World Snooker Championship 2011

[shaun.lawson]

One of my favourite sporting events of the year gets underway tomorrow. Snooker has changed over the years, and doesn't have anything like the popular appeal it once did: but this tournament still has the power to grip viewers and hold them in its thrall like very few others. It always throws up tight finishes, great stories and drama by the bucketload.

 

Standards are rising all the time - and nowadays, the World Championship is incredibly unpredictable. John Higgins, Mark Williams, defending Champion Neil Robertson, Ding Junhui, Mark Selby, Shaun Murphy, Stephen Maguire and Ronnie O'Sullivan all enter the event with a serious chance - and the likes of Ali Carter or Mark Allen cannot be ignored either.

 

Of these, Higgins has had the bit between his teeth ever since his return. He has a reputation to re-make, and will take some stopping. Williams - a shadow of his former self for several seasons until the last year or two - is just quietly going about his business, and knows how to win here. At his best, I still believe he's just as talented as O'Sullivan. Robertson has the Crucible curse to overcome: but enters the event with no form at all, and has a nightmare first round opponent in Judd Trump, a star of the future: an upset looms there. And Ding, who I'm tipping (I have him beating Williams in the final), has the talent - but does he have the nerve to win in Sheffield, a venue so unlike any other in the game?

 

As for Ronnie... well, in the case of any other player who hadn't won a single match in several months, and actually tried to withdraw last week before changing his mind, you could discount their chances right now. But with him, you just never know. O'Sullivan's first world title was won when he'd just started taking Prozac for bipolar disorder; his subsequent titles came pretty much out of the blue too. So while it's impossible to back him with any confidence - he's the kind of player who'll either crash out in the first round or win the whole thing by a mile - he can never, ever be ignored.

 

Finally, here's a reminder of snooker's boom time. 25 years ago, this song blazed a trail in the charts - and however naff it undoubtedly was, I still always end up humming along to it:

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BliAPzEsao0

[JWL]

Perrie Mans this year for me, long overdue.

[micole]

One of my favourite sporting events of the year gets underway tomorrow. Snooker has changed over the years, and doesn't have anything like the popular appeal it once did: but this tournament still has the power to grip viewers and hold them in its thrall like very few others. It always throws up tight finishes, great stories and drama by the bucketload.

 

Standards are rising all the time - and nowadays, the World Championship is incredibly unpredictable. John Higgins, Mark Williams, defending Champion Neil Robertson, Ding Junhui, Mark Selby, Shaun Murphy, Stephen Maguire and Ronnie O'Sullivan all enter the event with a serious chance - and the likes of Ali Carter or Mark Allen cannot be ignored either.

 

Of these, Higgins has had the bit between his teeth ever since his return. He has a reputation to re-make, and will take some stopping. Williams - a shadow of his former self for several seasons until the last year or two - is just quietly going about his business, and knows how to win here. At his best, I still believe he's just as talented as O'Sullivan. Robertson has the Crucible curse to overcome: but enters the event with no form at all, and has a nightmare first round opponent in Judd Trump, a star of the future: an upset looms there. And Ding, who I'm tipping (I have him beating Williams in the final), has the talent - but does he have the nerve to win in Sheffield, a venue so unlike any other in the game?

 

As for Ronnie... well, in the case of any other player who hadn't won a single match in several months, and actually tried to withdraw last week before changing his mind, you could discount their chances right now. But with him, you just never know. O'Sullivan's first world title was won when he'd just started taking Prozac for bipolar disorder; his subsequent titles came pretty much out of the blue too. So while it's impossible to back him with any confidence - he's the kind of player who'll either crash out in the first round or win the whole thing by a mile - he can never, ever be ignored.

 

Finally, here's a reminder of snooker's boom time. 25 years ago, this song blazed a trail in the charts - and however naff it undoubtedly was, I still always end up humming along to it:

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BliAPzEsao0

 

Chas 'n' Dave are not naff

[johnjl]

Perrie Mans this year for me, long overdue.

Used to love the snooker back then. Staying up to watch Pot Black with the old man on the colour set downstairs. Full of characters back then, feel like it's lost a certain something over the years. Can't be bothered with it now.

[The Old Tolbooth]

I must admit I love the snooker, and this years competition is as wide open as I've seen it. I won't go into as much detail on the snooker as I did on the Grand National last week (or as Shaun did ), but I think this year could see Mark Selby rule the world, but I reckon Higgins will have a very big say in where the trophy ends up too.

