hendry- time to call it a day

[bonoman1970]

Grow up!!!
Do you know anything about snooker ?
I have seen and met both players on more than several occassions,Hendry was a great player dont get me wrong,but just because Steve Davis missed one black in the world final lessened his world championship wins ....6 against Hendry's 7,....the nugget has still won more pro tournaments than anyone else ,and he hasnt won any for about ten years!!!!! Davis has a far superior technique to Hendry's ...if you cant see that ...well!
Davis Is a superior cueist to Hendry,probably one of the very best sportsman this country has ever produced,and if it wasnt for him the like of Hendry and co probably wouldnt even be snooker players!
I dont like to see Hendry struggle so much ,because he was a great but he does lack fight and bottle nowadays......looks bored and fed up out of his head .....he should retire, he is 39 with no fight left in him ,wont be still beating high ranked players in 11 or twelve years time like someone else, in fact in when he is 51 no one will probably even remember him>
:snooker:

[bonoman1970]

perhaps ive gone over the top ....ofcourse for the next twenty or so years people will remember Hendry, but maybe it is time now for him to give up.
Maybe Stephen can find some inner peace on a secret island somewhere,away form the likes of Adrian Gunnel and Dominic Dale !!!

:snooker:

[Matt_2745]

I don't subscribe to the view that Hendry lacks fight, he wouldn't have beaten Mark Allen at the Crucible how or have pushed Stephen Lee half as close as he did the other day if he didn't want it. I really think he still wants to win, but his game and confidence just isn't there at the moment.

Actually been quite impressed with his determination and fight over the last year or so, the way he played he should never have pushed Walden to 5-4 or Lee to 9-7, but he hung in there and on another day could have won those matches.

No way should he give up, not yet. Saying that people won't remember him when he is 51 or in twenty years time is absurd also, he's arguably the greatest player ever to have played the game (statistically and in my opinion), and I'll remember him in fifty years time for sure.

[bonoman1970]

But he is supposed to be the very best human that has ever picked up a cue.........
that is my query ?

[Matt_2745]

But he is supposed to be the very best human that has ever picked up a cue.........
that is my query ?

Not 100% sure what you are getting at but I'll say that I have never seen better snooker than what Hendry produced on such a consistent basis when he was at his absolute peak. Obviously opinions will differ on that, but that's mine.

For me the fact that he is unlikely to be plodding around at 51 like Davis doesn't take away from that in the slightest. Davis' style is undoubtedly more suited to old age that Hendry's but I don't think that can be a criticism of Stephen personally.

Personally I'd rather see Stephen call it a day rather than carry on as long as Davis has, but if he chooses to continue then I'll support him all the way.

[bonoman1970]

I really respect the guy as man and a player ,however youre argument doesnt stand up.....
beating Mark Allen and losing to Stephen Lee with about six people watching doesnt add to this great mans profile!

[Matt_2745]

I'm not arguing that it adds to his profile, I'm arguing that he hasn't totally lost his fight and bottle as you suggest.

Also replied at the end of the last page in case it gets lost.

[bonoman1970]

The thing that gets me is that lots of people might mock Steve Davis ,because he is 51,and hardly practices, he struggles,not even a quarter of the player he once was ,but he loves competing,putting his neck on the line on live tv ,when he is still the best technical player in the game (name me anyone else with a better technique?) even now at his age ????
Hendry is struggling because he has never had a textbook technique
He relied totally on his confidence and the fact that he had Jimmy bottling it against him and Nigel Bond.
I totally honestly believe that the nugget was and still is a better player!
More pro titles wins than anyone else

[Matt_2745]

With all due respect I can't take your argument seriously when you dismiss Hendry as someone who relied on playing White and Bond.

I have total respect for Steve Davis and his achievements, but Stephen's are just as good, if not greater.

[wildJONESEYE]

i have respect for Steve Davis but what people forget is when Hendry started to dominate the sport Steve Davis was stil in his prime winning World Titles and Reaching UK Finals consistantly........Ronnie has gone on record to say the reason Steve Davis dominance came to a end was Stephen Hendry..

Steve Davis was a mugger as a player..........stephen hendry would walk up to you and punched you in the face....

Anyone who saw the 1989 and 1990 UK Finals between Hendry and Davis knows in thoes 2 matches Davis was at his ultimate best and lost both matches..After thoes 2 matches the davis invincibility of the 80s was gone and people saw the newer and better player that had arived...

[moondan]

Hendry was totally different class to Davis.

Only Ronnie can be mentioned in the same breath, but for very different reasons.

Steve was old school, master of a different game on different conditions, the head to head is too one-sided to make any case, not to mention the century tally.

[moondan]

That's a bit of an overstatement. The only two players who went on to win the tournament after beating Hendry were Walden and Higgins. He lost to Lee in the NIT, to Stevens in Bahrain, and to Lee again here (he could still win it though). So that's 2 out of 4(5) this season.

In last season's part of 2008, he lost to the eventual winner in the Masters, the Welsh open, and the Worlds. He lost to Hawkins in the China Open, and in the gruop stage in Malta (although, he did play Murphy).


I agree however, that he hasn't lost to a "mediocre" player for awhile. He plays Neil Robertson in the Masters btw.

Odri, Thanks, I stand corrected.

I dont fancy him getting past Robertson in the Masters, Neil looked pretty good to me and a bit unlucky, thought his game looked mature.

[Matt_2745]

Liking Stephen's Welsh Open draw, looks like Gould/Parrott/Bond in the last 32 so if he loses to one of them then he deserves all he gets.

Allen in the last 16 potentially could be tough but it could also be worse.

[Templeton Peck]

To be fair when Hendry started to dominate Davis was 32/33 which is the usual age for a player to start going into decline. I would argue that Davis wasn't at his peak at this age - Davis peaked at about 29/30. Davis at the 1990 UK hadn't won a ranker for a year while Hendry was enjoying his longest sustained winning streak of his career in this period and Davis still took him to a decider. I think playing at their respective bests Davis shades it as the better player given his tactical superiority - both players would clear from half a chance and Davis' tactical game would yield the majority of chances. It's a moot point now anyway because they are fighting over second place, Ronnie has clearly produced a level of snooker that is in a league of its own...