World Snooker Championship 2011

[The Old Tolbooth]

[Jam Tarts 1874]

Fair play to Hendry, he is past it but still goes for the shots.

[Larry]

Vintage Perry

 

Well done Stephen, don't know if I can handle much more like that. Luckily he will be a massive underdog in the next round(If selby wins his match) so no expectations.

[Larry]

Foulds is good, I agree. Nice guy, and very good player, treated disgracefully by the contemptible Colin Moynihan (small but imperfectly informed) when the latter was Sports Minister.

 

What happened?

[shaun.lawson]

Fair play to Hendry, he is past it but still goes for the shots.

 

He can't play any other way. The reason he was so brilliant is, above all, he has balls the size of watermelons. And I'm relieved he won, because as Terry Griffiths said, if he hadn't, that might well have been the last time we'd seen him at the Crucible.

 

Has to improve about 500% to stand a chance in his next match - but maybe he'll relax a bit now?

[Victorian]

Vintage Perry

 

Well done Stephen, don't know if I can handle much more like that. Luckily he will be a massive underdog in the next round(If selby wins his match) so no expectations.

 

selby on decent form versus that hendry... it will be about 13-5 selby.

 

to be quite honest, any player capable of winning through to round 2 should be too good for hendry in that form. it seems unlikely he'll all of a sudden play with a gay abandon as he should have been doing for years.

 

hendry's trouble is that he cares too much about it. but then again, that's why he can come through the final framers.

[shaun.lawson]

What happened?

 

Foulds, top four in the world by 1987 and a Champion of the future, had a serious heart condition, for which his doctor prescribed beta blockers. Moynihan demanded Foulds "lay down his cue", because he viewed this as blatant cheating.

 

Neal's a shy, retiring sort, and naturally was affected by the press storm it all caused, with many utter ignoramuses bracketing Foulds alongside drug cheats like Ben Johnson. So he slid down the rankings, and lost the best years of his career. Moynihan, meanwhile, went on to back the appalling, notorious ID card scheme for football fans; to describe England fans as the "effluent tendency"; and to suggest field hockey or swimming could surpass football as the national sport.

 

Worst. Sports Minister. Ever.

[Chester™]

It also winds me up to hear Willie "Worst Bottler in History" Thorne castigating anyone for their lack of nerve; or for that matter, anyone for poor safety play. Thorne's idea of practicing safety was to smash the balls up and go for a 147 every time: I think he might well have been the worst under-achiever in the history of the sport.

Thorne and John Virgo do my nut in with their constant whining.

 

 

What always bothers me about Thorne and Virgo's commentary is their complete lack of empathy. Mistakes happen under pressure: they're part of the game, especially at the Crucible. Both Thorne and Virgo had the most pathetic records in Sheffield, probably because they fell victim to the same factors which they routinely ignore when they're affecting anyone else.

 

Listen to Taylor sometime. He never judges, and invariably sympathises with any player who's struggling. That's because he had his own personal battle to fight in order to come through and win this title: he knows how tough it is. Only players who've actually done it here ever seem to.

 

 

The best commentator by a mile, though, is the great Clive Everton. Are the BBC using him at all this year? His understanding of the psychology of the sport is fantastic; so too is his empathy.

 

Thank feck someone else thinks like me and my mate. We fecking hate those two. The 'Former World Number Seven' (they put that up as its his only achievement of note in the game) Thorne really grinds my gears. In the last couple of years he's managed to have a fight with Steve Davis in the comms booth over shot selection (when Davis was clearly right) and turn round to Hendry and ask 'what have you ever done' (or quite close to it)! Absolute trumpet.

 

As for Clive, im sure I read he was looking to do less due health concerns (IIRC).

 

Top commentators currently are: Taylor, Foulds, Joe Johnson, Mike Hallett. If you've got Eurosport, give the latter two a go, which I find myself doing when Thorne and Virgo are on. Ive also been fairly impressed with the likes of Doherty, Davis and Hendry on the occasions they have done it.