[JWL]

Used to love the snooker back then. Staying up to watch Pot Black with the old man on the colour set downstairs. Full of characters back then, feel like it's lost a certain something over the years. Can't be bothered with it now.

 

 

 

Snooker is shite now. One personality amongst the whole lot performing at this years World Championship and even he is a major pain in the arse.

[johnjl]

Snooker is shite now. One personality amongst the whole lot performing at this years World Championship and even he is a major pain in the arse.

 

I agree. I actually wish I could get back into it cos I really used to enjoy it but just can't.

[JWL]

When I used to play snooker you always had a sort of affinity to players that were kicking about at the time. Whilst I always wanted to be compared with the likes of Higgins and White, unfortunately the way I played was more Davis and Thorburn (albeit off course, not to their standards). Thing is though, who would you like to be compared with today..................Mark Selby, Neil Robertson, hardly inspiring names to get people either playing or watching the game.

[shaun.lawson]

Perrie Mans this year for me, long overdue.

 

I swear you say that on the equivalent thread every year!

 

Used to love the snooker back then. Staying up to watch Pot Black with the old man on the colour set downstairs. Full of characters back then, feel like it's lost a certain something over the years. Can't be bothered with it now.

 

 

When I used to play snooker you always had a sort of affinity to players that were kicking about at the time. Whilst I always wanted to be compared with the likes of Higgins and White, unfortunately the way I played was more Davis and Thorburn (albeit off course, not to their standards). Thing is though, who would you like to be compared with today..................Mark Selby, Neil Robertson, hardly inspiring names to get people either playing or watching the game.

 

Both good posts, with which I have a lot of sympathy. In its heyday, Barry Hearn described snooker as "Coronation Street with balls": there were so many characters with whom the viewer could empathise, and what is televised sport without human stories to inspire us and engage with?

 

Then a number of things happened:

 

1. Football fans stopped being treated as pariahs, and the boom in the sport began. At one point, I think snooker briefly challenged football as the televised sport most people wanted to watch - but that could only ever be very temporary, and the national game reasserted itself completely in the 1990s.

 

2. Satellite TV eroded what was once the norm: tens of millions of people all watching the same sporting event on the same channel, as happened most famously in snooker's case at the climax of the 1985 final.

 

3. Snooker went 'open' - but this meant standards rose beyond belief, leading to a bunch of automatons all playing exactly the same error-free game. The thing is, snooker doesn't work as a televised sport without mistakes: mistakes are what create the drama and tension. Every top player in the 1980s - even Steve Davis to a degree - had clear weaknesses; but this changed almost entirely as Hendry reached his peak, and was followed by Higgins, Williams and O'Sullivan.

 

4. The end of tobacco sponsorship coincided with ruinously inept leadership of the sport: meaning its profile largely collapsed.

 

Put all those things together, and you get what we have now: far too few characters, far too low a profile. But in fairness to him, Hearn is trying to shake things up - and if anyone can revive snooker at least to an extent, he can.

[DG_HMFC]

Yip, looking forward to it. Higgins has been the man-in-form since his return from his ban and the death of his father, so I think he'll take some stopping this year. My favourite player has always been Stephen Hendry, and before every world championships I have the feeling that he might turn back the clocks to when he was at his most devastating and win his 8th crucible crown. I'm always left disappointed though although you never know! Mark Williams is another player I have alot of time for, he seems to be a great character, and when on form a joy to watch.

 

So, My heart wants Hendry to do it but my head tells me either Higgins or Williams to win.

 

Hopefully the opener tomorrow morning between Robertson and Trump sets us up for an entertaining couple of weeks.

[H.A.N.S]

O'Sullivan has no chance. He won't fin his form in the matter of a week. He is 8/1 at bookies. I will give anyone 25/1 win only, minumum bet ?40.

 

I am betting Dale +3.5 frames at 5/4 in his first match.

[Larry]

It's about time Ding put in a good performance at the Crucible. Can't remember him ever playing anywhere near his best there. He is due to play Selby in the quarters and fancy the winner of that to go on and win the tournament.

 

?10 Ding 8/1

?5 Selby 6/1

 

I always have a sentimental Hendry bet. He should get past Perry, but then he could potentially have Selby and then Ding. But have stuck ?2 on him winning his quarter of the draw at 8/1.

