Ronnie O'Sullivan to play pool this year
- Thread starter zed9
- Start date
I really don't know ...
and haven't looked it up.
How many Pool titles has Steve Davis won?
Wasn't he acclaimed to be the best Snooker player
in the world at 1 time? I know he plays on the
European team for the Mosconi Cup, but I don't
think he is considered the elite of the elite in
European or American Pool.
and haven't looked it up.
How many Pool titles has Steve Davis won?
Wasn't he acclaimed to be the best Snooker player
in the world at 1 time? I know he plays on the
European team for the Mosconi Cup, but I don't
think he is considered the elite of the elite in
European or American Pool.
F
Fred Agnir
Guest
This is a pretty good analogy. Same basic game, but clearly different skill sets.Travis Bickle said:
Fred
Well, I looked it up ...
Steve Davis has Snooker titles under his belt like Efren
has Pool titles under his, and you know what?
Steve Davis (per AZ billiards) has NEVER won a
major Pool title ever. He took second 1 time, that's
all. His high winnings for a year (since 2000) is
$8,000 and some change. Now, this is only going
off of information on this website. I could not find
anything else about him for Pool years before 2000.
And, it seems, he has gone back to playing Snooker
in the last couple of years, and is currently listed as
8th in the world, making 94,000 and change in pounds
last year. It was stated that he was the world's first
millionaire Snooker player.
I think the previious statement made in an earlier post
that a player is more comfortable just playing what they
grew up with has a lot of truth to it.
Steve Davis has Snooker titles under his belt like Efren
has Pool titles under his, and you know what?
Steve Davis (per AZ billiards) has NEVER won a
major Pool title ever. He took second 1 time, that's
all. His high winnings for a year (since 2000) is
$8,000 and some change. Now, this is only going
off of information on this website. I could not find
anything else about him for Pool years before 2000.
And, it seems, he has gone back to playing Snooker
in the last couple of years, and is currently listed as
8th in the world, making 94,000 and change in pounds
last year. It was stated that he was the world's first
millionaire Snooker player.
I think the previious statement made in an earlier post
that a player is more comfortable just playing what they
grew up with has a lot of truth to it.
Snapshot9 said:
He only plays the Matchroom events, he hasn't done too bad, considering he doesn't practice much.
Yes he was the World Number 1 in the 80's, bit past his time now.
Lol Snapshot you are talking like Steve plays pool the whole year round, he plays on the main Snooker tour, and then the odd Matchroom pool event.
Steve was unbeatable 10-20 years ago in Snooker, obviously time has past and his form is very patchy, like any ageing Snooker player.
Steve was unbeatable 10-20 years ago in Snooker, obviously time has past and his form is very patchy, like any ageing Snooker player.
shortshooter
Registered
bruin70 said:
This statement is a bit lame.
Age has nothing to do with it.
Steve Davis just lost to a 16 year old in the 9ball Masters.
(His name is Wu and he is world 9ball Champion)
I think all the best 8ballers in the world predominantly play 8ball because they excel with the necessary skills, all the best 9ballers play 9ball because they excel with these skills, and snooker players have snooker skills!
Any top cueist CAN be good at all of the above but to be GREAT and win comps then they would have to do the table time!
Pocketing balls is only the half of it.
Jon.
(ex England International 8Ball Player and Current 9Ball Pro. UK.(still learning))
Last edited:
Travis Bickle said:
That's a good analogy. Pete Sampras has won more majors than anybody, but (I'm fairly certain) never won the French Open, the only major played on clay. He was dominant on grass (Wimbledon), winning 6 or 7 times there. He would routinely lose to some no-name, clay court specialist Spaniard at the French Open. Meanwhile, these guys normally wouldn't stand a chance against him on grass or hard court.
fuxake
Registered
LowEnglish said:Shut up bitch. You wouldn't know what good snooker is if it slapped you in the face. Jealous punk
Ooooh! U bitch, u gonna slap me in the face or hit me with ur handbag???
Ronnie is not the greatest snooker player ever, why am I jealous of that muppet? & I would know good snooker if I saw it, prob seen more of it than U, nob jockey
Oh, I don't know ...
He is only in his 40's, hardly an over-the-hiller, and is currently
8th in the world in Snooker. I just read on a Snooker site where
he just recently came from 8-4 down against Ronnie O'Sullivan to
win 10-8. I wouldn't call that past his prime yet.
