blonde poker forum

Community Forums => Betting Tips and Sport Discussion => Topic started by: gatso on September 20, 2010, 08:14:47 PM



Title: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: gatso on September 20, 2010, 08:14:47 PM
there`s certainly never a dull moment with ronnie playing. today he set the record for the most competitive 147s when he completed his 10th but he wanted to leave it at 140, as there was no specific prize for a 147, and went to shake hands with mark king before the ref persuaded him to go back to the table and pot the last black


edit: the record is for televised maximums


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: AndrewT on September 20, 2010, 08:21:51 PM
Loved the way he asked about the 147 prize money when he was only on 9.


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: gatso on September 20, 2010, 08:25:33 PM
yeah, never mind people sliding big piles of little chips into a pot, that`s a definite live tell that the player is confident


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: titaniumbean on September 20, 2010, 08:27:33 PM
Loved the way he asked about the 147 prize money when he was only on 9.

it's pretty ridic, it's not like he was bout to drop in on the yellow to clear up the colors, he's gotta do another 37 shots perfectly but he's already watched that play out in his head and cant be bothered to wait.


he is so stupidly good it is untrue.


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: AndrewT on September 20, 2010, 08:35:05 PM
He also had a right go at Barry Hearn afterwards - saying he thought Barry was supposed to be putting more money into snooker etc.


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: titaniumbean on September 20, 2010, 08:39:18 PM
lol cocaine is one hell of a drug


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: Josedinho on September 20, 2010, 09:17:15 PM
Was class to watch. Couldn't believe the record was 9 and he was prepared to miss out on one out of principle.


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: titaniumbean on September 20, 2010, 09:21:40 PM
Was class to watch. Couldn't believe the record was 9 and he was prepared to miss out on one out of principle.

hardly the most principled reason to miss out?!


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: outragous76 on September 20, 2010, 10:45:15 PM
wow just watched this break

the 4th and 3rd to last reds were sublime!

lol @ asking what the 147 prize was then knocking one in! sick puppy!


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: gatso on September 20, 2010, 10:50:38 PM
YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=In11qtMRy6k.


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: celtic on September 20, 2010, 10:50:46 PM
wow just watched this break

the 4th and 3rd to last reds were sublime!

lol @ asking what the 147 prize was then knocking one in! sick puppy!

And the 13th black was awesome.


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: Woodsey on September 20, 2010, 11:11:09 PM
Wow that was sick, didn't realise he made such a big deal over asking about the prize early on...........


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: Longy on September 20, 2010, 11:16:42 PM
Brilliant, he is so ridiculously talented.


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: GreekStein on September 20, 2010, 11:18:57 PM
Brilliant, he is so ridiculously talented.


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: titaniumbean on September 20, 2010, 11:22:44 PM
Wow that was sick, didn't realise he made such a big deal over asking about the prize early on...........

he asks during the 3rd to 5th shots rotflmfao


no pressure!


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: gatso on September 20, 2010, 11:24:30 PM
anyone who questions him being the greatest ever should watch that video


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: stonecoldkiller on September 20, 2010, 11:34:35 PM
The term mad genius springs to mind yet again for Ronnie.


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: Alverton on September 21, 2010, 12:18:25 AM
Brilliant, he is so ridiculously talented.


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: thetank on September 21, 2010, 12:29:42 AM

he wanted to leave it at 140, as there was no specific prize for a 147, and went to shake hands with mark king before the ref persuaded him to go back to the table and pot the last black


That just looked like banter to me, I don't think he ever intended to leave it at 140.

Would have been beyond awesome if he did though, would have made lack of high break prize a talking point in the newspapers for weeks.


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: celtic on September 21, 2010, 12:42:55 AM

he wanted to leave it at 140, as there was no specific prize for a 147, and went to shake hands with mark king before the ref persuaded him to go back to the table and pot the last black


That just looked like banter to me, I don't think he ever intended to leave it at 140.

Would have been beyond awesome if he did though, would have made lack of high break prize a talking point in the newspapers for weeks.

To be fair he didn't need much persuading to take the black.


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: titaniumbean on September 21, 2010, 12:51:30 AM
The shot up the table back between the green and brown was quality!


sick sick man.


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: gatso on September 21, 2010, 12:58:19 AM

That just looked like banter to me, I don't think he ever intended to leave it at 140.


maybe but shouldn`t the ref have called the game and match as soon as ronnie offers the handshake? he would have in any other situation where a player finishes a frame winning break leaving the black on the table


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: titaniumbean on September 21, 2010, 01:04:32 AM

That just looked like banter to me, I don't think he ever intended to leave it at 140.


maybe but shouldn`t the ref have called the game and match as soon as ronnie offers the handshake? he would have in any other situation where a player finishes a frame winning break leaving the black on the table


most people dont enquire about the max prize money 4 shots into a break.


crowd and ref wanted it in!


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: celtic on September 21, 2010, 01:10:25 AM
I used to go to the B&H Masters at Wembley. Every year i would have a bet that a 147 happened in the games we were watching. One year i went on a Sunday and the bookies inside Wembley were closed. Ken Doherty missed what seemed to be a very easy black for a 147. I was so happy he missed.

I haven't been since.


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: celtic on September 21, 2010, 01:15:36 AM
YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nxl78K9DMWs

4 mins in.

After the relief of him missing, i then realised i had missed the opportunity to see quite a rare achievement.


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: Ironside on September 21, 2010, 01:59:31 AM
his interview on radio 5 this afernoon was pure crass i lost alot of respect i had for him during that interview, as a player he is unreal but his attitude stunk
barry hearn seemingly had words with him aswell saying he would of been facing a charge of bringing game into disrupt and possably a ban if he didnt pot the black


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: Tractor on September 21, 2010, 08:42:46 AM
Wow that was sick, didn't realise he made such a big deal over asking about the prize early on...........


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: outragous76 on September 21, 2010, 08:49:58 AM
his interview on radio 5 this afernoon was pure crass i lost alot of respect i had for him during that interview, as a player he is unreal but his attitude stunk
barry hearn seemingly had words with him aswell saying he would of been facing a charge of bringing game into disrupt and possably a ban if he didnt pot the black

i think even barry knows that is a hollow threat given that ronnie doesnt give a toss! He has already said to barry he doesnt want to play in every event and will give up the game if he is forced too


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: Josedinho on September 21, 2010, 10:54:16 AM
When did Hearn say any of this? As mentioned before if it wasn't a 147 it's not uncommon for the black to be left as the frame is won.
He won the frame so you can't say he wasn't trying. Hard to see it being anything he could have been punished for.


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: Girgy85 on September 21, 2010, 01:00:47 PM
The guys a fuckin genius that has got some problems, he should be knighted!

FYP


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: celtic on September 21, 2010, 01:02:37 PM
The guy is a genius at what he does Dave and raises the profile of a sport that has been  dying on its arse for ten years or more. Surprised you've heard of him tbh.


