2016 UK Championship

[jw147]

Selby was very lucky to win in round 2 against wells, he played abysmal, dunno how he won that match, as for the final, the second frame was the turning point, ronnie missed when in control and on way to a 2-0 lead, then it all got bogged down and he lost interest.

[JimMalone]

That is a valid point, I certainly think he raises his game for the big events. But he doesn't always do well in the big events, there are about ten players, maybe more, who can win them now. People were talking after the event as if Selby was the form player and miles ahead of the field, but Higgins was viewed as the in-form player before the tournament began. But he just played poorly in this event. Trump was playing well a while back, yet he crashed out in the first round here. In my opinion, it's very much on the day with the big hitters in the game now. I think O' Sullivan has declined a bit, but if you had to bet your life savings on someone to go deep into any tournament, he is probably still the best bet.

Well, for me Selby is the one, with whom I count in every big tournament. He will occassionally lose definitely, but he is just such a complete player, that he is hard to beat even on his weeker days. The rankings and the huge lead he has there tell how consistenly he is picking up big points.
But of course O'Sullivan is still playing fantastic and a favorite to win in every tournament as well.
John Higgins was great in this tournament as well and lost just very close to Selby, the later winner. So I still think that Higgins has good shots at the next tournaments.

[JimMalone]

That is a valid point, I certainly think he raises his game for the big events. But he doesn't always do well in the big events, there are about ten players, maybe more, who can win them now. People were talking after the event as if Selby was the form player and miles ahead of the field, but Higgins was viewed as the in-form player before the tournament began. But he just played poorly in this event. Trump was playing well a while back, yet he crashed out in the first round here. In my opinion, it's very much on the day with the big hitters in the game now. I think O' Sullivan has declined a bit, but if you had to bet your life savings on someone to go deep into any tournament, he is probably still the best bet.

With Federer-Nadal, the big problem for Federer was that Nadal's forehand was into his one-handed backhand, and he could never find a way of dealing with it on surfaces where the ball bounced high. And he lost so much to him on clay, I think he got in his head a bit. If Nadal had been right-handed, it would have been a completely different match up. Nadal even said in his book that his tactics against Federer are simply to hit every single ball to his backhand. The reason he has struggled against Djokovic is that he can't do this because Djokovic has developed his backhand and has a really solid two-hander. When he used to play Federer, if he got behind in a point he would just hit a loopy forehand to Federer's backhand and then he would be back in the point. He can't do that with Djokovic, and now even Murray, although he is obviously in decline now as well. Again, he even said in his book that he has no tactics to beat Djokovic, he just has to try really hard and hope that he wins.

Obviously against Federer that was his tactics and rightfully so. Also he made Federer risk on nearly every shot, because Federer knew he HAD to do something, cause he couldn't compete from the baseline. And with this risk obviously the errors come. And that Nadal forehand is still probably the best shot I've seen. That spin is just incredible.

The Nadal-Djokovic matches were incredible in another way, cause both nearly neutralised each other. Djoko was the only one who from the baseline was nearly as strong as Nadal in his heyday. It was mostly just one point or the other that made the difference as well as the mental state.

Murray is a very good player, but far behind the Big Three. Nadal and Federer aren't there anymore (the former losing to his body, the other one to age) and Djoko, I feel, has trouble with motivation after finishing the Grand Slam at Paris. But I think he will find new hunger and get back on the top again.

But as much as I love talking about tennis we should stop here. This is a snooker forum after all.

[wake_up_bomb]

The other way to look at it, though is, that Selby wins, when it truly counts.

That is a valid point, I certainly think he raises his game for the big events. But he doesn't always do well in the big events, there are about ten players, maybe more, who can win them now. People were talking after the event as if Selby was the form player and miles ahead of the field, but Higgins was viewed as the in-form player before the tournament began. But he just played poorly in this event. Trump was playing well a while back, yet he crashed out in the first round here. In my opinion, it's very much on the day with the big hitters in the game now. I think O' Sullivan has declined a bit, but if you had to bet your life savings on someone to go deep into any tournament, he is probably still the best bet.

As for Nadal against Federer it was not only that Nadals style was difficult for Federer, it was just that, when Nadal was playing at his best, he was just the best tennis player I've ever seen.

With Federer-Nadal, the big problem for Federer was that Nadal's forehand was into his one-handed backhand, and he could never find a way of dealing with it on surfaces where the ball bounced high. And he lost so much to him on clay, I think he got in his head a bit. If Nadal had been right-handed, it would have been a completely different match up. Nadal even said in his book that his tactics against Federer are simply to hit every single ball to his backhand. The reason he has struggled against Djokovic is that he can't do this because Djokovic has developed his backhand and has a really solid two-hander. When he used to play Federer, if he got behind in a point he would just hit a loopy forehand to Federer's backhand and then he would be back in the point. He can't do that with Djokovic, and now even Murray, although he is obviously in decline now as well. Again, he even said in his book that he has no tactics to beat Djokovic, he just has to try really hard and hope that he wins.

[shmeeko69]

I'm going to next year's UK. Any tips on where to stay in York? Not been to a snooker comp before

York is overpriced. The trick is to stay @ a hotel near a railway station that can easily take you in to the centre of York. You'll get rooms and they'll be affordable.

I remember doing that a few years ago when I went to the UK semi's @ its temporary home in Telford and it worked a treat

[dcrackers147]

there is a travel lodge right next door and its only 10 mins from city centre so loads of options.

[shmeeko69]

It's interesting because I see O' Sullivan-Selby as more like Federer-Nadal. Selby has a way of playing that O' Sullivan struggles to deal with and find answers for, just as Federer was posed technical difficulties by Nadal.