I played some of my best Pool in my 40's, had a peak period like
I had in my early 20's. We have several pro Pool players in their
40's who are still considered among the elite of the sport.
Buckster_uk said:
He is only in his 40's, hardly an over-the-hiller, and is currently
8th in the world in Snooker. I just read on a Snooker site where
he just recently came from 8-4 down against Ronnie O'Sullivan to
win 10-8. I wouldn't call that past his prime yet.
I played some of my best Pool in my 40's, had a peak period like
I had in my early 20's. We have several pro Pool players in their
40's who are still considered among the elite of the sport.
shortshooter
Registered
I think that snooker is all about long shots and it seems that the younger players must have more of an "Eagle Eye" than the "older" ones.
With Pool, it is more about knowledge of shots and strategey.
This comes with experience (and age)
Maybe there are exceptions but on an average I think this is why.
With Pool, it is more about knowledge of shots and strategey.
This comes with experience (and age)
Maybe there are exceptions but on an average I think this is why.
axejunkie said:
Yeah, that's exactly the case. Boris Becker never won ANY professional tournament on clay, though he once had a match point in a final against a top clay player, Thomas Muster. He was so desperate he tried to hit a second-serve ace, missed, and lost it. I believe Sampras lucked out and won a minor, once, the Italian Open. Ivan Lendl was best in the world for several years and never won Wimbledon ... McEnroe never could win the French. As great as Federer is, he, hasn't won the French, either.
Perhaps with the IPT a line will be drawn not only between snooker players and 9 ballers, but 8 ball specialists?
Last edited:
I don't understand why you start arguing about these things. I play both pool and snooker regularly and find it much harder to pot a ball on a snooker table. Yet I began on a pool table and have played pool for 10 years now while I started snooker only a year ago.
I can't see Ronnie win pool tournaments as long as he doesn't start to get into pool in some way. Steve Davis got interested in pool, and his results aren't so bad for somebody that hardly ever plays pool (I think he plays 3-4 tournaments a year). From listening to plenty of his commentary throughout the wc, I tend to think he sometimes regrets that he didn't get into pool more when he was younger.
Whatever you may say, Steve is not nearly as dominant on the snooker circuit now as he was in the eighties where he won 6 world championships and countless other tournaments. I have actually hardly seen him play well last season, which is a pity because I always liked him as a player and person.
Tony Drago never was at Steve's level of play as far as snooker goes, but he's the better pool player - I venture to say because he's played much more pool than Steve, and also practices considerably more. I can't remember him winning a snooker major, but in 2003 he not only got to the semis of the wpc, he also went on to win the world pool masters later that year.
Both Drago and Steve are excellent cuists. Drago practices pool much more seriously than Steve. He also plays more tournaments. Steve said it himself, that is why Drago is a full-fledged pool player with some top results, and he himself is somebody who enjoys pool but doesn't "pay his dues" to the game - he (according to himself) doesn't deserve to be really good at playing pool because he hasn't put the time in that is needed to become really good.
Ronnie O'Sullivan is probably more gifted than either Steve or Tony, yet he has less experience in pool than both of them. That is why I think he won't have good results until he starts appreciating pool and putting in some practice time and some thought.
Side note: Mark Williams won the World Snooker Championship in 03 and competed in the WPC the same year. He made it through the group stages but got trounced by Hsia in the first knockout round, 0-7 (or was it 0-9?). I don't think he's played in a pool tournament since.
I can't see Ronnie win pool tournaments as long as he doesn't start to get into pool in some way. Steve Davis got interested in pool, and his results aren't so bad for somebody that hardly ever plays pool (I think he plays 3-4 tournaments a year). From listening to plenty of his commentary throughout the wc, I tend to think he sometimes regrets that he didn't get into pool more when he was younger.
Whatever you may say, Steve is not nearly as dominant on the snooker circuit now as he was in the eighties where he won 6 world championships and countless other tournaments. I have actually hardly seen him play well last season, which is a pity because I always liked him as a player and person.
Tony Drago never was at Steve's level of play as far as snooker goes, but he's the better pool player - I venture to say because he's played much more pool than Steve, and also practices considerably more. I can't remember him winning a snooker major, but in 2003 he not only got to the semis of the wpc, he also went on to win the world pool masters later that year.