 

To win their quarter of the draw...........Shaun Murphy and Mark Allen ?2 pays ?56.

 

First round accumulator..... Allen, Dott, Ebdon, Fu and Hendry ?3 pays ?31.

 

1st round handicap accumulator..... Cope(-2.5), Carter(-2.5), Walden(-1.5) and Murphy(-2.5) ?3 pays ?21.

 

1st round shock double.... Dominc Dale and Stephen Lee ?1 pays ?15

[shaun.lawson]

It's about time Ding put in a good performance at the Crucible. Can't remember him ever playing anywhere near his best there. He is due to play Selby in the quarters and fancy the winner of that to go on and win the tournament.

 

?10 Ding 8/1

?5 Selby 6/1

 

I always have a sentimental Hendry bet. He should get past Perry, but then he could potentially have Selby and then Ding. But have stuck ?2 on him winning his quarter of the draw at 8/1.

 

To win their quarter of the draw...........Shaun Murphy and Mark Allen ?2 pays ?56.

 

First round accumulator..... Allen, Dott, Ebdon, Fu and Hendry ?3 pays ?31.

 

1st round handicap accumulator..... Cope(-2.5), Carter(-2.5), Walden(-1.5) and Murphy(-2.5) ?3 pays ?21.

 

1st round shock double.... Dominc Dale and Stephen Lee ?1 pays ?15

 

I like that shout. I have a horrible record of tipping the winner the year before they actually do it - so wouldn't be at all surprised if Selby goes all the way. But going into the semis last year, he really should've won it - then promptly did a Matthew Stevens and lost to Graeme Dott. That left me suspecting he'll never do it: would love to be wrong though, as Mark's a class act and one of the most popular players on the circuit.

 

Meanwhile, Robertson is in trouble, 5-4 down to Judd Trump at the interval. Trump's been regarded as a coming force for ages now: everyone knows how good he is, and his game is very, very reminiscent of a young Jimmy White. He might well go on and knock the Champion out tonight.

[Larry]

It's nicely set up, but I still fancy Robertson to come through tonight and win a tight one. Don't think he has much chance of breaking the crucible curse though.

 

I was flicking between the two matches, and Jamie Cope played horrendously bad. God knows how he is leading 5-4. Hopefully he gets it together as I need him to win by at least 10-7.

 

Selby will definitely win it at some point I reckon. He is right up there with John Higgins in terms of being the best all round player. Very much suited to playing 2/3/4 session snooker IMO.

[JWL]

I swear you say that on the equivalent thread every year!

 

 

 

Caught!!! and another well known ex-poster would join in with another obscure 1970's snooker star (think Rex Williams would often crop up), good memory Shaun.

[Larry]

Just stuck ?2 @ 13/2 for Carter to win the first 4 frames versus Dave. Going to have a wee ?1 or ?2 bet on most sessions this year. No doubt will come out with losses.

[Larry]

Just stuck ?2 @ 13/2 for Carter to win the first 4 frames versus Dave. Going to have a wee ?1 or ?2 bet on most sessions this year. No doubt will come out with losses.

4-0. Should have had a fiver on it. Carter playing very well, could have been a good bet to win the top quarter of the draw.

[Larry]

Backed Robertson to win 10-8 11/2. Another massive ?2 bet

 

Think Trump will bottle it tonight. Saying that, Robertson just missed an easy black off the spot.

[Statto]

?10 on Robertson E/W @ 11/1

[Larry]

Trump 9-7 up now. The champion could be out at the first hurdle.

[shaun.lawson]

Robertson has the Crucible curse to overcome: but enters the event with no form at all, and has a nightmare first round opponent in Judd Trump, a star of the future: an upset looms there.

 

[Beats]

I won a Snooker Comp on my Stag Doo

 

 

Mitchell out in round 1

 

 

Shaun is there any sport you don't like?

[shaun.lawson]

 

 

 

Shaun is there any sport you don't like?

 

Yep. Horse racing, basketball, ice hockey (except at the Winter Olympics). All absolute pish. Oh, and Formula 1 too. JOKE SPORT.

[Beats]

Yep. Horse racing, basketball, ice hockey (except at the Winter Olympics). All absolute pish. Oh, and Formula 1 too. JOKE SPORT.

