I'm fortunate enough to have been entertained by snooker for over 50 years. I'm a terrible player myself but I can appreciate good talent. In the 70's there was Ray Reardon, in the 80's Steve Davis revolutionised the game, in the 90's Stephen Hendry astounded us and in the 00's we were mesmerised by the Ronnie phenomenon. The 10's have yet to produce an outstanding talent because there are now about a dozen different players who share the ranking titles. I expect a Chinese teenager to emerge sometime who will inherit the mantle of the game's greats. Meanwhile I enjoy hearing the past masters commentating on televised games, their insight adds immensely to the entertainment value.
They need a new Ronnie fast because if Ronnie retires my interest in watching matches will seriously decline. Trump dominated like crazy for two years solid but he seems to have fallen off a bit even though he did reach the world final. If you look at it though, Selby has dominated winning four world titles yes? He's only three away from equaling Ronnie and Hendry's record. Robertson looked like the new Steve Davis, so pale and boring but plays like a machine that malfunctions every now and then. He should have at least three world titles by now but it's clear he doesn't have the endurance to last in the world championship. The amazing thing is that Ronnie is still beating these guys at the top of their game which is astounding. Just want to add that I'd like to see Higgins win one more title, as he's an amazing player who's just short of Ronnie and Hendry.
Hendry doesn't have the appetite or desire because he's not good enough to compete with the elite's of '92 that took over in '00. That's why he retired in 2012. He should have retired 10years earlier. Quality of the game has risen massively since 2000 & again since 2010. Top 3 class of '92 are mesmerising, far beyond any other era.
It's nice to see Hendry speaking his mind. He and Ronnie were both aggressive and quick. He was the only reason why I picked up the sport. It pains me to watch the slow, boring and defensive snooker of modern day players. He should have got to 1000 centuries and 10 world championships. Stephen Hendry is the G.O.A.T
No Hendry is still the GOAT and for me he will always be unless someome else can win 7 WC and 36 rankings in 10 years time. @ Kartick. I agree with you but recently I like Brecel a lot. he is very agressive and likes to go for the shots and take his chances. A lot like Hendry used to do...
Having more titles doesn't mean he's the GOAT, dum dum. Hendry played in a weak era, that's the only reason he won so much. He played the bottler White in 4 finals and a nobody like Nigel Bond in another. When the level of snooker rose and the likes of Ronnie, Higgins and Williams entered their prime, Hendry's domination ended. He was finished by the age of 30. He didn't win a single major title after that. That says it all.
stephen hendry is statistcally the better player, more consistent and more focused. But Ronnie o' sullivan is incredibly gifted. Born genius He made the game look so easy. All the greats acknowledge this fact. Also he's a tremendous underachiever. If he could combine the consistency and emotional stability of Hendry, I dare say he'd have 10 titles by now.
Actually, except for World Title Totals, in fact O'Sullivan is statistically ahead. Average break, winning percentage, number of centuries, number of 147s. And he isn't finished yet......
Those statistics accentuate the fact that Ronnie is a snooker genius and the most gifted player to ever hold the cue. He really has nothing left to prove to the world. Although winning a couple more of the world titles could end all arguments. There is still a chance. This man is in his 40s and still not showing any lapse in his talent!!
I hope Ronnie wins another 2 world titles it all depends if his head is in the right place I spose .. he did say he was going to play for another 10 years till hes 50 so....... and he also said he want to beat hendrys ranking title wins
Hendry won it all in a spell of 10 years. To beat his records, if he will. ronnie will need more than 25 years and you want to say Ronnie is better??? What a joke...
"Stronger" doesn't mean he is "best" than Ronnie... The point of discussion here is that Hendry have a very different psychological profile than Roonie: Hendry is a very (VERY MUCH) consistent and emotional stable than Ronnie. Plus, remember Ronnie had some bad life episodes regarding his family and his main supporter (his father). This is why Hendry says "he's stronger". Not because he's technically better... no way. You cant beat a naturally gifted guy like Ronnie when he's on the mood. If Ronnie's life wasn't that mess, the 7 world titles record would probably been broken right now.
