Promise me... The player from Germany who will be a World Class player (or at least Top 32) is not yet born. We will be happy over the first player who reach the first round of a main tour tournament...
It looked a great atmosphere at the tournament in Berlin this year.
I really need to visit Berlin again in the future, I maybe will visit again next year when the tournament is there
The final is an example when stats don't tell the whole story of the match. Trump rated higher than Higgins in
Safety play
Long Pots
Pot success percentage - (I think it was level at the end of the match but for 99 percent of the game Trump has a higher pot percentage).
He also made two century breaks, I don't think Higgins made any in the match.
If you judged the game on those stats Trump was the better player. So did Trump lose the match or did Higgins win it? Hmm... I'd say Trump lost the match by not making as many big breaks as he should have on the final day of the tournament. Had he played in a similar way to the Ding match I think the score would have been 18:11 - something like that - to Trump. I agree with some people saying Higgins didn't play mindblowingly good snooker to win the tournament but it does show you how his B game is good enough. I don't know if that is a bit depressing! Higgins B game is better than most players A game? That can't be right!
Personally I think John Higgins has matched Steve Davis and Reardon tonight, and only 1 behind Hendry in class in real terms.
I know he's 2 behind Davis and Reardon, and 3 behind Hendry on the official list. But it's tougher than the old days.
Higgins breakbulding wise now is on a par with Hendry was at the same age as him now (Hendry never developed a tactical game which made him much more beatable once his scoring deterioted just a touch (still superb by many players standards) against a stronger field where scoring got a lot better with players who were better tactically than him at the same time) while Higgins has always had a great tactical game and has developed it further once his scoring deteriorated just a touch the same manner as Hendry. But Higgins is vastly superior scoring game compared to Davis of the same age which deteriorated badly well before 35. Higgins tactical game now is still on a par with Davis's great tactical game at the same age.
That's why Higgins is still going strong and winning world titles at 36 and Hendry and Davis did not even make the world final after 30 and 31 years of age.
Last year I am sure Liang Wenbo was the next "sensation" and he seems to have sunk without trace.
I remember seeing Liang Wenbo a few times and thinking what a fantastic player he was.
It's a shame he's disappeared, we could've seen him in a final by now, maybe even lifting a trophy. I hope the brilliant Judd Trump doesn't sink into obscurity like that, but I doubt he will.
The Chinese players are fantastic. I'd love to see Ding Junhui win another title. Was rooting for him for this World Championship, to be honest. Shame he missed out.
I always watch the winner hold up the trophy and hear his interview (regardless of whether I like them or not) but if Higgins wins im just switching off tonight.
Bye Bye - some of your gut-rot has been unforgiveable at times ...:p
Higgins' long pots looked almost amateur at times compared to Trump's. Trump was in a different league. Had Trump shown his sem-final form in the final, I don't think Higgins would have stood much of chance. I don't think Higgins was even close to Ding's form during the final so he can count himself fortunate Trump struggled to break build on the final day's play.
As for Hendry, I think he may have suffered burnout post 2000. He won seven world titles in nine years - Higgins has won four world titles over a period of fourteen years. This proves Hendry was the better player in his prime, far more dominant. Davis and Hendry - in terms of success over a fixed period of time (10 years or so) the most dominant players of the modern era. It's no surprise they both experienced burnout after such sustained success. It's ridiculous for Davis to say Higgins is the best player ever. Hendry is, the stats prove it.
What about the rest of the video that you haven't seen?
You know, the stuff the NOTW decided they didn't want you to see.
What in the hell could any other part (if it existed) prove to excuse the scheming nature of his thoughts then...?
The harder you look, the more bull$hit you can create in order to prove something..
Looking at the simple facts, which are the sequences of comments made between the edit points in the video, he's basically selling out to the mighty $$$ and then working out how to best hide it..
& as for people suggesting that because he didn't actually go through with it makes him ok, wtf...He didn't proceed because he was exposed..
As he said, it's easy to miss balls and throw frames and now you know that when they do, they might be coining it in..
Ronnie misses a few sitters which raises doubts over his integrity, but he's always thrown frames to make for a more worthy challenge, especially when he's bored..