 

 

Bit surprised about they 2

[shaun.lawson]

Bit surprised about they 2

 

I think many football fans have a problem with basketball. Because in football, goals are a rarity; whereas in seven foot brick shithouse beanpole land, not scoring is a rarity.

 

On ice hockey: does anyone seriously watch it for the sport, and not for the (admittedly entertaining) punch-ups? Of North American sports, gridiron and especially baseball are far better, IMO.

 

Oh, I forgot another one. Much to your unhappiness, WWF also gets the Lawson

[Beats]

I think many football fans have a problem with basketball. Because in football, goals are a rarity; whereas in seven foot brick shithouse beanpole land, not scoring is a rarity.

 

On ice hockey: does anyone seriously watch it for the sport, and not for the (admittedly entertaining) punch-ups? Of North American sports, gridiron and especially baseball are far better, IMO.

 

Oh, I forgot another one. Much to your unhappiness, WWF also gets the Lawson

 

 

It's WWE.

 

But you knew that Shaun

[shaun.lawson]

It's WWE.

 

But you knew that Shaun

 

Meh. As far as I'm concerned, Snickers are actually Marathon bars; and Starbursts are Opal Fruits.

[Victorian]

ah the annual reprisal of watching stephen hendry games through the fingers.

 

 

i'll be quite happy as long as higgins doesn't win and roaster rocket ronnie eventually fecks off and stops boring the ****** off everyone with his whining about giving the game up.

[Chester™]

On ice hockey: does anyone seriously watch it for the sport, and not for the (admittedly entertaining) punch-ups? Of North American sports, gridiron and especially baseball are far better, IMO.

 

 

 

Yes. Most who go take it seriously..

[Larry]

I know what you mean, It used to be enjoyable watching Hendry. Now you have to hold your breathe every single shot, no matter how easy it is. Still, Perry is a good draw for him and he should win it comfortably. Put a couple of quid on him to win the first session 6-3 @ 7/2.

 

I don't think we will hear much from Ronnie this year. If he gets passed Dale, Murphy will beat him in the second round. Will be interested to see what odds they will offer on a Murphy/Ronnie match. Most people have had enough of him now, wasted talent.

[shaun.lawson]

I know what you mean, It used to be enjoyable watching Hendry. Now you have to hold your breathe every single shot, no matter how easy it is. Still, Perry is a good draw for him and he should win it comfortably. Put a couple of quid on him to win the first session 6-3 @ 7/2.

 

I don't think we will hear much from Ronnie this year. If he gets passed Dale, Murphy will beat him in the second round. Will be interested to see what odds they will offer on a Murphy/Ronnie match. Most people have had enough of him now, wasted talent.

 

He's a three time World Champion, and a former dominant world number one. I wish I could "waste my talent" like that.

 

Plus, like George Best, Alex Higgins, Paul Gascoigne or so many other sporting genii, you wouldn't get good Ronnie without bad Ronnie. O'Sullivan couldn't ever be a Hendry or Davis: he's wired completely differently. As it is, to have achieved what he has despite bipolar disorder and the familial background from hell (both parents imprisoned: his father for murder when Ronnie was still a boy; his mother for tax evasion, leaving 16 year old Ronnie to look after his siblings, and carve out a professional career at the same time, all in the public eye) says an awful lot for him IMO.

[Larry]

He's a three time World Champion, and a former dominant world number one. I wish I could "waste my talent" like that.

 

Plus, like George Best, Alex Higgins, Paul Gascoigne or so many other sporting genii, you wouldn't get good Ronnie without bad Ronnie. O'Sullivan couldn't ever be a Hendry or Davis: he's wired completely differently. As it is, to have achieved what he has despite bipolar disorder and the familial background from hell (both parents imprisoned: his father for murder when Ronnie was still a boy; his mother for tax evasion, leaving 16 year old Ronnie to look after his siblings, and carve out a professional career at the same time, all in the public eye) says an awful lot for him IMO.

 

He has more ability than Hendry or Davis ever had. I realise he has had his problems to deal with, and he's probably played in a more competitive era. But I still think he should have been closing in on Davis's 6 titles now. Ok wasted talent is over the top, but it's definitely a case of 'what could have been'.

[Larry]

Right, place all your money on Perry going by Hendrys first 3 pot attempts. Never seen a pro snooker player miss by so much.