He is the only person I know of that openly admits that he would be upset if his record was beaten. What's the difference if Ronnie beats it, should have kept playing snooker instead of retiring just because his game deteriorated a bit. He has a strange attitude to be honest. O'Sullivan is in his forties now and is better than ever, and he enjoys the game of snooker, not only the winning part.
I don't think so. He has invested thousands of hours in the game and become very successful and dominating at a time so its only natural to be sentimental towards his own records and unwillingness still, even though not playing, to not be beaten. It's the same attitude he had to win so much when he was playing.
Muzzer27 why would he want to play when his game is deteriorating? He wasn't winning tournaments or getting close. Ronnie is playing as good as ever and still can win tournaments.. hendry wasn't playing to the same level into his forties as ronnie is now..
Hendry was playing at a similar level up until 2008, the difference was that the standard was higher than it was when he was dominating in the 90's, that's why he wasn't top dog no more. Another problem Hendry had was the fact that he was never an all round player, his safety and tactical play were average at best. He was stubborn and didn't adapt his game. That meant top players often got in first before him. Plus there were more top players that could punish his mistakes in the 00's.
@Bach Wagner Hendry only set those records cause he played against inferior opposition. Had he turned pro at the same time as the class of 92, he would have won 3 World Titles at best.
@Bach Wagner Ronnie said that the competition was a bit harder at the top level in the late 90's-early 00's, not in the first half of the 90's. And he was only referring to the top 8 players. Hendry only won 1 major title from 97 to around 2004.
abusiveFIRE why is it a disgrace because he isn't happy playing unless he wins ? He's played at such a high standard for years he knows he should beat 99.9% of the players. There's nothin more demoralising than getting beat by someone who isn't as good as you. Why risk being remembered as a player who didn't know when to stop and kept getting beat when you could finish on a high and be remembered as the greatest player ever. He doesn't need the money. I bet if you ask any top professional in any sport, tiger woods roger federated etc they will say they only like playing when they win. That's what separates the good from the great the competitiveness and hunger to win. Ps I don't particularly like hendry and he's not even in my top 5 players but you have to respect his winning attitude
@ AbusiveFire, He played for more than 10 years after he stopped winning titles. Hendry loves snooker, breathes snooker, but he is a winner and as a 7 times world champion he didn't wanted to mess around if he couldn't compete anymore at the level he wanted. He still could have made good money continue playing. i respect him he didn't want to take money if he was not at his best anymore. I guess it depend from your point of view. He knew when to stop instead of getting beaten all the time by players that were not as talented than him. @ Martin Peterman? Are you serious? Hendry was more stable, emotionally stronger, better match player, the better fighter, more consistent in his prime,... and when he was on top of his game Ronnie couldn;t beat him. Don't mention the Uk Final in 1993 please. Obviously it was during Hendry's rain but he didn't perform at his best the whole event and certainy not during the final...
@@abusiveFIRE, disgrace???? OK how about when ronnie walk out and shake the hand of stephen hendry and said I had enough. Score was 4 - 1 best of 17 games.
He might stronger than Ronnie, in title records. More stabilized, yes. But he can't deny that Ronnie is more talented than him, with better cue ball control, positional skill, and most of all for audience, much more fun to watch! But in the end, he only admitted that Ronnie's a little bit faster than him, what a shame! (Let alone it's not just "a little bit"faster in fact)
I don't think he would deny Ronnie is more talented. Osullivan and hendrys cue ball control was similar. There is something about watching someone who can handle the mental pressure and has a will to win which is exciting too. Hendry had that in spades over osullivan when it came close eg 2002 semi final of worlds, but I don't think the same thing could have been said for osullivan when both were playing similar standard as in 2002. The test of a really good snooker player comes down to mental ability to handle pressure but produce same technique or become more and not less aggressive. Hendry had that over osullivan.
Criss Chang Ronnie is more naturally talented and a much more exciting player to watch. Hendry isn’t there to excite anyone though. He’s just there to let everyone know he’s the best player to ever play the game.
+IFranchisedI good point but irrelevant relevant. Hendry was attacking by nature and only needed one chance to win a frame. He was also reknowned for being ice cool under pressure - hence level of competition doesn't matter. Hendry beat O sullivan twice - when ronnie was at his peak/close to his peak and ironically Hendry was on his way down.
