World Championship Snooker

vilkrang wrote:

tac wrote:

vilkrang wrote:

Allan D wrote:

vilkrang wrote:Different game back in the 80s though

Isn't this a bit of a sporting cliche? In what way? Do the balls travel any faster over the baize? Still involves pushing balls with a wooden stick into holes covered with netting. A test of hand-eye co-ordination in any era, I would have thought.

Yes, actually. The standard is also a lot higher today and there are far more professional players around.

I guess you're a Bradman denier as well, vilks . . .

Not at all.

The same argment is used again Bradman, but . . . players are fitter, more professional, genetically superior blah blah blah . . .

I see what you did there.


Fark, imagine if I asked that. Imagine the response - "stupid, f*cking, tosser, don't you know anything?".

Tac: Well, no you clearly don't.

[Gabba Dan]Of course the modern players are better. It's all due to evolution.[/Gabba Dan}

Was Gabba Dan an atheist?

DJ_Smerk wrote:I see what you did there.


Fark, imagine if I asked that. Imagine the response - "stupid, f*cking, tosser, don't you know anything?".

Tac: Well, no you clearly don't.

WTF are you blithering on about now, sheep-boy?

Something or other.

or perhaps nothing . . .

We need some cricket - stat!

tac wrote:

vilkrang wrote:

tac wrote:

vilkrang wrote:

Allan D wrote:

vilkrang wrote:Different game back in the 80s though

Isn't this a bit of a sporting cliche? In what way? Do the balls travel any faster over the baize? Still involves pushing balls with a wooden stick into holes covered with netting. A test of hand-eye co-ordination in any era, I would have thought.

Yes, actually. The standard is also a lot higher today and there are far more professional players around.

I guess you're a Bradman denier as well, vilks . . .

Not at all.

The same argment is used again Bradman, but . . . players are fitter, more professional, genetically superior blah blah blah . . .

Mmm, it's a bit different though. Once someone gets "in" during a frame of snooker then it's totally up to their skill as to how many points they can score, the opponent can't do shit. With cricket there is always the issue of having to respond to your opponent.

Players in snooker are now scoring far more heavily than player in the 1980s did, so much so that I believe I'm right in saying that not a single player from that era holds any scoring records, for either speed or quantity.

But anyway, "Bradman deniers" are fools, if he had an average of 70 odd then they may have some sort of argument but to finish a career with a first class average of 95+ is simply too astonishing and too far ahead of anyone else (both then and now) for any reasonable person to deny his "best batsman ever" tag.

in scoring more heavily, you mean average break or something like it?

Lags was the chief 'Bradman denier'. It kept him happy and periodically stopped him posting all that other guff.

Snooker isn't a patch on billiards. Discuss.

Or buying more cocaine in the back alley outside the tournament.

Better than buying it in a blind alley.

nice google . . .

Cheers.