Originally Posted by Dave Walton
View Post
But at the end of the day this final didn't come down to who played the best, but who played the poorest. While O'Sullivan's best in the match was better than Selby's, his worst was a lot worse than Selby's worst. Numerous easyish pots missed, some very careless safeties (particularly running in-off in a top pocket when all the reds were in baulk).
A match of that length isn't just about skill, isn't just about luck, isn't just about temperament. It's about every factor of snooker rolled into one and overall that favoured Selby.
I get more and more exasperated that many people cannot see that there are lots of players all capable of winning on their day. I expect that is why I rarely post here (or indeed on other internet forums) all that often anymore.
Comment