Ronnie O'sullivan

Ronnie keeps on forgetting he's over the hill.
I hope he keeps forgetting for just a couple more years.

At least in snooker there is no debate over who has
the highest gear of anyone that ever played the game.

It's just......wow.
 
Ronnie keeps on forgetting he's over the hill.
I hope he keeps forgetting for just a couple more years.

At least in snooker there is no debate over who has
the highest gear of anyone that ever played the game.

It's just......wow.

Aside from his love for the game, I think there's only 2 reasons he still plays.

1. To break Hendry's record of World Championships. Honestly, I think this one will not happen. Ronnie can win these little week long tournaments with short races. But the odds are against him to win a 17 day tournament. Especially if he has to cross paths with the likes of Higgins or Selby. Even guys like Hawkins and Trump can give him trouble

2. To make over 1k centuries. This one is definitely possible.
 
1. To break Hendry's record of World Championships. Honestly, I think this one will not happen. Ronnie can win these little week long tournaments with short races. But the odds are against him to win a 17 day tournament. Especially if he has to cross paths with the likes of Higgins or Selby. Even guys like Hawkins and Trump can give him trouble

Anyone who doesn't roll over against Ronnie can give him trouble. The level he's able to reach is unbelievable at times (and even more so given his age) but he's still a front runner prone to rolling over against opponents whose own standards don't drop just because he's scoring heavily.
 
his primary motivation is $$$$

if he could sustain his lifestyle indefineltley he'd quit snooker tommorow
 
his primary motivation is $$$$

if he could sustain his lifestyle indefineltley he'd quit snooker tommorow

Nah. He's got plenty of it, and if he retired tomorrow, he'd be hired immediately as a commentator. Which he would be very good at if you've ever heard him in the booth.
 
I've seen handicaps that kind of work that way. But the problem is points scored is dependent on the level of player you are up against. A top amateur may regularly get 80 odd points per frame against me for example, and I would be able to manage an 80 odd aggregate against lower level players consistently.

All true. But this is also true of points in straight-pool, games in 9-ball, etc.

Fargo Ratings would work just fine for snooker -- using points.
 
Nah. He's got plenty of it, and if he retired tomorrow, he'd be hired immediately as a commentator. Which he would be very good at if you've ever heard him in the booth.

After reading his current book, "Running", I believe his main motivation for still playing is money.
 
All true. But this is also true of points in straight-pool, games in 9-ball, etc.

Fargo Ratings would work just fine for snooker -- using points.

Do you mean to say that a snooker system would best based on points scored per frame? Or individual games won, like in 8/9/10 ball?

It's neat seeing the relative difference between pool players. But it would cool to see the rating difference between for example Kyren Wilson and Alfie Burden.

Would the number ranges be larger since players tend not to lose as much against lower standard players? Or since it is still based on how a player performs based on expectations, would the ranges remain more or less the same, but a 10 point difference (for example) would mean more than in 8/9/10 ball?
 
Back
Top