Ali Carter v Judd Trump

[Looki]

But, the thing to remember is that playing that many frames you're likely to get one, and sometimes more cases of pure luck. Yes, this was a big, flashy and timely example of it, but think about it.. if you /never/ play a big flashy risky shot your chance of getting a lucky break playing one is zero, it can't happen.

So, players that never take a chance like that, will never get a lucky break like that, and might therefore appear to be less lucky. But, in fact they just take less risks. They still get lucky outcomes, but you might not even notice when it happens because they're so minor in comparison to this one.

There's a lot between "never" and "most of the time".

[SnookerPilot]

I haven't read the whole of the thread, so apologies if I'm way off topic or it's already been covered.

I just think it's a shame that what was one of the great Crucible come backs by Carter has turned into a bit of a slanging match as to the rights and wrongs of snooker sportsmanship. There was a huge amount of emotion in the last few frames and I think it boiled over with Carter's sarcastic clapping and accusations towards Trump over not acknowledging flukes etc. but in that position on that stage no one can really say exactly how they'd react to the situation.

You could see at the end just how much it meant to both players. The pressure on Trump going into the tournament was huge with everyone, especially the mainstream media, touting him as the winner before the tournament had begun purely because of the style of snooker he plays and the fact he reached the final last year. I actually thought before the match, with Trump having not being well etc. that Carter would walk it quite easily. I think this may well be Carter's year but we'll have to see how much the match has taken out of him mentally.

I just hope that snooker can sort itself out for the rest of the tournament, as some brilliant games are getting over shaddowed by players spouting off at each other after the game.

[DamienB]

The player that hit the balls harder will always have more luck, more power more travel.

[doorag]

Montoya: So what are you suggesting? Is there an invisible force surronding the table dishing out fortune to Trump?

[nrage]

There's a lot between "never" and "most of the time".

The more often you play the risky shot, the more likely you'll get lucky doing it

[nrage]

His game doesn't rely on luck. Judd himself relies on his luck. He hits and hopes that balls are going to end up in a good position for him.

Ronnie did something very similar, recently, and ended up on a black over the corner if I recall

Yes, I agree that other players get their fair share of luck, as well. But just as you said, there is a real difference between the presence of luck.
Thinking back about the match, you may or you may not remember the moments Carter got lucky. I do remember a couple of positions, but even those were minor helps from the table in general.

It's like I said, he had the same amount of luck, but when he got lucky it made less difference as he wasn't playing a big flashy shot and moving a load of balls, instead he might have got a slightly better cannon or similar.

But counting on Trump's lucky moments is a lot more easier. It's simple. If you hit the balls hard, you really have no control over the balls and there is a fair chance you'll end up lucky.
It's not Trump's mistake to be lucky. But it's certainly his choice to have hope on the run of balls in those kind of situations.

So which is it? If you have a "fair chance" of being lucky when you bash the balls why isn't everyone doing it?

I do agree though that it does seem that Judd falls back on a bit of hit and hope sometimes, perhaps more often than other players (Ronnie's hit and hope which gave him the black on a plate notwithstanding).

Maybe it's because Judd can't see any other option or maybe the hit+hope has worked better for him than trying to control a dodgy but more conservative shot. When you've got only bad options to choose from, why not try something a bit different and trust to chance.

[montoya10]

Yes, but he potted the ball in the intended pocket. QUITE a big of a difference, eh?

[gavpowell]

I don't really understand why everyone wants to turn snooker's latest maverick into another one who plays the game "properly". I didn't notice him not apologising for flukes but if true, that's not to my taste, but the style of play has won him a UK championship, a China Open title, three PTCs, a handful of non-ranking events, a Masters semi-final and a world final, the majority of which have been in the past 18 months or so. If he doesn't mind losing a few to win a few, it makes him all the more dangerous.

If he's not conducting himself properly, someone should have a word officially, but otherwise, leave him alone - I for one am enjoying the madness.

[Csmith]

As I'm sure others have commented it's difficult to criticize a two time ranking event winner and world finalist. He has to be doing something right. Though I do agree that he needs to find a little bit more of a balance in his game, but to lose his attacking game might take away some of his edge.

But luck comes in a lot of different ways. I'd say the position of the reds after Judd missed that last red with rest was rather fortuitous. In fact, that he missed the red at all was a decent bit of fortune on Ali's part.

[Looki]

The more often you play the risky shot, the more likely you'll get lucky doing it

And also more likely to get punished. I'm talking about balance here. But I'm not going to tell Trump how to play snooker, he's entitled to play with the style he wants.

[EnterTheDragon]

I've always liked Judd's style of play and it is a style that involves a lot of luck, but he goes for things instead of taking forever just to make a simple safety shot.
And the thing that people didnt seem to see at the end of the match was that the flukes really started to get to Judd himself as well. The pressure got to him, he played bad and got away with it a couple of times and it really seemed to annoy him.
But Carter sure knew what buttons to push with the hand clapping, the smiles and the weird sitting when it's his turn.

Fair play to Ali, it was an important match and you do what you think you have to do to win.. But he really shouldn't talk about etiquette after that show.

[nrage]

Yes, but he potted the ball in the intended pocket. QUITE a big of a difference, eh?

Not really. It would have been end of break without that fluked position.

[nrage]

And also more likely to get punished. I'm talking about balance here. But I'm not going to tell Trump how to play snooker, he's entitled to play with the style he wants.

No argument here

[montoya10]

Not really. It would have been end of break without that fluked position.

Yes. Just the end of the break, though.
If Trump didn't get away with that amazing fluke snooker, probably it was frame over. Probably, of course, but a very good probability. In O'Sullivan's case, it just netted him the frame. It would be the same if he went for the shot, missed it and miraculously get away with such a pacey shot.

[P.Smith]

Luck is luck, there is nothing you can do about it.