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: Marky147 on September 21, 2010, 01:04:10 PM
He was making a point and basically saying Barry get your fucking chequebook out!!

Hearn will have been loving it though regardless of what he says, takes the attention away from the Higgins fiasco for a while!



Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: StuartHopkin on September 21, 2010, 01:04:15 PM
When did Hearn say any of this? As mentioned before if it wasn't a 147 it's not uncommon for the black to be left as the frame is won.
He won the frame so you can't say he wasn't trying. Hard to see it being anything he could have been punished for.

This ^^^^

He shouldnt have potted it imo. Tournament with no 147 prize money = no one gets to see one.


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: Rockstar on September 21, 2010, 01:14:07 PM
A clearly troubled genius not comfortable in his own skin,the greatest natural talent to pick up a cue undoubtedly

That said he acts like a spoilt child more often than not nowadays, an awfull role model,a prem footballer,xfactor reject,big brother wannabe roled into one

Grow up Ronnie and let the public enjoy the god given gift you were given without the histrionics,the repeated retirement  act is all a bit tiresome tbh


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: celtic on September 21, 2010, 01:24:56 PM
A clearly troubled genius not comfortable in his own skin,the greatest natural talent to pick up a cue undoubtedly

That said he acts like a spoilt child more often than not nowadays, an fuawfull role model,a prem footballer,xfactor reject,big brother wannabe roled into one

Grow up Ronnie and let the public enjoy the god given gift you were given without the histrionics,the repeated retirement  act is all a bit tiresome tbh

That's all wrong rockstar. He threatens retirement because he genuinely doubts his ability at times. I think he tried to make a great point yesterday. A few months ago along comes Barry hearn with I'm  gonna make snooker great again and get money back into the game and get the public back onto it. Then in the f8rst comp of the season takes Away the bonus for the one thing a snooker fan would love to see. I would guess from now on every comp  will have a bonus for a 147. And if so yesterday would have helped snooker a little bit more.


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: celtic on September 21, 2010, 01:27:09 PM
The guy is a genius at what he does Dave and raises the profile of a sport that has been  dying on its arse for ten years or more. Surprised you've heard of him tbh. DICK!

FYP

Why is he a dick Dave?


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: GreekStein on September 21, 2010, 01:30:49 PM
When did Hearn say any of this? As mentioned before if it wasn't a 147 it's not uncommon for the black to be left as the frame is won.
He won the frame so you can't say he wasn't trying. Hard to see it being anything he could have been punished for.

This ^^^^

He shouldnt have potted it imo. Tournament with no 147 prize money = no one gets to see one.

then no one goes to see snooker matches and the whole sport dies


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: StuartHopkin on September 21, 2010, 01:35:22 PM
When did Hearn say any of this? As mentioned before if it wasn't a 147 it's not uncommon for the black to be left as the frame is won.
He won the frame so you can't say he wasn't trying. Hard to see it being anything he could have been punished for.

This ^^^^

He shouldnt have potted it imo. Tournament with no 147 prize money = no one gets to see one.

then no one goes to see snooker matches and the whole sport dies

or barry gets his wallet out for the next one

hearn not neville


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: Scottish Dave on September 21, 2010, 01:37:59 PM
The guy is a genius at what he does Dave and raises the profile of a sport that has been  dying on its arse for ten years or more. Surprised you've heard of him tbh. DICK!

FYP

Why is he a dick Dave?

he is a disgrace, and a Bigot to boot


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: GreekStein on September 21, 2010, 01:40:51 PM
The guy is a genius at what he does Dave and raises the profile of a sport that has been  dying on its arse for ten years or more. Surprised you've heard of him tbh. DICK!

FYP

Why is he a dick Dave?

he is a disgrace, and a Bigot to boot

Disgrace why? Please give a proper reason


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: celtic on September 21, 2010, 01:42:03 PM
O
The guy is a genius at what he does Dave and raises the profile of a sport that has been  dying on its arse for ten years or more. Surprised you've heard of him tbh. DICK!

FYP

Why is he a dick Dave?

he is a disgrace, and a Bigot to boot

Details?


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: RED-DOG on September 21, 2010, 01:54:06 PM
The guy is a genius at what he does Dave and raises the profile of a sport that has been  dying on its arse for ten years or more. Surprised you've heard of him tbh. DICK!

FYP

Why is he a dick Dave?

he is a disgrace, and a Bigot to boot

A bigger two boots.

(http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQVT69nwmF4QX0zGHOgVEsqqX01BRfOY4I_PE6N7iMXpeBLpgM&t=1&usg=__foEmo41dab4wifsDNQk-w_HYZBc=)


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: boldie on September 21, 2010, 02:01:08 PM
this he asked about the prizemoney for the 147 because he can't be arsed to focus for an entire tournament anymore?



Obv, he is awesome but a flawed genius if ever there was one in the game.


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: Josedinho on September 21, 2010, 02:08:33 PM
He asked about the prizemoney because it effects the way he plays the frame. It was set up well so if there is a bonus he'd go for a 147, without it he can concentrate on winning the frame without taking any risks to get on the black after every red. 


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: Girgy85 on September 21, 2010, 02:11:31 PM
The guy is a genius at what he does Dave and raises the profile of a sport that has been  dying on its arse for ten years or more. Surprised you've heard of him tbh. DICK!

FYP

Why is he a dick Dave?

he is a disgrace, and a Bigot to boot

A bigger two boots.

(http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQVT69nwmF4QX0zGHOgVEsqqX01BRfOY4I_PE6N7iMXpeBLpgM&t=1&usg=__foEmo41dab4wifsDNQk-w_HYZBc=)

Two big boots

(http://i499.photobucket.com/albums/rr358/girgy85/carboot2.jpg) (http://i499.photobucket.com/albums/rr358/girgy85/carboot.jpg)


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: sweet potata! on September 21, 2010, 02:31:12 PM
Personally , I dont like Ronnie, he does my head in with his constant histrionics, to me it looks like he aint happy if he wins or loses which is poor, its hard to warm to him to win a world title for instance when I'm thinking does he actually give a shit if he wins? Biting off his tip, conceding frames early, constantly threatening to quit the game and forever saying how poor he's playing when hes prob after knocking in a few centuries its so tilting , Hes a very very odd character, I'm surprised that Dave seems to have offended quite a few in here by slating Ronnie I really thought most people would have thought hes a bit of  a douche, thats ronnie btw not Dave ;)

I will say though, personality aside hes is the best player to ever pick up a cue regardless of how many world titles he wins, I mean come on, centuries left and right handed , phenomenal. If he wasnt such a muppet he would have about 10 world titles, thats what his ability deserves.


