2016 UK Championship

[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

[dcrackers147]

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

[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

[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.

[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.

[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.

[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.

[mikeyd100]

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.

Selby is probably the most capable player on the circuit when he is playing a "B" game.

[Erwan_BZH]

Yesterday's battle was like a clash of titans! Unbelievable comeback from Ronnie from 7-2 down to 8-7. I really thought he was about to equalize but Selby hold firmly and manage to conclude. Once again, Selbs proved he really is an absolute animal under pressure. Ice cool when it matters most. As he said in a post-match interview, he may not be the most talented but he worded his a*** off to get to the top and noone can take it off him.

[ace man]

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.

No, he got dominated in first session. Pure and simple. Pressure got to Ronnie a little. Likewise, Mark missed two pinks in the middle in second session. Again, pure pressure. Even the very best players are not immune to it.

[jw147]

No, he got dominated in first session. Pure and simple. Pressure got to Ronnie a little. Likewise, Mark missed two pinks in the middle in second session. Again, pure pressure. Even the very best players are not immune to it.

Have to disagree, ronnie looked up for it and up for getting a fast start, then i think he missed a red in 2nd frame when in amongst them, and the frame took nearly an hour then, that bogged him down and messed his plans up, i think it would of been a similar match to the masters final they played if ronnie had of not got frustrated during first mini session, 2-2 wasnt the outcome he was looking for.

[Kargetina]

Nice to see O sullivan retract his torturer comments about Selby. Well played Ron.

Can anyone explain this, please? Was this in an interview? What was the context?

[daffie]

Can anyone explain this, please? Was this in an interview? What was the context?

It was a BBC interview. Ronnie said he had been watching lots of Selby matches and came to the conclusion Mark plays like he does because it's his style, nothing personal (against Ronnie). Which is a strange thing to think anyway But glad Ronnie saw the light in the end

[Kargetina]

It was a BBC interview. Ronnie said he had been watching lots of Selby matches and came to the conclusion Mark plays like he does because it's his style, nothing personal (against Ronnie). Which is a strange thing to think anyway But glad Ronnie saw the light in the end

Thanks a lot, bud!

Nice to see Ronnie starting to appreciate Mark more. It was pretty evident yesterday in the interview after the match that he views Mark as a worthy rival.

[daffie]

Thanks a lot, bud!

Nice to see Ronnie starting to appreciate Mark more. It was pretty evident yesterday in the interview after the match that he views Mark as a worthy rival.

NP

Exactly. Very nice to see indeed. Also Ronnie seemed in a real good place...had a big & genuine smile on his face.

What a Final! :snooker: