Stephen Hendry Vs Peter Ebdon - World Snooker Final 2002 4th Session 

he was fored

Yeah it's improved..... Can't beat boring one hit wonder Dennis

RIP yes but his commentary was boring and always repetitive He used to repeat what the other commentator said and spoke a lot of crap

What a mistake in last frame. He deserved 8th world champion title in my eyes on this day. Hendry is my favourite snooker player ever

For me, Stephen Hendry's game started to deteriorate from 97/98 onward and was never quite the tour de force after that. To his credit, he did achieve a record 7th world title in 1999, but his best years were sadly past him. At his peak, what a player he was. In some ways, the standard never really rose past Hendry's absolute best. He was able to create chances to pot an opening red with the white tight on the baulk cushion, he was deadly among the balls and deadly when under pressure, a total winning machine. Some of the greatest comebacks ever seen came at the hands of Stephen Hendry. It's funny how after 2 decades when Stephen Hendry was ruling the roost, memories start to fade at just how great a player he really was.

@@mrghiax Well said.

@@mrghiax, agree somewhat.Think the better level of opposition coming through could make it look like he was deteriorating.As in davis's case when hendry/parrot / came on scene, davis was still a top quality player but hendry and opposition in general was just a bit better to what he had faced before .Similar but probably moreso for hendry as had to deal with likes of williams/ higgins/ osullivan/ hunter /stevens/ ebdon/doherty/mcmanus/ and lee bursting on scene, all players that could beat stephen on the day.

Hendry had to peak earlier in the championship than be would normally have had to in the 1990's against Doherty and then O'Sullivan just to make it to the final, then when it got to the final having psyched himself up so much he didn't have it in him to fire on all cyllinders from the off. It was never going to be something like Hendry 6-2 or 7-1 after the first session. I would say that Ebdon played too well at the same time to allow Hendry to catch a flyer.. A first visit century clearance in the 35th to rescue the title wasn't in him either. But still, it went to the 35th.,

So he was not always a negative defensive player to try to stop the opponent rather than going for it after all. But he got the reputation of being a negative player trying to stop the opponent after the O'Sullivan match in 2005 where him using such tactics happened to be successful.

I'm really glad you said that because so many times, on hearing all the jokes and comments made about his play, I've thought to myself that I was sure he didn't play like that back in his earlier years. I assumed that I must have just misremembered.

@@Vortigan07 Thanks so much for your feedback!

@@Vortigan07 Without losing the last 3 frames at the end of day 1 in 1996 after Ebdon pulled back to 7-6 vs Hendry, Ebdon would have still been well in with a chance of becoming world champion then. There was very little in it other than that. And Ebdon went for his shots.

A bloody awful bore to watch...from long before this match.

You turned the TV off? Is that how folks followed sport back in the 2000s?

@@TheOriginalGankstar When you think it is over, yes.

Colin M You must've watched thus again like me during this frustrating lockdown. Ebdon was largely misunderstood, slow and deliberate does not mean negative shot choice, I used to argue that about Thorburn and Mountjoy who, incidentally, took much longer than Ebdon but nobody complained as much. Unfortunately, Ebdon is a complex character and, despite his intelligence is prone to investing in crazy whims which culminated in his near bankruptcy a few years ago. Overall, I'd say Hendry has to be the greatest of the modern era despite what people say about O'Sullivan, the objective stats are there.

@@thomasgray9170 if you're talking "objective stats" O'Sullivan has stayed at the top for nearly 30 years (something Hendry couldn't do) and been at the top in multiple generations. He's won more of the Triple Crown Titles than any player. He's a record winner of both the Masters and the UK Championship. He's compiled more Century breaks than any other player . He is level with Hendry on ranking titles and only 3 behind on overall tournament wins, which I've no doubt he will overtake him on both. He took nearly a year off from any competitive Snooker and came back to retain the World Championship (something I doubt any other player could ever do). The results of 1 tournament played over 2 weeks, where the luck of the draw can help or hinder, does not determine a legacy, it is merely a component. My top 3 is, 1st, O'Sullivan, 2nd Davis, 3rd, Hendry.

@@kevoconnor145 id put Hendry above Davis to be fair. But O'Sullivan has to be no1. when he is at his best he is unplayable.

@@SuperChalkster Obviously I disagree on Davis below Hendry. He's won more titles. He dominated in a way no player has imo. He won the Masters at 39, made the UK Final at 47 and the World Quarters at 53. He was able to maintain a hugely competitive level of snooker for nearly 40 years. Hendry just wasn't able/willing to fight for titles/compete once others started to overtake him.

@@kevoconnor145 if you meaning longevity then yes Davis would be higher then Hendry, But if its on talent and abilty then Hendry above Davis for the fact that Its wellknown that Hendry took the game to a higher standard from the Davis era. Not only did he break nearly all of Davis records but the standard was much higher, like 12 x 147s to Steve's what 1? centurys per frame ratio... pot percentages and so on. Davis was the best of all time but Hendry and O'Sulliavan have surpassed him, theres no shame in it, Davis was the no1, 40 years ago.

coronavirus

Although we have disagreements on RU-vid comments among various RU-vid snooker videos. Its safe to say we both view such a wide array of distinct snooker matches from the past time that most modern day fans couldn't be asked to watch or even have known about :)

A Hendry century in frame 35 was always highly unlikely and so it proved. It hasn't ever been done at such a point of a eotld chsmpionship final. There comes a point when you suddenly can't produce a century in the deciding frame of a big final on very first visit of framr to the table (except in frsme 35 of world championship final) any longer after several years of seemingly doing it automatic clockwork. Others improved more significantly than Hendry realistically could humanly speaking and those others had scope to do so, and that happened a few years before the 2002 world champion, Hendry stopped being able to consistently clear the table immediately in the deciding frame of big tournaments once things were no longer so consistently one sided in Hendry's favour. Hendry maxed out in terms of improving his game still further but also still remaining as far ahead of the rest of field and romping to a glut more of triple crown titles. He just couldn't remain invincible in the 1997 to 1999 period and well into the noughties and couldn't constantly totally destroy the fields of then in the same fashion he did vs the fields of 1990 to 1995 and that despite still improving. He did improve, but many more improved still further Reality was that Hendry wasn't going to make an immediate century first visit of the match on his way to romping Ebdon 7-1 in the opening session with 4 more big 100's, then go 11-2 up, then 14-2 of 13-3 up, then win by 4pm bank holiday monday, despite people suddenly claiming he's invincible again because he beat Doherty and O'Suliivan the 2 previous rounds. He just couldn't peak again in the final he had less in the tank than many assumed, there just wasn't another superb performance in him. He peaked too early but he had to or else he wouldn't have made it to the final. Steve Davis and Reardon never won 6+ world totles in a decade them gone on to win any more or a few more yet nobody said anything about them. Nobody in the modern professional era has had 2 or 3 sucessive decades of total domination and invinciblity, it was too difficult for Hendry to have the longevity at such a level he produced for a longer period than anybody else in snooker history (but at s lower level.of form) to see off all comers of all eras.

Not likely to change today with Ronnie 12-5 up..

Or covid

It would all be redesignated as 'con vid' nowadays

Mark Williams today just matched the (16) record of most centuries at the worlds. April 2022.

@@ExtremePainGames he didn’t win it either

Hendry was the best player that year at the World Championships in 2002 my belief as to why he didn’t win is twofold- firstly his start at the beginning of the final was terrible going 4-0 down and to get back into the final must have taken a lot out of him and secondly so much was his belief that he would win he underestimated Ebdon and turned up with the mindset that all he had to do was turn up to the final.

Holding the centuries record doesn’t mean anything. Because a lesser player may win by having to play more frames thus giving more opportunity to get a century whereas a better player may win the matches in fewer frames. With stats it’s easy to be fooled but you need to always apply some logic and nuance

There's more to snooker than scoring. On any single day a guy like Ebdon is capable of going toe-to-toe in scoring and wallop Hendry into oblivion in the safety game to go with it. Surprising Ebdon didn't smack him around a bit more TBH given that during the match he actually outscored Hendry with 4 centuries each but 3 additional frames with 50+ breaks from Ebdon for 14 vs 11 throughout the match.

I think he smeared it with vasoline. 😂😂

@@seancyco9446 hahaha

Great stat!

Interesting fact. 👍

John Williams retired from refereeing right after this final.

Hendry being involved in two of those finals.

X...

I was born in 1985 and lived through hendrys peak years. Guy was seriously insane when under pressure. Changed how snooker is played and arguably the greatest player ever although i think maybe ronnie edges it now in terms of greatest.

Hes boring and slow 🐌 Terrible really should have been warned ⚠️about it he was bad for it.gamesmanship I think it's called 🤔

Well, he's retired now but yes, he definitely was a force and 2002 title was not a fluke.

@@Geena-tn1pt Hendry was making too many mistakes. He can only blame himself for not lifting 8th title. But Ebdon did not fluke himself to title. He participated in three finals, winning one of them, against the greatest snooker player in history.

Ebdon is terribly slow 🐌

@@mikegallagher3700 still gets to call himself world champion until he dies though

Just finished watching the final frame, chances missed by both players at the start. Great sportsmanship by both players.

@@seancyco9446 yes. Ebdon also

Ronnie is

@@jb894 Sorry he was. Ronnie is. Agreed.

Nonsense he's a has been

he crashed fast

He was already past his best by 2002 - the Hendry of the mid 90's would have comfortably won this match.