[shaun.lawson]

Thank feck someone else thinks like me and my mate. We fecking hate those two. The 'Former World Number Seven' (they put that up as its his only achievement of note in the game) Thorne really grinds my gears. In the last couple of years he's managed to have a fight with Steve Davis in the comms booth over shot selection (when Davis was clearly right) and turn round to Hendry and ask 'what have you ever done' (or quite close to it)! Absolute trumpet.

 

As for Clive, im sure I read he was looking to do less due health concerns (IIRC).

 

Top commentators currently are: Taylor, Foulds, Joe Johnson, Mike Hallett. If you've got Eurosport, give the latter two a go, which I find myself doing when Thorne and Virgo are on. Ive also been fairly impressed with the likes of Doherty, Davis and Hendry on the occasions they have done it.

 

Yep, I like Doherty too. And Griffiths, who has a dry sense of humour which works really well in commentary, I find.

 

As for former Mercantile Credit Classic champion (big whoop), Willie Thorne: never were Fantasy Football League as bang on the money as in his case. Great WT, my arse.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LvJZL2SnFBE

[The Merse]

The first session of Ebdon v Bingham and the conclusion of the Maguire v Hawkins match starting now.

 

Reckon Bingham can knock out Ebdon and fancy Maguire to come back and win despite being 6-3 down and not playing well earlier.

[Larry]

Foulds, top four in the world by 1987 and a Champion of the future, had a serious heart condition, for which his doctor prescribed beta blockers. Moynihan demanded Foulds "lay down his cue", because he viewed this as blatant cheating.

 

Neal's a shy, retiring sort, and naturally was affected by the press storm it all caused, with many utter ignoramuses bracketing Foulds alongside drug cheats like Ben Johnson. So he slid down the rankings, and lost the best years of his career. Moynihan, meanwhile, went on to back the appalling, notorious ID card scheme for football fans; to describe England fans as the "effluent tendency"; and to suggest field hockey or swimming could surpass football as the national sport.

 

Worst. Sports Minister. Ever.

Never knew that about Foulds. Could easily be a bit of a bitter commentator after all that, In the way that Virgo and Thorne can come across at times. Maybe being the shy, retiring type means he just turns up and calls a game of snooker the way he sees it. All the others seem to either have agendas or are always trying to out do each other in some way. Plus they always use the same cliches, the same references to how golf and snooker are so similar, and the smug way they tell us that snooker is the only sport that players will call fouls on themselves. Most of what they say might be close to the truth, but do they need to mention it every single session of snooker?

 

Foulds comes across as a top bloke, and is miles ahead of the rest of the BBC clique as a commentator imo.

 

Just too add, I do like Everton. But even he has started doing my head in recently.

[Larry]

The first session of Ebdon v Bingham and the conclusion of the Maguire v Hawkins match starting now.

 

Reckon Bingham can knock out Ebdon and fancy Maguire to come back and win despite being 6-3 down and not playing well earlier.

 

Got 'The Force' in one of my accumulators. Hasn't been in the best of form, but could be too strong mentally for Bingham over the closing stages.

 

Also stuck ?2 on a Hawkins single @ 15/8, so I could be in for a massive payout

[The Merse]

Maguire back to 7-8 now.

 

Reckon he will complete the job now.

[Larry]

Sounds like 'Angles' McManus in the commentary booth for Eurosport.

 

Could be a late one. Don't really have much time for Maguire, hope Hawkins wins it.

[Stanley_]

Sounds like 'Angles' McManus in the commentary booth for Eurosport.

 

Could be a late one. Don't really have much time for Maguire, hope Hawkins wins it.

 

I know what you mean. I normally support the Scottish players but I struggle to support Maguire. There's something about him that's irritating.

[The Old Tolbooth]

9-8 Hawkins now after Maguire missed a golden chance to steal the frame.

[Larry]

'The Hawk' goes 9-8 up

[The Old Tolbooth]

Another decider, top stuff!

[Larry]

Superb break this by Hawkins

[The Old Tolbooth]

Well done Hawkins, he held it together very well when a lot of other players would crumble.

[Victorian]

can't say i'm unhappy about maguire going out, or burnett for that matter. speaking of which... higgins... hope he gets trousered as well.

