long long weekend from being up so late the other nights, but never remember a match where a player got so many chances in every frame. Good to watch, but none of the stuff I was hoping for. like one/2 chances on the table and finishing up the frame.
have to say i love the way BBC2 finish off the final day. always some great light-hearted stuff going on./
Quote:
Originally Posted by bennocelt
Here you go Bennocelt.........
Do or die break to keep semi-final against White alive -1982
135 break to win World Championship in 1982
the ronnie o'sullivan one you spoke of earlier was the fastest. about 5 mins and 05 seconds if memory serves me correctlyQuote:
Originally Posted by gilberto_eire
Nobody thought it but Mark Selby was in the final...wat a player!
What?:confused:
Mark Selby was in the final!
Six weeks ago!