Hendry - Not good enough

[ADR147]

once again, totally correct. Hendry is being punished because unlike Davis he has no plan B to fall back on

i would agree aswell to some extent and the same could be said of ronnie o'sullivan and ding when they are not playing well there is no b plan to win games.

[Fist of Fury]

Except of course that Ronnie is World Champion and WN1 and is still competing at the highest level...and hendry is not.

Ronnie does have a very good safety game. Ronnie's only downside is his temperament, same with Ding.

But in terms of skills, Ronnie does have a plan B (safety, left handed play), whereas Hendry simply has pot or lose.

[wildJONESEYE]

1. Ronnie O'Sullivan
2. Stephen Maguire
3. Shaun Murphy
4. Mark Selby
5. John Higgins MBE
6. Stephen Hendry MBE
7. Allister Carter
8. Ryan Day
9. Peter Ebdon
10. Neil Robertson
11. Ding Junhui
12. Joe Perry
13. Graeme Dott
14. Marco Fu
15. Mark King
16. Mark Allen

hendry is not exactly out of it is he.

mate im a Hendry fan the play the guy produced at his best has never been seen before or sinse despite the bull fist of fury comes up with but the reason he is at no 6 sais more about standards of play than what hes achieved over the last 3 seasons...............

its been painfull for so long its a mirracle he reached the World Semi Final playing as useless as he was........

[Templeton Peck]

To be fair I don't ever recall Hendry making five centuries in a best-of-9...he made 7 in a best of 19 once but that's only two more in a match twice as long. It's pretty clear that Hendry's best form has not only been matched but at times surpassed. We have to be realistically here, Hendry's best often came against inferior opponents when there was very little threat. O'Sullivan has produced breathaking displays against world class players like John Higgins, Ding, Maguire and Hendry himself. While I accept Hendry set a standard for his time we have to accept that Ronnie O'Sullivan has raised the bar on the very top level of the game even if he hasn't quite had the consistency of a Davis or Hendry, and while you can make a case for either of those players being the best players the game has ever seen there is only one answer to the question "Who has played the best snooker ever seen?": Ronnie O'Sullivan. Anyone who can't see that clearly doesn't know the game that well.

[ADR147]

Except of course that Ronnie is World Champion and WN1 and is still competing at the highest level...and hendry is not.

Ronnie does have a very good safety game. Ronnie's only downside is his temperament, same with Ding.

But in terms of skills, Ronnie does have a plan B (safety, left handed play), whereas Hendry simply has pot or lose.

but for example john higgins would have won that final frame against trump - ronnie threw it away.

[Fist of Fury]

but for example john higgins would have won that final frame against trump - ronnie threw it away.

again, that is temperament (he came to the trump match not giving a crap about winning if you ask me and it showed). Ronnie is world N1 and champion, that is all that matters to me at the moment. We aren't debating ronnie though, we are debating Hendryand his lack lustre play.

To be fair I don't ever recall Hendry making five centuries in a best-of-9...he made 7 in a best of 19 once but that's only two more in a match twice as long. It's pretty clear that Hendry's best form has not only been matched but at times surpassed. We have to be realistically here, Hendry's best often came against inferior opponents when there was very little threat. O'Sullivan has produced breathaking displays against world class players like John Higgins, Ding, Maguire and Hendry himself. While I accept Hendry set a standard for his time we have to accept that Ronnie O'Sullivan has raised the bar on the very top level of the game even if he hasn't quite had the consistency of a Davis or Hendry, and while you can make a case for either of those players being the best players the game has ever seen there is only one answer to the question "Who has played the best snooker ever seen?": Ronnie O'Sullivan. Anyone who can't see that clearly doesn't know the game that well.

Careful, wild is liable to say you "no nuffin about snooker! you talk absuloute bull"
------

I totally agree and it is sad that people can't see that the bar has been risen. Stuck ina time warp with the fanboy goggles. Infact Templeton, I have tried unsuccessfully, especially here, to say what you have there and make people understand the difference in consistently good and occasionally the greatest ever seen. The same old crap about win records gets popped out. (although it is clear when seeing morgan, robidoux, Wattana and other such names [have a look at Hendry's 1990-96 draws] pop out, that this just isn't going to wash!)

I don't know whether it is really not knowing much about snooker, rather, that there are a lot of fanboys around who are completely deluded by nostalgia etc. Wild is a classic example. The guy is the biggest fanboy I have ever seen, does not accept that Hendry's best has been surpassed and just cannot see it. He clearly knows his snooker but at the same time, is clouded by fanboyism to look at the situation properly. This is why he doesn't see that the standard itself has risen despite how many 50+ 100+ breaks are being knocked in now, even by qualifiers. The 00's has been the toughest time to be a snooker player. People who argue that the standard is worse or the same, simply want to protect the win record argument.

This site in particular has a lot of clouded judgement because of the aforementioned problem. I used to have it with Jimmy but I outgrew it and it is time others did too. Somebody who says that Hendry's best was a match for Ronnie;s in 20 years time will simply be laughed at. LIke you said, Ronnie's downfall is temperament and thus consistency, and PART of this is down to a debiliting mental illness and if changing the mentality of Ronnie meant we lost the genius....I would prefer this Ronnie, with all his faults because we get matches and sometims whole tourmanents of snooker from the god's. Snooker that no one has never reached a level of. EVER.

[Le Ball Sack]

The latter end of the 00s have been a joke. I also disagree with Hendry not being able to handle big players. He handled Ronnie in 99/02 alright.

[Fist of Fury]

The latter end of the 00s have been a joke. I also disagree with Hendry not being able to handle big players. He handled Ronnie in 99/02 alright.

we are talking about now though. In the past he had less opponents who could do the damage on any given day. That isn't to say that he wouldn't have still won many titles or competed. Of course he would, just not near what he has. That is the point.

But now we are talking about the present hendry and at the moment he couldn't beat uncle tom from the race tracks

[Templeton Peck]

The standard has clearly dipped since the period spanning the late 90s and first half of this decade, but it's still generally higher than the 1990-96 period when Hendry dominated. If you can put Ronnie's recent success down to the recent dip in opposition (which is true in some respects) then that holds for Hendry's dominant period too. I think Ronnie achieved perfection with his game across 2004-2005 when he found the winning balance between his prolific scoring ability and a strong tactical game culminating in his demolition of John Higgins at The Masters - it takes something pretty special to make a player like John Higgins look like an amateur. I don't honestly believe Hendry at his best could have done that.

[In-off]

Apart from when he beat him 9-1 in the UK Championship semi-finals you mean?

[Fist of Fury]

I don't honestly believe Hendry at his best could have done that.

Which is true. Higgins and williams are among the elite and feature regularly in peoples top 5 players of all time.

Are we really saying that had they been around in 1990-96 period (in prime) that Hendry would still have the same win records? come off it...

[Templeton Peck]

That's the thing though - the only time Hendry could get a result like that against him was while he still was an amateur!

[moondan]

Fist for such a scientific guy, you fall over at the first hurdle, conditions have the utmost relevence in science.
I dont believe these tables this century, they are as different as the nineties table was to the eighties table.
Doesnt suit the less educated snooker watcher but its fact.

[moondan]

Some want to review a few of those matches, In the Higgins and Ronnie match john left him over the pocket frame after frame, wasnt great snooker, more like exhibition stuff with a mug dressed up as Higgins, in their other match that is always discussed Ronnie returned the favour.

[In-off]

That's the thing though - the only time Hendry could get a result like that against him was while he still was an amateur!

It was 1995 when Higgins was the provisional world no.2