10 grand ?? Pah !

It transpires The Great One aka ROS turned down the opportunity of a 147 break because it carried a mere £10000 earner. Immediate thoughts spring to mind. Namely....
1) O'Sullivan is arrogant & spoilt beyond comprehension having turned professional at 16 and earning multi-millions in the process without having done a day's work in his life
2) O'Sullivan has decided to do his adoring public ( the ones who have lined his pockets with the afore-mentioned millions ) a huge disservice ( in particular the paying audience) by depriving them of what they'd love to see. Who gives a damn whether it's been done over 100 times in Pro events over the years. It's still a magical moment. Especially when seen live.
3) O'Sullivan has decided to laugh in the face of the majority of the working population for whom the sum of money on offer would represent the best part of 6 months' income.    
4) O'Sullivan is too stupid/stubborn (delete where necessary) to realise that the money on offer was a BONUS and over-and-above the £60k he'd be expecting to pick up for his week's 'work'.No extra effort was needed from him to pocket the cash as a 146 break still needs the same number of balls potted as a 147.
I could see the point if he turned down an invite to a 2-day tourney that carried a £10k first prize that involved (naturally enough) an overnight stay and ( let's say ) a 500 mile round journey. By the time his flunkies as well as George Osbourne, Betty the landlady & the Esso garage got their slice he might feel there'd barely be enough left to heat his swimming pool for a fortnight so that's fair enough but the Welsh money ?? That was a BONUS. Comprende, Ronnie ??
5) O'Sullivan probably feels that the £10k on offer is little more than Chump Change because many, many moons ago he trousered 167 Big Ones for the 5 and a half minutes of genius he made in full view of Mick Price. It's important for O'Sullivan to realise that the days of 6 figure bonuses for maximums are all but gone.

Granted, £10k for him amounts to little more than a couple of nights exhibition 'work' but if he felt contemptible with such a 'piddly' sum he could easily have done a couple of wild and crazy things instead of going for a 146. Namely 1) Go for the 147 and 2) Take the bonus money being offered and give it to a charitable cause. Just some food for thought, Ronnie, before the next 147 opportunity comes your way and you decide to let ego get in the way of a constructive idea ( assuming the money on offer isn't worthy of your efforts ).    

Ronnie, we're all aware that you probably see yourself as a bit of a 'maverick' and one of the game's few real 'characters' but a few words of advice in your shell-like which could be seen as especially invaluable as you recently turned 40.
Namely : 1) Wake up
             2) Smell the coffee
             3) Get a grip
             4) Grow up.

He's played a masterstroke. He's propelled snooker right back to the forefront of sports news a few months out from the World Championship. The casual fan will be delighted.

Great publicity. That was always the aim.

Never understood the love for the spoilt brat...

Never done anything other than pee on snooker...

No class.

Snooker isn't a mainstream sport, it's comparable to Darts & its financial rewards. A nine-dart finish in the WDC 2016 is worth £15k. A 147 break is the maximum achievement possible from a single frame & a nine-dart finish is the best possible feat, from a single leg of darts. This was the Welsh Open, not the World Championships, so expecting to be paid more than £10k is pretty ridiculous. Ronnie is a legend of the game, unbelievably talented, but he can be an idiot & this is just another example. Move on.

Don't see what all the fuss is about really. He didn't make the 147 and didn't get paid for it. His choice. Don't see that he is obliged to do it.

Get over it.

A bigger issue and one that will be ignored is Mark Allen arguing with the referee over a clear foul.

O'Sullivan is under no obligation to go for a 147 and it's not as if he's thrown away the £10k, it was still there to be won and was in fact a rolling prize.

Have to admire this guy.....Plays only when he wants and when he does he beats everybody...

Whatever one thinks of his juvenile behaviour...Awesome talent..

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Have to admire this guy.....Plays only when he wants and when he does he beats everybody...

Whatever one thinks of his juvenile behaviour...Awesome talent..

Yes. How did he do in the World Grand Prix again?

Spot on Stuart.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/snooker/36013667

CaledonianCraig wrote:Spot on Stuart.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/snooker/36013667

"Ronnie is the best player to ever pick up a cue."

Damn right.

Duty281 wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:Spot on Stuart.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/snooker/36013667

"Ronnie is the best player to ever pick up a cue."

Damn right.

But a mental midget compared to messrs Davis and Hendry PLUS has never ruled snooker like they did as in won several back-to-back titles. Titles count not ego sizes.

Talent also counts as does entertainment, the three of them are very different players and would happily have any of them down as the greatest on any given day.

Hammersmith harrier wrote:Talent also counts as does entertainment, the three of them are very different players and would happily have any of them down as the greatest on any given day.

Of course. But to try to claim someone as the greatest who doesn't have the greatest stats has big flaws in the argument. The other point is that Ronnie was never even dominant in an era when folks try to downplay Hendry's achievements by painting snooker as being weaker then.

It doesn't work like that for me, for much of his career he had Hendry, Higgins, Williams, Doherty, Ebdon and a few others to contend with whilst not meaning to downplay Hendry the bulk of his success came against White.

Hammersmith harrier wrote:It doesn't work like that for me, for much of his career he had Hendry, Higgins, Williams, Doherty, Ebdon and a few others to contend with whilst not meaning to downplay Hendry the bulk of his success came against White.

Eh Ronnie was playing in the 90s as well as was Williams, Doherty and Ebdon.

