Ronnie O'Sullivan does it again, Oct 5, 2019

ShootingArts

ShootingArts

Smorg is giving St Peter the 7!
Gold Member
Silver Member
May be the best

Ronnie may be the best at any cue sport that involves pockets. You can see when he decides he can make a 147 and it is often well before 80 points. I think it is often before he hits a ball. One of my favorite runs of his is a 146. The usual fund at an event for 147's seems to be 25,000, pounds or euros. While there is usually only one 147 if any, the fund is split if there are multiple 147's. Anyway, that was just a side note. This particular event decided to pay only 10,000 for 147's. Ronnie didn't think this was adequate compensation so very deliberately when it was obvious he could get on the seven, he shot a six ball. Then he continued his runout with all reds and sevens then the number balls to score a 146 and a giant FU to the event!

The professional tables are set up tighter than club tables so it is a bit apples and oranges to point out that nonpro's sometimes score 147's. It is true, but also true it is usually on club tables. Impossible to compare pro 147's to anything else, a lot like trying to compare carom to pool. I think there are usually multiples a year but there are also multiple events without one.

Hu
 
8cree

8cree

Reverse Engineer
Silver Member
Quote:


Originally Posted by Bob Jewett View Post

..

One thing that makes it a little hard to compare is that after 80 points of snooker the rest of the frame is an exhibition since the opponent will almost certainly concede as soon as you miss.


pooladdict said:
Excellent point, thats why its hard to compare to a run in 14-1 or a x-pack in 9-ball. In pool, your opponent can always come back in each game. In snooker, all the pressure is off after 80 points - in that particular game.

That said, RS is a true artist an perhaps the best cueist ever
Click to expand...

Then why don't they only play to 80 points instead? I'm so confused.

One day I may decide to learn the rules to that game... but for now I'll just watch vids in awe of the long shots, the amount of action the cue carries, and the strength of a rail bounce in snooker...
 
ShootingArts

ShootingArts

Smorg is giving St Peter the 7!
Gold Member
Silver Member
8cree said:
Quote:


Then why don't they only play to 80 points instead? I'm so confused.

One day I may decide to learn the rules to that game... but for now I'll just watch vids in awe of the long shots, the amount of action the cue carries, and the strength of a rail bounce in snooker...
Click to expand...



They play to 74 points, except for when they don't which is most of the time. I hope I have made things so much less clearer for you!

Hu
 
Last edited:
DaveK

DaveK

Still crazy after all these years
Silver Member
sjm said:
Yes, that's the shot. He plows through a few loose balls with follow and somehow finds the carom angle and speed for position on the black. You could see from his facial expression before the shot that he was upset with himself for having landed in such poor position --- but then he pulled a rabbit out of his hat.
Click to expand...

His touch on those shots is what blows my mind. He can carom off and plow through balls and end up with shape that could only be improved by hand placing the cue ball. He hit that ball very hard and it ended up dead solid perfect !

If you watch a lot of Ronnie and pay attention to how he breaks up the pack you'll see that skill in action. Sometimes it takes a lot or power, sometimes not ... sometimes a lot of spin (follow or draw) and sometimes not ... but he almost always understands exactly what he intends and then executes. An amazing mind for snooker combined with unworldly skill.

Dave
 
Last edited:
C

Cameron Smith

is kind of hungry...
Silver Member
8cree said:
Then why don't they only play to 80 points instead? I'm so confused.
Click to expand...

A game-winning run is generally 10 reds and colours, but of course, it depends on the point value of the colours. The game isn't truly over until the final ball is potted or the game is conceded since it is up to the trailing player to concede the game. You wouldn't be able to run 80 and just start pulling balls from the pocket.

But there will be a point in the game where the difference between the scores is greater than the available points on the table. For example, let us assume you are leading me by 70 - 30 and there is only one red on the table. The difference in our score is 40 points. If I cleared the table, the best I could score is 35 points (red and black is 8 + all the colours, 27 = 35). That would still leave me trailing 70-65 and you win.

However, I can still play on and try to get snookers, thereby hopefully forcing a foul. These fouls can help me make up the point difference. So if I can force two 4 point fouls, to make the score 70-38, I can then hopefully run the 35 points and get a win, 73-70.

So in this way, theoretically the game is always in contention until the pink is potted. A pro could probably give a beginner 200 point head start despite the fact that there is a maximum of 147 points available. But the pro could force the beginner to foul almost at will.

Now, in most competition, you will typically see the losing player concede when they are behind by 3 snookers or more. Which brings us to, why continue a break after the game is that far out of reach?

I would say the reason is a mixture of tradition and psychology. The game has a tradition of tracking and building high runs. There is the prestige of centuries and maximums, not to mention high run prizes. The other factor is the confidence booster that big breaks provide. Finally, big breaks keep you at the table and your opponent in the chair. Much like in pool, the more you can limit your opponent's table time the better.

But snooker is indeed an oddity in the cue sport world where it's high runs have more impact on playing statistics than the outcome of the game. As you note, an 80 provides the same result as a 147. By comparison, I've been watching the English Billiards and David Causier made a break of 600 last weekend which was a devastating contribution.
 
alstl

alstl

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Not related to this video in particular but the thing I find odd about snooker is the kicking rules. Don't have to catch a rail and if you miss the kick they guesstimate where the cue ball was and you kick again from the same position on the table.
 
H

Hits 'em Hard

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
alstl said:
Not related to this video in particular but the thing I find odd about snooker is the kicking rules. Don't have to catch a rail and if you miss the kick they guesstimate where the cue ball was and you kick again from the same position on the table.
Click to expand...