JH should've simply owned up. I'm no JH hater, I'm just not afraid to speak my mind and say it like it is. He said things on camera that are questionable of such an ambassador of the sport..Simple as that really.
Is he alone in those thoughts, nope..
The line, 'it matters more when there's money on it' is very apt and many sporting figures in many differing sports no doubt have done/thought of it..
I think the main problem people have is that someone that clearly conspired to defraud was allowed to compete and then after having plenty of luck defeated someone that out played him in just about every aspect of the game..
The BBC may bang on about JH's great tactical game etc etc, but JT was ahead of JH in many of the stats..
.. but it does show you how his B game is good enough. I don't know if that is a bit depressing! Higgins B game is better than most players A game? That can't be right!
JH had more roll at key points of the final two sessions...
& in the game of snooker, that makes for some seriously unjust results..
I'm not saying he's the 4 times WC because of luck because he is a superb player, but the one thing you don't need is a great player being especially fortunate also...
"The BBC may bang on about JH's great tactical game etc etc, but JT was ahead of JH in many of the stats.."
Prior to the last few frames, Judd was ahead on every major stat! Points scored, safety play, long pots success, centuries made during the final, overall pot success. Perhaps this proves that stats are meaningless other than the one main stat - the 'winner' stat. Higgins won! But the other stats would have suggested Trump was the better player for 95 percent of the match. Oh well, snooker, like life, can be unfair!
"The BBC may bang on about JH's great tactical game etc etc, but JT was ahead of JH in many of the stats.."
Prior to the last few frames, Judd was ahead on every major stat! Points scored, safety play, long pots success, centuries made during the final, overall pot success. Perhaps this proves that stats are meaningless other than the one main stat - the 'winner' stat. Higgins won! But the other stats would have suggested Trump was the better player for 95 percent of the match. Oh well, snooker, like life, can be unfair!
I edited my previous post to address this, but as you say, I've played plenty of league matches where I've lost being the better player through laying snookers and having the opponent fluking another back (as happened today) and playing safe only to be kicked by rotten luck following a hit n hope..
JT will gain match knowledge from this and should prove to be an even harder challenge to others in the future..
"The BBC may bang on about JH's great tactical game etc etc, but JT was ahead of JH in many of the stats.."
Prior to the last few frames, Judd was ahead on every major stat! Points scored, safety play, long pots success, centuries made during the final, overall pot success. Perhaps this proves that stats are meaningless other than the one main stat - the 'winner' stat. Higgins won! But the other stats would have suggested Trump was the better player for 95 percent of the match. Oh well, snooker, like life, can be unfair!
But Trump did the equivalent of a football team having 70% of the possession, forced 20 corners, hit the post hit the bar, the keeper producing a series of spectacular saves, shots cleared off the line, but the other team coming up the other end of the park had their only shot at goal all match and scored.
But at the end it was down to Trump to do the job i.e. the first man to 18, he didn't but Higgins did. Higgins deserved the trophy because he won more frames than Trump. Scored the important points at the important times. It's not pretty but it's clearly fair.
I edited my previous post to address this, but as you say, I've played plenty of league matches where I've lost being the better player through laying snookers and having the opponent fluking another back (as happened today) and playing safe only to be kicked by rotten luck following a hit n hope..
JT will gain match knowledge from this and should prove to be an even harder challenge to others in the future..
It's much like matchplay golf as well where you made more birdies, made fewer bogeys than your opponent, but ended up losing 1 down at the 18th because 2 of your birdies won 2 holes v your opponents 2 bogeys.
It's much like matchplay golf as well where you made more birdies, made fewer bogeys than your opponent, but ended up losing 1 down at the 18th because 2 of your birdies won 2 holes v your opponents 2 bogeys.
It happens in all sport.
Yup and as you say...JT simply didn't reach 18 frames on the board.
The fact he reached the final though and reignited interest in the sport was much more important than him winning imo. When you're that close to winning the WC at that age, the hunger for it will grow as will the belief you can win it
As long as BH doesn't ruin snooker with smoke and glitter, I predict good times ahead
"The BBC may bang on about JH's great tactical game etc etc, but JT was ahead of JH in many of the stats.."