[The Merse]

I see Hendry is hinting at retirement.

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/snooker/13117395.stm

 

Not sure if I'm happy about that or not.

 

He's clearly well past hsi best but would still be missed.

 

Interesting to think that he has not win the Worlds since 1999 - when he was 31.

 

I doubt many people expected that one to be his last...

[Victorian]

I see Hendry is hinting at retirement.

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/snooker/13117395.stm

 

Not sure if I'm happy about that or not.

 

He's clearly well past hsi best but would still be missed.

 

Interesting to think that he has not win the Worlds since 1999 - when he was 31.

 

I doubt many people expected that one to be his last...

 

the game has been drastically revamped. the system of ranking touranments and points has been expanded and there are far more events that players have to take part in in order to gain points, many of which are spread throughout the world. hendry has already stated that he has no interest in it whatsoever and that he will be virtually unable to retain a ranking.

 

in essence he's had a difficult decision made a lot easier for him. it's a nap he'll be legging it at the end of this season or perhaps next.

[The Merse]

I'd be interested to know at what age all the other multipe world champions won their last title at.

 

Can't help but feel Hendry lost his head far too early.

[Victorian]

I'd be interested to know at what age all the other multipe world champions won their last title at.

 

Can't help but feel Hendry lost his head far too early.

 

steve davis last won in 1989 i think. 22 years ago would make him early 30s.

[milky_26]

steve davis last won in 1989 i think. 22 years ago would make him early 30s.

davis would have been 31, reardon would be 45 spencer would have been 41 alex higgins was 33, john higgins 33

[Victorian]

davis would have been 31, reardon would be 45 spencer would have been 41 alex higgins was 33, john higgins 33

 

tells a story. spencer and reardon were the last of the greats from the old era. the modern era began to be dominated by a younger man and the new era greats of davis, hendry, higgins and o'sullivan appear.

[I P Knightley]

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.

 

 

GULP.

[Tiberius Stinkfinger]

tells a story. spencer and reardon were the last of the greats from the old era. the modern era began to be dominated by a younger man and the new era greats of davis, hendry, higgins and o'sullivan appear.

 

Bat and ball games are shite.

 

Just thought you should know this.

[Victorian]

Bat and ball games are shite.

 

Just thought you should know this.

 

so you keep saying, over and over again.

 

[rudi must stay]

I see Hendry is hinting at retirement.

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/snooker/13117395.stm

 

Not sure if I'm happy about that or not.

 

He's clearly well past hsi best but would still be missed.

 

Interesting to think that he has not win the Worlds since 1999 - when he was 31.

 

I doubt many people expected that one to be his last...

 

probably not, especially when he was beating Peter Ebdon very convincingly in 2001 and ended up losing.

[shaun.lawson]

I'd be interested to know at what age all the other multipe world champions won their last title at.

 

Can't help but feel Hendry lost his head far too early.

 

Remember, Hendry remains the youngest ever Champion. He's been playing snooker since five or six: incessantly from his teenage years onwards. He's achieved everything he could ever want to in the game, and has a family now; so naturally, his motivation's gradually faded.

 

For me, Hendry's peak was circa 1996/7. Six times World Champion, untouchable at the top of the rankings, and even as Higgins, O'Sullivan and Williams began to emerge, Hendry still always seemed to have something extra. In the 1997 Charity Challenge final against Ronnie, Hendry watched an 8-2 lead evaporate in the blink of an eye - but come the final frame, when anyone else would've had it after losing such a huge advantage, Hendry unbelievably went straight in and made a 147. Ridiculous.

 

But the problem was he was so successful that season that, by the time he got to the Crucible, he was exhausted. He still somehow dragged himself to the final anyway - but there, a fully fresh Doherty playing the snooker of his life was too much for him. And that broke the aura surrounding Hendry, something he couldn't adjust to. He blew a big lead against Williams in the Masters final at Wembley, losing sensationally on a re-spotted black; he lost the first seven frames against White in Sheffield; and the nadir was reached when Marcus Campbell (who?) beat him 9-0 at the UK Championship.

