If ever the rhyming nickname ‘on fire’ Stephen Maguire was apt it was last night as the Scot, burning with determination, extinguished Shaun Murphy’s hopes of lifting the German Masters title.
Maguire was superb throughout. This was the sort of snooker he was producing during the golden spell in which he finished runner-up in the 2004 British Open and won the UK Championship.
In both events he beat Ronnie O’Sullivan, who he plays again in the Berlin final today.
With a 13-3 head-to-head advantage, O’Sullivan has the stats in his favour but he said yesterday he was exhausted through glandular fever, and a two session final against an in form opponent is demanding enough without such ailments.
O’Sullivan seemed almost embarrassed by the manner of his 6-4 victory over Stephen Lee yesterday.
It did become a struggle, although it isn’t apparent why he tried to clear the colours left-handed in the tenth frame, which he very nearly lost.
O’Sullivan has always wanted to win playing snooker that is almost perfect, but this is impossible. Nobody, even if they possess his talent, can play perfectly all of the time. Snooker remains a very difficult game.
I hope if he does win today it will make him happy. It will certainly please his fans and he has many of them.
25 comments:
Well he's done the spade work in salvaging his top 16 place, so the title would just be a bonus I guess. The true irony here is that from a ranking perspective, if he is only going to win more match before the cut-off he'd be better off winning his first round match rather than the title! How crazy is that?
Totally agree Anonymous. Apparently World Snooker wants to award consistency. It's almost as if the ranking system actively wants to reward those players simply for playing more events. Completely going against the ethos and values of the Hearn regime.
For me the scoring system is skewed too much towards average results, out of line with other sports.
In a way I'd like Ronnie to drop out of the top 16, just to show how poor the points system is. Quite clearly he is one of the best 16 players in the world.
Reward those that win.
it would certainly please those who are not fans.
and there are many of us.
come on Maguire!
Dannyiloveron wrote:
Quite clearly he is one of the best 16 players in the world.
Reward those that win.
------------------
clearly he isnt.
if you go through his results in the last 3 years of real WS ranking events (and include the masters), cos they are proper snooker events, you will find his results are average.
yes he can play the best, but hes quite clearly not
The real Ronnie fans and true haters have been posting subjective shait here for ages.
I'm very happy Dave looks at snooker from an objective perspective.
There are several factors why he's in this predicament, and if you are going to skip tournaments you have to face the consequences, but they have to be fair consequences that represent his performance. He has got 1000 points for beating Maguire in a final, and you get 1200 points for beating a qualifier in the first round at the Welsh Open. I mean, at least inject a bit of sanity into the point tiers and make it 1200 points between each stage, don't go giving players more points for beating lesser players in earlier rounds because there is no way such a point structure can accurately reflect a player's achievements...
That's a good point you make Dave about Ronnie wanting to be perfect. The fact is that at the age of 36 the days of Ronnie winning with unadultrated brilliance are in the past, he has to embrace his imperfections then he can still win. That is what he's done tonight.
Don't forget, he is at 4th place in the 1-year-list this season. That's not just average in my opinion.
Anonymous said...
There are several factors why he's in this predicament, and if you are going to skip tournaments you have to face the consequences, but they have to be fair consequences that represent his performance. He has got 1000 points for beating Maguire in a final, and you get 1200 points for beating a qualifier in the first round at the Welsh Open. I mean, at least inject a bit of sanity into the point tiers and make it 1200 points between each stage, don't go giving players more points for beating lesser players in earlier rounds because there is no way such a point structure can accurately reflect a player's achievements...
11:33 PM
-----------------
thats where you are completely wrong!
in first rounds, other players have came through many rounds to get 1200 points (or whatever)
top 16 players are rewarded by not having to play those early qualifying rounds....by winning matches at other events and gaining rankings.
the points are an ever increasing scale upwards.
the pros who get 1200 )or whatever) for 1st rounders arent just placed there by random. they have worked hard to get rankings and therefor are placed in the draw at a later date.
if you want, they could all go back to 1st qual rounds and get 1200 for something like 4 matches, which is what is really happening.
but wire in and twist things how you see fir, to go with your debate.
Anonymous said...
Don't forget, he is at 4th place in the 1-year-list this season. That's not just average in my opinion.
