O'Sullivans Latest Interview!

The Golden Miller

Right, generally I take nothing of what he says seriously, but he made a comment that did annoy me. Whinging that he's playing so poor, he'll be lucky to be in the top 16 in 2/3 years. The implication is, he expects to be if he's playing well, that's his arrogance, but what players of his age were in the top 16, ever? On top of that, he knows very well he will be in the top 16, if he chooses to be, as the standard is so poor, again, patronising the field!

I've always had a bit of a gripe with O'Sullivan, and I don't know how many people agree. People fall over themselves hailing him as the greatest natural player ever, but for me, a testament to that title is who's the "greatest single ball potter" ever. And by a distance, that's Mark Williams and Alex Higgins. I don't think O'Sullivan, has pulled off the impossible shots they did, with anything close to the regularity they did. You put your life on one man to pull off an impossible shot, an eye for that shot, and your picking Williams and Higgins over him everyday. Thats raw talent for me.

After cica 05, when Williams stopped practising, Hunter passed away, Hendy declined, Stevens regressed, Doherty declined etc, he's had a bit of an open field. As did John Higgins. The success both had, I don't think would of happened had the standard in general been higher. Before people start saying there's more centuries now than ever, Mark Williams makes more centuries than he did in his prime, yet a shadow of the player he was. That's external factors, the quality in talent has defintely dropped.

O'Sullivan has beaten Dott, Carter, Hawkins etc in finals since, that's a joke, foregone conclusions. No where near the standard he had to face up to 05. The only player to come through, genuinely up to the level of the top guys in the early 00's, is Selby. And he has personal issues, leading to huge inconsistency, one season to the next.

I think O'Sullivan is blessed with the record he actually has (many people actually believe he should have won more), due to being a fluid player, and extending his level. If he regularly had to face the competion he did up to 05, he's not winning half of what he did. Even Higgins went from 1 world title to 4 without breaking a sweat, such was the lack of talent.

It's telling that Mark Williams can half refocus for about a month, and for the first time in 12 years, put a bit of daily practice in, and canter to a world title. Imagine Hendry in his prime facing Carter, Dott or Hawkins etc in finals, he'd curbstomp them. O'Sullivan grew up in a priviledge position imo, and continues to have one, being hailed as the most naturally gifted ever and being fortunate to win what he has with, at times, the appalling standard he faces. Yet continues to patronise the field and fans, the guy is a joke imo!

satguy

Never liked him..

He has a nasty streak about him,, it just puts me off him.

The Golden Miller

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122587476#Comment_122587476

Alex Higgins had a "nasty streak" but was still likeable. He was a "working class hero". Ronnie has a smug patronising attitude, the sort you get off the same people in the likes of Dalky, entitlement. His father used to pay Ken to practice with him as a teenager.

But because he father was locked up, the assumtpion was he was working class, the new peoples champion, and he's lived off that since. In reality, a posh entitled toff! When he loses, "didn't care anyway", to take the good from his opponents win. That's how bitter he is, and can't accept losing.

Doherty even said, he practised harder than anyone, and does. This "not caring anyway", is a defense mechanism, to soften the fact he can't accept losing.

Mark Williams doesn't play up to this, he actually doesn't practise, and when he casually does, wins a world title. Thats the difference people don't realise.

Williams has an innate ability to consistently pot shots O'Sullivan can't. Alex Higgins had it too

The Golden Miller

There's a perception that O'Sullivan has an innate ability no one else had. He does to a point, in how fluid he is, can pot with both hands. That's an innate ability from a technical stand point. People rarely make the distinction between an innate fluid ability technically, and that of having an innate ability to pot an impossible shot. O'Sullivan simply doesn't have the razor sharp eye Mark Williams or Alex Higgins did.

In the world final where Williams beat Higgins, Williams pulled off more "impossible" shots in that match alone, than Ronnie did all season. Ronnie simply doesn't have that ability, to that level. Thats before you get into Williams' matches against Hawkins etc, some of the pots the man regularly pots are simply mind boggling.

And Alex Higgins is a level up again from Williams, in terms of innate ability. People put him down for lack of centuries, didn't win enough etc. These people simply didn't watch him. He cued wrong, learned how to play wrong, did everything wrong, and was drunk, impatient. Had no control on the cueball. An absolute disaster from every technical standpoint. Spent every frame trying to "rescure the situation".

But if you watch him play, therein lay his brilliance. His whole game was built on "rescueing the situation" from one shot to the next. Every ball he potted was ridiculous, such were the situations he got himself into with the cueball and positional play. For people that doubt his talent, watch any frame he plays, and the shots he has to pull out of the bag to keep a basic break going.

Ye he didn't utilise his game, and the fact he struggled with basic breaks can be held against him, but thats what true innate ability really is. Alex Higgins' whole career was about shooting himself in the foot, and anything he won, was in spite of himself, constantly having to pull it out of the bag. But the fact he did win what he did, with the lowest percentage game ever played is actually staggering. It was so low percentage, one frame you'll watch him win on youtube, contains more impossible shots than many players would pull off in a season. And that's not even joking.

If he wasn't an addict and was shown how to play right in the first place, he was a once in a century talent. He had the innate ability we now laud on O'Sullivan. O'Sullivan simply wouldn't have potted a fraction of the shots Higgins pulled off every frame. For how bad Higgins was positionally, how he stood and cued wrong, how he was constantly drunk, and for every other way he handicapped himself, despite all this, he was still an absolute potting machine. His career was built on potting shots no one else before or since could pot regularly.

In an era of "statistics", looking back on his career (which seems relatively poor now), people don't understand that about him. He consistently did, what no one else ever had the ability to do, pretty much every frame he won. Simply put, no one to this day, could pot balls like him. Imagine he grew up being shown how to play the game right, and was sober!

gormdubhgorm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122587481#Comment_122587481

Ronnie never battered women or head butted officials etc etc. Or threaten to have an opponent (Dennis Taylor) shot by paramilitaries I certainly would not call Alex Higgins likeable. You are correct that Ronnie is no "working class lad" that annoys the hell out of Shaun Murphy. As he is painted as the "posh boy" by Ronnie and most of his fans, just because he speaks well. When the reality is a lot different.

However, you have to factor Ronnie's parents were "new money" given the industry they were in and their background, they will always have an edge. You can't buy class.

As for Ronnie's comments the fella clearly is riddled with all sorts of mental disorders, bipolar on "the spectrum" or whatever the phrase is. He is never going to be right in head. Which is why he comes out with these dopey/odd interviews.

Personally I think the fella is definitely the best of all time snooker wise (for longevity alone, nevermind the fact he reinvented himself and his game) but it is pointless to really take to heart anything he says off the table. He is an oddball.

His background and upbringing have to have a lot to do with it. He has tried to fix himself at least, and he was not as bad as he was. So he deserves some credit for that how he reinvented himself.

However, there is always going to be that up and down thing with Ronnie to some extent. Has to be his condition/conditions. Likely formed by his dysfunctional family background, and having underlying issues added to that.

The Golden Miller

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122590885#Comment_122590885

Do you really think he could consistently pot the outrageous pots Higgins did every frame to save himself? I actually don't think he could.

I get that he wouldn't be in the position in the first place, but if we're to accept Alex wouldn't be either, without being handicapped in everyway possible if he was sober and showed how to play right as a youngster, do you really think O'Sullivan could build a career on potting the impossible.

People don't understand, Higgins handicapped himself to the point, his innate ability to pot impossible shots was so good, it offset all those handicaps to a point. By rights, Higgins shouldn't of won anything, and I don't think any other player would under the same conditions!

drury..

Alex higgins likeable. I've heard it all now😁

Sure didn't they all get handy world titles, davis and hendry. There's usually a mug in the final

Don't know what the rest of its about. The best player is the best potter ?

fplfan12345

Ronnie ‘anyone wanna give me a nosh’ O Sullivan.

Despicable baby. That’s how he’s always come across.

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2008/mar/27/snooker.davidhendon

drury..