Selby could win more titles, but I would still make O' Sullivan the favourite for any event that he enters. If you look at the big events they've been in recently, O' Sullivan narrowly lost in the final of the European Masters, Selby got stuffed 6-2 by Trump. They both lost to outsiders in the English Open. Selby did better at the International Championships, winning it. O' Sullivan pulled out of the China Championships where Selby lost in the second-round to Mark Allen. O' Sullivan made the final of the Champion of Champions, Selby lost to Mark Allen again. And then there was the UK Championship.

It's not the case that Selby is a dominant player, he's obviously one of the best and deserves to be ranked world number 1, but he could easily go out in round 1 of the Masters. When he plays his best he is very tough, but he quite often doesn't play his best.

You have it nailed on there mate. O'Sullivan and Federer are very gifted and artistic at what they do and just get on with the job, whereas Selby and Nadal have great determination and fighting spirit, but can be boring to watch. Selby looks at a shot, gets up, looks at it again, looks to the crowd and then takes his shot leaving the cue down and Nadal touches his ear, then his nose, picks his pants out of his a@se, bounces the ball a few times and then eventually serves. zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

[jimev]

I'm going to next year's UK. Any tips on where to stay in York? Not been to a snooker comp before

[dcrackers147]

I have watched a lot of both of these players live and was lucky enough to be at the afternoon session yesterday in the second row at the top of the table. It hit me that Selby actually really struggles to settle into a match which is why he often makes his renowned comebacks clawing frame after frame once he does settle. Ronnie started the session with a century and his action didn't change throughout if he was struggling or not. Selby's back arm really shakes on the final back swing something I noticed more than ever yesterday in the first few frames which I believe caused the misses. As his confidence grew the shaking stopped. Ronnie on the other hand kept his perfect technique but as I was sitting so close to him he gave off a clear vibe he was struggling without saying a word or even making a gesture.

[vmax4steve]

It is not just about that, but the grimacas he was making when the ref was respotting pink behind its spot etc etc

Referees make too big a song and dance over this, it can be done accurately far more quickly. Take the gloves off and simply put it on the table as close as you can get it. You have the blue and brown to use as a guide when you're doing it so no need to be squatting down behind the black everytime you make a small adjustment.

As for Ronnie, simply pushed the boat out too often, taking on too many difficult ones when a simple safety would have sufficed, but that's the way he is.
The miss rule has to go though.

And Nadal like Selby takes an inordinate amount of time to do anything, it breaks the concentration of the opponent and that's whay they do it.

[JimMalone]

It's interesting because I see O' Sullivan-Selby as more like Federer-Nadal. Selby has a way of playing that O' Sullivan struggles to deal with and find answers for, just as Federer was posed technical difficulties by Nadal.

Selby could win more titles, but I would still make O' Sullivan the favourite for any event that he enters. If you look at the big events they've been in recently, O' Sullivan narrowly lost in the final of the European Masters, Selby got stuffed 6-2 by Trump. They both lost to outsiders in the English Open. Selby did better at the International Championships, winning it. O' Sullivan pulled out of the China Championships where Selby lost in the second-round to Mark Allen. O' Sullivan made the final of the Champion of Champions, Selby lost to Mark Allen again. And then there was the UK Championship.

It's not the case that Selby is a dominant player, he's obviously one of the best and deserves to be ranked world number 1, but he could easily go out in round 1 of the Masters. When he plays his best he is very tough, but he quite often doesn't play his best.

The other way to look at it, though is, that Selby wins, when it truly counts. Nobody can play fantastic at every tournament. But the big players, whether it is tennis or snooker, try to play their best snooker at the events, where it counts most. Selby really wanted this win at the UK Championship and he won it with a marvellous performance in the final. He won the World Championship last year and he won the International Championship. Of course he isn't that much better than the rest that he can't lose at this tournaments, but right now at the big events he is the man to beat for me.

As for Nadal against Federer it was not only that Nadals style was difficult for Federer, it was just that, when Nadal was playing at his best, he was just the best tennis player I've ever seen. He was soo dominant from the baseline, you couldn't stand up toe-to-toe with him there. And that is, where tennis matches are decided these days. Federer brought tennis to a new level, with his great baseline shots and especially with his excellent defesne. But then Nadal and later on also Djokovic even topped this, because their defense ability was even better.

[wake_up_bomb]

It's interesting because I see O' Sullivan-Selby as more like Federer-Nadal. Selby has a way of playing that O' Sullivan struggles to deal with and find answers for, just as Federer was posed technical difficulties by Nadal.

Selby could win more titles, but I would still make O' Sullivan the favourite for any event that he enters. If you look at the big events they've been in recently, O' Sullivan narrowly lost in the final of the European Masters, Selby got stuffed 6-2 by Trump. They both lost to outsiders in the English Open. Selby did better at the International Championships, winning it. O' Sullivan pulled out of the China Championships where Selby lost in the second-round to Mark Allen. O' Sullivan made the final of the Champion of Champions, Selby lost to Mark Allen again. And then there was the UK Championship.

It's not the case that Selby is a dominant player, he's obviously one of the best and deserves to be ranked world number 1, but he could easily go out in round 1 of the Masters. When he plays his best he is very tough, but he quite often doesn't play his best.

[shmeeko69]

Every top player needs both. Natural ability AND determination. Without one of those two you can't get to the top. Especially Federer is known for training harder than everybody else.

I don't think Ronnie is that determined, but has unlimited natural ability?

[DeanH]

And of course there is an exhibition with Selby, Murphy, Trump and Robertson in Ljubljana just before Christmas, so I will finally get to see what snooker looks like live. :wink:

cool
Hope you have a great time, let us know what you think

[JimMalone]

Yes, natural ability v determination.

Every top player needs both. Natural ability AND determination. Without one of those two you can't get to the top. Especially Federer is known for training harder than everybody else.