posted Oct 6, 2008

In reply to David16b I fail to see how anyone can claim it's more difficult to win a title today than in 1997-2000 . For me the period of 1997 up until 2003 was the most comptetive era EVER . We had Hendry , O'Sullivan , Ebdon , Doherty , Williams and Higgins all contenders for a title . Only O'Sullivan has maintained his form in to 2008

Would Selby , Carter , Dott , Mcguire , Walden etc have been serious contenders for a world title ten years ago ? , almost certainly not

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Oct 6, 2008

Snooker was at its peak in the 90's not today. Today's snooker is really bad in comparison to then. People can keep knocking Hendry's achievements but he had to beat White in 4 world finals when Jimmy was at his best. White at The Crucible in those days was awesome. Hendry also had to beat Ebdon in a final(Ebdon had beaten Ronnie in the semi), Ebdon is better than Carter and Dott(who Ronnie has beaten in finals), and Hendry had to beat Williams in a final when Williams was at his best(and Hendry had beaten Ronnie in the semi). Hendry's other title was agianst Bond but he had also had to beat the likes of Ronnie and Jimmy before that. Hendry had to beat players of the highest calibre to win his titles, players far better than Carter and Dott! Ronnie is a great talent but there is more to being a champion than having talent. Until Ronnie wins 7 world titles Hendry stands alone as the greatest ever modern era player. I cannot comapre Hendry to Joe Davis as I never saw him play.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Oct 6, 2008

i am sick to death of a lot of people saying hendry's era was the most hardest to play in steve davis is the greatest snooker player at the age of 51 and he still gets to a quarter final of tourney speaks volumes for how good davis is davis has won more titles than any other player hendry might have most 100 breaks ronnie might have the most 147's but davis has still won more titles than any snooker player living or dead but most on here and on bbc forget how many he has won, davis has won 6 worlds 6 uks 8 irish masters 3 masters 73 professional titles 100 finals hendry 7 world 5 uk 3 irish 6 masters 69 career titles and mark my words hendry will not pass davis's 73 titles and 100 finals before hes out of top 16 at end of the season and retires within next 3 years

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Oct 6, 2008

sdavis the best,


hendry has won more 12 or 13 more RANKING titles and more WORLD titles. he has made DOUBLE the amount of centuries in half the years, this implies he killed off many more frames than davis in one visit! Hendry played frequently to a higher level than davis and their head to head dramatically favours hendry. Who are you trying to kid!? Simply calling yourself 'Sevedavisbest' will not brain wash people into believing your own deluded thoughts!

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Oct 6, 2008

Snooker is no different to any other sport. The standard is getting better and better as years go by. All those matches Hendry won against White were of a much lower standard than todays play. In those days there were 2 or 3 top players standing aside from the pack, nowadays you have 20 or 30 players who can play to that standard on their given day.
For me, White was always lacking, and very error prone, and Hendry was far more consistent. Hendry was playing then at the standard everyone is playing NOW. He was a standout then, but the depth has improved. Ronnie has played possibly the quickest and best snooker ever played, but his depression does make him inconsistent. STephen hendry was like the Martina Navratalova of womens tennis, playing in an era where only one or two decent opponents were on the scene.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Oct 6, 2008

i agree only that the OVERALL standard hs improved: much more strength in depth, but the top players of a few years ago: hendry, higgins, ronnie, williams, hunter, stevens, doherty, ebdon were far superior to todays top 16: maguire, selby, murphy, carter, perry, day.... sorry but these current top players don't compare.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Oct 6, 2008

More overall depth, better overall standard means that the top ranked guys cannot rest for a moment, knowing that a mistake is more likely to be much more severely punished than it was in the past.

A hard match for the top players awaits last 32 now as compared to the last 8 earliest in the past. That means no breathing space and harder for the same man to keep winnin torumanets, as at some point you are likely to either have a bad match and get beaten, or you are going to face an opponent playing out of his skin and get beaten, and well before the last 8 far more often than just the 1st round of Grand Prix in the olden days when it used to be 1st tournament of the season.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Oct 8, 2008

Hendry himself said it was easier in the 1990s so anyone going to argue with the guy?

Hendry won one more WC but Davis also appeared in 8 finals and lost one of them to Dennis Taylor on the black! Are people so silly as to think that because of that 3 point swing in ONE frame that Davis is 'obviously worse than Hendry because he won one title less' ?

Nonsense.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Oct 8, 2008

but we love Jimmy

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Oct 10, 2008

Someone here mentioned about the standard of top 16 players from 97 til 03 being better than todays top 16's,, i think its absolutely true. Likes of Perry, Magiure, Selby, Carter are few names to mention.. now compare them to Paul Hunter, Mark Williams, Higgins, Doherty and so on. The truth is todays top 16 is actually "weak".

add comment | complain about this comment