Hardly news that O'Sullivan isn't the most likeable either

Is snooker a personality contest or a sporting contest

The Golden Miller

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122593446#Comment_122593446

He's likeable in the sense he's a working class fan favorite. Black b*stard though id call him. But he was such a fan favorite, not because of his antics, but what he could do.

In an era of stats, people just look up his century record and dismiss him. If you seen him play, then you understand. That guy's career was built on swimming against the tide, rescuing that impossible, that he often did.

The balls he potted, and the consistency he potted them, those impossible shots, is unmatched.

His career was about offsetting all his disadvantages

drury..

He off set his poor positional play with the fancy pots

He won some big matches and beat the best

gormdubhgorm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122593431#Comment_122593431

The key thing is though Ronnie's positional play meant he rarely if ever has to pot outrageous shots time and again.

That is why I will never rate that Alex Higgins 60 plus break fellas like White eulogises over from the 1982 WC. It actually annoys me watching that break it is sort of comedically so bad it is good.

My logic is why put yourself under that much pressure on each shot. That type of play does not bring consistency. And that is what you need to have longevity and consistent success in the game.

I think O'Sullivan could go for hail mary shots if got out of position, but let's be honest he rarely loses the cueball. And if he does it is a shock moment type thing.

It is actually funny how annoyed O'Sullivan gets with himself if his positional play is not spot on at times.

It was one of those Eurosport commentators had a great paraphrased quote from Ray Reardon today "The most important ball on a snooker table is the white ball, learn to control that and you control the game".

Sure Alex Higgins could not control himself, never mind the white ball! As he said himself he could not help himself wanting to "entertain" the crowd. basically showing off for the sake of it.

Yeah I know Ronnie can be a complete arse, but from his perspective he cannot get his head around why others do not have the same cueball control as he does. And he is baffled that he is STILL around at his age dominating.

I get the impression with O'Sullivan deep down beneath all the silly interviews, is that he feels owes it to snooker and to himself to keep going. That's the vibe I get. He is waiting for the next 20 year old prodigy to take over, and is shocked it has not happened yet. So he stays going.

drury..

The impressive thing about O'Sullivan was the way he got the head down over the years and didn't throw it all away

Higgins had quite a few great moments but he's not in the goat discussion

Neither particularly nice people if it matters

The Golden Miller

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122593607#Comment_122593607

The thing is though, if Higgins was taught growing up, how to play right technically, how good was he potentially. And without drink. The mad thing about Higgins is, even at his "prime", he was operating at a shadow of the level he potentially could. No one has ever actually seen Alex Higgins play right or anywhere near his potential.

Add alcohol into the mix, it led to huge impatience with the cueball, and the more he drank over a long game, got progressively worse.

Dunno how true this is, but I've read that in the lead up to the 82 final he didn't drink as much and actually practiced, as he broke down crying, looking at his toddler daughter up on a stool trying to pot balls. Basically the first, and only tournament, he half practiced for and took serious, he won, and backed himself heavily to win it too he was that confident.

I still don't think any player, could pot outrageous shots, consistently the way he did, regardless of whether they should or shouldn't have been in that position in the first place. It was actually phenomenal the pots he was regularly pulling off every frame to offset every handicap he gave himself.

To put it into context, and this is actually no exaggeration, he was pulling off Mark Williams or Ronnie O'Sullivans best shots highlight reel, every match to just keep himself competitive.

You never felt he had the situation under control, always rescuing the situation, but I mean the pots he so regularly pulled out of the bag to make a basic 64 break was actually incredible.

His detractors have to give him that at least, his ability to pot out of this world shots, consistently. Just watch any old match he plays on YouTube, it's amazing

The Golden Miller

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122593607#Comment_122593607

And the reality is with O'Sullivan practices harder than anyone, Doherty would tell you that. It's why he doesn't like Williams, the attitude he tries to portray of not practicing, not caring about records, is exactly Williams' attitude. He wants to be like Williams in that regard, but isn't, and over compensates. It's why he's never liked him.

He likes to be seen as the tortured genius, but again, the man who actually doesn't practice and continues to pull off mercurial unorthodox shots, is Williams. Williams is actually the more naturally talented potter of the two.