Geena 1980 marc is right. Ronnie didn’t start utilising his safety game until 2004 onwards- most people would regard that as prime o sullivan. Yes he played well in 1999, but he hadn’t peaked. He won his first worlds in 2001 not 2002. ‘Hendry should of won 8...’ yeah well he didn’t. If deserves has anything to do with it, White should have beaten him. So by rights he should be on 6. Most experts in the game has stated Ronnie could have won 10 worlds if he was as mentally strong as Hendry. Hendry is bested by O sullivan in every relevant winning dpt aside from world championship wins, and mental fortitude. I love Hendry, but Ronnie is the superior player. My guess is that if Ronnie gets to 6 that would cement it for most.
What a ignorant comment only one decade?? How many player now in ur strong Era could dominate one decade and with 8 world titles and other feats? Jude Trumph lost to a weak player nigel bond from the weak Era, Neil robertson got trash by a novice zhang xintong, same gose to ding, mark got wack by a weak player, hmmm so much for the strong Era player. Not so impressive I guess.
I'm fortunate enough to have been entertained by snooker for over 50 years. I'm a terrible player myself but I can appreciate good talent. In the 70's there was Ray Reardon, in the 80's Steve Davis revolutionised the game, in the 90's Stephen Hendry astounded us and in the 00's we were mesmerised by the Ronnie phenomenon. The 10's have yet to produce an outstanding talent because there are now about a dozen different players who share the ranking titles. I expect a Chinese teenager to emerge sometime who will inherit the mantle of the game's greats.
Meanwhile I enjoy hearing the past masters commentating on televised games, their insight adds immensely to the entertainment value.
The new 21st century Chinese champion will be zhang xintong.
They need a new Ronnie fast because if Ronnie retires my interest in watching matches will seriously decline. Trump dominated like crazy for two years solid but he seems to have fallen off a bit even though he did reach the world final. If you look at it though, Selby has dominated winning four world titles yes? He's only three away from equaling Ronnie and Hendry's record. Robertson looked like the new Steve Davis, so pale and boring but plays like a machine that malfunctions every now and then. He should have at least three world titles by now but it's clear he doesn't have the endurance to last in the world championship. The amazing thing is that Ronnie is still beating these guys at the top of their game which is astounding. Just want to add that I'd like to see Higgins win one more title, as he's an amazing player who's just short of Ronnie and Hendry.
Hendry doesn't have the appetite or desire because he's not good enough to compete with the elite's of '92 that took over in '00. That's why he retired in 2012. He should have retired 10years earlier. Quality of the game has risen massively since 2000 & again since 2010. Top 3 class of '92 are mesmerising, far beyond any other era.
both of them the best of all times... no need to argue
It's nice to see Hendry speaking his mind. He and Ronnie were both aggressive and quick. He was the only reason why I picked up the sport. It pains me to watch the slow, boring and defensive snooker of modern day players.
He should have got to 1000 centuries and 10 world championships. Stephen Hendry is the G.O.A.T
Ronnie holds the title of Goat realistically, just like mango holds it when its Armada.
No Hendry is still the GOAT and for me he will always be unless someome else can win 7 WC and 36 rankings in 10 years time.
@ Kartick. I agree with you but recently I like Brecel a lot. he is very agressive and likes to go for the shots and take his chances. A lot like Hendry used to do...
Having more titles doesn't mean he's the GOAT, dum dum.
Hendry played in a weak era, that's the only reason he won so much. He played the bottler White in 4 finals and a nobody like Nigel Bond in another. When the level of snooker rose and the likes of Ronnie, Higgins and Williams entered their prime, Hendry's domination ended. He was finished by the age of 30. He didn't win a single major title after that. That says it all.
very sincere talk especially words about JW and the compare between R O'su and himself
stephen hendry is statistcally the better player, more consistent and more focused. But Ronnie o' sullivan is incredibly gifted. Born genius He made the game look so easy. All the greats acknowledge this fact. Also he's a tremendous underachiever. If he could combine the consistency and emotional stability of Hendry, I dare say he'd have 10 titles by now.
