Ronnie O'Sullivan vs Raj Hundal?

voiceofreason said:
Why does he have the edge??

Just because he's a bit handy at snooker??
Click to expand...

Because I think his cue ball control and accuracy are better than Raj's. I think shot for shot Ronnie is the better cueist. So over a lengthy match Ronnie will make less mistakes and that will be the difference is my prediction.

And yes this has a bit to do with Ronnie being a world class snooker player.
 
voiceofreason said:
Why does he have the edge??

Just because he's a bit handy at snooker??
Click to expand...

Well that, and because Raj isn't exactly the best 9 ball player in the world. Don't get me wrong, he's a great player, but I wouldn't consider him a top tier pro.

Now put Ronnie against Dennis, Alex, or Shane in a long set and I don't think he has an edge anymore.
 
JB Cases said:
Because I think his cue ball control and accuracy are better than Raj's. I think shot for shot Ronnie is the better cueist. So over a lengthy match Ronnie will make less mistakes and that will be the difference is my prediction.

And yes this has a bit to do with Ronnie being a world class snooker player.
Click to expand...

Hmmmmm....

I'm not sure what you are saying about pool and pool players there to be honest.
 
BeiberLvr said:
Well that, and because Raj isn't exactly the best 9 ball player in the world. Don't get me wrong, he's a great player, but I wouldn't consider him a top tier pro.

Now put Ronnie against Dennis, Alex, or Shane in a long set and I don't think he has an edge anymore.
Click to expand...

People tend to think of snooker as harder than pool for some reason. Probably because the table is bigger and the pockets smaller. this is simply not true though.

Snooker is not harder than pool but pool is not harder than snooker either. They are equally hard.

Becoming the "best" is equally hard. Number one is number one. If anything pool is "harder" than snooker in that there are many millions more players and therefore statistically it is harder to become the best.

But they are different games. Similar in that they use similar equipment but they are different.

Pool is a game of knowledge. Snooker, certainly at the top levels is bash bash bosh loads of pots. Not a lot to think about really.

Another difference is the value of a mistake.

In snooker, making a mistake may result in the loss of a rack but in pool a mistake may result in the loss of more than one rack indeed many racks.

Anyway...

My point was more I don't like the premise that a snooker professional is better than a pool professional at pool. If that is what people within the sport think about the sport, then no wonder sponsors, tv companies and other outside interests don't give a monkeys if people within consider themselves inferior.
 
Last edited:
O'Sullivan retired after winning his fourth world championship.
Came back to defend and won his fifth world championship - about $400,000 US.
Said he need the money to pay for his kids' schooling.

Question is:
Would this match have a pot big enough to get him to take it seriously?

On the other hand, Ronnie dislikes travel and long tournaments, so a single match would appeal to him. :D

Just read the comments - seems pool would be secondary to the comedy routine, The Raj & Ronnie Show.
Bet at your peril. :D
 
Last edited:
voiceofreason said:
People tend to think of snooker as harder than pool for some reason. Probably because the table is bigger and the pockets smaller. this is simply not true though.

Snooker is not harder than pool but pool is not harder than snooker either. They are equally hard.

Becoming the "best" is equally hard. Number one is number one. If anything pool is "harder" than snooker in that there are many millions more players and therefore statistically it is harder to become the best.

But they are different games. Similar in that they use similar equipment but they are different.

Pool is a game of knowledge. Snooker, certainly at the top levels is bash bash bosh loads of pots. Not a lot to think about really.

Another difference is the value of a mistake.

In snooker, making a mistake may result in the loss of a rack but in pool a mistake may result in the loss of more than one rack indeed many racks.

Anyway...

My point was more I don't like the premise that a snooker professional is better than a pool professional at pool. If that is what people within the sport think about the sport, then no wonder sponsors, tv companies and other outside interests don't give a monkeys if people within consider themselves inferior.
Click to expand...

Have you ever played snooker? Hell I live in Texas and I will admit snooker is harder...
 
Gsitz89 said:
Have you ever played snooker? Hell I live in Texas and I will admit snooker is harder...
Click to expand...