If Williams actually applied himself after circa 2005, he may have won more than 7 world titles. It's like what Becker said about Sampras, he didn't like him, cause on his best day, he wasn't as good as Sampras on his best day

O'Sullivan believes to himself, deep down, on his best day is better than anyone else, including Henry. The only exception is Williams. He genuinely believes, that on his best day, he may not be good enough to beat Mark on his best day. That's why there's always been that needle between the two, well it only goes one way in fairness, Mark doesn't actually care.

And I don't think many Ronnie fans would be that confident either. Mark in his prime didn't miss, was a robot. O'Sullivan at his best doesn't either. What would separate them is who could get in first every frame. The hard reality is that's Mark, he can consistently output Ronnie, on ridiculous reds no one else would even think of taking on, and get them more often than not.

Mark in his prime is simply the best player ever, the most talented actually, but didn't practice after 05, and only casually does now. The only other man who was potentially better, in terms of potting, was Higgins. O'Sullivan for me is third as the most talented ever, and second to Hendry as being the best ever.

O'Sullivan knows this himself, particularly in relation to Mark. At his very best, he doesn't fancy himself against Mark at his very best. It's actually why their hth is so lobsided, he puts everything into beating Mark, even when Mark was rubbish, to try and prove to himself he's better. But he doesn't really believe it, it's clear to see!

The Golden Miller

And I'll just post one more message about Alex Higgins that people retroactively fail to take into account, and consider.

He's a lifelong alcoholic, that rarely played a professional game sober. And became more intoxicated as matches went on. What other player could do that, to a point, successfully?

He was never shown how to play properly, and refused help and coaching in any meaningful way. Again he spent his whole career playing wrong.

And to further handicap himself, the minute he got a bit of money, the practice went out the window. Hardly practiced a day in his life after that.

Yet still had a relatively successful career, as his talent was so great, could often offset that. But when you really consider it, what players could achieve what he did, playing wrong, refusing coaching, not practicing and being heavily intoxicated every match?

I genuinely don't think anyone end could. And the pots he was still pulling out of the bag, were on a different sphere to what most other players could pot consistently.

It's actually staggering the man managed to win the world title in 82, seeing as how low percentage and handicapped every facet of his game was. He was carried by a raw and innate talent I genuinely don't believe even O'Sullivan carries. It's actually baffling the more you weigh it up.

The pots the man was regularly pulling off were genuinely ridiculous, but became standard and expected from him, such were the holes he had to pull himself out of! No other player could succeed playing under the same set of handicaps in any match, let alone have to do it in every match

Rocket_GD

This whole thread is just the OP screaming into and echo chamber that he loves Alex Higgins and doesn't like Ronnie O'Sullivan.

gormdubhgorm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122599443#Comment_122599443

Higgins according to Jimmy White - played better when drunk.

Basically in summary Alex Higgins never changed = zero consistency. You obviously prefer the myth and aura of Higgins. But to me he was a bit of clown to put it mildly. Even O’Sullivan and Williams changed their lifestyle and game.
OK O’Sullivan does silly interviews but the man is a professional. Higgins was more of a circus act who used to blame everything and everyone before himself.

drury..

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122600003#Comment_122600003

You're the poster who previously stated that Higgins was a novelty act

The truth lies somewhere in between the 2 views here

drury..

Higgins beat the best on his day. UK and Worlds .

His game was limited by poor positional play and tactics etc.

He was what he was but he was no circus act

That's doing him a disservice

The Golden Miller

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122600003#Comment_122600003

Well you say Williams changed his lifestyle and game. He did, he went to giving up practicing full time after 05. Since around winning the world title lately, he casually practices. You say it like he consciously put huge effort into evolving and improving his game. Hes hardly tried a leg since 05

The Golden Miller

I often reckon I play pool better after a few pints. At that level it's not the case. White being facetious, just to underscore how talented the man was.

Even if it was the case, it would also depend. He clearly went over that apex of where you could say he was better regularly, and was scuttered, particularly in the longer matches.