[shaun.lawson]

He has more ability than Hendry or Davis ever had. I realise he has had his problems to deal with, and he's probably played in a more competitive era. But I still think he should have been closing in on Davis's 6 titles now. Ok wasted talent is over the top, but it's definitely a case of 'what could have been'.

 

But to be a remorseless winner in the Hendry or Federer mould requires a mindset or attitude so few sportsmen ever have. When most sportsmen reach the top, the idea that all they can do is just stay there is kinda deflating in a way - so very few manage it. The discipline, dedication and above all, hunger it involves separates the all time greats from the rest.

 

Funnily enough, that mindset has contributed to Hendry's problems in recent seasons. If only he could accept his limitations and laugh at himself - as Steve Davis did from the mid-90s onwards - he might well enjoy a much more productive indian summer to his career... but he can't. The perfectionist in him won't allow it. So instead, he castigates himself for missing an easy shot, and essentially makes life impossible for himself by demanding too much.

 

But back to Ronnie. I'm loathe to describe any multiple World Champion as an under-achiever. O'Sullivan's great rivals as a kid were John Higgins and Mark Williams: neither has achieved more than he has. There was a time when I regarded Higgins (who did, at one point, seem to have a similar mentality to Hendry or Davis, and a similarly rock solid game and temperament) as an under-achiever; but he got that monkey off his back by winning world titles number two and three. Williams is a different story - the Chris Eubank of snooker in some of his comments about the sport - but in the end, all three have done what Jimmy White couldn't, and win the world title, each on more than one occasion.

 

All time, I rank O'Sullivan fourth. And I'd say that's pretty bloody good TBH.

[Victorian]

Right, place all your money on Perry going by Hendrys first 3 pot attempts. Never seen a pro snooker player miss by so much.

 

having to watch it on the i-player because the bbc have got some non-elite runners running around london on the red button.

 

 

just as i say that they put the snooker on the red button but you can't access the hendry game.

[Larry]

He still looks good amongst the balls. Shot choice, safety and long potting let him down.

[Victorian]

He still looks good amongst the balls. Shot choice, safety and long potting let him down.

 

the safety.

[Larry]

He's never had to rely on safety so I can understand why it isn't a strong point. But how can he be so bad at it? He hardly continues from a snookers needed position, but if you ever see him attempt it it can be painful to watch.

 

1-1

[Victorian]

He's never had to rely on safety so I can understand why it isn't a strong point. But how can he be so bad at it? He hardly continues from a snookers needed position, but if you ever see him attempt it it can be painful to watch.

 

1-1

 

i can sense this match being sheer torture. hoofsnooker.

[Larry]

Every frame feels like a last frame decider when watching Hendry these days. 2-2

[Chester™]

But to be a remorseless winner in the Hendry or Federer mould requires a mindset or attitude so few sportsmen ever have. When most sportsmen reach the top, the idea that all they can do is just stay there is kinda deflating in a way - so very few manage it. The discipline, dedication and above all, hunger it involves separates the all time greats from the rest.

 

All time, I rank O'Sullivan fourth. And I'd say that's pretty bloody good TBH.

 

As a matter of interest Shaun, who are 1, 2 and 3?

 

As for your first paragraph, could that mindset all be part of one's 'ability', therefore Hendry has/had more 'ability' than O'Sullivan?

[Rudi Skacel]

Put a couple of quid on him to win the first session 6-3 @ 7/2.

 

Good call

 

[Larry]

Decent enough performance. Couple of centuries and 3 or 4 half centuries to go with it. The kind of form that will get him past the Joe Perry's of this world, but he will be toiling against Selby in the next round.

[Victorian]

Decent enough performance. Couple of centuries and 3 or 4 half centuries to go with it. The kind of form that will get him past the Joe Perry's of this world, but he will be toiling against Selby in the next round.

 

got a bit jammy with a kind run of the ball. got ahead and suddenly the shackles were off and he looked a different player. god only knows which hendry will appear tomorrow or in the next game if he gets through.

[shaun.lawson]

As a matter of interest Shaun, who are 1, 2 and 3?

 

As for your first paragraph, could that mindset all be part of one's 'ability', therefore Hendry has/had more 'ability' than O'Sullivan?

 

You could argue that I suppose - but then, unlike most, I've never accepted O'Sullivan to have more talent than Hendry anyway. Hendry was also a wunderkid - and they're both geniuses.