Prior to the last few frames, Judd was ahead on every major stat! Points scored, safety play, long pots success, centuries made during the final, overall pot success. Perhaps this proves that stats are meaningless other than the one main stat - the 'winner' stat. Higgins won! But the other stats would have suggested Trump was the better player for 95 percent of the match. Oh well, snooker, like life, can be unfair!
The one thing missing from this equation was Trump's biggest weakness in my opinion: positional play. Time after time he found himself running out of position - the amount of times he ended up wrong side of the blue was pretty incredible given some of the other shots he was playing. That wasn't just bad luck, it was a real weakness and one that Higgins, who was much more consistent with his positional play, exploited.
It does show up in one stat, which is that Higgins had far more breaks over 50 in the final than Trump did. That's often more important than centuries when it comes to winning a match.
The BBC needs to take a good look at its Snooker presentation and get a decent anchor. They could cut back the commentators by about 50% and make Clive Everton the lead for the final. It is unbelievable that he is not used for more commentary in the later stages.
I would just get rid of Hazel and Rishi because JP and Steve have been on camera so long now, they are more than capable of handling the interviews and presenting. WT has to stay in the commentary box just because I crack up every time I hear him talking about break building as he is the world record holder for 147s on the practice table!
Comments
Of course, but at the end of the day had he just flatly refused the meeting there would be no video, and no allegations, and no furore.
If you do suspicious things, you'll get treated with suspicion, that's the way of the world.
I'll be interested to see what the papers make of this victory tomorrow.
It looked a great atmosphere at the tournament in Berlin this year.
I really need to visit Berlin again in the future, I maybe will visit again next year when the tournament is there
Is snooker really popular in Germany now
Safety play
Long Pots
Pot success percentage - (I think it was level at the end of the match but for 99 percent of the game Trump has a higher pot percentage).
He also made two century breaks, I don't think Higgins made any in the match.
If you judged the game on those stats Trump was the better player. So did Trump lose the match or did Higgins win it? Hmm... I'd say Trump lost the match by not making as many big breaks as he should have on the final day of the tournament. Had he played in a similar way to the Ding match I think the score would have been 18:11 - something like that - to Trump. I agree with some people saying Higgins didn't play mindblowingly good snooker to win the tournament but it does show you how his B game is good enough. I don't know if that is a bit depressing!
I know he's 2 behind Davis and Reardon, and 3 behind Hendry on the official list. But it's tougher than the old days.
Higgins breakbulding wise now is on a par with Hendry was at the same age as him now (Hendry never developed a tactical game which made him much more beatable once his scoring deterioted just a touch (still superb by many players standards) against a stronger field where scoring got a lot better with players who were better tactically than him at the same time) while Higgins has always had a great tactical game and has developed it further once his scoring deteriorated just a touch the same manner as Hendry. But Higgins is vastly superior scoring game compared to Davis of the same age which deteriorated badly well before 35. Higgins tactical game now is still on a par with Davis's great tactical game at the same age.
That's why Higgins is still going strong and winning world titles at 36 and Hendry and Davis did not even make the world final after 30 and 31 years of age.
I remember seeing Liang Wenbo a few times and thinking what a fantastic player he was.
It's a shame he's disappeared, we could've seen him in a final by now, maybe even lifting a trophy. I hope the brilliant Judd Trump doesn't sink into obscurity like that, but I doubt he will.
The Chinese players are fantastic. I'd love to see Ding Junhui win another title. Was rooting for him for this World Championship, to be honest. Shame he missed out.
Bye Bye - some of your gut-rot has been unforgiveable at times ...:p
As for Hendry, I think he may have suffered burnout post 2000. He won seven world titles in nine years - Higgins has won four world titles over a period of fourteen years. This proves Hendry was the better player in his prime, far more dominant. Davis and Hendry - in terms of success over a fixed period of time (10 years or so) the most dominant players of the modern era. It's no surprise they both experienced burnout after such sustained success. It's ridiculous for Davis to say Higgins is the best player ever. Hendry is, the stats prove it.
What in the hell could any other part (if it existed) prove to excuse the scheming nature of his thoughts then...?
The harder you look, the more bull$hit you can create in order to prove something..
Looking at the simple facts, which are the sequences of comments made between the edit points in the video, he's basically selling out to the mighty $$$ and then working out how to best hide it..