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: DaveShoelace on September 21, 2010, 02:47:47 PM
Personally , I dont like Ronnie, he does my head in with his constant histrionics, to me it looks like he aint happy if he wins or loses which is poor, its hard to warm to him to win a world title for instance when I'm thinking does he actually give a shit if he wins? Biting off his tip, conceding frames early, constantly threatening to quit the game and forever saying how poor he's playing when hes prob after knocking in a few centuries its so tilting , Hes a very very odd character, I'm surprised that Dave seems to have offended quite a few in here by slating Ronnie I really thought most people would have thought hes a bit of  a douche, thats ronnie btw not Dave ;)

I will say though, personality aside hes is the best player to ever pick up a cue regardless of how many world titles he wins, I mean come on, centuries left and right handed , phenomenal. If he wasnt such a muppet he would have about 10 world titles, thats what his ability deserves.

This.

Worst ambassador for his chosen sport I can think of, other than actual cheats. Shows no appreciation of the fans at all or the game that has made him a millionaire where in any other walk of life he would be a nobody. Its just unfortunate that he is also one of the most talented and entertaining players to watch - I guess his appeal is somewhat similar to some rock n roll bands who are either brilliant or a train wreck on any given night, you don't know what you are going to get.

If he had an ounce of common sense he would have ten world titles indeed, in fact the game of snooker would be much bigger full stop.

Girgy's suggestion he should be knighted is borderline treason imo


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: DaveShoelace on September 21, 2010, 02:48:57 PM
The guy is a genius at what he does Dave and raises the profile of a sport that has been  dying on its arse for ten years or more. Surprised you've heard of him tbh. DICK!

FYP

Why is he a dick Dave?

he is a disgrace, and a Bigot to boot

A bigger two boots.

(http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQVT69nwmF4QX0zGHOgVEsqqX01BRfOY4I_PE6N7iMXpeBLpgM&t=1&usg=__foEmo41dab4wifsDNQk-w_HYZBc=)

Two big boots

(http://i499.photobucket.com/albums/rr358/girgy85/carboot2.jpg) (http://i499.photobucket.com/albums/rr358/girgy85/carboot.jpg)

Two big fruits


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: Girgy85 on September 21, 2010, 02:51:53 PM
Personally , I dont like Ronnie, he does my head in with his constant histrionics, to me it looks like he aint happy if he wins or loses which is poor, its hard to warm to him to win a world title for instance when I'm thinking does he actually give a shit if he wins? Biting off his tip, conceding frames early, constantly threatening to quit the game and forever saying how poor he's playing when hes prob after knocking in a few centuries its so tilting , Hes a very very odd character, I'm surprised that Dave seems to have offended quite a few in here by slating Ronnie I really thought most people would have thought hes a bit of  a douche, thats ronnie btw not Dave ;)

I will say though, personality aside hes is the best player to ever pick up a cue regardless of how many world titles he wins, I mean come on, centuries left and right handed , phenomenal. If he wasnt such a muppet he would have about 10 world titles, thats what his ability deserves.

This.

Worst ambassador for his chosen sport I can think of, other than actual cheats. Shows no appreciation of the fans at all or the game that has made him a millionaire where in any other walk of life he would be a nobody. Its just unfortunate that he is also one of the most talented and entertaining players to watch - I guess his appeal is somewhat similar to some rock n roll bands who are either brilliant or a train wreck on any given night, you don't know what you are going to get.

If he had an ounce of common sense he would have ten world titles indeed, in fact the game of snooker would be much bigger full stop.

Girgy's suggestion he should be knighted is borderline treason imo

Wasnt a serious comment! Plz dont send me for beheading!


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: Josedinho on September 21, 2010, 03:04:37 PM
To SP: I don't think Scottish Dave offended anyone he just failed to back up his opinion with any reasons unlike yourself and Shoelace. I can see why people don't warm to him but i like him and think he is immensley talented and entertaining and for those reasons i can forgive him his personality flaws.
I can't remember the exact phrase Dave used but i don't understand how you can say he shouldn't be praised or applauded for his achievements.
If Usain Bolt wasn't a nice bloke we would all still be amazed at how fast he can run 100m. Personality shouldn't define whether you respect what somebody has achieved imo.


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: Rockstar on September 21, 2010, 03:26:18 PM
A clearly troubled genius not comfortable in his own skin,the greatest natural talent to pick up a cue undoubtedly

That said he acts like a spoilt child more often than not nowadays, an fuawfull role model,a prem footballer,xfactor reject,big brother wannabe roled into one

Grow up Ronnie and let the public enjoy the god given gift you were given without the histrionics,the repeated retirement  act is all a bit tiresome tbh

That's all wrong rockstar. He threatens retirement because he genuinely doubts his ability at times. I think he tried to make a great point yesterday. A few months ago along comes Barry hearn with I'm  gonna make snooker great again and get money back into the game and get the public back onto it. Then in the f8rst comp of the season takes Away the bonus for the one thing a snooker fan would love to see. I would guess from now on every comp  will have a bonus for a 147. And if so yesterday would have helped snooker a little bit more.

He never doubts his ability,he KNOWS he is the best by a country mile with his "B" game.He just needs to hear people say it,his ego needs permanently massaging.

Dont forget the frame before he plays a crap shot on the yellow,has a massive hissy fit and smashes into green and brown randomly.King has two chances to clear up and messes it up,if he does Ronnie was gone in the head,no 147 no discussion here.The point being his attitude sucks,he doesnt care about anyone bar himself Vinny.Snooker means nothing to him and it doesnt sit well with me,massively disrespectful to the Game and to his fans laughing about 4k,no class at all.

Can see him in a very lonely place when his talent dries up and the big stage is no more,who wants to be around an arrogant old bore?(insert pun here)

Magician at the table,complete arsehole off it.


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: TightEnd on September 21, 2010, 03:30:12 PM
screwed up by his family background, dad in for life, problems with the mum, surrounded by chancers.....that's the problem no?

whatever character traits he had before hand the insecurities and complexities have been magnified by his experiences?


Wonderful to watch on the table, absolutely brilliant, but clearly a troubled guy.


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: DaveShoelace on September 21, 2010, 03:34:56 PM
screwed up by his family background, dad in for life, problems with the mum, surrounded by chancers.....that's the problem no?

whatever character traits he had before hand the insecurities and complexities have been magnified by his experiences?


Wonderful to watch on the table, absolutely brilliant, but clearly a troubled guy.

Again, probably the reason he is popular. The brits love a loser, especially in sport, normally when someone is amazingly talented they also have a charmed life - so we hate them. With Ronnie you get the amazingly entertaining talent plus the fact that he is a loser with problems, a perfect match.

His past still doesnt excuse his behaviour, just helps explain it, there are plenty of talented people who had difficult lives who appreciate what they have got and conduct themselves correctly.


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: Rockstar on September 21, 2010, 04:17:15 PM
screwed up by his family background, dad in for life, problems with the mum, surrounded by chancers.....that's the problem no?

whatever character traits he had before hand the insecurities and complexities have been magnified by his experiences?


