Ronnie O'Sullivan....

[Snelly]

I thought it was a good way to make his point and I like him. He is a talent and a maverick.

 

[The_LHC]

how frequently are 147's made? they used to be as rare as hen's teeth but seem far more common - at least one every tournament?

That simply shows the standard of play now and the larger number of pros playing but it is one reason why these prixes aren't given, the sponsor knows they're much more likely to have to pay out.

9-dart finishes don't seem that uncommon either.

No they are, it's only Phil making it look easy, I know Barney's had the odd one recently but Taylor's really taken it to another level.

hole's-in-one are much less common (though at least two on the Saturday of the Senior Masters at Woburn this year) so are probably still worthy of the 'star' prize label.

But as we all know, they're mostly luck anyway, there's very little luck involved in a 147 and none in a 9-darter.

 

[johng]

I absolutely applaud him for his actions and what he achieved.

yes it may be arrogant, and I'm sure that there is no love lost between Barry Hearn and Ronnie - wan't Ronnie against him taking over the running of snooker? - however the fact remains that he is one of, if not, the biggest names in the game of snooker.

Good for him, what's more memorable - another 147 with little reward, or being part of the crowd who can talk about him not taking the last black to clear up? I know which scenario would be talked about the most and be more memorable. (and in a way isn't that what we're doing now, and he has raised the profile of snooker with it)??

John.

 

[USER1999]

Yup, he's raised the profile of snooker, by making them look like spoilt over paid knobs.

At his stage in his career, he should be chasing titles, not money.

 

[The_LHC]

I absolutely applaud him for his actions and what he achieved.

yes it may be arrogant, and I'm sure that there is no love lost between Barry Hearn and Ronnie - wan't Ronnie against him taking over the running of snooker?

No he wasn't, he's supported him all the way down the line, because, as Ronnie said himself yesterday, Hearn said he'd get more money into the sport, which the World Open doesn't seem to have achieved particularly.

You have to realise that for Ronnie the game is too easy, it doesn't present enough of a challenge, he knows he could win every match he plays, if he really wanted to but clearly just doesn't feel there's any challenge left in the game, so he needs to find another way to motivate himself. He doesn't care about titles, he's got three world championships and has said he doesn't care if he never wins another one, so really the money is the only thing left that gets him going, if he doesn't feel it's good enough, he doesn't bother playing, which is why he doesn't usually play in China, it's a long way to go for not enough reward (I think the first prize is about 35k, so by the time you fly out there, get the hotel etc etc if you don't make it through the first round you're barely breaking even).

 

[USER1999]

If he is soley motivated by money, then he is an even bigger knob than I thought. He ought to give up snooker, and find something he is passionate about. I find his little protest a bit pathetic. Doesn't he know there is a recession on?

 

[Region3]

No he wasn't, he's supported him all the way down the line, because, as Ronnie said himself yesterday, Hearn said he'd get more money into the sport, which the World Open doesn't seem to have achieved particularly.

But it's added a tournament to the calendar, which gives the lower ranked players an extra chance to earn some wages, and gives more exposure, which has the potential to bring in more sponsors for more tournaments with more prizemoney in the future.

he knows he could win every match he plays, if he really wanted to

Do you really believe that?

He doesn't care about titles, he's got three world championships and has said he doesn't care if he never wins another one, so really the money is the only thing left that gets him going

I'd have thought he had enough several times over to do whatever he wanted for the rest of his life.

If he doesn't feel it's good enough, he doesn't bother playing, which is why he doesn't usually play in China, it's a long way to go for not enough reward (I think the first prize is about 35k, so by the time you fly out there, get the hotel etc etc if you don't make it through the first round you're barely breaking even).

They get their flights and accommodation paid for.

If he doesn't want to play then that's fair enough (although I don't agree with it) but China (and most of the far east) is the biggest potential market that snooker could ever have.

If he really wants to stand up for the 'lesser' players on tour then why not go, try his best, and promote the sport as best he can with the press and audiences.

That makes a better statement than not bothering to pot the black at the end of a 147 in protest of not having a prize for something that most of the lesser players on tour haven't got much chance of winning anyway.

For the record, ROS is one of the few players I'll go out of my way to watch. I just don't like his attitude towards the game and people that have saved him from having to do real work for a living like 99% of the rest of us.

 

[level5s]

I think it is a waste him having so much talent and not giving it back to the game and fans.

To take away a 147 from a fan, who has paid to go and view him is low

 

[The_LHC]

he knows he could win every match he plays, if he really wanted to

Do you really believe that?

Of course, if Ronnie wants to be there and he's concentrating then nobody can live with him. Ronnie beats himself far more than anyone else does.