11:57 PM
--------------
nobody was forgetting.
think the comment was passed on what was mentioned.
i didnt comment on the snow, as it wasnt mentioned either.
doesnt mean id forgotten about it.
825 has missed the point totally. The absolute point total is irrelevant, it is the differential that counts (from the point of view of what you actually have to do to get those points) and the differential between winning and losing a first round match is a higher differential between winning and losing a final. Anyone who has an IQ in double digits can see how stupid that is, unless they're more stupid than the person who thought up the system. There is a simple solution: 1st round seeded (700), 2nd (1900), QF (3100), SF (4300), F (5500), W (6700). I still contest that the differential for winning the final should be more, but a slight adjustment would at least make all wins worth the same, rather the first round worth more.
Nice one Ronnie, well done!
Any haters want to claim the German Masters is a Mickey Mouse event that was especially created for O'Sullivan?
Nice call earlier, Dave: about him being able to produce the goods when his back is against the wall. He needed this ranking title, more for himself, less for the rankings.
Great stuff.
rather it was 853 that missed the point
players who just get 1200 points for first round ARENT JUST PLUCKED FROM THE SKY
they win matched at other events to bypass the early rounds
for which points tally increase
they dont just jump in
still, again, if it fits your debate, we will just pretend theyre all plucked and put there because theyre nice guys
#blinkered
Anonymous said...
Nice one Ronnie, well done!
Any haters want to claim the German Masters is a Mickey Mouse event that was especially created for O'Sullivan?
9:03 AM
----------------------------
have you been waiting 2 and a half years to post that?
yes I have
O'Sullivan has won four events this season which is more than any other player, hardly the sign of a player that is finished yet.
I do find it baffling that winning this event is not safeguarding his position for the Crucible.
He has won three events carrying ranking points this season.
jamie brannon said...
O'Sullivan has won four events this season which is more than any other player, hardly the sign of a player that is finished yet.
--------------------
1 real event. the rest mickey mouse.
ive won 5 local snooker competitions since the season started.
im obviously better than ron
jamie brannon said...
I do find it baffling that winning this event is not safeguarding his position for the Crucible.
--------------
you must be easily baffled
The money list can't come soon enough IMO, to avoid farcical situations where a player gets more reward for winning a first round match. A money list would pretty much guarantee every event winner would be in the top 16, and that has to be a good thing.
312, i agree in principle, but there would need to be a fine balance as in future you could end up with a tournament being worth a lot more in terms of £ in relation to more prestigious events.
do you include £ from premier league or the masters...where only a few play / are invited etc..
imho a £ list could work, but it could completely slant the rankings too, unless the events prize £ was on at least a basic level footish.
also, lets say the asian market had 1/4 of the events, but 1/3 of the £ available.
the player(s) who dont want to travel there are up a lum
I never said it made him the best player, but the events are not mickey mouse.
The PTC events are real bunfights, and require you play excellent snooker just like at the German Masters.
While the Premier League is an elite field, being watched by packed houses. In addition, the prize money is comparable to ranking events.
im fairly certain the top pros think theyre mickey mouse.
ron doesnt hold much of a candle to them either. not worth him entering when he can stay at home with family.
the rest think the prizemoney is a joke, especially balanced versus expenses.
but still, they carry ranking points and rons won them, so lets all say theyre proper events that are really meaningful.
no, lets not! they are best of 7s shootouts anyone can win, badly scheduled where top players can have to turn up overnight, ron included and carry a fraction of prizemoney and points of a real event.
they are mickey mouse, just like the championship league, just like poweRsNOoker, like sky shootout,
mickey mouse, not proper snooker!
The idea that PTC events can be won by any player is not true, just look at the general standing of most of the winners.
The Premier League is unfairly labelled as an exhibition.
jamie brannon said...
The idea that PTC events can be won by any player is not true, just look at the general standing of most of the winners.
4:52 PM
--------------
id say the can realisically be won by 2/3 of the field.
a real ranker can realistically be won by 1/4 of the field.
jamie brannon said...
The Premier League is unfairly labelled as an exhibition.
4:52 PM
-----------------
i thinks its fairly labelled as such, esp as its about 10% of the main tour players who are in it.
Post a Comment