Wonderful to watch on the table, absolutely brilliant, but clearly a troubled guy.

Again, probably the reason he is popular. The brits love a loser, especially in sport, normally when someone is amazingly talented they also have a charmed life - so we hate them. With Ronnie you get the amazingly entertaining talent plus the fact that he is a loser with problems, a perfect match.

His past still doesnt excuse his behaviour, just helps explain it, there are plenty of talented people who had difficult lives who appreciate what they have got and conduct themselves correctly.

Game,set,and match.


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: RED-DOG on September 21, 2010, 04:34:47 PM
The guy is a genius at what he does Dave and raises the profile of a sport that has been  dying on its arse for ten years or more. Surprised you've heard of him tbh. DICK!

FYP

Why is he a dick Dave?

he is a disgrace, and a Bigot to boot

A bigger two boots.

(http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQVT69nwmF4QX0zGHOgVEsqqX01BRfOY4I_PE6N7iMXpeBLpgM&t=1&usg=__foEmo41dab4wifsDNQk-w_HYZBc=)

Two big boots

(http://i499.photobucket.com/albums/rr358/girgy85/carboot2.jpg) (http://i499.photobucket.com/albums/rr358/girgy85/carboot.jpg)

Two big fruits



Boo! Pig shoots.

(http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQ6oRszdSd3L9xyDAC_Rww4mVz7oWiRNgE3alSSbGlpUGhchRk&t=1&usg=__GQNFW4H4SsIXoq5umTg_43y63WI=)


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: RED-DOG on September 21, 2010, 04:42:23 PM
The guy is a genius at what he does Dave and raises the profile of a sport that has been  dying on its arse for ten years or more. Surprised you've heard of him tbh. DICK!

FYP

Why is he a dick Dave?

he is a disgrace, and a Bigot to boot

A bigger two boots.

(http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQVT69nwmF4QX0zGHOgVEsqqX01BRfOY4I_PE6N7iMXpeBLpgM&t=1&usg=__foEmo41dab4wifsDNQk-w_HYZBc=)

Two big boots

(http://i499.photobucket.com/albums/rr358/girgy85/carboot2.jpg) (http://i499.photobucket.com/albums/rr358/girgy85/carboot.jpg)

Two big fruits



Boo! Pig shoots.

(http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQ6oRszdSd3L9xyDAC_Rww4mVz7oWiRNgE3alSSbGlpUGhchRk&t=1&usg=__GQNFW4H4SsIXoq5umTg_43y63WI=)

Two fig roots.
(http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcT16ybAYomlcmvlH5SbiFX6k3dMWyWwHB9KIkwP3XnizpgZWCA&t=1&usg=__yeFrxAyFBdmkJo3GjD5m2u-FM7Q=)


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: DaveShoelace on September 21, 2010, 04:42:36 PM
The guy is a genius at what he does Dave and raises the profile of a sport that has been  dying on its arse for ten years or more. Surprised you've heard of him tbh. DICK!

FYP

Why is he a dick Dave?

he is a disgrace, and a Bigot to boot

A bigger two boots.

(http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQVT69nwmF4QX0zGHOgVEsqqX01BRfOY4I_PE6N7iMXpeBLpgM&t=1&usg=__foEmo41dab4wifsDNQk-w_HYZBc=)

Two big boots

(http://i499.photobucket.com/albums/rr358/girgy85/carboot2.jpg) (http://i499.photobucket.com/albums/rr358/girgy85/carboot.jpg)

Two big fruits





Boo! Pig shoots.

(http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQ6oRszdSd3L9xyDAC_Rww4mVz7oWiRNgE3alSSbGlpUGhchRk&t=1&usg=__GQNFW4H4SsIXoq5umTg_43y63WI=)

Shoe, Trigg, Glutes


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: Bongo on September 21, 2010, 04:43:42 PM
(http://www.xcel.uk.net/fresh-talent/images/levis-roots.jpg)

Levi Roots

 ;karabiner;


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: RED-DOG on September 21, 2010, 04:45:47 PM
two big coots.

(http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRBs0Q0zYKzFyR72yNhCHw7NOUtmcGuPJ-u-V1dy00mIZX31Wc&t=1&usg=__wyRBqtmZelz_pXAKCtwFViJkQdE=)


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: stonecoldkiller on September 21, 2010, 04:49:18 PM
If he had the commitment of Phil Taylor, he would be en route to matching Taylors achievements, lets be honest he probably does'nt even practice, that imo is scary talented.


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: RED-DOG on September 21, 2010, 04:50:58 PM
Smell of Brut.

(http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRGqZcB2phaIl4sUfMaDm3wEaopNUEI8BexCFpYTFrVEouXoeE&t=1&usg=__-LyyR_KJNGJSuHdXw1AJ53FrlWg=)


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: RED-DOG on September 21, 2010, 04:52:59 PM
Painful foot.

(http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcR0CVj7pXc4BAVkrwngaAN7y44IpYTx0LZxhJjdBo6cMxppxIo&t=1&usg=__i6xo4yD65wybR_mRJN_W67tpcY8=)


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: DaveShoelace on September 21, 2010, 04:53:49 PM
scene from Das Boot


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: RED-DOG on September 21, 2010, 04:55:17 PM
Lol


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: titaniumbean on September 21, 2010, 04:55:57 PM
scene from Das Boot

looooooooool


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: RED-DOG on September 21, 2010, 04:57:51 PM
Pissed as a newt.

(http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSgVNJ4C2vV3-xsV-ilYRhvdz-xEzs8Mfzix2gCaqpPzGhkuus&t=1&usg=__r4I6lZ45ytml7vMS8_aJPd3hNYE=)


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: RED-DOG on September 21, 2010, 04:59:40 PM
Don't share this flute.
(http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTZwN-Ou5DicAvVcdVw08nsSPY_pWaYVhteSDJg4ma8yCRVnYM&t=1&usg=__M2rst4CJahSjViQjYZGs_u7rGwc=)


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: TightEnd on September 21, 2010, 05:00:22 PM
Got two Bi's

(http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/feature/ourpurpose/images/stoller_3.jpg)


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: RED-DOG on September 21, 2010, 05:03:03 PM
Oy! No clever stuff.


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: The Baron on September 21, 2010, 05:31:59 PM
If he had the commitment of Phil Taylor, he would be en route to matching Taylors achievements, lets be honest he probably does'nt even practice, that imo is scary talented.

The commitment of PHIL TAYLOR?

Not Federer or Hendry or a million other sports stars who actually play a sport?


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: outragous76 on September 21, 2010, 05:37:38 PM
If he had the commitment of Phil Taylor, he would be en route to matching Taylors achievements, lets be honest he probably does'nt even practice, that imo is scary talented.

The commitment of PHIL TAYLOR?