Both Drago and Steve are excellent cuists. Drago practices pool much more seriously than Steve. He also plays more tournaments. Steve said it himself, that is why Drago is a full-fledged pool player with some top results, and he himself is somebody who enjoys pool but doesn't "pay his dues" to the game - he (according to himself) doesn't deserve to be really good at playing pool because he hasn't put the time in that is needed to become really good.
Ronnie O'Sullivan is probably more gifted than either Steve or Tony, yet he has less experience in pool than both of them. That is why I think he won't have good results until he starts appreciating pool and putting in some practice time and some thought.
Side note: Mark Williams won the World Snooker Championship in 03 and competed in the WPC the same year. He made it through the group stages but got trounced by Hsia in the first knockout round, 0-7 (or was it 0-9?). I don't think he's played in a pool tournament since.
I would venture to say ...
That Federer will win the French Open, and probably be considered one
of the all time if not the very best tennis player of all times before he
is through. He is to tennis what Tiger is to golf. But Pete Sampras was
my favorite player ....
Travis Bickle said:
That Federer will win the French Open, and probably be considered one
of the all time if not the very best tennis player of all times before he
is through. He is to tennis what Tiger is to golf. But Pete Sampras was
my favorite player ....
Snapshot9 said:
I agree with you there. A fantastic player ... Nadal will probably always have the edge on him on clay, but Roger probably will get past him once.
And I'm sure Ronnie O will do pretty well over here, too. But nobody's dominating pool, so if he were to that would really say something. The snooker snobs would be as unbearable as any roomful of Yankee fans!
But I don't think you hear too many pool fans trying to say the game or its best players are somehow SUPERIOR to snooker ... like we've got to hear them saying all the time.
Last edited:
pinkisntwell said:
Tap, Tap, Tap. I agree totally, there's no way that
the top pool players don't play snooker because they
find it boring. I also agree that if we may see a lot
of snooker players over here if the snooker money
goes down. Besides O'Sullivan, I'd love to see
Matthew Stevens, John Higgins, Stephen Lee, etc play
pool. I think Ken Doherty would especially excel at
8-ball because he's such a great strategist. It
will definitely be interesting.
Colin Colenso said:
Hmm...I find it surprising that a pro snooker player would find understanding 8-Ball strategy very difficult. I don't think it's especially difficult to understand the right patterns in 8-Ball, and I would think that 8-Ball is the best game for a top snooker player who wants to compete against the top pool players. Based on my own experience, it's definitely the game that I would have the best chance at of beating the top pro pool players, but then maybe I'm especially good at reading the table at 8-Ball.
O'Sullivan will surely have to pay his dues, but, on the whole, I'm far more excited about Ronnie's participation than I could ever be about Sigel's. My guess is it wil take Ronnie about seven events to learn how play eight ball at World Championship level. After that, he'd be a contender for a title, but, I'm guessing, no sooner.
lol... bring on the hooligans... Just because the UK has 3 sports Soccer (no I am not going to call it football...) Cricket and Snooker such that all the sponsorship dollars make it more lucrative than pool, doesnt make snooker a better game... I like 14.1 and I have played and like snooker (yes on a 6x12 table)...fuxake said:U R GAY!
just thought I would let U know
Like many said 8 ball played in bars and in tourneys are 2 completely different games... I am sure you got some moogs making up snooker rules when they get drunk in bars too...
All that being said it is an adjustment playing with larger balls and not having the precise cue control available with tiny balls and a narrow tipped cue... There are definately nuances to 8 ball that make it difficullt in competitive play... One being the break... It is essential that you pocket a ball on the break or a good opponent will have the first chance to run out... I am sure the break is quite different form snooker break strategy...
Just like you are defending you fine game some of us our defending ours... noone is right as it is all a matter of preferences...
Just showing that Ronnie O made that huge chunk of change last year means little... An American Pool player could go over there and take his chances with a game that he doesn't play very much and maybe do ok, but unless he is willing to spend a couple years in England and adjust to the game he isn't gonna take down the Top Pros and thus he wont win major money... Ronnie won half of the majors that year... what was the number 2 & 3 players money winnings that year...
Earl S. going over there to take down the snooker tour and dominate would be similar to Colin Montgomerie trying to come here and win on the Pro golf Tour and win some majors (oh yea he hasn't)