 

[Region3]

Ronnie beats himself far more than anyone else does

I wouldn't say far more, but I agree with you.
He certainly loses far more due to his mental shortfalls than any other player.

We'll have to agree to disagree on the other part though.

Taking an analogy from golf. In my opinion Tiger Woods at his peak was further away from the rest than Ronnie is/was at snooker. You might disagree but would hopefully concede that there's not much in it?

Tiger wants to win every time he plays. He even does his best to win when things aren't going his way, unlike Mr O'Sullivan.
But Tiger didn't win every time. Even with amazing talent and a great will to win every time it's just not possible, because as much as the chasing pack aren't as gifted, they're all capable of catching fire for a few days and the best are capable of throwing in a bad one.

 

[Fyldewhite]

Only just seen this tonight. We all know that he's just "not right", but what breathtaking talent to basically call a 147 when on 8 and then follow it through. I'm glad he did pot the black at the end but what a way to make a point ie on the table.

 

[Losttheplot]

Only just seen this tonight. We all know that he's just "not right", but what breathtaking talent to basically call a 147 when on 8 and then follow it through. I'm glad he did pot the black at the end but what a way to make a point ie on the table.

I think you might have hit the nail on the head there with Ronnie.
I applaud him for speaking out but in hindsight I now think he could of been more tactful in his approach, but since Ronnie isn't 'all there' mentally then it's just his way of doing things.

 

[The_LHC]

Ronnie beats himself far more than anyone else does

I wouldn't say far more, but I agree with you.
He certainly loses far more due to his mental shortfalls than any other player.

It's more than that though, Ronnie will give up on a game (literally in some cases) for the slightest of reasons, if his opponent isn't playing the way Ronnie wants them to, if a frame becomes too tactical or if he simply doesn't want to be there, no other player does that.

Taking an analogy from golf. In my opinion Tiger Woods at his peak was further away from the rest than Ronnie is/was at snooker. You might disagree but would hopefully concede that there's not much in it?

I'm not sure I would agree, Tiger got to where he was partly through talent but mainly through sheer hard work and bloody-mindedness he absolutely refuses to accept when he's beaten and utterly hates losing. Ronnie, most of the time, really doesn't care if he wins or loses, the fact that he's still been number one is purely down to his natural talent and in that, at least, he's MUCH further ahead of any other snooker player. You only have to look at the fact that most of the audience don't even notice when he switches to playing left-handed to realise that, he's so natural even when playing with the wrong hand he's 90% as good. He'd have made the top 16 playing left-handed. That's talent.

Tiger wants to win every time he plays. He even does his best to win when things aren't going his way, unlike Mr O'Sullivan. But Tiger didn't win every time. Even with amazing talent and a great will to win every time it's just not possible, because as much as the chasing pack aren't as gifted, they're all capable of catching fire for a few days and the best are capable of throwing in a bad one.

There's a big difference between golf and snooker though, every golf tournament Tiger goes to (nearly) there's 140-odd other players who are there and Tiger has to beat all of them, at the same time and as you say it only needs one person to have a purple patch over 4 days to take it from him, look at the number of one time Major winners, guys who had that one good weekend and then never managed to recreate that form.

Now, compare that to snooker, sure there might be 64 people taking part, but the winner will only play 7 of them (less if the tournament begins with the last 32) and has to sustain his form over two weeks (for the World Championships). Throw in a longer format game and it usually means the best will rise to the top, there's far less chance for a freak result. Sure you can point to someone like Shaun Murphy (I'd rather you didn't though) winning the World Champs as a qualifier but the fact that he's maintained his position in the top ranks shows that it was simply his time to break through.

Back to the point though, IF Ronnie came to every match 100% focussed, only one of the top players at the absolute peak of their game could get anywhere near him but they'd have to be clearing the table every visit to beat him.

But that's a big "IF", especially for Ronnie, I just don't believe he's capable of that level of sustained concentration but if you gave that level of natural ability to someone like Steve Davis, well, the rest of them might as well go home.

 

[znuffzz]

it was a protest agains the amount being out of line with other sports/competitions though wasnt it

 

[Region3]

If you believe him in this interview, it wasn't a protest at all, just a wind-up.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/other_sports/snooker/9027943.stm

Don't know if it's carefully prepared damage limitation or the truth. Neither would surprise me, but I think it's a really good interview from him.

 

[clubchamp07]

great interview. We can only take him at his word!

 

[freddielong]

I like him, he has so much talent he appears to get bored the most gifted snooker player I have ever seen

He has the talent to back up his arrogance so its ok in my book