Champion of Champions Snooker

[PatBlock]

Ding hasn't exactly been great either

And he's not getting any better. I'd be surprised if Ding wins this now.

-

[Guy3103]

You can just see how bad Ronnie wants it... I think he will win this

[cueman]

You can just see how bad Ronnie wants it... I think he will win this

Really, I think he's really struggling with his game. I can't see Ding losing from 4-2 ahead unless Ronnie plays at the top of his game which just doesn't look likely tonight. Ding is going to get chances and he scores so fluently even though he's nowhere near top of his game either.

I'm gonna give them the benefit and say the table is playing a bit slow tonight and maybe this is why the players are struggling. I've noticed on a few shots that the cueball seems to be reacting quite sluggish, especially compared to last night when it played really lively. Cushions seem a bit dead.

[itsnoteasy]

He really is poetry when it's flowing,

[Masterdoctorgenius]

he should have been in the lead ronnie

[Masterdoctorgenius]

should be 5-3 for ding

[Odrl]

he should have been in the lead ronnie

4-3 behind isn't too bad, considering how he's played so far. He can't complain about the luck in the last frame, as he pushed a red over the pocket and was lucky to cover it, and arguably lucky that Ding failed to move it on his safety. Good break though. :wink:

[PatBlock]

Ding has had a good run of the ball but that is nothing unusual really, along with Selby they have a lot more luck than most.

When you say that cueman, do you mean they have a particular style of play which in some way influences the amount of good and bad luck they have? Or is it something else you mean. I constantly hear people say about Judd, that he hits the ball hard so there is more chance of him having a positive lucky kiss or pot. But this is absolute nonsense isn't it?
Surely once the shot is out of your control, i.e. you messed it up, then there's just as much chance of the outcome being negative as there is positive, no different from tossing a coin really.

So I don't see how any particular style of play could ever affect a person's ratio of good to bad luck. How can luck be anything other than that, random uncontrollable unpredictable chance, which will inevitably even out over time. Which is why we need much longer matches, best of 75 sounds good to me.

-

[Odrl]

Well, O'Sullivan's luck possibly saved him from a defeat in this frame... If that red had stayed over the pocket, those 40 points could have been Ding's, and they would have got him over the winning line. O'Sullivan still alive then. :smile:

[lennon11]

On a side note.... I know from local snooker players in west Yorkshire that ding has been recently working with a guy called john inglby, who is very well regarded in billiards circles.

[Masterdoctorgenius]

How is it going for ronnie? Cannot watch it.

[Odrl]

How is it going for ronnie? Cannot watch it.

Just about to force the decider on his third or fourth scoring visit in the frame. The first he got with a fluke again, the others with good pots from distance, but he wasted the first couple with poor positional shots. 5-5. :wink:

[streamer45]

Decider, c'mon Ronnie

[Masterdoctorgenius]

How is the decider going on?

[PatBlock]

Decider, c'mon Ronnie

NOOOOOO! C'MON DING!! ositive:

-