 

The work Hendry did over the next four or five months to put his game back together was the finest in his career. Because the standard of the sport had shot up over the previous two or three years; and Higgins, Williams and O'Sullivan were all much younger than Stephen, so winning relentlessly didn't take anything like as much out of them. What followed, in 1999, was the greatest World Championship in history: the best eight players in the game (Hendry, Higgins, O'Sullivan, Williams, Parrott, Doherty, Stevens, Lee) all reached the quarters; the Big Four all got to the semis (remarkably enough, the only time the latter has ever happened). And in the semi-final, Stephen Hendry and Ronnie O'Sullivan produced, for my money, the highest standard snooker match in history: especially the third session, which Clive Everton described as "snooker from the Gods".

 

But whereas the old Hendry could've seamlessly maintained an insanely high standard for months on end, the new one - who'd literally had to tear it all up and start again - couldn't. Watching the final that year, I suspected this would be Hendry's final title: just as Steve Davis' crowning glory had been when he'd finished first and daylight finished 2nd in 1989, when Hendry, White and Parrott were all about to mow him down. Sure enough, although Hendry again beat O'Sullivan 17-13 in the 2002 semis, he was almost imperceptibly weaker. Ebdon wouldn't have stood a chance against him in '99; but now, he did, and was a worthy winner of an epic final.

 

Hendry's ambitions to win an eighth title effectively expired that night. If you look at his results since, he's always come up short over long matches: like older players of the past, he can't put the standard together over a full three or four sessions any more. That O'Sullivan obliterated him 17-4 in the 2004 semis, and 17-6 in 2008, tells its own story: he's not a contender at that level any longer. But none of that detracts from his incredible legacy: Stephen Hendry revolutionised the sport, and it's highly unlikely his modern day record will ever be topped. That he's honest enough to get out either now or soon instead of clinging on when his heart isn't in it only adds to my respect for the man.

 

probably not, especially when he was beating Peter Ebdon very convincingly in 2001 and ended up losing.

 

Er - a 14-12 lead in a best of 35 frames final (in 2002, not 2001) is no-one's idea of "convincing", Rudi. Only Ebdon - at 11-6 up - ever held a convincing lead in that match; but it seemed inevitable it would go to the wire, Hendry coming back and pushing his opponent to the limit - just as he had done against Doherty in 1997, when an impossible 7-15 deficit became 12-15, creating panic in pretty much everyone except Ken.

[The Merse]

Interesting post Shaun.

 

I started watching snooker probably about a year or two before the Doherty final.

 

I remember being gutted when he lost, (and a bit annoyed I think!) as a 12 year old not fully understanding that he couldn't win every time.

 

I never seen Hendry fully at his peak. I remember my long departed Gran used to love him, but gave him a telling off when she bumped into him in "the Sweater Shop." for always puting her through the mill

 

Here's a question then. Do you think Hendry at his peak starting out his career say, 5-10 years ago would have been able to win 7 titles?

[shaun.lawson]

Interesting post Shaun.

 

I started watching snooker probably about a year or two before the Doherty final.

 

I remember being gutted when he lost, (and a bit annoyed I think!) as a 12 year old not fully understanding that he couldn't win every time.

I never seen Hendry fully at his peak. I remember my long departed Gran used to love him, but gave him a telling off when she bumped into him in "the Sweater Shop." for always puting her through the mill

 

Here's a question then. Do you think Hendry at his peak starting out his career say, 5-10 years ago would have been able to win 7 titles?

 

I wasn't! It was the whole Sampras/Federer/Schumacher thing: I was frantic for someone else to win at last. In 1996, Hendry had walked the tournament despite being nowhere near his best: the definition of greatness I'd say, but bloody alarming for the rest of snooker. So in '97, when he was given what looked like the draw from hell, I thought that year, someone had to take him out: meaning I was devastated when Darren Morgan beat O'Sullivan 13-12 in the second round. I knew Morgan couldn't beat Hendry in the following round; and seriously doubted anyone could in the one-table setting of a semi or final. Thank heavens, Doherty proved me wrong.

