2018 Players Championship

[kibo]

to me he didn't do it himself but by influence from Ebdon :wink:

True.I think you need at least 3 top players on the throne for the good health.Like in tennis back when there were Federer, Nadal and Novak.Tenis was pretty healthy, and other players were good as side attackers and tenis was fun to watch.Now in snooker there are only Ronnie and Selby.

[Odrl]

Not the best evening of snooker, but I was not surprised by that. :smile:

Murphy can't complain about the lack of chances, he was in first in most of the frames, but his scoring form wasn't good enough on the day. O'Sullivan himself didn't really produce any fireworks, but he came back from behind in a single visit in so many frames, wasting very few chances. Another solid final display and yet another title for the best player in the world this season.

If we disregard the short-format stuff, this was O'Sullivan's third major ranking title this season, which is something he had only managed to do once before, in the 2004/2005 season. Highly impressive. :smile: I liked the little segment on Eurosport before the final started, where O'Sullivan was asked who would win between himself now and himself from 15 years ago. He said that he was perhaps a better shot-maker 15 years ago, potting all kinds of balls and reaching a higher standard on his best day, but today he is a much better tournament player, and that makes him more difficult to beat. I can only agree with that, and I think he has the form and the mindset to win at the Crucible next month, and maybe Beijing as well. That said, there are never any guarantees... :smile:

As for Murphy, another good week for him, but yet again he comes up short in the final. He has won pretty much everything there is to win in the game, so you can't really criticize his achievements too much, but I always have the feeling he could have added a few more titles. If only he had that crucial ability to play his best when it matters the most, like O'Sullivan, Higgins and Selby seem to have...

All in all, it was a decent week of snooker. I certainly like the slightly longer matches, and I think there was some entertaining stuff and some high quality snooker played as well. My only complaint about this format is that it all feels a little "light" for major ranking snooker. I wouldn't have minded an extra round and a few more sessions throughout the week. :smile:

Anyway, very much looking forward to the China Open now!

5 won and still two more ranking tournaments left in the season.

If he managed to win 6 I think that would be equivalent to Hendry winning 5 out of 8 in a season as there are more ranking tournaments these days but if he somehow won the China Open and then the World's then I don't think 7 ranking wins in a season will ever be bettered.

I don't know, to win six titles is impressive, but 6 out of 20 doesn't really sound as good as 5 out of 8, does it? If you think about it, we've had someone winning five titles in three of the last five seasons now, so it's becoming quite common it seems. If you include all the short-format stuff, I think seven is not out of the question in the future, especially if the player in question skips fewer events than O'Sullivan is doing.

Also, I would say that not every title on offer these days is worth as much as the traditional ranking titles in the past, though I realize I am in the minority as far as that particular opinion is concerned. :smile:

[OmaMiesta]

Not the best evening of snooker, but I was not surprised by that. :smile:

Murphy can't complain about the lack of chances, he was in first in most of the frames, but his scoring form wasn't good enough on the day. O'Sullivan himself didn't really produce any fireworks, but he came back from behind in a single visit in so many frames, wasting very few chances. Another solid final display and yet another title for the best player in the world this season.

If we disregard the short-format stuff, this was O'Sullivan's third major ranking title this season, which is something he had only managed to do once before, in the 2004/2005 season. Highly impressive. :smile: I liked the little segment on Eurosport before the final started, where O'Sullivan was asked who would win between himself now and himself from 15 years ago. He said that he was perhaps a better shot-maker 15 years ago, potting all kinds of balls and reaching a higher standard on his best day, but today he is a much better tournament player, and that makes him more difficult to beat. I can only agree with that, and I think he has the form and the mindset to win at the Crucible next month, and maybe Beijing as well. That said, there are never any guarantees... :smile:

As for Murphy, another good week for him, but yet again he comes up short in the final. He has won pretty much everything there is to win in the game, so you can't really criticize his achievements too much, but I always have the feeling he could have added a few more titles. If only he had that crucial ability to play his best when it matters the most, like O'Sullivan, Higgins and Selby seem to have...

All in all, it was a decent week of snooker. I certainly like the slightly longer matches, and I think there was some entertaining stuff and some high quality snooker played as well. My only complaint about this format is that it all feels a little "light" for major ranking snooker. I wouldn't have minded an extra round and a few more sessions throughout the week. :smile:

Anyway, very much looking forward to the China Open now!




I don't know, to win six titles is impressive, but 6 out of 20 doesn't really sound as good as 5 out of 8, does it? If you think about it, we've had someone winning five titles in three of the last five seasons now, so it's becoming quite common it seems. If you include all the short-format stuff, I think seven is not out of the question in the future, especially if the player in question skips fewer events than O'Sullivan is doing.

Also, I would say that not every title on offer these days is worth as much as the traditional ranking titles in the past, though I realize I am in the minority as far as that particular opinion is concerned. :smile:

6 out of 20 would only apply if ronnie played all 20, if he wins another it would be 6 out 11 tournaments hes playd in so far.

[Odrl]

6 out of 20 would only apply if ronnie played all 20, if he wins another it would be 6 out 11 tournaments hes playd in so far.

I suppose so, although the percentage of wins is still a little smaller. :smile: For comparison, O'Sullivan won 3 of the 6 ranking events he played in in the 2004/2005 season, and one of his defeats was in the Malta Cup where he clearly couldn't be bothered to play. He also won the Masters and the Premier League that year, so I wonder how many titles he could have won that season if there were a few more on offer... :smile:

Ding Junhui also won half of the ranking events he played in in the 2013/2014 season, 5 out of 10.