& as for people suggesting that because he didn't actually go through with it makes him ok, wtf...He didn't proceed because he was exposed..
As he said, it's easy to miss balls and throw frames and now you know that when they do, they might be coining it in..
Ronnie misses a few sitters which raises doubts over his integrity, but he's always thrown frames to make for a more worthy challenge, especially when he's bored..
JH should've simply owned up. I'm no JH hater, I'm just not afraid to speak my mind and say it like it is. He said things on camera that are questionable of such an ambassador of the sport..Simple as that really.
Is he alone in those thoughts, nope..
The line, 'it matters more when there's money on it' is very apt and many sporting figures in many differing sports no doubt have done/thought of it..
I think the main problem people have is that someone that clearly conspired to defraud was allowed to compete and then after having plenty of luck defeated someone that out played him in just about every aspect of the game..
The BBC may bang on about JH's great tactical game etc etc, but JT was ahead of JH in many of the stats..
JH had more roll at key points of the final two sessions...
& in the game of snooker, that makes for some seriously unjust results..
I'm not saying he's the 4 times WC because of luck because he is a superb player, but the one thing you don't need is a great player being especially fortunate also...
It cost JT many frames this afternoon..
Prior to the last few frames, Judd was ahead on every major stat! Points scored, safety play, long pots success, centuries made during the final, overall pot success. Perhaps this proves that stats are meaningless other than the one main stat - the 'winner' stat. Higgins won! But the other stats would have suggested Trump was the better player for 95 percent of the match. Oh well, snooker, like life, can be unfair!
I edited my previous post to address this, but as you say, I've played plenty of league matches where I've lost being the better player through laying snookers and having the opponent fluking another back (as happened today) and playing safe only to be kicked by rotten luck following a hit n hope..
JT will gain match knowledge from this and should prove to be an even harder challenge to others in the future..
But Trump did the equivalent of a football team having 70% of the possession, forced 20 corners, hit the post hit the bar, the keeper producing a series of spectacular saves, shots cleared off the line, but the other team coming up the other end of the park had their only shot at goal all match and scored.
But at the end it was down to Trump to do the job i.e. the first man to 18, he didn't but Higgins did. Higgins deserved the trophy because he won more frames than Trump. Scored the important points at the important times. It's not pretty but it's clearly fair.
It's much like matchplay golf as well where you made more birdies, made fewer bogeys than your opponent, but ended up losing 1 down at the 18th because 2 of your birdies won 2 holes v your opponents 2 bogeys.
It happens in all sport.
Amen to that my fellow Luddite!
Yup and as you say...JT simply didn't reach 18 frames on the board.
The fact he reached the final though and reignited interest in the sport was much more important than him winning imo. When you're that close to winning the WC at that age, the hunger for it will grow as will the belief you can win it
As long as BH doesn't ruin snooker with smoke and glitter, I predict good times ahead
Then he constantly hit on the break to do what was required
Thought i've heard Dougie Donnelly doing the golf on Sky a few times recently but I might be mistaken..............
Well done Trump! You did yourself proud.
The one thing missing from this equation was Trump's biggest weakness in my opinion: positional play. Time after time he found himself running out of position - the amount of times he ended up wrong side of the blue was pretty incredible given some of the other shots he was playing. That wasn't just bad luck, it was a real weakness and one that Higgins, who was much more consistent with his positional play, exploited.
It does show up in one stat, which is that Higgins had far more breaks over 50 in the final than Trump did. That's often more important than centuries when it comes to winning a match.
You were a bit late with your reply weren't you, Higgins will be in the arms of his paymasters by now.
How about "you know what, I'm not doing it, it wouldn't be right"?
Yeah. Also the players said it was great.
Yes, Snooker is popular. Snooker is on EuroSport one sport with the highest ratings, and we have a lot of exibitions here over the year.
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/3559969/Snooker-star-Steve-Davis-stalked.html
Poor Steve, the "insider" and Barry Hearn were a bit unkind
Is that a compliment?!:D
The BBC needs to take a good look at its Snooker presentation and get a decent anchor. They could cut back the commentators by about 50% and make Clive Everton the lead for the final. It is unbelievable that he is not used for more commentary in the later stages.