Not Federer or Hendry or a million other sports stars who actually play a sport?

lol - thats prob the worst comeback ever! Referencing Hendry and saying darts isnt a sport! If darts isnt a sport, neither is snooker! And you would be wrong on both counts!


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: The Baron on September 21, 2010, 05:42:08 PM
If he had the commitment of Phil Taylor, he would be en route to matching Taylors achievements, lets be honest he probably does'nt even practice, that imo is scary talented.

The commitment of PHIL TAYLOR?

Not Federer or Hendry or a million other sports stars who actually play a sport?

lol - thats prob the worst comeback ever! Referencing Hendry and saying darts isnt a sport! If darts isnt a sport, neither is snooker! And you would be wrong on both counts!


Hendry is in the same field as Ronnie at least. So their commitment is comparable.

And Snooker is a million times the "sport" drts is.


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: outragous76 on September 21, 2010, 05:49:14 PM
If he had the commitment of Phil Taylor, he would be en route to matching Taylors achievements, lets be honest he probably does'nt even practice, that imo is scary talented.

The commitment of PHIL TAYLOR?

Not Federer or Hendry or a million other sports stars who actually play a sport?

lol - thats prob the worst comeback ever! Referencing Hendry and saying darts isnt a sport! If darts isnt a sport, neither is snooker! And you would be wrong on both counts!


Hendry is in the same field as Ronnie at least. So their commitment is comparable.

And Snooker is a million times the "sport" drts is.

lolz - talk me thru your logic


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: The Baron on September 21, 2010, 05:56:30 PM
Which bit of it? That Hendry would be a far better comparison to Ronnie that Phil Taylor (lolz) or that I don't rate darts as a great Sport?

Chess>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Darts, imo.


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: outragous76 on September 21, 2010, 06:03:52 PM
Which bit of it? That Hendry would be a far better comparison to Ronnie that Phil Taylor (lolz) or that I don't rate darts as a great Sport?

Chess>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Darts, imo.

what is the difference between the sports?


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: RED-DOG on September 21, 2010, 06:07:36 PM
Which bit of it? That Hendry would be a far better comparison to Ronnie that Phil Taylor (lolz) or that I don't rate darts as a great Sport?

Chess>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Darts, imo.

what is the difference between the sports?

It's hard to get 3 cues in treble 20.


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: The Baron on September 21, 2010, 06:15:07 PM
Cant be arsed going into it but I just don't rate it. Just as I dont compare the winner of the 25 metre handgun shooting gold medal (or whatever the event is) at the olympics with Usain Bolt's WR 200m run. It's not even close imo.

Not all "sports" are equal - I just find the comparison to Phil Taylor pretty funny.


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: stonecoldkiller on September 21, 2010, 06:16:50 PM
Cant be arsed going into it but I just don't rate it. Just as I dont compare the winner of the 25 metre handgun shooting gold medal (or whatever the event is) at the olympics with Usain Bolt's WR 200m run. It's not even close imo.

Not all "sports" are equal - I just find the comparison to Phil Taylor pretty funny.

So whats the big difference athletically between snooker and darts? Both are working mans games, all "professionals" in the 70's and 80's got pie-eyed while playing.


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: outragous76 on September 21, 2010, 06:17:57 PM
Cant be arsed going into it but I just don't rate it. Just as I dont compare the winner of the 25 metre handgun shooting gold medal (or whatever the event is) at the olympics with Usain Bolt's WR 200m run. It's not even close imo.

Not all "sports" are equal - I just find the comparison to Phil Taylor pretty funny.

your olympic comparison is dire

these are 2 sport bourne out of the same social back drop, play from similar venues, with probably similar skill levels required at the very top

to say they are not comparable is laughable

now just because you dont like darts........thats another thing


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: stonecoldkiller on September 21, 2010, 06:22:58 PM
Which bit of it? That Hendry would be a far better comparison to Ronnie that Phil Taylor (lolz) or that I don't rate darts as a great Sport?

Chess>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Darts, imo.

what is the difference between the sports?

It's hard to get 3 cues in treble 20.

I did lol hard at this.


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: The Baron on September 21, 2010, 06:25:06 PM
Cant be arsed going into it but I just don't rate it. Just as I dont compare the winner of the 25 metre handgun shooting gold medal (or whatever the event is) at the olympics with Usain Bolt's WR 200m run. It's not even close imo.

Not all "sports" are equal - I just find the comparison to Phil Taylor pretty funny.

So whats the big difference athletically between snooker and darts? Both are working mans games, all "professionals" in the 70's and 80's got pie-eyed while playing.

I'm not saying there's a huge difference or that the differences are athletic. I just think Ronnie wouldn't necessarily be a 10X world champion had he modelled himself on Phil Taylor lol.


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: DaveShoelace on September 21, 2010, 06:26:51 PM
Interesting side question, which is more of a sport, poker or wwe wrestling?



Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: DaveShoelace on September 21, 2010, 06:28:07 PM
I agree that snooker is slightly more sporty, in that you move round a table, bend over more and a cue weighs more than a dart, but really you have to lump them in the same group, sport or not, they are both 'only just' sports.


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: The Baron on September 21, 2010, 06:29:22 PM
Cant be arsed going into it but I just don't rate it. Just as I dont compare the winner of the 25 metre handgun shooting gold medal (or whatever the event is) at the olympics with Usain Bolt's WR 200m run. It's not even close imo.

Not all "sports" are equal - I just find the comparison to Phil Taylor pretty funny.

your olympic comparison is dire

these are 2 sport bourne out of the same social back drop, play from similar venues, with probably similar skill levels required at the very top

to say they are not comparable is laughable

now just because you dont like darts........thats another thing

How so? I just pointed out that not all sports were equal.

Sigh. Once again I'm not comparing darts to snooker. (IF I had to pick I'd say snooker has a tougher skill set but that was not my point for the 88th time)

They aren't comparable. Do you honestly think Taylor and Hendry have the same skills sets? Laughable indeed.

Lol nice presumption but I absolutely love darts.


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: stonecoldkiller on September 21, 2010, 06:34:50 PM
Cant be arsed going into it but I just don't rate it. Just as I dont compare the winner of the 25 metre handgun shooting gold medal (or whatever the event is) at the olympics with Usain Bolt's WR 200m run. It's not even close imo.

Not all "sports" are equal - I just find the comparison to Phil Taylor pretty funny.

So whats the big difference athletically between snooker and darts? Both are working mans games, all "professionals" in the 70's and 80's got pie-eyed while playing.

I'm not saying there's a huge difference or that the differences are athletic. I just think Ronnie wouldn't necessarily be a 10X world champion had he modelled himself on Phil Taylor lol.


The guy practices 8 hours a day and whenever under pressure alwayd pulls it out, he lives for his profession and is constantly trying to get better, if ronnie had that attitude he would win alot more.