 

My 1-2-3 all time are Hendry-J.Davis-S.Davis - although it's very, very close between Joe and Steve. On my list, then comes O'Sullivan, then Reardon, then it's a flip of the coin between the two Higgins for 6th, with Alex maybe just getting the nod there.

[Rudi Skacel]

The scary thing with O'Sullivan is he could probably beat most others with his left hand.

 

Remember he played only left handed against King in the WC a few years back. King was raging.

[Chester™]

You could argue that I suppose - but then, unlike most, I've never accepted O'Sullivan to have more talent than Hendry anyway. Hendry was also a wunderkid - and they're both geniuses.

 

 

Im glad someone thinks the same.

 

And I'd put John before Alex BTW. I honestly think he doesnt get as much credit as he deserves.

[The Old Tolbooth]

You could argue that I suppose - but then, unlike most, I've never accepted O'Sullivan to have more talent than Hendry anyway. Hendry was also a wunderkid - and they're both geniuses.

 

My 1-2-3 all time are Hendry-J.Davis-S.Davis - although it's very, very close between Joe and Steve. On my list, then comes O'Sullivan, then Reardon, then it's a flip of the coin between the two Higgins for 6th, with Alex maybe just getting the nod there.

John Higgins has done more in the game than Alex could ever dream of mate, although Alex was more of an entertainer to be fair. If you're putting Alex Higgins that highly then Jimmy White should be up there too, probably ahead of Alex Higgins, although never having been World champion due to being unlucky at being around at the same time as Steve Davis and Stephen Hendry at their peak, an unluckier player in snooker you'll not find!

 

I'd also have John Parrot, Mark Williams, and Ken Doherty up there too, with Ebdon trailing just in behind (I always hated Ebdon but loved his desire to win, I was gutted when he beat Hendry 18-17 in 2002)

 

It's difficult to judge just how good Joe Davis, Fred Davis, and John Pullman were compared to the players nowadays, and we also shouldn't forget that Scotland's first champion was Walter Donaldson who was twice World champion and runner up no less that six times (he must have been a Hibby!)

 

As much as I dislike Ronnie, it's difficult to ignore how explosive he can be on the table and how much he can light an arena up with his brilliance, at his best he's more exciting than any player I've ever seen, but he's nowhere near as consistent and Hendry gets the vote every time over him in the list of all time greats. Ronnie reminds me of Jimmy White a bit, and if Ronnie was around when Davis and Hendry were in their prime (like White was) then I think he would have the same tag as White, who is the best player never to be World champion.

[shaun.lawson]

John Higgins has done more in the game than Alex could ever dream of mate, although Alex was more of an entertainer to be fair. If you're putting Higgins that highly then Jimmy White should be up there too, probably ahead of Alex Higgins, although never having been World champion due to being unlucky at being around at the same time as Steve Davis and Stephen Hendry at their peak, an unluckier player in snooker you'll not find!

 

I'd also have John Parrot, Mark Williams, and Ken Doherty up there too, with Ebdon trailing just in behind (I always hated Ebdon but loved his desire to win, I was gutted when he beat Hendry 18-17 in 2002)

 

It's difficult to judge just how good Joe Davis, Fred Davis, and John Pullman were compared to the players nowadays, and we also shouldn't forget that Scotland's first champion was Walter Donaldson who was twice World champion and runner up no less that six times (he must have been a Hibby!)

 

As much as I dislike Ronnie, it's difficult to ignore how explosive he can be on the table and how much he can light an arena up with his brilliance, at his best he's more exciting than any player I've ever seen, but he's nowhere near as consistent and Hendry gets the vote every time over him in the list of all time greats. Ronnie reminds me of Jimmy White a bit, and if Ronnie was around when Davis and Hendry were in their prime (like White was) then I think he would have the same tag as White, who is the best player never to be World champion.

 

I think Ronnie would've taken Davis or Hendry at some point had he been born when Jimmy was. The level of snooker O'Sullivan played in dismantling Hendry in the 2004 semi-finals was the finest I've ever seen from anyone. White never even approached that level.