Actually, except for World Title Totals, in fact O'Sullivan is statistically ahead. Average break, winning percentage, number of centuries, number of 147s. And he isn't finished yet......
Those statistics accentuate the fact that Ronnie is a snooker genius and the most gifted player to ever hold the cue. He really has nothing left to prove to the world. Although winning a couple more of the world titles could end all arguments. There is still a chance. This man is in his 40s and still not showing any lapse in his talent!!
I hope Ronnie wins another 2 world titles it all depends if his head is in the right place I spose .. he did say he was going to play for another 10 years till hes 50 so....... and he also said he want to beat hendrys ranking title wins
Hendry won it all in a spell of 10 years. To beat his records, if he will. ronnie will need more than 25 years and you want to say Ronnie is better??? What a joke...
"Stronger" doesn't mean he is "best" than Ronnie... The point of discussion here is that Hendry have a very different psychological profile than Roonie: Hendry is a very (VERY MUCH) consistent and emotional stable than Ronnie. Plus, remember Ronnie had some bad life episodes regarding his family and his main supporter (his father). This is why Hendry says "he's stronger". Not because he's technically better... no way. You cant beat a naturally gifted guy like Ronnie when he's on the mood.
If Ronnie's life wasn't that mess, the 7 world titles record would probably been broken right now.
+fabrizzolla actually Hendry is technically better in many ways
Stephen Hendry was just about better in his prime but Ronnie was easily better after the 90s when Hendry started to decline
now I know why Ronnie says he's a boring t@#t. He hates to lose but loses at pool anyway.... baffled
He is the only person I know of that openly admits that he would be upset if his record was beaten. What's the difference if Ronnie beats it, should have kept playing snooker instead of retiring just because his game deteriorated a bit. He has a strange attitude to be honest. O'Sullivan is in his forties now and is better than ever, and he enjoys the game of snooker, not only the winning part.
I don't think so. He has invested thousands of hours in the game and become very successful and dominating at a time so its only natural to be sentimental towards his own records and unwillingness still, even though not playing, to not be beaten. It's the same attitude he had to win so much when he was playing.
Muzzer27 why would he want to play when his game is deteriorating? He wasn't winning tournaments or getting close. Ronnie is playing as good as ever and still can win tournaments.. hendry wasn't playing to the same level into his forties as ronnie is now..
Hendry was playing at a similar level up until 2008, the difference was that the standard was higher than it was when he was dominating in the 90's, that's why he wasn't top dog no more. Another problem Hendry had was the fact that he was never an all round player, his safety and tactical play were average at best. He was stubborn and didn't adapt his game. That meant top players often got in first before him. Plus there were more top players that could punish his mistakes in the 00's.
@Bach Wagner
Hendry only set those records cause he played against inferior opposition.
Had he turned pro at the same time as the class of 92, he would have won 3 World Titles at best.
@Bach Wagner
Ronnie said that the competition was a bit harder at the top level in the late 90's-early 00's, not in the first half of the 90's. And he was only referring to the top 8 players.
Hendry only won 1 major title from 97 to around 2004.
And I thought American TV editing was ridiculous.
hendry stronger tan ronny? on what morning pushups?
+Martin Peterman Exactly. It's just sad that he doesn't even enjoy the game unless he wins. What a disgrace.
abusiveFIRE why is it a disgrace because he isn't happy playing unless he wins ? He's played at such a high standard for years he knows he should beat 99.9% of the players. There's nothin more demoralising than getting beat by someone who isn't as good as you. Why risk being remembered as a player who didn't know when to stop and kept getting beat when you could finish on a high and be remembered as the greatest player ever. He doesn't need the money. I bet if you ask any top professional in any sport, tiger woods roger federated etc they will say they only like playing when they win. That's what separates the good from the great the competitiveness and hunger to win.