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: DaveShoelace on September 21, 2010, 06:36:22 PM
I think what Baron is saying is that there is a spectrum to the difficulty/atheleticness of different sports, for example:

Boxing>>>>>>>rugby>>>>>>>football>>>>>>>>>tennis>>>>>>>arm wrestling>>>>>>>>>snooker>>>>>>>>darts>>>>>>>>>>scratching your arse>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>poker

But what Guy is saying is that the difference between snooker and darts, relative to this spectrum, is marginal

Boxing>>>>>>>rugby>>>>>>>football>>>>>>>>>tennis>>>>>>>arm wrestling>>>>>>>>>snooker>darts>>>>>>>>>>scratching your arse>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>poker

Which I happen to agree with.

All the other sports are rough guesses, I might be wrong and footy might be tougher than rugger etc


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: The Baron on September 21, 2010, 06:39:41 PM
I think what Baron is saying is that there is a spectrum to the difficulty/atheleticness of different sports, for example:

Boxing>>>>>>>rugby>>>>>>>football>>>>>>>>>tennis>>>>>>>arm wrestling>>>>>>>>>snooker>>>>>>>>darts>>>>>>>>>>scratching your arse>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>poker

But what Guy is saying is that the difference between snooker and darts, relative to this spectrum, is marginal

Boxing>>>>>>>rugby>>>>>>>football>>>>>>>>>tennis>>>>>>>arm wrestling>>>>>>>>>snooker>darts>>>>>>>>>>scratching your arse>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>poker

Which I happen to agree with.

All the other sports are rough guesses, I might be wrong and footy might be tougher than rugger etc

As do I.

Agree with this whole post. (And worded far better than I have managed!)


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: outragous76 on September 21, 2010, 06:39:58 PM
I think what Baron is saying is that there is a spectrum to the difficulty/atheleticness of different sports, for example:

Boxing>>>>>>>rugby>>>>>>>football>>>>>>>>>tennis>>>>>>>arm wrestling>>>>>>>>>snooker>>>>>>>>darts>>>>>>>>>>scratching your arse>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>poker

But what Guy is saying is that the difference between snooker and darts, relative to this spectrum, is marginal

Boxing>>>>>>>rugby>>>>>>>football>>>>>>>>>tennis>>>>>>>arm wrestling>>>>>>>>>snooker/darts>>>>>>>>>>scratching your arse>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>poker

Which I happen to agree with.

All the other sports are rough guesses, I might be wrong and footy might be tougher than rugger etc

fyp


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: The Baron on September 21, 2010, 06:43:52 PM
Cant be arsed going into it but I just don't rate it. Just as I dont compare the winner of the 25 metre handgun shooting gold medal (or whatever the event is) at the olympics with Usain Bolt's WR 200m run. It's not even close imo.

Not all "sports" are equal - I just find the comparison to Phil Taylor pretty funny.

So whats the big difference athletically between snooker and darts? Both are working mans games, all "professionals" in the 70's and 80's got pie-eyed while playing.

I'm not saying there's a huge difference or that the differences are athletic. I just think Ronnie wouldn't necessarily be a 10X world champion had he modelled himself on Phil Taylor lol.


The guy practices 8 hours a day and whenever under pressure alwayd pulls it out, he lives for his profession and is constantly trying to get better, if ronnie had that attitude he would win alot more.

Fair enough if this is true but I read an interview with him not long ago saying the far east will be amazing at darts in a few years as their players practise 8-10 hours a day which is almost double what he does.

Hence why I would have compared to Hendry (as he's in the same sport not as snooker is the daddy of sports or nuttin)


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: thetank on September 21, 2010, 11:52:00 PM
I would have thought Snooker, with it's considerable strategic elements, requires a lot more concentration endurance than darts.

Obesity and difficulty with concentration endurance are not unrelated, thusly there are not many snooker players at the top level who aren't physically fit.

I'm prepared to accept Snooker as a sport. Darts is a defo just a game, (unless one of those big bastards is in the same room as me, I don't want sat on)


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: titaniumbean on September 22, 2010, 12:05:02 AM
Hadn't seen this before  ;tightend;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y_MTB6SmKew


He's just so good.


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: EvilPie on September 22, 2010, 12:13:47 AM
I think what Baron is saying is that there is a spectrum to the difficulty/atheleticness of different sports, for example:

Boxing>>>>>>>rugby>>>>>>>football>>>>>>>>>tennis>>>>>>>arm wrestling>>>>>>>>>snooker>>>>>>>>darts>>>>>>>>>>scratching your arse>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>poker

But what Guy is saying is that the difference between snooker and darts, relative to this spectrum, is marginal

Boxing>>>>>>>rugby>>>>>>>football>>>>>>>>>tennis>>>>>>>arm wrestling>>>>>>>>>snooker/darts>>>>>>>>>>scratching your arse>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>poker

Which I happen to agree with.

All the other sports are rough guesses, I might be wrong and footy might be tougher than rugger etc

fyp

Jeez that took some finding.


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: Moskvich on September 22, 2010, 12:31:25 AM
I would have thought Snooker, with it's considerable strategic elements, requires a lot more concentration endurance than darts.

Obesity and difficulty with concentration endurance are not unrelated, thusly there are not many snooker players at the top level who aren't physically fit.

I'm prepared to accept Snooker as a sport. Darts is a defo just a game, (unless one of those big bastards is in the same room as me, I don't want sat on)

Also a big difference in that in snooker (as in football/tennis/badminton/etc etc) you get to affect the situation faced by your opponent, whereas in darts you don't - your opponent just gets a go. Obviously they might be affected by your scoring, as they might in, say, ski-racing or something, but darts definitely lacks a major element of the direct competition associated with most of what I'd think of as proper sports.


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: gatso on September 22, 2010, 12:44:33 AM
Also a big difference in that in snooker (as in football/tennis/badminton/etc etc) you get to affect the situation faced by your opponent, whereas in darts you don't - your opponent just gets a go. Obviously they might be affected by your scoring, as they might in, say, ski-racing or something, but darts definitely lacks a major element of the direct competition associated with most of what I'd think of as proper sports.

by that definition you're dismissing all athletics field events, all track events run in lanes, swimming, archery, shooting, rowing, weightlifting, modern pentathlon, gymnastics, trampolining and all equestrian events. you've just decimated the summer olympics


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: thetank on September 22, 2010, 01:11:17 AM
Also a big difference in that in snooker (as in football/tennis/badminton/etc etc) you get to affect the situation faced by your opponent, whereas in darts you don't - your opponent just gets a go. Obviously they might be affected by your scoring, as they might in, say, ski-racing or something, but darts definitely lacks a major element of the direct competition associated with most of what I'd think of as proper sports.

by that definition you're dismissing all athletics field events, all track events run in lanes, swimming, archery, shooting, rowing, weightlifting, modern pentathlon, gymnastics, trampolining and all equestrian events. you've just decimated the summer olympics