 

Could Hendry have won 7 titles in today's game? It's possible - I think the standard remained static around the middle of the last decade, largely because the sport was being so horrendously mis-managed - but I still doubt it. When Higgins won his first title in 1998, he said it was impossible for anyone to dominate the game as Hendry, Davis and Reardon respectively all had; and it has to be said, he's been completely vindicated in that.

 

Some of the things Hendry did, though:

 

- Slaughtering Steve Davis 9-3 in 1988, when the great man was still at the peak of his powers

 

- Winning tournament after tournament after tournament through most of 1990/1 - meaning he was knackered by the time his defence of the world title came around

 

- Coming back from 7-0 and 8-2 down to shock Mike Hallett 9-8 in the 1991 Masters final

 

- 14-8 down to Jimmy White in the 1992 final and being totally outplayed, somehow winning the final two frames of the session (including a brown, with the cue ball in the jaws of the middle pocket, I've never seen bettered anywhere), to plant doubt in Jimmy's mind, then reeling off frame after frame to win 18-14

 

- Becoming the only player ever to win five Masters titles in a row, meaning he was given the trophy to keep

 

- After struggling uncharacteristically for much of 1992/3, winning the 1993 Championship by an insane margin, in which he conceded just 25 frames all tournament, and beat White 18-5 in the final

 

- Producing one of the greatest displays of breakbuilding ever to thrash Parrott 9-3 in the 1993 UK semis

 

- Winning the 1994 World Championship, and famously breaking the hearts of much of the nation in the final, despite fracturing his elbow mid-tournament, for heavens sake

 

- Seven centuries in ten winning frames to beat Doherty (who miraculously only lost 10-6!) in the 1994 UK final

 

- Making the greatest 147 I've ever seen, in the 1995 semis against White. Some of the potting was just ludicrous - including a final black which would've been a nightmare to win a frame, never mind finish a maximum at Sheffield

 

The sixth world title, the seventh world title, that maximum against Ronnie, and so much else besides... it was just extraordinary.

[The Merse]

He's some boy.

 

Probably why it feels so hard for us to watch him these days, let alone what is going through his head too.

[Victorian]

the jimmy white finals are an interesting point. i think white could very easily have won two of those but didn't due to:

 

1. hendry being a genius and having enormous belief.

 

2. white being a total bottler.

 

i never liked jimmy white the man. i never liked the 'peoples' champion' hype that surrounded him. it pleases me greatly that hendry destroyed him so often (in a variety of ways) and that he never did win the WC.

[shaun.lawson]

He's some boy.

 

Probably why it feels so hard for us to watch him these days, let alone what is going through his head too.

 

I think he's a fulfilled man, though. Losing still hurts him - of course it does - but he won his battle with history when he won his seventh world title 12 years ago. If he was still on six, I don't think he'd be half as satisfied; as it is, I get the feeling he's viewed anything he's achieved since 1999 largely as a bonus, tbh.

[shaun.lawson]

the jimmy white finals are an interesting point. i think white could very easily have won two of those but didn't due to:

 

1. hendry being a genius and having enormous belief.

 

2. white being a total bottler.

 

i never liked jimmy white the man. i never liked the 'peoples' champion' hype that surrounded him. it pleases me greatly that hendry destroyed him so often (in a variety of ways) and that he never did win the WC.

 

I don't accept for a moment that White was a bottler. Two shots White played when trailing in 1994 and staring defeat in the face in the final session defied belief. One, a very long blue hit dead weight against the nap, with the white tight on the top cushion. And the second, a black off its spot to win a black ball frame with the cue ball on the side cushion, adjacent to the baulk line!

 

Yes, he missed a black off its spot in the final frame - but it wasn't at all easy, and White had gradually been losing position over the previous half dozen shots. Hendry, meanwhile, wobbled a pink during his clearance: that could easily have stayed up, in which case history would be very different. And Hendry would, in his own words, go on to bottle three clear chances to win the final frame in 2002 against Ebdon: that's what the white heat of the Crucible does to even the greatest of all time.

