posted Feb 16, 2007

Well said parklifericky.
not sure about head to heads either. I thought it was closer than that with ronnie shading it.
After seeing Hendry looking dangerous again he is the only player in the field that I wouldnt like to lay come the w.c. He is looking solid and I think he is the man to beat and I havent thought that for 6 years. That man can play under pressure like no other.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Feb 16, 2007

Yes woody147,where is he? and lets not forget teabag!

Just good laugh lads!

I cant understand why snooker does not have challenge matches and with Hendry looking decent again I would pay a lot of money to see those two play each other over fifty frames it would be snooker for the gods and be a huge hit with the public.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Feb 17, 2007

Littlesense; I must say you make little sense. You cannot spell for one thing, I had trouble understanding you. Can you read. I never said I like Reardon. I don't care what Reardon says or does, not interested.
I am tired of this rubbish about century breaks, who cares if someone has made 10,000 or 50. Winning is all that matters. It is like saying someone has served more aces in tennis, it doesn't matter. I am sure Ronnie would give half of those centuries to win another world title.

Parklife; well said. By the way Ronnie has played in 14 worlds so his ratio is 1 in 7.

Who cares what head to heads are, Mark King is 5-2 up on Ronnie. He will not say he is better than Ronnie though. Ronnie knows he isn't better than Hendry.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Feb 17, 2007

Both players played really good.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Feb 17, 2007

As i said Frame and fortune you cant help but make rude comments about other people. As i look over the history of the comments on here im happy to see that im not the only one who has noticed your poor attitude towards others.
in regard to the comment you made about myself , perhaps it is your reading ability that is in question ?
If you would like i can give you an address where you can ask for my notes to be sent to you in large print ?

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Feb 17, 2007

Littlesense; can not should be cannot, havnt should be haven't, apone should be upon, Rays should be Ray's, consistant should be consistent, passed should be past, isnt should be isn't, tours should be tour, thats should be that's. On top of that i should be written I; start a new sentence with a capital; sometimes you have a space after at the end of a sentence and sometimes you don't etc, you write like a 4 year old.

A quote from you, 'to say in a recent comment you have to like Ronnie due to Ray Reardon shows myself just how weak you are'. I never said that. I said I don't care what Reardon says or does. I am indifferent to Reardon.

You show your undoubted ignorance at the end of your drivel when you say that Ronnie is dominating, dominating what exactly? He hasn't won a ranking event for 2 years.

If you want to know what dominating is watch Roger Federer. If Ronnie had one tenth of his talent he might be a winner.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Feb 18, 2007

If Ronnie had 1/10th of Federer's talent, that make him a reasonable tennis player. However, why would tennis prowess help his snooker ability? I'm puzzled on that one.

On another note how many events ranking or otherwise has Hendry won in the last two years? The last was the Malta Cup I believe in 2005. Another puzzler, why would a defeat in the last 16 of the Welsh Open convince anyone that a player will win the biggest prize in Sheffield? I would put Neil Robertson ahead of old boy Hendry, I wish Stephen luck, he'll need it.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Feb 18, 2007

With only about 5 ranking Tournaments to play in a year i think the argument of not winning any for two years is a little on the lame side.There has still been some amazing play and some fantastic wins and results.
Dominating isnt just about the ranking tournaments that are won its much more than that and within the bigger picture Ronnie has dominated for the large part of the 2000's.
Thank you for the spelling lesson's Frameandfortune im glad that i have given you something to do in your retirement.You dont seem to be a fan of anything apart from putting people down and yourself.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Feb 18, 2007

Python; talent can be related and compared in different arenas. Federer has more talent than O'Sullivan in their comparitive pursuits, not that difficult to understand, I shouldn't need to elaborate.
I never said anything about Hendry having achieved anything the last couple of years. I have already said I think Hendry should retire. The thing here is that O'Sullivan is portrayed as something of a mega winner. You would think reading certain contributors comments that he hadn't lost a match in the last 5 years. He isn't dominating anything on the snooker table, nobody is. Jahangir Khan was unbeaten for about 5 years in the Squash world in the eighties, that is domination. O'Sullivan is vastly overrated.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Feb 18, 2007

pythonbyte.

I would strongly fancy hendry at the crucible.
Sure he is not the player of his youth but he is tough and he is class, especially over a distance of frames.
As much as I love watching Robertson, this year may be a year too soon.
I am not sure you can pot your way to glory over 5 tough matches at the crucible, I have never seen it done before.
Having said that it would be great to watch.

add comment | complain about this comment