The three of them were predominantly at the peak of their powers in the late 90's and early 00's by which time Hendry was no longer dominant, they played during the early 90's but weren't the players they would become.

Hammersmith harrier wrote:The three of them were predominantly at the peak of their powers in the late 90's and early 00's  by which time Hendry was no longer dominant, they played during the early 90's but weren't the players they would become.

That doesn't wash with me. Ronnie won two UK titles and a Masters in the mid to late 90s. His first world title only came though when Hendry was on the decline.

That's like saying Hendry's first world title only came when Davis was on the decline, it would be hard to argue that O'Sullivan in the early to mid 90's was at his best.

Hammersmith harrier wrote:That's like saying Hendry's first world title only came when Davis was on the decline, it would be hard to argue that O'Sullivan in the early to mid 90's was at his best.

Hendry's first world title came at his fifth attempt and Ronnie's came at his ninth attempt. Yes players peak and dip at different ages - I say that if you want to lump terms like greatest ever on a player they must back that up with periods of domination and Ronnie has longevity but no domination spells a la Davis and Hendry had. It tells me that mentally he isn't in the same category - talent-wise he probably exceeds them. However, measuring greatness is about the complete package and that includes the mental department.

CaledonianCraig wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:Spot on Stuart.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/snooker/36013667

"Ronnie is the best player to ever pick up a cue."

Damn right.

But a mental midget compared to messrs Davis and Hendry PLUS has never ruled snooker like they did as in won several back-to-back titles. Titles count not ego sizes.

'Mental midget'? That's a charming phrase for someone who suffers from clinical depression.

Clinical depression/mood swings/mental midget - call it what you will but lacking in areas where Davis/Hendry/Reardon/J.Higgins were all substantially better. O'Sullivan most naturally gifted and do believe I have said it before but I am talking whole package here.

Got to say that is a pretty disgraceful thing to say.

Hammersmith harrier wrote:Got to say that is a pretty disgraceful thing to say.

If it is a lie then I take it back but feel free to try to prove otherwise. I want people to explsin why this GOAT has had longer longevity in the sport at the top than Davis and Hendry yet has a poorer return on world titles? H e has the talent but not the world titles. Why?

And clinical depression does not negate other mental frailties. As I understand it clinical depression comes in peaks and troughs where you have spells of times of mental highs and mental lows so at times of mental highs when he has evidently had good runs at The Crucible reaching semis and finals and lost what is the explanation there?

Some people just have no class.

Hammersmith harrier wrote:Some people just have no class.

Yes I agree just look at Ronnie's transgressions.

CaledonianCraig wrote:And clinical depression does not negate other mental frailties. As I understand it clinical depression comes in peaks and troughs where you have spells of times of mental highs and mental lows so at times of mental highs when he has evidently had good runs at The Crucible reaching semis and finals and lost what is the explanation there?

Clinical depression is persistent and lasts for weeks/months.

Experiencing highs and lows in quick succession is more commonly associated with bipolar disorder.

Duty281 wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:And clinical depression does not negate other mental frailties. As I understand it clinical depression comes in peaks and troughs where you have spells of times of mental highs and mental lows so at times of mental highs when he has evidently had good runs at The Crucible reaching semis and finals and lost what is the explanation there?

Clinical depression is persistent and lasts for weeks/months.

Experiencing highs and lows in quick succession is more commonly associated with bipolar disorder.

Ah right so when Ronnie wins he is fine but when he loses it is clinical depression. Very convenient. And besides if it is so debilitating then it hasn't affecting him getting to QF's, SF's and Finals at The Crucible where he has lost but I suppose that is where the clinical depression clicks in again.

You're a bit brainless aren't you.

Hammersmith harrier wrote:You're a bit brainless aren't you.

And Ronnie fans are a bit delusional if they want to put his world title count down to solely clinical depression. In that case can I make a claim for Frank Bruno being the greatest heavyweight ever as he has been riddled with the same. Can we also give Alex Higgins a dorme World title count of three or four due to his mental issues. Really we could go on about this all day.

Just to clarify that I have never heard Ronnie himself ever use his 'condition' as an excuse for not winning world titles so I don't see why his fans should try doing it. If he surpasses Hendry's seven world titles he becomes GOAT but until then he is a contender to that title that Hendry holds.

Your naivety in thinking it's not an issue is pretty pathetic.

Hammersmith harrier wrote:Your naivety in thinking it's not an issue is pretty pathetic.

If you honestly wish to believe that Ronnie's mental disorder has robbed him of world titles then I despair I really do. I call it straw-clutching by his fans alone and a disservice to the snooker players who have beaten him fair and square. Heck the commentators are all over Ronnie and even they daren't say he has been cheated out of world titles due to clinical depression.

Despair all you want I couldn't give a toss for the opinion of a mental health denier.

And you can look at it in other ways as well. Whereas the lion's share of players in the history of snooker have had to take the tough schedules and enter all the ranking tournaments and suffer mental burn-out Ronnie has been given special treatment and has picked and chosen what he has entered leaving him more mentally fresh for The Crucible so that is advantageous to him.

Give it up you simply don't have a clue what you're talking about.

Hammersmith harrier wrote:Despair all you want I couldn't give a toss for the opinion of a mental health denier.

Who is denying it? I am denying it has any affect on how many world titles he has won.

Hammersmith harrier wrote:Give it up you simply don't have a clue what you're talking about.

And you do I suppose? I have aired my opinion now can you go on and tell me why Ronnie has five world titles and not more if he is GOAT as some claim?