[OmaMiesta]

I suppose so, although the percentage of wins is still a little smaller. :smile: For comparison, O'Sullivan won 3 of the 6 ranking events he played in in the 2004/2005 season, and one of his defeats was in the Malta Cup where he clearly couldn't be bothered to play. He also won the Masters and the Premier League that year, so I wonder how many titles he could have won that season if there were a few more on offer... :smile:

Ding Junhui also won half of the ranking events he played in in the 2013/2014 season, 5 out of 10.

Hendrys record was certainly impressive given only 8 tournaments but would you say that perhaps winning frequent tournaments is more impressive these days, the standard being as high as it is despite there being more tournaments? I feel like its more impressive for a player to win 4+ events in a season now cause every match is tough or has potential to be.

[Odrl]

Hendrys record was certainly impressive given only 8 tournaments but would you say that perhaps winning frequent tournaments is more impressive these days, the standard being as high as it is despite there being more tournaments? I feel like its more impressive for a player to win 4+ events in a season now cause every match is tough or has potential to be.

I can't really comment on the early 90s, as I didn't follow snooker the way I do now, but I would say the current state of the calendar certainly helps the in-form players to string a few titles together. Take Ryan Day for example, he found a bit of form in the last couple of weeks and managed to win back-to-back tournaments, whereas ten years ago he would have probably had to wait a month between events, so his good form would have been wasted during the weeks without any snooker. We had a long period from about 2004 onwards where there wasn't even a single instance of anyone winning two events in a row in a single season, which seems unlikely to be repeated now that events follow one another in such quick succession.

If a player like Robertson or Ding goes close to a year without winning a tournament, it's big news and gets repeated every time they play. Well, a few years ago O'Sullivan and Higgins each had more than one period of poor results where they went almost three years without winning a ranking title. I think it would have been much easier for them to find a way out of those slumps if the calendar was as full as it is today.

On the other hand, actually dominating a season the way Hendry used to do (or indeed Williams or O'Sullivan in the early 2000s) seems virtually impossible at the moment. Selby won four of the eight ranking events with matches of at least medium length last season, which I found to be an impressive statistic, but of course those events are not even half of what the snooker calendar has to offer these days. You can run into a Kurt Maflin or a Xiao Guodong in your opening match regardless of where you are in the rankings, and most of the time it's only a short match, so it's much tougher for the top players to play themselves into a tournament the way they perhaps could in the past. :smile:

[I just want a ton!]

Hendry won titles when there was less tournaments in a year, only 8 a season. But perhaps this was key to his success. Ronnie puts his own success in this modern game, down to the fact he's picking and choosing his tournaments.
Only playing an odd one here and there, avoiding the burn out.
So Hendry only playing one tournament a month, and usually on UK soil, I'd say he had an easier task of gaining titles.
Then there's the level of competition to look at, the debate can go on.
For me, Hendry was the game changer, a legend, but no one has, or will ever play the game like Osullivan can.

[JimMalone]

If we disregard the short-format stuff, this was O'Sullivan's third major ranking title this season, which is something he had only managed to do once before, in the 2004/2005 season. Highly impressive. :smile: I liked the little segment on Eurosport before the final started, where O'Sullivan was asked who would win between himself now and himself from 15 years ago. He said that he was perhaps a better shot-maker 15 years ago, potting all kinds of balls and reaching a higher standard on his best day, but today he is a much better tournament player, and that makes him more difficult to beat. I can only agree with that, and I think he has the form and the mindset to win at the Crucible next month, and maybe Beijing as well. That said, there are never any guarantees... :smile:

As for Murphy, another good week for him, but yet again he comes up short in the final. He has won pretty much everything there is to win in the game, so you can't really criticize his achievements too much, but I always have the feeling he could have added a few more titles. If only he had that crucial ability to play his best when it matters the most, like O'Sullivan, Higgins and Selby seem to have...

All in all, it was a decent week of snooker. I certainly like the slightly longer matches, and I think there was some entertaining stuff and some high quality snooker played as well. My only complaint about this format is that it all feels a little "light" for major ranking snooker. I wouldn't have minded an extra round and a few more sessions throughout the week. :smile:

Anyway, very much looking forward to the China Open now!


I don't know, to win six titles is impressive, but 6 out of 20 doesn't really sound as good as 5 out of 8, does it? If you think about it, we've had someone winning five titles in three of the last five seasons now, so it's becoming quite common it seems. If you include all the short-format stuff, I think seven is not out of the question in the future, especially if the player in question skips fewer events than O'Sullivan is doing.

Also, I would say that not every title on offer these days is worth as much as the traditional ranking titles in the past, though I realize I am in the minority as far as that particular opinion is concerned. :smile:

At the moment O'Sullivan certainly has to be made the favorite. I said it before: I just hope Selby, Ding and Higgins will hit their form right in time for the World Champions and give him a tough battle.

I think Murphy just lacks the overall game. Therefore he will never be on the same level as O'Sullivan, Higgins and Selby. He is great, when he is in full flow, but this usually doesn't last long. He is so aggressive and so dependent on his long pots. If they go in like they did in the semifinal that's well. But if his pots don't come he will gift chances to his opponent and this is exactly the one thing you've got to avoid against O'Sullivan. Hence, Murphys weak record against Ronnie. Of course it's not all about his long pots. It happened a lot yesterday in the early frames, that he had a long pot, but then run out of position. He then tried a tough shot, missed and left another chance instead of playing safe. Or he lost a safety battle, because that's a definitive weakness he has in contrast to Selby, Higgins and O'Sullivan.


I'm also with you on this. Not every title is worth the same. I think 5 out of 8 is certainly more impressive than 6 out of 15 or whatever. But even within more important ranking titles there are still differences among their values. The flaw in Hendry's 1990/91 season is that he didn't win the World Championship of course.