Tweet
Ok, so only the final remains, and we still haven't had a decider this week. There were a couple of 6-4 finishes, but in every one of those matches one player led something like 4-1 at the halfway point. The Masters final has in recent years either been one sided, finishing 10-3 or 10-4, or gone all the way to a decider or a 10-8 finish. That's been the case for the last 15 years, which is quite remarkable, as you would expect 10-6 or 10-7 to be fairly common results. I think going all the way is the most likely scenario today.
A lot is made of Robertson's record in finals, but thinking a bit more analytically about it, it's not that impressive. He has played in five major ranking finals, and by major I mean two or four-session matches. In four of those he played against qualifiers, and he was always a fairly comfortable favourite. So for me, his biggest challenge to date was the Grand Prix final against Ding Junhui, an opponent of similar stature. He also won the one-session World Open final against O'Sullivan, and two PTC finals. It's a good record, sure, but it's not like he has been beating the likes of Higgins, Williams or Selby without a single defeat. Why am I saying all this? Well, along with Ding Junhui, Shaun Murphy will be his toughest final opponent to date, so a win here would make his final "invincibility" a lot more credible.
As I said yesterday, Robertson played a decent game against Williams and Trump, but he would be very lucky to win the Masters with only a decent performance. He needs to find another gear. We know he has it in him, he has shown it several times in the last three seasons or so. More times than Murphy certainly. In fact, since winning the UK Championship in 2008, Murphy has more or less suffered a drought in the major events. He won the Premier League, the Wuxi Classic, the Brazil Masters, all non-ranking. He also won the PTC finals last season, an event carrying ranking points, but played over a short format. So it's about time he wins something major again, if he still wants to be considered among the really top players. He played an excellent match against Higgins, a poor shot or two thrown in, but nothing major. I think there is no doubt he has played the better snooker of the two finalists.
Now, they don't play each other particularly often, but I do remember at least two big matches in the fairly recent past. There was the semi-final of the WC in 2009, a match in which Murphy led 14-7 before Robertson got back to 14-14, but Murphy still prevailed in the end. I suppose at that point in time, Robertson had still not played at the one-table situation at the Crucible, so the experience was with Murphy, and Murphy was of course the higher seed as well. The second of their big encounters was the quarter-final of the UK Championship in 2010. You could say the roles were reversed as Robertson had, at least for a month or two, taken Higgins' title as the world's best player, while Murphy was not really among the immediate contenders for the title. But Murphy was up for it, and prevailed again, 9-7.
So one would think the advantage would be with Murphy. But as I said yesterday, Robertson is not the kind of character to continually lose to the same opponents. He answered Trump's challenge, can he answer Murphy's? Tactically there is not much between them. They both take their time if they need to, they don't lose their patience or get tired, they don't usually play stupid shots under pressure, and they don't crack with their back to the wall. So to recap, Robertson's advantage should be his record in finals and the confidence gained from his performances over the last couple of seasons, while Murphy has been better this week and has had the better of their previous encounters. That's two each.
I'll leave it at that this time, and just call a 10-9 either way, hopefully after midnight.
A lot is made of Robertson's record in finals, but thinking a bit more analytically about it, it's not that impressive. He has played in five major ranking finals, and by major I mean two or four-session matches. In four of those he played against qualifiers, and he was always a fairly comfortable favourite. So for me, his biggest challenge to date was the Grand Prix final against Ding Junhui, an opponent of similar stature. He also won the one-session World Open final against O'Sullivan, and two PTC finals. It's a good record, sure, but it's not like he has been beating the likes of Higgins, Williams or Selby without a single defeat. Why am I saying all this? Well, along with Ding Junhui, Shaun Murphy will be his toughest final opponent to date, so a win here would make his final "invincibility" a lot more credible.
As I said yesterday, Robertson played a decent game against Williams and Trump, but he would be very lucky to win the Masters with only a decent performance. He needs to find another gear. We know he has it in him, he has shown it several times in the last three seasons or so. More times than Murphy certainly. In fact, since winning the UK Championship in 2008, Murphy has more or less suffered a drought in the major events. He won the Premier League, the Wuxi Classic, the Brazil Masters, all non-ranking. He also won the PTC finals last season, an event carrying ranking points, but played over a short format. So it's about time he wins something major again, if he still wants to be considered among the really top players. He played an excellent match against Higgins, a poor shot or two thrown in, but nothing major. I think there is no doubt he has played the better snooker of the two finalists.
Now, they don't play each other particularly often, but I do remember at least two big matches in the fairly recent past. There was the semi-final of the WC in 2009, a match in which Murphy led 14-7 before Robertson got back to 14-14, but Murphy still prevailed in the end. I suppose at that point in time, Robertson had still not played at the one-table situation at the Crucible, so the experience was with Murphy, and Murphy was of course the higher seed as well. The second of their big encounters was the quarter-final of the UK Championship in 2010. You could say the roles were reversed as Robertson had, at least for a month or two, taken Higgins' title as the world's best player, while Murphy was not really among the immediate contenders for the title. But Murphy was up for it, and prevailed again, 9-7.
So one would think the advantage would be with Murphy. But as I said yesterday, Robertson is not the kind of character to continually lose to the same opponents. He answered Trump's challenge, can he answer Murphy's? Tactically there is not much between them. They both take their time if they need to, they don't lose their patience or get tired, they don't usually play stupid shots under pressure, and they don't crack with their back to the wall. So to recap, Robertson's advantage should be his record in finals and the confidence gained from his performances over the last couple of seasons, while Murphy has been better this week and has had the better of their previous encounters. That's two each.
I'll leave it at that this time, and just call a 10-9 either way, hopefully after midnight.
Comment