SUBSCRIBE for the biggest and best videos from the only official World Snooker channel on RU-vid Website: www.wst.tv Twitter: @WeAreWST Facebook: /WorldSnookerTour Instagram: @WorldSnookerTour
@Wayne Holmes H2H lol. Ronnie didn’t beat Hendry often at his peak. No one was as consistent as Hendry including Ronnie. Hendry has the highest win rate at the crucible, youngest World champion, Triple crown titles back to back(still only player to do so), 5 Masters, 5 WC’s in a row. Ronnie only has 2WC’s consecutively. It took Hendry 9 years to win 7 WC’s, it’s took Ronnie 20 years to win 6. Hendry would have many more Ranking titles if they were available, fact. Hendry also got a 147 against Ronnie in a final, which must really irk Ronnie.
Hendry didnt face peak Ronnie, Higgins, Williams, Robertson, Selby and Trump. Dont tell me the players back then were better. Davis and Jimmy (when not stoned) only.
I remember this .... I was so mad with myself because I went out thinking hendry couldn't win..shows what a champion he really was . Cool as a cucumber
Hallett was 7-0 and 8-2 up yet still lost 9-8, he says this hurt way more than losing 9-0 to Davis three years earlier. Hallett's career never fully recovered from this, one of the biggest chokes in snooker history
Tbh, being a JW fan I didn't want to admire Hendry, but in the end I had no choice. So many difficult clearances made under pressure and in the end, you have no choice but to raise your hand. Like 58 behind with 4 reds left, two of which were on the cushion, half the colours safe and he'd clear it. Snooker is a game played in the head and Hendry was the best of his time.
He was 7-0 up and crumpled. Poor fella got home and his house had also been burgled. Day from hell. He was a very good player for a few years. Think this defeat destroyed him.
@@rickagfoster his highest break in his first world championship win was 82 he was nowhere near his prime he was just lucky his competition wasn't up to much in the early 90s
I remember this final. I've met Mike, he's a lovely chap. Hendry was just class but the way he won that last frame was horrific. Mike deserved the title and Hendry fluked the last frame on numerous shots. Hendry always says in the commentary of today's matches that games shouldn't be won in fluke fashion but he forgets times of his own like these.
You only deserve to win at that level if you do not make any mistakes. Cliff Thorborn once told me that as a professional, if you make 2 mistakes you should lose. Mike made a few.
Stephen Hendry never made that comment, he simply said that it was cruel to lose a final due to a fluke and he had Mike Hallett in mind when he said it.
Hallet took it up the bum in that final frame. It would have been hilarious if Hendry had fluked the brown as well. Hallets face sure would have been a sight to behold!🤣
Hallett blew that match big time... 2 flukes in final frame as well for Hendry.. great player he was but this game was just run of the ball.. and a under hit Blue to pink for Hallett to clear up and win 9-2 if I remember..
I remember Hallett's "Has anyone got a rope?" comment but it's only due to seeing the full game on here that I heard Clive Everton's comments afterwards that make me wince. I mean Clive wasn't wrong but it was pretty chilling all the same. This game was probably Hendry at his weakest but he had the will and resolve of iron. Phenomenal game.
It was a cruel way for Mike Hallett to lose, he didn't get the run of the balls in the decider, but there was nothing unlucky about some of the chances he missed earlier when the winning post loomed, especially at 8-2 and 8-7 ahead. It reminds me of the old sayings along the lines of "when you don't take your chances, the balls don't forgive you". I think of the 1991 Masters as more Mike Hallett bottling it than Stephen Hendry making a great comeback. But while Stephen often gets criticised for not having much of a plan B, it's often forgotten that in the 1990s he often put so much psychological pressure on his opponents that he could come back like this even when he wasn't at his best. Mike would probably have got over the line against any other player that year.
Ronnie is my favourite player of all time, his natural talent and genius is unmatched on the green baize but there's no arguing that Hendry, back in his day, was the most consistent and well rounded snooker player, even Ronnie was never this consistent or as well rounded.
But Ronnie is still at the peak of his game at 46 and winning world titles, hendry won his last major title at 29 years of age. Ronnie has natural talent and hendry was a machine for 10 years and after that he declined. Ronnie been a pro for 30 years and he’s still super accurate
@@smokinjoe8909 The funny thing is, Ronnie is way past his peak, but he's just that good, and the competition is that poor, that he keeps winning big titles. The likes of him, Hendry, Mark Williams, John Higgins etc. haven't been replicated since. The only newer players that have turned heads, in my opinion anyways, are Selby and Trump.
@@smokinjoe8909 to add to this, it would seem that Snooker is a declining sport. How many great talents are coming through? None... I think this can be attributed to the fact that there are far less snooker clubs than the days of old, and wherever there are clubs, the prices are too high to play and to play seriously.
The standard in the early 90s was terrible Hendry was great but he dominated a very poor era. The highest break he had in this match was 60 it was one of the poorest finals ever regards standard. The highest break when he won his first world final was 82. When Ronnie was in his early 20s the standard had went up 10 fold any one of the class of 92 would've destroyed the early 90s like Hendry did. Hendry only won one more triple Crown event once the class of 92 hit 21 years old.