And even if you could argue his potting was better drunk, it clearly led to impatience with the cueball position and tactical play, that will cost you countless games per match. Thats where I was really highlighting the handicap lay in being intoxicated!

I see the man's shortcomings but it's not the myth I rate him on. Ive seen the pots with my own eyes, he regularly pulled off every frame, that I've never seen another man do to that level. It was incredible.

Ye it was always last ditch stuff rescuing the situation, but the pots the man was regularly putting in, every frame, was simply baffling!

The Golden Miller

Nah Higgins was a prod haha. But I think people retroactively dismiss him, it's all about stats now

gormdubhgorm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122600842#Comment_122600842

I think Higgins still was a novelty act. Although I changed my opinion slightly and ended up with “talented novelty act” . The top lads who win consistently are professional. What did Higgins do between 72 and 82? That was supposed to be Alex the hurricane at his peak. Yet Reardon and Spencer dominated. Plus let’s be honest. Higgins was blessed that Davis was knocked out early in 82. And faced an over the hill Reardon in the final.

At least the top draw ambassador of the game Ronnie O’Sullivan treats snooker very seriously. Higgins rarely did.

Ronnie is a top pro not only on ability but in attitude ON the table.And only for O’Sullivan many casual watchers would not bother watching snooker at all. When Higgins was briefly top dog he literally and metaphorically pissed it away not once, but twice.

The Golden Miller

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122603350#Comment_122603350

I think if Davis met Higgins in the 82 World Championships, it was one match Higgins would of blown him away. He was on a mission that tourament, so his daughter had one example of him playing sober, practising and with his head in the game, to show what he was capable off. To prove it to himself, her and the public. Jimmy is often seen as one of the first modern day, heavy break builders, Alex could live with him.

When you know Alex had blown most of his money, yet puts most of what he had left on himself to win, he meant business. There was no one beating him that tournament. You pushed him to the edge, he responded by pulling off ridiculous shots.

Generally he couldn't hack Davis tactically, dragging the game down, and would get progessively more impatient, intoxicated and erratic, leaving Davis easy clear ups every frame. But in 82, he was on the ball. Couldn't see Davis getting close to that Alex.

Just look at the interview match he played with John Virgo on Youtube, and the pink and black he potted. He called both, and black into the middle was one handed. Most other players would pot either shot 1/2 times in 10. He called both and knocked both it, like it was nothing. Thats simply outrageous talent

The Golden Miller

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122603350#Comment_122603350

I've asked you several times, and you've never really answered. You say O'Sullivan took the game serious, and Higgins didn't. That he's a novelty act. If he did take it serious, was coached properly from the start etc, how great do you think his potential was, going by what you've seen off him?

If he was a model pro, how good do you think he may have been, ability wise? How highly do you rate his ability and talent, had he taken the game serious?

Strumms

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122587476#Comment_122587476

when he just sat back arrogantly slagging off other players… “ id have to lose an arm and a leg to fall out of the top 50 “…was one statement by him I believe…. No player is going to feel motivated by that..

It’s nasty, it’s arrogant, it’s demeaning. And he says he doesn’t care, but if he loses, he doesn’t care apparently right, ohhh he never practices or so he says… very respectful to snooker fans, not. Very respectful to opponents, not. It’s all böllocks anyway as he misses a pot, routinely he slams the butt of the Q off the floor, was doing it this year…Not exactly the actions of someone not caring…

gormdubhgorm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122603399#Comment_122603399

All that is "if's but's and maybe's" the fact is Higgins had not it in his make up to be a dedicated pro.

I remember reading Jimmy White's book where he said he would have won 10 WC's title's if had lived more sensibly - ie not taken the "devil's dandruff" as he called it. But it annoyed me, the fact is White did not have the cop on to live like a dedicated pro in his early days. He has knuckled down now but it is way too late in the day.

That is part of pro top level snooker, no way Hendry would have done as well as he did without "treating it like a job" ie pure dedication. Ian Doyle basically babysat him him making him play in club on his own away from distractions of his friends. While Doyle looked on from his office.