 

Why didn't White ever win the title?

 

1. His lifestyle. While others practiced relentlessly and were fully dedicated, Jimmy was off boozing all night and playing cards (he was actually drunk during matches in 1993, when he still incredibly reached the final anyway). I actually think this sometimes left him feeling he didn't deserve to win as much as his rivals, for whom (Davis and Hendry especially) he may have developed a slightly exaggerated respect.

 

2. His game. Whereas other harder match players would play safe when necessary, Jimmy couldn't resist that one extra crowd pleasing shot. Hendry was just as good as him in the balls, and more consistent: White had to be more circumspect when up against him, but he wasn't.

 

3. His opponents. Hendry and Davis are arguably the two greatest players of all time - and White would only get one chance in a final against someone else, whereupon Parrott - a completely different man and far harder match player for six months in 1991 - played the snooker of his life: snooker no-one would've lived with over the first session of the final.

 

4. His popularity. No other player had an army of fans willing him on in every match in the way Jimmy did. Everyone else won for themselves; White was expected to win for the people. This created horrible levels of pressure - and that he still reached six finals (including five in a row) is, in my view, incredible, and the very opposite of what a 'bottler' would do.

 

5. Plain bad luck. The clearance Higgins made to level at 15-15 against Jimmy in the 1982 semis was a miracle: the greatest clearance in history. Davis had gone by the end of the 1985 final; but when he lost a big lead against White the previous year, he just about had enough to hang on. And whereas Ebdon bottled a simple black in the 2002 final against Hendry, he got away with it; White was never allowed to.

 

Think of those mistakes Taylor and Davis made late on in the epic to end all epics. They were capable of missing anything at that point. When did anyone ever do that against Jimmy? So because of that, White's a "bottler", whereas Taylor or Ebdon are Champions who did it under pressure? Please.

[Victorian]

I don't accept for a moment that White was a bottler. Two shots White played when trailing in 1994 and staring defeat in the face in the final session defied belief. One, a very long blue hit dead weight against the nap, with the white tight on the top cushion. And the second, a black off its spot to win a black ball frame with the cue ball on the side cushion, adjacent to the baulk line!

 

Yes, he missed a black off its spot in the final frame - but it wasn't at all easy, and White had gradually been losing position over the previous half dozen shots. Hendry, meanwhile, wobbled a pink during his clearance: that could easily have stayed up, in which case history would be very different. And Hendry would, in his own words, go on to bottle three clear chances to win the final frame in 2002 against Ebdon: that's what the white heat of the Crucible does to even the greatest of all time.

 

Why didn't White ever win the title?

 

1. His lifestyle. While others practiced relentlessly and were fully dedicated, Jimmy was off boozing all night and playing cards (he was actually drunk during matches in 1993, when he still incredibly reached the final anyway). I actually think this sometimes left him feeling he didn't deserve to win as much as his rivals, for whom (Davis and Hendry especially) he may have developed a slightly exaggerated respect.

 

2. His game. Whereas other harder match players would play safe when necessary, Jimmy couldn't resist that one extra crowd pleasing shot. Hendry was just as good as him in the balls, and more consistent: White had to be more circumspect when up against him, but he wasn't.

 

3. His opponents. Hendry and Davis are arguably the two greatest players of all time - and White would only get one chance in a final against someone else, whereupon Parrott - a completely different man and far harder match player for six months in 1991 - played the snooker of his life: snooker no-one would've lived with over the first session of the final.

 

4. His popularity. No other player had an army of fans willing him on in every match in the way Jimmy did. Everyone else won for themselves; White was expected to win for the people. This created horrible levels of pressure - and that he still reached six finals (including five in a row) is, in my view, incredible, and the very opposite of what a 'bottler' would do.

 

5. Plain bad luck. The clearance Higgins made to level at 15-15 against Jimmy in the 1982 semis was a miracle: the greatest clearance in history. Davis had gone by the end of the 1985 final; but when he lost a big lead against White the previous year, he just about had enough to hang on. And whereas Ebdon bottled a simple black in the 2002 final against Hendry, he got away with it; White was never allowed to.

