Theory onpoor standard

[missneworleans]

Who said standart went down?!
Well there have been a few stuns and a few poor matches but overall it was classy tournament!

[Acrowot]

The reason that the so called top players did not win was nothing to do with it having no ranking points. They just could not hack it. They all wanted more chance to earn more money and surely they could not afford to turn down £150,000. Most of them would have killed for it!

Or were there better offers........

:snooker:

[moondan]

The fact is that at present the table is so fast and the pockets accept balls in a way they do not on a thicker cloth has made it very difficult for any player to impose his class.
I have little doubt this will not change and because of that, it is difficult for any player to gain that extra confidence that enables him to progress and become another Hendry or Davis.
Snooker is won in the head at this level and because the conditions have brought average players to a level they would never have achieved on tighter conditions, its the future and I can see a time coming when we will not see players often enough to get to know them and have our favourites and that will do nothing to serve for a healthy sport.
Hendry is the father of the modern game and up to this present day for most he is still the best.
I dont see another Ronnie around or even on the horizen and sometimes I wonder whether we ever will see their likes again.
The game is becoming global, and the sooner the better because these tiny insignicant tournaments may keep the players busy but their pockets wont be too full.
Im not sure about anything I have witnessed this past decade, what I am sure of is that it would not have been achievable on cloths in days gone by.
Like much in life today everything is for the now and snooker has become judged on how big the breaks are but a seventy will see you over the line in most frames, which makes the ton of no importance whatsoever.
I think the player of this century can knock in the big break but there is a certain brittleness about his game, much of his safety lands 18 inches away from his intended destination and snuggles up to a baulk colour and the audience claps, I think that is sad.

[gettingbetter]

This is what I wrote in response to another thread on here.

Wouldn't say either. Higgins and Williams have been there and thereabouts in the last two seasons and Ronnie is always a threat (without winning anything major for a while. I'm not taking into consideration the Premier League).

The youngers ones I am not sold upon. People are waiting for the likes of Allen and Cope not only to win, but start winning multiple titles. But it doesn't look likely.

I don't see what the big suprise is. Its the Masters. the top 16 players. 5/8 remaining are ranking title winners, two others are ranking final runner-ups and the other has made four or five semi finals. What is worse is that many others seem to be throwing some sort of conspiracy theory. Also, there are three world champions remaining.

So really, what is the big suprise?

I was suprised to see how poorly Higgins has performed at the Masters even though he has won it twice, O'Sullivan has been playing poorly and Williams didn't really play an underdog.


Original Source: http://www.thesnookerforum.com/board...#ixzz1BLSnqVnF
TSF - TheSnookerForum.com