Dylan Doyle Well spotted

Wayne Holnes I wonder if it's him sounded very like him

Yeah thats Taylor alright

Not everyone with a stoke accent is the same person

liked his come on, the year before, but not shown anywhere

I enjoy watching ebdon as well

@@adamglasgow9268 so you guys enjoy watching one of the slowest player of all time?

@@stephen729 maybe they are very slow in their movements as well. Then i would understand... kind of...

He was good in spells but ruined it with his dreadfully slow play he should have been challenged for it tbh

Wouldn't get away with that these days

That was Willie Thorne... later sacked by the BBC for offensive language... the BBC changed, Willie didn’t; which is a shame because he was a good pundit/personality

Virgo meant to say he would love sitting there playing with his wife

The incident at 15-14 was certainly a turning point. I'm not convinced that he took that red on out of frustration - he has a history of taking on similarly difficult shots to keep a break going when out of position, and for most of this tournament it worked for him. In hindsight he took on one too many there, but it's easy to be wise after the event. I remember it being more of an issue later in his career when a much lower percentage of them were going in. I think an even bigger turning point was in Frame 12 when Ebdon he got a lucky snooker and then Hendry struggled for the next four frames, often cueing across long shots and missing them by a long way and going 6-11 down. Hendry has admitted that he underestimated Peter Ebdon - especially after playing so well against Ronnie O'Sullivan in the semi-final, he just assumed he'd win, which might have contributed to him being psychologically affected by what happened at 6-5 (and possibly also at 15-14). I thought Ebdon was a worthy champion in 2002 and that he was quite entertaining to watch in that world championship despite being relatively slow (his pink at 16-14 against Matthew Stevens sticks out), but I get a strong impression that if Hendry had approached that final with the right mindset, he'd have won. His best was just that bit better than Ebdon's.

Thanks for the great summary

Ok mister albeit....

Catch 22?

Sikander Grt Khan well he and Doherty :)

people forget stephen beat ebdon in 1996 final to win his 6th world so its one each in world finals but to be fare hendry should of won this

Most annoying commentator ever. Even back then.

should have been 8 world crowns

@@mancordo3151 , I can never understand why some people say Hendry 'should' have won this match, as if there was some kind of injustice or fluke about the result. He only made it to a final frame decider because Ebdon missed two opportunities to close it out in frame 34. In the decider, Hendry had a couple of half-chances and didn't take them - Ebdon did.

@@chriswilliamson7694 tbf hendry the 8th would of been a good headline

@@johnmccaughey2722 , yeah it would in fairness. I loved Hendry as a kid (I was 13 at the time of this final) and after he beat O'Sullivan in the semis I have to admit I kind of took it for granted that he was going to be too strong for Ebdon in the final. But looking back objectively, the right man did win.

@@Geena-tn1pt yeh he didnt look his usual self in this match. He looked nervous and stressed at times. His performance overall in this tournament was amazing. 16 centuries, a record that still stands to thus day.

Well, that would have been two snookers needed (57 behind, 51 left on). I get what you're saying, but it's just common parlance for any ball which puts your opponent at the snookers required stage to be called the frame or match winning ball. Not all that many frames are won from snookers required positions overall.

Don't forget, the "points available" is if every red was followed by a black, which was impossible on that table. Tbh, Ebdon had it won once he was 50+ ahead.

Drama Queen even back then.

No he's retired now

Shit happens when the the standards get better, and when you cant cope, you go 12 years without winning a major titles 1999-2012

Do you mean he could have got one snooker then kept putting Ebdon back if he missed?

Hendry needed snookers so the miss rule does not apply in that situation

Nah, it was done. He needed 4 snookers and a miss can't be called in that situation, so he wouldn't have been able to put Ebdon back in the same position. Players are pretty good at escaping from snookers - to get four of them, you'd probably need to lay at least eight or nine to begin with. Just wasn't on.

@@Geena-tn1pt Ebdon won it fair and square. He also reached 2 other world finals and won plenty of other stuff. Granted he's not the greatest ever (my vote would be Ronnie O'Sullivan) but unfair to dismiss him as the worst imo.

Ebdon was underrated. Just a shame he often plays really slow which is poor sportsmanship imo.

He played some of the best snooker of his career during the '02 WSC. That semifinal against Stevens was as memorable as the final. He must have had nerves of iron.

Ebdon does that to annoy his opponents.

Wheres all the twats who said ages ago stevens would definitely be world champion one day!! Wer is stevens now?

He should won the semi-final then.

He bottled it in 2 finals

I agree - he had an incredible run of bad luck in the semi-final. Even Ebdon admitted he was lucky afterwards.

Maybe cause this is a snooker world championship with interesting players. It's a little part of snooker history right there. Quality stuff for a snooker fan imo. Slower, but still quality stuff.

