2019 World Snooker Championship

[gavpowell]

For me this was a new level. And I've seen Ronnie outperform Walden as well as Hendry pour seven centuries on Doherty back in the day...

To me the highest level is either O'Sullivan's English Open triumph or his 2013 world title - over 40, a year out, defending champion, never dropped a single session the entire tournament - ludicrous standard.

[neuronic]

I haven’t seen anyone argue that it wasn’t a great performance.

But it wasn’t a “new level of snooker the likes we’ve never seen before” as the BBC would like you to believe. If you agree with them then I’d question how much snooker you watch and for how long you’ve been following it.

Like I said... go watch what Stephen Hendry said if you really think "the BBC would like you to believe" something. Or wait, would Hendry like you to believe something, too? Well, then...

For me this was a new level. And I've seen Ronnie outperform Walden as well as Hendry pour seven centuries on Doherty back in the day...

[vilkrang]

Utter BS this, sorry. Higgins had to be favourite to win before the match, Judd had never won anything longer than a best of 9 against John. https://cuetracker.net/head-to-head/...ins/judd-trump
Higgins' performances up the final were by far more consisting and convincing than Trump's who just had two massive sessions against Ding and Maguire. I was actually pretty sure John would take this but then Judd showed up with ... this.

And all that talk of the BBC and everybody being hyperbolic about it Judds performance... just watch what Stephen Hendry said after the match, watch how genuinely baffled he was. Hendry is no one to go floridly raving about how great some snooker player is (like Ronnie sometimes does when he wants to... well I'll leave it you to judge what he actually wants).
Judds performance in that final was something else. You may not like it, you may want to defend your heroes but that doesn't take anything away from it.

I haven’t seen anyone argue that it wasn’t a great performance.

But it wasn’t a “new level of snooker the likes we’ve never seen before” as the BBC would like you to believe. If you agree with them then I’d question how much snooker you watch and for how long you’ve been following it.

[armstm]

Ding has a century every 12 frames ; hendry every 15 frames. so on this basis trump is actually a better break-builder than ding and hendry and on a par with ronnie.

[armstm]

He needs the cue power because the countless times he's out of position he needs a power shot to recover the break. He's not a master break builder like O'Sullivan, Higgins, Hendry or Ding.

cue tracker has ronnie on a century every 11 frames, trump has a century every 11 frames.

[arsalanjami]

Just read that Judd had laser eye surgery at 17yo and again at 25yo, does this fall into the 'performance enhancing' category?

Similar to when Tiger Woods having laser eye surgery to give himself better than 20/20 vision, there was some controversy around that. I'd do the same if I could afford it mind

Just read the match stats again I was surprised at John's safety success % being lower than Judd's.

Those stats show it was certainly a superb performance from Judd, but we have seen even higher quality finals from individuals in the past (Hendry UK '94, WC '93/'94, O'Sullivan Masters '05, WC '04/'12/'13), I understand why BBC are pushing the hyperbole as they need to act in a fluffy PR way to promote the game to general viewers

I had it myself. I used to wear glasses and not the Dennis kind. My vision was only slightly off but enough for the balls to look blurry (couldn't see them sharply past 3 ft..the edges would be slighly blurry) if I played without my glasses.

Once I got laser - whole different ball game. It wasn't super expensive for me as i only needed a minor correction according to Lasik, which was great.

I will say that my vision was SUPER for about a month and then it came down a bit to normal. It is still 20/20 and going just over one year. got insurance for 5.

For anyone considering laser - I would HIGHLY recommend it no matter the cost. It truly is freedom if you hate glasses.
My eyes would never settle with contacts on a good day, let alone play snooker so this was never an option.

[Mark187187]

Dont the the issue.. same sort of build myself.. am fat and i know it.

Oh well, if you meant it as a compliment that's different.........

[The Artful Dodger]

No need for that. A few members have said they are staying away from the forums because of this kind of talk. You could have made your point without personal insults.

Dont the the issue.. same sort of build myself.. am fat and i know it.

[Mark187187]

agree...always nice to see higgins take a beating.. went off him ever since that infamous interview.. fortunate not to go the way of that other fat bandit

No need for that. A few members have said they are staying away from the forums because of this kind of talk. You could have made your point without personal insults.

[The Artful Dodger]

Best WC final ever, my a%%...One sided match. We knew the winner from the first day. Some great shots from Trump though and it's always pleasant to watch Higgins taking a beating.

agree...always nice to see higgins take a beating.. went off him ever since that infamous interview.. fortunate not to go the way of that other fat bandit

[neuronic]

Best WC final ever, my a%%...One sided match. We knew the winner from the first day. Some great shots from Trump though and it's always pleasant to watch Higgins taking a beating.

Utter BS this, sorry. Higgins had to be favourite to win before the match, Judd had never won anything longer than a best of 9 against John. https://cuetracker.net/head-to-head/...ins/judd-trump
Higgins' performances up the final were by far more consisting and convincing than Trump's who just had two massive sessions against Ding and Maguire. I was actually pretty sure John would take this but then Judd showed up with ... this.

And all that talk of the BBC and everybody being hyperbolic about it Judds performance... just watch what Stephen Hendry said after the match, watch how genuinely baffled he was. Hendry is no one to go floridly raving about how great some snooker player is (like Ronnie sometimes does when he wants to... well I'll leave it you to judge what he actually wants).
Judds performance in that final was something else. You may not like it, you may want to defend your heroes but that doesn't take anything away from it.

[vmax]

Don't know about pocket sizes etc, but surely, a pot at that angle can't go in other than off the far jaw. It's not like it hit the near jaw and went in.

It didn't just miss the near jaw though did it, was about 1/4 inch away from the near jaw and the far jaw grabbed it, on our match table the far jaw throws it across the pocket and it stays out, even at a slow pace.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AqFDlCmsBtY

Check out the pot Trump takes on into the green pocket at 1:51:00 in the video. Would that have gone in on most tables this season?

I remember that one also, again this goes down the cushion 1/2 inch off all the way and still drops.

There is always a line on just about any decent table where a ball down/near the rail will go in even at pace. The pace just reduces the tolerance and at high pace, it may need to be millimetre perfect

Practice just shooting the cueball straight into pockets from near the cushion at speed and it's amazing how hard they can be hit

Practice hitting it straight into the near and far jaw at various pace, and be mindful of any running side that will take it in off the far jaw. On our match table you can hit them at top speed along the cushion and they will go in, but anything other than hugging the cushion they won't.
When I practise line up I only put two reds above the black, and if I can get past those (for that's where I start) then I'm on for a decent practise break. OK so this table is a bit extreme but it really grinds that when a pro misses one, and it clearly touches the cushion before the jaw, Dennis Taylor chips in with that old adage, 'they don't go in off the jaws on these tight pockets' but shuts up when the next one does.

[DeanH]

Ha ha, this was beginning to read like a bionic-man type conspiracy theory. Maybe Martin Gould and Dennis Taylor were early prototypes.

scary thought!

[Mark187187]

Ha ha, this was beginning to read like a bionic-man type conspiracy theory. Maybe Martin Gould and Dennis Taylor were early prototypes.

[DeanH]

I'm not sure. My understanding is the surgery Trump had essentially gives him the same vision he had with contact lens without contact lens (20/20). If I could afford it and had an eyesight problem, I'd do it. Tyger's on the other hand was to give him 20/15 vision; which is a performance enhancement.

that is the way I read it back when