Moskvich's post said that the lack of direct competition is a factor. Most of what
Also a big difference in that in snooker (as in football/tennis/badminton/etc etc) you get to affect the situation faced by your opponent, whereas in darts you don't - your opponent just gets a go. Obviously they might be affected by your scoring, as they might in, say, ski-racing or something, but darts definitely lacks a major element of the direct competition associated with most of what I'd think of as proper sports.

by that definition you're dismissing all athletics field events, all track events run in lanes, swimming, archery, shooting, rowing, weightlifting, modern pentathlon, gymnastics, trampolining and all equestrian events. you've just decimated the summer olympics

By what definition? Plz highlight


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: gatso on September 22, 2010, 01:25:59 AM
not getting to affect the situation faced by your opponent, your opponent just gets a go (though sometimes that go is at the same time as yours). that definition

just realised it also gets rid of synchronised swimming so I'm all for it. moskvich for olympic sports selecting czar


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: Moskvich on September 22, 2010, 01:44:00 AM
Also a big difference in that in snooker (as in football/tennis/badminton/etc etc) you get to affect the situation faced by your opponent, whereas in darts you don't - your opponent just gets a go. Obviously they might be affected by your scoring, as they might in, say, ski-racing or something, but darts definitely lacks a major element of the direct competition associated with most of what I'd think of as proper sports.

by that definition you're dismissing all athletics field events, all track events run in lanes, swimming, archery, shooting, rowing, weightlifting, modern pentathlon, gymnastics, trampolining and all equestrian events. you've just decimated the summer olympics

Yeah pretty much. But then it is called the Olympic Games...

Obviously there's a load of overlap between what we consider sports and games, and I'm not really going to try and argue a conclusive case that snooker is a sport and darts is a game. All I was really saying is that if you're trying to class them as a sport or not a sport then you can differentiate between them in aspects other than simply the required physical skill and/or number of pints needed to hit peak performance.

That said, I personally would prefer to say that the events you list are examples of sporting events or activities rather than genuine sports (with an invisible big 'S'). (That's apart from the modern pentathlon of course, which is in its own category, being 20% sport and 80% random competitive athletic activity).

Actually, for what it's worth, I don't really think any actual sports, by my arrogant personal definition, should be in the Olympics anyway. Pretty sure it's supposed to be about 'faster higher stronger', not 'best able to manipulate a shuttlecock within the confines of an artificial set of rules drawn up by some people who were no good at any other sports so decided to play badminton instead'.


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: Moskvich on September 22, 2010, 01:47:46 AM
not getting to affect the situation faced by your opponent, your opponent just gets a go (though sometimes that go is at the same time as yours). that definition

just realised it also gets rid of synchronised swimming so I'm all for it. moskvich for olympic sports selecting czar

Well, am not sure we agree on the reasoning, but yes, obviously it's got to go by any criteria. Thanks for your support.


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: gatso on September 22, 2010, 01:49:17 AM
moskvich for olympic sports selecting czar

+1


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: Cf on September 22, 2010, 01:52:22 AM
Snooker = a sport.

Darts = a game.

Source: wikipedia!!

Seems obvious to me tho. Snooker requires you to be physically fit and is competitive in the sense you're playing against another player. It's also a game that requires a lot of skill. Darts doesn't require the same level of fitness and is just two people taking turns to throw darts at a board. I'm not denying that to get good at darts requires skill but it's not in the same league.

Calling darts a sport is a bit like trying to call Counter-Strike a sport because there's professional leagues for it.


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: RioRodent on September 22, 2010, 06:52:26 AM
Snooker = a sport.

Darts = a game.

Source: wikipedia!!

Seems obvious to me tho. Snooker requires you to be physically fit and is competitive in the sense you're playing against another player. It's also a game that requires a lot of skill. Darts doesn't require the same level of fitness and is just two people taking turns to throw darts at a board. I'm not denying that to get good at darts requires skill but it's not in the same league.

Calling darts a sport is a bit like trying to call Counter-Strike a sport because there's professional leagues for it.

Is Archery a sport or a game?


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: thetank on September 22, 2010, 08:13:56 AM
Been thinking about this, here's my definition for what constitutes a sport.

It needs to be at least 100 years old, you need some method of quantifying who the best is at it, and the last 5 world champions (or at least two from the team if it's a team activity) need to be able to touch their toes.

Fulfill all those criteria and you're a sport. Congrats


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: henrik777 on September 22, 2010, 08:28:33 AM
Snooker = a sport.

Darts = a game.

Source: wikipedia!!

Seems obvious to me tho. Snooker requires you to be physically fit and is competitive in the sense you're playing against another player. It's also a game that requires a lot of skill. Darts doesn't require the same level of fitness and is just two people taking turns to throw darts at a board. I'm not denying that to get good at darts requires skill but it's not in the same league.

Calling darts a sport is a bit like trying to call Counter-Strike a sport because there's professional leagues for it.




Bill Werbeniuk was world number 8 and reached the quarters at the world champs 4 times. I very much doubt he was physically fit in anyones language.

Sandy


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: ChipRich on September 22, 2010, 10:01:03 AM
genius


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: Scottish Dave on September 22, 2010, 11:10:05 AM
Cant be arsed going into it but I just don't rate it. Just as I dont compare the winner of the 25 metre handgun shooting gold medal (or whatever the event is) at the olympics with Usain Bolt's WR 200m run. It's not even close imo.

Not all "sports" are equal - I just find the comparison to Phil Taylor pretty funny.

if you reread his post you will see that he doesn't say the sports are equal, he says if Ronnie's commitment level matched Taylors.

Taylor practices for 8 hours a day every day for 20 years! His desire and passion to win and be successful is far greater than any other sports person on the planet!

Ronnie's doesn't bother practicing, and doesn't care if he wins or hits centuries or 147's

This was the comparison that was made about the two personalities


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: gatso on September 22, 2010, 11:14:54 AM

Taylor practices for 8 hours a day every day for 20 years! His desire and passion to win and be successful is far greater than any other sports person on the planet!


he does nothing like that accorcing to this interview

http://www.unicorn-darts.com/community/the-big-interview/phil-taylor-interview.aspx


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: kinboshi on September 22, 2010, 11:49:56 AM
Snooker = a sport.

Darts = a game.

Source: wikipedia!!

Seems obvious to me tho. Snooker requires you to be physically fit and is competitive in the sense you're playing against another player. It's also a game that requires a lot of skill. Darts doesn't require the same level of fitness and is just two people taking turns to throw darts at a board. I'm not denying that to get good at darts requires skill but it's not in the same league.

Calling darts a sport is a bit like trying to call Counter-Strike a sport because there's professional leagues for it.




Bill Werbeniuk was world number 8 and reached the quarters at the world champs 4 times. I very much doubt he was physically fit in anyones language.