Peter ebdon painfully slow player will allways be remembered for dragging it out he should have been challenged for it tbh

Not sure he did.

@@outlawtorn49-oy4oh Everybody else loses in a world chsmpionship final or 3 but nobody has ever made a ballyhoo about them losing more times than Hendry in the final, snd winning the final far fewer times than Hendry. Not even such a ballyhoo after Steve Dsvis either after lost to Tsylor in 1985 and Johnson in 1986, Tsylor and Johnson were the big storyx yet when Hendty lost to Doherty in 1997 and Ebdon in 2002 Hendry was the big story. When Davis never cleared the table in gis firdt visit to the tsble nobody said s thing sbout that yet whenever Hendry never did an immediste century in a frame he was spparently terrible performance in failing to make a clearance even though hsrdly anybody else apart from the occaional White was making century almost straight away at the time yet they were still doing alright even though being at the table umpteen times in the same frame before winning it. Hendry only lost twice in the world championship final including only losing in the deciding frame in 2002 you can hardly call that terrible. Hendry peaked too early and psyched himaelf up extra against O'Sullivan after O'Sullivsn's pre match comments. He had to peak too early though or he wouldn't have made it to the final. There wss just not another superb performance in Hendry, nor a 35th frame century first visit to the table to rsscue himself, incidentally there has never been a century in the 35th frame of a world chsmpionship final. It just wasn't in him that time in the final. Not even he could be in peak form every session for 3 rounds vs Doherty, O'Sullivan then Ebdon. It's not thet surprising thst Hendry came out flat in the first session rather than going 7-1 up with 3 or 4 centuries in that very first session then extending it to 14-2 and then 16-2 to 16-4 in the next 2 sessions. Everybody else loses. I tecsll Doherty the yesr after ir ess mentiomex about him going to the well one more time with little left in the tank after a similarly demsnding chsmpionship yey thet was alright and Doherty didn't even go the 35th frame in the final, yet apparently Hendry should have romped Ebdon with a session to spare with lille left in the tank.

Yes he's terrible for snooker 🎱 Ebdon should have been challenged for slow play many times ⏲️ Al la ronnie o'sullivan ect.....

whats mad is peter was a quite fast player in the ponytail years he just slowed and changed hid game to so slow and in my opinion it dident do his game any good he should of still played like he did when he was younger

His Cue was broken in 2003. He was using his original cue for this final.

@@dannydoyle7040 Must have misread the year somewhere, thought it was 2000 bizzare glitch in the matrix, still a final he probably should have won...again 7 by then nothing to prove, the hate against Hendry is strange, like some can't stand he's the best, changed the game and dominated the 90s and won everythingin such a short timeframe, probably a feat never to be seen again as it has taken Osullivan a lot longer to do catch up and overtake in some records. Selby as Hendry said will be the most likely to break 7 worlds even if Osullivan does eventually win a 7th I doubt he will stick around much longer as he's got nothing to prove either apart from that. Some crazy Chinese guy will probably come along 12 years old and win a world championship lol

@@L1ghtOn3 O’Sullivan could end up winning 8 WC titles. He has the game to carry on playing at the highest level for another 5/6 years.

@@dannydoyle7040 He could have won 10 but his mentality has let him down...thats why Hendry is no.1 in my book what he done in the space of 10 years with nothing else to prove by 2000, took/takes Osullivan longer, so....

Much better the introduce the leg breaker bookies fixing the matches and paying the players salaries today.

Hendry played in a weak era. Once the class of 92 started peaking, he went downhill. "Whenever Hendry came up against Ronnie and both were on form Hendry triumphed and looked like the boss" Is that why Ronnie humiliated him in 2004 and 2008 ? On the other hand, when Hendry beat Ronnie in 99 and 02, the matches were close. And btw, Ronnie wasn't at his peak back then. Peak Ronnie will beat peak Hendry every single time.

@@harldoxborough2451 That doesn't change the fact that Ronnie is the best of all time.

You obviously assumed that Hendry was at peak in those two matches at the worlds, he was miles off form. I said when both were at peak. You don’t have a clue.

@@ashleyalmond4463 I don't assume anything. I've been watching snooker since 1992. I saw peak Hendry live. Up until 2006, Hendry was still in good form, very close to peak form. O'Sullivan was simply better. Just as good a potter and breakbuilder as Hendry, but miles in front in terms of safety and tactical play.

@@harldoxborough2451 You are right, Hendry did revolutionize thr sport, but Ronnie took it to a new level. Ronnie is just as good a potter and breakbuilder (or even better) and vastly superior in terms of tactical and safety play. And on top of winning multiple titles, Ronnie is also a crowd pleaser/favorite, something Hendry never was.