 

Think of those mistakes Taylor and Davis made late on in the epic to end all epics. They were capable of missing anything at that point. When did anyone ever do that against Jimmy? So because of that, White's a "bottler", whereas Taylor or Ebdon are Champions who did it under pressure? Please.

 

easy jimmy, don't take it personally.

[shaun.lawson]

easy jimmy, don't take it personally.

 

I'll get Jimmy's mate Ronnie Wood on to you if you don't stop it!

 

During the final stages of the 1994 final, the BBC kept showing footage of Jimmy's Dad, Tommy (hugely popular throughout the circuit), and little daughter, Lauren, watching from off stage. I so, so wanted him to win it for them - and have never been more gutted after a sporting event (with the possible exception of Airdrie '95) when he didn't.

[The Merse]

Shaun, where do you pull these stats up from?

 

They can't ALL just be from memory.

 

[Victorian]

I'll get Jimmy's mate Ronnie Wood on to you if you don't stop it!

 

During the final stages of the 1994 final, the BBC kept showing footage of Jimmy's Dad, Tommy (hugely popular throughout the circuit), and little daughter, Lauren, watching from off stage. I so, so wanted him to win it for them - and have never been more gutted after a sporting event (with the possible exception of Airdrie '95) when he didn't.

 

i could buy into the reasons why people supported him. the shot making and cue power were imperious. only o'sullivan could match what white could do on the table.

[shaun.lawson]

Shaun, where do you pull these stats up from?

 

They can't ALL just be from memory.

 

 

Oh, they're all from memory. I was a snooker afficionado throughout the 90s; almost as much as football!

 

i could buy into the reasons why people supported him. the shot making and cue power were imperious. only o'sullivan could match what white could do on the table.

 

It wasn't just that. O'Sullivan has always had a hint of the devil about him - like a cross between Jimmy and Alex - but Jimmy was just such a good guy, a cheeky chappy who never meant any harm. And a magnificent sportsman too: the number of times he called a foul on himself late in matches (including late in the '94 final) was incredible.

 

None of his contemporaries have ever had a bad word to say about him, which says it all for me.

[Victorian]

Oh, they're all from memory. I was a snooker afficionado throughout the 90s; almost as much as football!

 

 

 

It wasn't just that. O'Sullivan has always had a hint of the devil about him - like a cross between Jimmy and Alex - but Jimmy was just such a good guy, a cheeky chappy who never meant any harm. And a magnificent sportsman too: the number of times he called a foul on himself late in matches (including late in the '94 final) was incredible.

 

None of his contemporaries have ever had a bad word to say about him, which says it all for me.

 

loved watching alex higgins games. as well as being streets ahead of anyone else on the scene at the time in terms of shot making, watching one of his games was fascinating in terms of wondering if and when he would do or say something berserk. some of the 'flourishes' after his shots were something to behold. he used to virtually jump after the shot as if to help it into the pocket through sheer will.

 

what a character. lobbing tellys out of windows and saying he was going to get dennis taylor shot.

[shaun.lawson]

loved watching alex higgins games. as well as being streets ahead of anyone else on the scene at the time in terms of shot making, watching one of his games was fascinating in terms of wondering if and when he would do or say something berserk. some of the 'flourishes' after his shots were something to behold. he used to virtually jump after the shot as if to help it into the pocket through sheer will.

 

what a character. lobbing tellys out of windows and saying he was going to get dennis taylor shot.

 

In the words of Liam Gallagher: 'What about that Alex Higgins? .... He's off his tits. All that money and fame and shit and he's blown the lot. What a ******* way to go. I hope that happens to me. One big ******* blowout. Top.'

 

Snooker would've been nothing without Alex Higgins - and I still think the sport as a whole could and should have done far more for him. But that said, as a kid, I couldn't stand his antics, just as I couldn't in John McEnroe's case. I viewed the latter as a cheat, the former as a thug. I was such a square (what do you mean, "was?"); my favourite players were Dennis Taylor in snooker, and Stefan Edberg in tennis.