Higgins/White would not have had the application and focus to do that.

In answer to your question, I think Higgins was always destined to implode, it was in his make up. He knew no other way.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122603420#Comment_122603420

I would agree with you it does sound nasty, but given Ronnie's mental disorders/background he is prone to such statements. He can't change that now. I honestly think he is fed up having to carry the torch for snooker as well. Wanting someone new to take over.

Bingtao could have been that guy but whether he was pressured into it or not it was an even worse choice than Stephen Lee. Bingtao had a great chance to be the first Chinese World Champ, setting himself up for life and his descendent's.

There is a lot of truth to what O'Sullivan said though at the same time. As there is no one coming up that is even close to him. If anything O'Sullivan has improved his all round game. There is plenty of times I have seen O'Sullivan make clearances from frames he looked dead and buried in. Where balls were really awkward etc. He used not to be bothered about those frames now he gives it a go

And there is one thing I realised in relation to @the golden miller said no one was better than Higgins for outrageous shots. What I noticed when asked to do recreations of shots O'Sullivan seems to find it fairly easy to get close to/recreate them. He has a natural instinct for a snooker shot.

Having application on top of natural talent, plus various mental disorders. Gets you a 30 year snooker career at highest level, over 1200 centuries, the most world titles of the modern era, and the occasional daft interview.

drury..

The idea that higgins was a novelty act doesn't hold water

You simply can't fluke your way to a UK or World's win

At the same time he was what he was . He was limited by his overall game .

Jimmy White was consistently making world finals and should have won more

The Golden Miller

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122604948#Comment_122604948

Well you say "to answer your question", but again you don't. We're all aware of Alex' handicaps. It's just you keep calling him a novelty act. I'm not asking about "ifs". I'm simply asking, of what you've seen of him, how highly do you rate his natural talent? Do you think he's overrated in that sense, when people say he was possibly the best ever, talent wise?

I get that it's hard to distinguish that, from how he was hardwired to be, but do you not think he had outrageous natural ability? I don't rate him as the best ever either overall, far from it, but I can't say I haven't seen him repeatedly do stuff other players simply couldn't imo, even Mark, Stephen, Steve, Ronnie etc at their best. Some of the obscure unorthodox stuff he was regularly pulling out of the hat was simply baffling.

I guess you could say the paradox of Alex Higgins is that he made an easy routine break look hard, but made the hardest shots look easy.

The Golden Miller

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122604948#Comment_122604948

Just in relation to the recreations of Alex's shot's, yes it may be fairly easy now, when it's just that, recreation shot. No one was pulling them off in competition though. And recreations on modern tables make it easier.

I remember one year during the World Championships on the BBC, they recreated his famous shot on the blue in the studio. Not too hard to pull off now. But they used an older table, heavier cloth and balls, which wasn't as heated as tables now. None of the pro's could successfully pot the ball, and come off the cushion with anywhere close to the required spin to get the position on the following ball. And Alex done it in a scenario where it was no miss snooker, he was out otherwise.

See people like yourself, will say that break is over rated, because it's to hold up the myth of Alex. On modern tables it's doable, to pot the blue and get position. But it wasn't then and under the pressure. No other player could actually pot that blue and get position to this day. The only reason why Alex could, is due to how he naturally struck the ball, and jutted it, creating far more natural stun and spin that anyone else was capable of. There's an irony there, he could only pot it, because his stance was "wrong". And it's often hailed as showing his "genius". It actually had nothing to do with his "genius" in this case, again, simply a result of the akward looking way he naturally cued. Still, no one else to this day, could pull it off. People don't realise that, when they retrospectively call it overrated.

I also think you overstate Ronnie's mental conditions. I simply think he's a product of entitlement, a snob, who was handed everything and can't accept losing. You'll find the same arrogance and ego in many parts of affluent Ireland and UK. He simply looks down on others, and tried to ridicule and belittle them if they are a threat. Like Hendry. Williams is even "one of the lads" who doesn't care, you'd think him and Ronnie would get on, but Ronnie hates him, Willams being who Ronnie wants to be, makes him insecure.