They don’t guess. They have a computer overlay to help get it correct.
 
8cree

8cree

Reverse Engineer
Silver Member
Cameron Smith said:
A game-winning run is generally 10 reds and colours, but of course, it depends on the point value of the colours. The game isn't truly over until the final ball is potted or the game is conceded since it is up to the trailing player to concede the game. You wouldn't be able to run 80 and just start pulling balls from the pocket.



But there will be a point in the game where the difference between the scores is greater than the available points on the table. For example, let us assume you are leading me by 70 - 30 and there is only one red on the table. The difference in our score is 40 points. If I cleared the table, the best I could score is 35 points (red and black is 8 + all the colours, 27 = 35). That would still leave me trailing 70-65 and you win.



However, I can still play on and try to get snookers, thereby hopefully forcing a foul. These fouls can help me make up the point difference. So if I can force two 4 point fouls, to make the score 70-38, I can then hopefully run the 35 points and get a win, 73-70.



So in this way, theoretically the game is always in contention until the pink is potted. A pro could probably give a beginner 200 point head start despite the fact that there is a maximum of 147 points available. But the pro could force the beginner to foul almost at will.



Now, in most competition, you will typically see the losing player concede when they are behind by 3 snookers or more. Which brings us to, why continue a break after the game is that far out of reach?



I would say the reason is a mixture of tradition and psychology. The game has a tradition of tracking and building high runs. There is the prestige of centuries and maximums, not to mention high run prizes. The other factor is the confidence booster that big breaks provide. Finally, big breaks keep you at the table and your opponent in the chair. Much like in pool, the more you can limit your opponent's table time the better.



But snooker is indeed an oddity in the cue sport world where it's high runs have more impact on playing statistics than the outcome of the game. As you note, an 80 provides the same result as a 147. By comparison, I've been watching the English Billiards and David Causier made a break of 600 last weekend which was a devastating contribution.
Click to expand...
Well, that's a solid explanation. Thank you for that! I reckon I actually will do some more research and reading to gain some more knowledge of the game, I appreciate the head start!
 
alphadog

alphadog

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
8cree said:
Quote:


Originally Posted by Bob Jewett View Post

..

One thing that makes it a little hard to compare is that after 80 points of snooker the rest of the frame is an exhibition since the opponent will almost certainly concede as soon as you miss.




Then why don't they only play to 80 points instead? I'm so confused.

One day I may decide to learn the rules to that game... but for now I'll just watch vids in awe of the long shots, the amount of action the cue carries, and the strength of a rail bounce in snooker...
Click to expand...

The real reason is because of the gambling and high run/147 pots.:wink:
 
ceebee

ceebee

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Ronnie is the Best...

Ronnie is without a doubt, the greatest Player of all time. No one will ever take his place. I liked Higgins too, every Sport needs a bad Boy, to give the game some personality.

If Ronnie came to America, for a year, there would be Snooker Tables in Every Pool Hall, before he left...
 
J

jtaylor996

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
alphadog said:
The real reason is because of the gambling and high run/147 pots.:wink:
Click to expand...

Don't knock it. They got rid of most gambling in the US and cue sports are almost extinct now in the US, and arguably ARE extinct spectator wise.

That's why there's money in the game over there. It has to be, because I played snooker once and it wasn't a whole lot of fun. You have to shoot lasers to even pot a single ball on those tables.
 
ShootingArts

ShootingArts

Smorg is giving St Peter the 7!
Gold Member
Silver Member
a lot of fun, addictive even

jtaylor996 said:
Don't knock it. They got rid of most gambling in the US and cue sports are almost extinct now in the US, and arguably ARE extinct spectator wise.

That's why there's money in the game over there. It has to be, because I played snooker once and it wasn't a whole lot of fun. You have to shoot lasers to even pot a single ball on those tables.
Click to expand...


The first time or two you play snooker you fight the table. Instead of accepting it is different you keep trying to make balls go without knowing where they have to be hit in order to fall. The shots are doomed before you shoot because your aim is wrong. Once your aim is recalibrated for those pockets snooker gets a lot easier.

It is harder than pool, but not nearly as much harder as it seems on the first try or three. It is also more fun than pool. Unfortunately it is a tough sell in the US. I didn't have a snooker table to play on for years, then one was put in down New Orleans way. I don't get that way very often but played on the snooker table every chance I got. Went down there yesterday, no more snooker table. Damnit! Buff said nobody played on it. Apparently my once every six months wasn't enough to justify keeping the table!

Hu
 
alphadog

alphadog

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
jtaylor996 said:
Don't knock it. They got rid of most gambling in the US and cue sports are almost extinct now in the US, and arguably ARE extinct spectator wise.

That's why there's money in the game over there. It has to be, because I played snooker once and it wasn't a whole lot of fun. You have to shoot lasers to even pot a single ball on those tables.
Click to expand...

I wasnt knocking it:wink: I merely offered a true explanation.
 
PoolBum

PoolBum

Ace in the side.
Silver Member
I've often wondered how good O'Sullivan would be at straight pool if that had been the game he had grown up playing.
 
pt109

pt109

WO double hemlock
Silver Member
PoolBum said:
I've often wondered how good O'Sullivan would be at straight pool if that had been the game he had grown up playing.
Click to expand...

I feel Ronnie would be a 200 ball runner in a month.
Snooker players are no stranger to pack play.
 
markjames

markjames

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I am one of those people that can honestly say,
of all the you tube matches with o’sullivan,
“I’ve watched all of them, and some many times.”
While really impossible, this statement is almost true.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top