 

Vic - have you ever read the book 'Pocket Money', by Gordon Burn? It's a quite brilliant, very funny look at the whole snooker circuit right when it was at its boomtime peak, in 1985/6. Wonderful insight into all the characters of yesteryear: Higgins, White, Davis, Taylor, Griffiths, Thorburn, Thorne, you name it. I highly recommend it.

 

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Pocket-Money-Gordon-Burn/dp/0571236839

[The Merse]

So Shaun...

 

Matthew Stevens is playing tonight.

 

Could you write me an essay regarding what the hell happened to him?

 

Your answer should provide at least 5 defining moments/matches and a critique on his game.

[Victorian]

In the words of Liam Gallagher: 'What about that Alex Higgins? .... He's off his tits. All that money and fame and shit and he's blown the lot. What a ******* way to go. I hope that happens to me. One big ******* blowout. Top.'

 

Snooker would've been nothing without Alex Higgins - and I still think the sport as a whole could and should have done far more for him. But that said, as a kid, I couldn't stand his antics, just as I couldn't in John McEnroe's case. I viewed the latter as a cheat, the former as a thug. I was such a square (what do you mean, "was?"); my favourite players were Dennis Taylor in snooker, and Stefan Edberg in tennis.

 

i can believe that. whereas i was always a fan of the black sheep / unpopular player / anti-hero / flawed genius.

 

steve davis, alex higgins, john mcenroe, jimmy connors, eric bristow, tom watson, john daly, ian botham, harvey smith

[shaun.lawson]

So Shaun...

 

Matthew Stevens is playing tonight.

 

Could you write me an essay regarding what the hell happened to him?

 

Your answer should provide at least 5 defining moments/matches and a critique on his game.

 

 

Ah, Stevens. The second greatest player never to win the world title. Stevens lost his father in 2001, then his best friend Paul Hunter some years afterwards; I think both events had a horrible effect on his career.

 

He's also lost a horrendous number of close matches at the Crucible. A lot like Alan McManus in the 90s, Stevens always seemed much more dangerous when behind in a match than when ahead; and whereas other leading players start a four session match as they mean to go on, Stevens would mess around and get himself into a needlessly tight battle.

 

When he lost the 2000 final to Mark Williams, despite having led 13-7, he wasn't quite ready yet; but he was ready in 2002, when he was playing far and away the best snooker in the event. But Ebdon crucially started well against him, then hung on to his coattails: Ebdon was simply the far harder matchplayer. Even then, Stevens had every chance to close it out at 16-14 (I'm convinced he'd have won the final too), but messed it up; whereas Ebdon produced a wonder clearance, then went straight in with a century.

 

When Stevens again lost to a player he shouldn't after again starting much too slowly - Dott in the 2004 semis - I couldn't believe it. And when he did all the hard work in the 2005 event, but somehow lost from well ahead against unheralded Shaun Murphy in the final, the die was cast. In the matches I've mentioned, Murphy, Dott, Ebdon and Williams were all inspired by the Crucible; but Stevens wasn't. Great players find their very best under the most colossal pressure; Stevens never really did.

[shaun.lawson]

i can believe that. whereas i was always a fan of the black sheep / unpopular player / anti-hero / flawed genius.

 

steve davis, alex higgins, john mcenroe, jimmy connors, eric bristow, tom watson, john daly, ian botham, harvey smith

 

Tom Watson, anti-hero? You sure? I only got into golf late in the 80s, but vastly preferred him to Nicklaus, who I thought was a bit of a ******. Watson was always such a gentleman, always tipping his cap to the crowd and with a genial smile on his face.

 

I also liked Connors - because by the late 80s, Connors had done an Agassi and completely changed. But yep, the pattern was consistent with me too: in darts, for example, I hated Bristow, and loved the completely unloveable John Lowe. He won the final ever unified World Championship in 1993 - and I was thrilled by that.

 

PS. Even I loved John Daly, though. Who wouldn't?! Oh, and Jocky Wilson always made me laugh - especially when he beat Bristow in '89.

[Larry]

I fancy we might see some late night drama in the Ebdon/Bingham match tonight