Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Ssb - ronnie o'sullivan wins ptc1

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally Posted by trains View Post
    Didnt think it was off tbf,other sessions of note the first v O'S in the UK 09 sf,run of the ball or not you can hardly play better tbf.
    I think Higgins played pretty well in that session, but it was O'Sullivan's mistakes that made it so one sided. I had a quick look through the old thread where the match was discussed, just to make sure there is nothing wrong with my memory, and here is what I said immediately after the session:

    Originally Posted by Odrl View Post
    Yes, O'Sullivan had only himself to blame at 1-6 down. Higgins only won one frame in one visit. He gave O'Sullivan a chance in every other frame, and quite a good chance usually. But in the end, O'Sullivan can be happy it's 6-2 and not 7-1.

    Comeback? If O'Sullivan plays his best, it's entirely possible against a solid but not brilliant Higgins. But let's be honest, if Higgins raises his game a little, he's not going to lose from 6-2 up.
    I don't think that particular session is anywhere near the best Higgins has played, but I do agree he's had sessions pretty close to perfect snooker.

    Having said that, there is no such thing as "unplayable". If your opponent plays one-visit snooker, you have every chance of doing the same, since there is nothing he can do from his chair. And when he gets you in trouble with a good safety, you just have to play a good shot in reply. The 2006 Masters final is a great example of a match like that. Both players played snooker that could have been described as unplayable, except that it wasn't, because they were both up for it. The 2009 WC quarter-final between Higgins and Selby is another example.

    I suppose what would be almost unplayable is someone going for low-percentage long pots, getting most of them, and winning frames in one visit. But that's never really been the type of snooker either O'Sullivan or Higgins have played.

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally Posted by Odrl View Post
      Having said that, there is no such thing as "unplayable"..
      Yep personally I've never took any notice of that saying either. I taped the Higgins O'S 98 sf but it was pre digital so I only got the first 4 frames and missed Higgins going 12-4,would have been interesting at least

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally Posted by ace man View Post
        "when on form he is unplayable" - very subjective term which doesn't really mean anything and could be said for many players.

        They are very very close to each other. Always have been. This is how I see them.

        Ronnie's edge over John:
        - break building (John very close)
        - cue ball control (again John very close)
        - developing reds, breaking clusters (nobody touches him here)
        - a bit smoother cue action; seems like his arm never gets stiff, never ever snatches even under pressure and adrenaline rush and gets unbelievable action on the cueball with such little effort at all times
        - his left hand isn't as good as right, but can reduce usage of rest


        John's edge over Ronnie:
        - mental department, fighting qualities (coming from behind etc), sits out centuries without any problem
        - long pots
        - safeties, laying snookers
        - rest play (Ronnie's good with it too)
        - escaping from snookers (extremely important part of the game)
        - doubles (overlooked part of the game)

        What do you think? Have I missed something?
        that's a great summary!
        Highest Match Break 39 (November 10th 2015)

        Comment


        • #34
          http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wq9LCbSxM4

          this is an example of the 99 beating the 95-97

          ronnie was untouchable like this.
          Highest Match Break 39 (November 10th 2015)

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally Posted by ace man View Post
            "when on form he is unplayable" - very subjective term which doesn't really mean anything and could be said for many players.

            They are very very close to each other. Always have been. This is how I see them.

            Ronnie's edge over John:
            - break building (John very close)
            - cue ball control (again John very close)
            - developing reds, breaking clusters (nobody touches him here)
            - a bit smoother cue action; seems like his arm never gets stiff, never ever snatches even under pressure and adrenaline rush and gets unbelievable action on the cueball with such little effort at all times
            - his left hand isn't as good as right, but can reduce usage of rest


            John's edge over Ronnie:
            - mental department, fighting qualities (coming from behind etc), sits out centuries without any problem
            - long pots
            - safeties, laying snookers
            - rest play (Ronnie's good with it too)
            - escaping from snookers (extremely important part of the game)
            - doubles (overlooked part of the game)

            What do you think? Have I missed something?
            to be fair ive seen ronnie escape from some damn good snookers and he can lay some crackers also, so nearly matched there i think.

            Comment

            Working...
            X