Yes of course. I am based in England so play quite often. Not a lot and not competitively for many years.

I play English pool so perhaps that is the difference. Often hear "snooker players" commenting about English pool. Personally, I've wrapped up many a snooker player turning to pool. They're great at potting, of course, but when was pool ever just about potting?
 
Last edited:
Snooker vs Pool

If u just consider potting balls, surely snooker is harder since the table is much bigger and the rounded corners make it extremely tricky. But once u get used to pocket balls consistently, I find it much easier to play position and to play safe compared to pool. Generally, u need much more spin in pool for which u have to consider cue deflection and also the friction on balls. the older the balls the more friction u get.

Pool seems to me much more creative and u need to improvise constantly, where snooker has more repeating situations.

In a short nine-ball race, it is possible that Ronnie will beat Raj. In a long set I am not so sure anymore. If Ronnie played one of the top tier pros in a long set, he would not stand a chance I predict. Especially in 10-ball.

Hope the match-up will take place.

so long
bicki
 
Snooker isn't hard. The break aspect at least. Bring the game over here on 9' tables with 4.5" pockets, and it wouldn't be long before you had Americans making 100+ breaks.

What makes the game difficult is the almost perfect fundamentals one needs to play well on the equipment.
 
Tough call...but my money would be on Raj. He plays more pool than Ronnie. I wouldn't be surprised if Ronnie tortured him, he is a phenomenal cueist and has played some top level events and done well. But Raj is a pool player and would know how to keep Ronnie in a box.
 
bicki said:
If u just consider potting balls, surely snooker is harder since the table is much bigger and the rounded corners make it extremely tricky. But once u get used to pocket balls consistently, I find it much easier to play position and to play safe compared to pool. Generally, u need much more spin in pool for which u have to consider cue deflection and also the friction on balls. the older the balls the more friction u get.

Pool seems to me much more creative and u need to improvise constantly, where snooker has more repeating situations.

In a short nine-ball race, it is possible that Ronnie will beat Raj. In a long set I am not so sure anymore. If Ronnie played one of the top tier pros in a long set, he would not stand a chance I predict. Especially in 10-ball.

Hope the match-up will take place.

so long
bicki
Click to expand...

I would agree completely..

If you simplify both games to simply potting, there is an argument that snooker is harder but neither game is just about potting.

On the bit in red above, the biggest difference with snooker to pool is that you generally play areas rather than precise position. When you are building a break, especially early on in a frame you can play areas for a choice of reds for example.

On the issue of safety, this is particularly easy in snooker compared to pool.

Another factor is that a single mistake at pool can be devastating resulting in loss of frame (or even loss of several frames in winner breaks) even at a very low standard, whereas one mistake does not automatically mean loss of frame even at the very highest standard at snooker.

And as my learned friend has said, the impact of the break in pool as opposed to snooker is enormous. The break is not a factor in snooker at all really - Either at a low or a high standard.
 
Last edited:
For Anyone who thinks for even half a second the Ronnie wouldn't have a chance against Raj in a game of 9 ball then just look at these results from 2007 when Ronnie took a year out to pursue the game of pool & started off at the Open Weert 9 ball Championship:

Last 64

Bart Houben - Ronnie O 'Sullivan - 8-4 O'Sullivan

Last 32

Fabio Petroni - Ronnie O 'Sullivan - 9-8 O'Sullivan

Last 16

Mario Lannoye - Ronnie O 'Sullivan - 9-7 O'Sullivan

Last 8

Christian Prager - Ronnie O 'Sullivan - 9-4 O'Sullivan

Last 4

Brian Beekers - Ronnie O 'Sullivan - 9-5 O'Sullivan

Final

Ronnie O 'Sullivan - Mika Immonen - 10-6 Immonen

Now if that doesn't show the skill of the man then I don't know what does & considering that was the first 9 ball tournament he had played in if you discount the mosconi cup which at the time was just classed as an exhibition match then I think he has every chance to beat Raj.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top