 

You're right not to forget the greats of the past (and to point out how difficult it is to judge them - but the World Championship was completely different back then, lacking genuine competitive depth); and I agree that Williams (8th on my list), Parrott and Doherty all warrant a mention somewhere. Ebdon has been my favourite player of the last 15 years, precisely because his will to win, bottle and work ethic make him such an over-achiever: I was thrilled when he won it in 2002, and maybe only Ebdon (the modern version of Cliff Thorburn) could've won both the semi and the final in the deciding frame to take the title. A long pink Ebdon made when trailing Matthew Stevens 16-14 and almost needing snookers in the semis was one of the greatest, most ballsy shots under extreme pressure I've ever seen.

 

John v Alex? The thing is, so many judges even now consider Alex to have been snooker's most talented player ever - and of course, he was essentially responsible for populising the game: making it what it became in the 1980s. It's hard to watch that clearance against White in the 1982 semis and not conclude that those observers must be correct. John's achieved more, but in a different era: it's desperately close between them, but maybe John's three world titles to Alex' two means he should get the nod?

 

Three years ago now, I had the idea of organising a virtual all-time World Championship. I seeded players 1-16, also included those who in my view were the next sixteen best all time, then drew all the names out of my trusty Nestle Yorkie mug. Then I posted all the matches on an excellent snooker forum I'd discovered, asked everyone to predict who would win if every player was at their best (including frame margins), took an average from all that, and continued the tournament through to the final. That there were barely any upsets at all vindicated my seedings - and Hendry, quite rightly, was crowned the all time World Champion.

 

Remember, this was three years ago: before O'Sullivan and Higgins won their third titles, and before Neil Robertson won it last year (for which he'd obviously make the top 32 all time now). I also didn't seed White, because he never won the title: I couldn't stop laughing when I promptly drew poor old Jimmy out against Hendry! But for the record, here were all the results:

 

Round 1 (19 frames):

 

Stephen Hendry (Scotland, 1) bt Jimmy White (England) 10-8

Shaun Murphy (England, 16) bt Neal Foulds (England) 10-7

John Spencer (England, 9) bt Doug Mountjoy (Wales) 10-7

Mark Williams (Wales, 8) bt Eddie Charlton (Australia) 10-6

Ronnie O'Sullivan (England, 5) bt Ding Jinhui (China) 10-6

John Parrott (England, 12) bt Stephen Maguire (Scotland) 10-9

Ken Doherty (Eire, 13) bt Paul Hunter (England) 10-9

Ray Reardon (Wales, 4) bt Nigel Bond (England) 10-5

Steve Davis (England, 3) bt Matthew Stevens (Wales) 10-6

Peter Ebdon (England, 14) bt Joe Johnson (England) 10-7

Cliff Thorburn (Canada, 11) bt James Wattana (Thailand) 10-8

Alex Higgins (Northern Ireland, 6) bt Alan McManus (Scotland) 10-6

John Higgins (Scotland, 7) bt Mark Selby (England) 10-8

Fred Davis (England, 10) bt Marco Fu (Hong Kong) 10-8

Terry Griffiths (Wales, 15) bt Dennis Taylor (Northern Ireland) 10-9

Joe Davis (England, 2) bt Graeme Dott (Scotland) 10-6

 

Round 2 (25 frames):

 

Hendry bt Murphy 13-6

Williams bt Spencer 13-11

O'Sullivan bt Parrott 13-8

Reardon bt Doherty 13-9

S. Davis bt Ebdon 13-9

A. Higgins bt Thorburn 13-11

J. Higgins bt F. Davis 13-9

J. Davis bt Griffiths 13-8

 

Quarter-Finals (25 frames):

 

Hendry bt Williams 13-10

O'Sullivan bt Reardon 13-12

S. Davis bt A. Higgins 13-11

J. Davis bt J. Higgins 13-12

 

Semi-Finals (33 frames):

 

Hendry bt O'Sullivan 17-16

S. Davis bt J. Davis 17-14

 

Final (35 frames):

 

Hendry bt S. Davis 18-15

 

All Time World Professional Snooker Champion:

 

Stephen Hendry

[The Old Tolbooth]

Bloody hell, that's what I call a reply!! (you need to get out more Shaun)

 

I like the way you did that but some of the results of the matches could be argued, although I appreciate you took the scores from several opinions and not just your own, for example I reckon O'Sullivan would thrash Reardon, not because Reardon was a poor player, but someone like Ronnie would terrorise the life out of poor old Ray with his fireworks

 

By the way, just out of interest, how many forums do you actually post on and where do you get the time?