Ps I don't particularly like hendry and he's not even in my top 5 players but you have to respect his winning attitude
@ AbusiveFire, He played for more than 10 years after he stopped winning titles. Hendry loves snooker, breathes snooker, but he is a winner and as a 7 times world champion he didn't wanted to mess around if he couldn't compete anymore at the level he wanted. He still could have made good money continue playing.
i respect him he didn't want to take money if he was not at his best anymore. I guess it depend from your point of view. He knew when to stop instead of getting beaten all the time by players that were not as talented than him.
@ Martin Peterman? Are you serious? Hendry was more stable, emotionally stronger, better match player, the better fighter, more consistent in his prime,... and when he was on top of his game Ronnie couldn;t beat him. Don't mention the Uk Final in 1993 please. Obviously it was during Hendry's rain but he didn't perform at his best the whole event and certainy not during the final...
His mentallity
@@abusiveFIRE, disgrace???? OK how about when ronnie walk out and shake the hand of stephen hendry and said I had enough. Score was 4 - 1 best of 17 games.
Hendry is mentally stronger when at his best. Ronnie crumbled many times. And only got good when he met Steve Peters to sort his mind out
I’m stronger than Ronnie also. Does he even lift?
11:40 no need to thank me
Ronnie is the best ever !!!
He might stronger than Ronnie, in title records. More stabilized, yes. But he can't deny that Ronnie is more talented than him, with better cue ball control, positional skill, and most of all for audience, much more fun to watch!
But in the end, he only admitted that Ronnie's a little bit faster than him, what a shame! (Let alone it's not just "a little bit"faster in fact)
I don't think he would deny Ronnie is more talented. Osullivan and hendrys cue ball control was similar. There is something about watching someone who can handle the mental pressure and has a will to win which is exciting too. Hendry had that in spades over osullivan when it came close eg 2002 semi final of worlds, but I don't think the same thing could have been said for osullivan when both were playing similar standard as in 2002. The test of a really good snooker player comes down to mental ability to handle pressure but produce same technique or become more and not less aggressive. Hendry had that over osullivan.
Criss Chang Ronnie is more naturally talented and a much more exciting player to watch. Hendry isn’t there to excite anyone though. He’s just there to let everyone know he’s the best player to ever play the game.
I never knew Stephen Hendry could understand Chinese
2:11 Dai ga hao watch me win 😀
hendry was unbeatable on his day so is ronnie hard to pick
+Kelly Doyle Hendry during a time of weaker, less attacking and less consistent snooker
+IFranchisedI good point but irrelevant relevant. Hendry was attacking by nature and only needed one chance to win a frame. He was also reknowned for being ice cool under pressure - hence level of competition doesn't matter. Hendry beat O sullivan twice - when ronnie was at his peak/close to his peak and ironically Hendry was on his way down.
Geena 1980 marc is right. Ronnie didn’t start utilising his safety game until 2004 onwards- most people would regard that as prime o sullivan. Yes he played well in 1999, but he hadn’t peaked. He won his first worlds in 2001 not 2002. ‘Hendry should of won 8...’ yeah well he didn’t. If deserves has anything to do with it, White should have beaten him. So by rights he should be on 6. Most experts in the game has stated Ronnie could have won 10 worlds if he was as mentally strong as Hendry. Hendry is bested by O sullivan in every relevant winning dpt aside from world championship wins, and mental fortitude. I love Hendry, but Ronnie is the superior player. My guess is that if Ronnie gets to 6 that would cement it for most.
Hendry take the world championship 7 times in 9 years .
for me his better but he was playing slower then the rocket .
[$-#- $- $- $- $-$- #- $]
Would've loved to see Hendry play in this day and age. He'd be a good player, but probably only top 5.
People onnabout Hendry ect.. but realistically.. he's only won in one decade...?
What a ignorant comment only one decade?? How many player now in ur strong Era could dominate one decade and with 8 world titles and other feats? Jude Trumph lost to a weak player nigel bond from the weak Era, Neil robertson got trash by a novice zhang xintong, same gose to ding, mark got wack by a weak player, hmmm so much for the strong Era player. Not so impressive I guess.
Haha, nice speculation on Ding maybe having 'woman troubles'
hasbeen
There's no doubt that hendry is the stronger of the 2, not taking anything away from ronnie he is a very good player too.
err... no.
great great payer. but ronnie is better
liar
What?