Sandy

Think people need to consider what the word 'fit' means.  Pretty much means 'suitable for purpose', and that's why you can be fit to play darts when you might struggle a little at the decathlon.  The same way as Gebrselassie is one of the best long-distance runners of all time, but he'd be pretty naff at weightlifting or the shot-putt. 


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: gatso on September 22, 2010, 12:01:14 PM
so what does fit for darts mean? having at least one arm?


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: DaveShoelace on September 22, 2010, 12:07:23 PM
so what does fit for darts mean? having at least one arm?

and at least three darts


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: outragous76 on September 22, 2010, 12:07:47 PM
id like to see anyone on here disrespcting darts players throw 501 in 12 darts - from 10 attempts


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: gatso on September 22, 2010, 12:24:04 PM
id like to see anyone on here disrespcting darts players throw 501 in 12 darts - from 10 attempts

wtf? I can't eat 20 hotdogs in a minute but that doesn't mean I should consider someone who can to be a sportsman


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: outragous76 on September 22, 2010, 12:37:28 PM
you could apply that sentiment to any sport/game


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: gatso on September 22, 2010, 12:40:51 PM
you could apply that sentiment to any sport/game

or activity. the fact that some poker players on a forum can't do something doesn't make it a sport otherwise they'd have to start having world championships for going out in daylight or talking to girls


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: boldie on September 22, 2010, 12:41:55 PM
id like to see anyone on here disrespcting darts players throw 501 in 12 darts - from 10 attempts

wtf? I can't eat 20 hotdogs in a minute but that doesn't mean I should consider someone who can to be a sportsman

This.

and I'd much rather try the hotdog thing than a game as boring as darts.


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: DaveShoelace on September 22, 2010, 01:06:54 PM
I reckon most darts players could also wolf 20 hotdogs in a minute, but doubt many competative eaters could get a treble 20.


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: EvilPie on September 22, 2010, 01:36:35 PM
Are sumo wrestlers fit?

Is sumo wrestling a sport?

Can the average sumo wrestler eat more hot dogs than the average snooker player?


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: StuartHopkin on September 22, 2010, 01:41:25 PM
Who would you rather fight? 50 sumo sized snooker players or 1 hot dog sized sumo wrestler?


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: RED-DOG on September 22, 2010, 02:26:03 PM
Are sumo wrestlers fit?

Is sumo wrestling a sport?

Can the average sumo wrestler eat more hot dogs than the average snooker player?

Yes. I think he could eat quite a lot of hot dogs, but only two  average snooker players.


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: The Baron on September 22, 2010, 03:17:53 PM
Snooker = a sport.

Darts = a game.

Source: wikipedia!!

Seems obvious to me tho. Snooker requires you to be physically fit and is competitive in the sense you're playing against another player. It's also a game that requires a lot of skill. Darts doesn't require the same level of fitness and is just two people taking turns to throw darts at a board. I'm not denying that to get good at darts requires skill but it's not in the same league.

Calling darts a sport is a bit like trying to call Counter-Strike a sport because there's professional leagues for it.




Bill Werbeniuk was world number 8 and reached the quarters at the world champs 4 times. I very much doubt he was physically fit in anyones language.

Sandy

George Foreman knocked out Michael Moorer at 46 whislt looking like the Michelin Man - I dare anyone to tell him he's not a sportsman.


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: Bongo on September 22, 2010, 03:20:50 PM
What about Disc Golf?  ;hide;


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: The Baron on September 22, 2010, 03:22:30 PM
Cant be arsed going into it but I just don't rate it. Just as I dont compare the winner of the 25 metre handgun shooting gold medal (or whatever the event is) at the olympics with Usain Bolt's WR 200m run. It's not even close imo.

Not all "sports" are equal - I just find the comparison to Phil Taylor pretty funny.

if you reread his post you will see that he doesn't say the sports are equal, he says if Ronnie's commitment level matched Taylors.

Taylor practices for 8 hours a day every day for 20 years! His desire and passion to win and be successful is far greater than any other sports person on the planet!

Ronnie's doesn't bother practicing, and doesn't care if he wins or hits centuries or 147's

This was the comparison that was made about the two personalities

He went on to imply that about the sports after.

Ronnie's commitment level isn't close to the bloke down my market who sells bananas but I would rather achieve what Ronnie has done in snooker than being the best banana seller in town, plus he's not the role model I'd base my commitment on either.

No he isn't.

I agree with this bit.

Yes - which I find amusing.



Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: henrik777 on September 22, 2010, 03:32:28 PM
Snooker = a sport.

Darts = a game.

Source: wikipedia!!

Seems obvious to me tho. Snooker requires you to be physically fit and is competitive in the sense you're playing against another player. It's also a game that requires a lot of skill. Darts doesn't require the same level of fitness and is just two people taking turns to throw darts at a board. I'm not denying that to get good at darts requires skill but it's not in the same league.

Calling darts a sport is a bit like trying to call Counter-Strike a sport because there's professional leagues for it.




Bill Werbeniuk was world number 8 and reached the quarters at the world champs 4 times. I very much doubt he was physically fit in anyones language.

Sandy

Think people need to consider what the word 'fit' means.  Pretty much means 'suitable for purpose', and that's why you can be fit to play darts when you might struggle a little at the decathlon.  The same way as Gebrselassie is one of the best long-distance runners of all time, but he'd be pretty naff at weightlifting or the shot-putt. 

Think some people need to consider reading lessons.

Sandy


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: Josedinho on September 22, 2010, 05:18:08 PM
Snooker = a sport.

Darts = a game.

Source: wikipedia!!

Seems obvious to me tho. Snooker requires you to be physically fit and is competitive in the sense you're playing against another player. It's also a game that requires a lot of skill. Darts doesn't require the same level of fitness and is just two people taking turns to throw darts at a board. I'm not denying that to get good at darts requires skill but it's not in the same league.

Calling darts a sport is a bit like trying to call Counter-Strike a sport because there's professional leagues for it.




Bill Werbeniuk was world number 8 and reached the quarters at the world champs 4 times. I very much doubt he was physically fit in anyones language.

Sandy

Think people need to consider what the word 'fit' means.  Pretty much means 'suitable for purpose', and that's why you can be fit to play darts when you might struggle a little at the decathlon.  The same way as Gebrselassie is one of the best long-distance runners of all time, but he'd be pretty naff at weightlifting or the shot-putt. 

Think some people need to consider reading lessons.

Sandy
So the bloke was unfit and didn't win anything and that proves you don't have to be fit to play snooker?


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: henrik777 on September 22, 2010, 06:16:32 PM
He has a world cup winners medal to his name as well as a title or two.

Sandy


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: gatso on September 22, 2010, 06:24:35 PM
I watched stephen lee beat nigel bond last night. sportsman he ain't


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: Scottish Dave on September 22, 2010, 06:56:07 PM
id like to see anyone on here disrespcting darts players throw 501 in 12 darts - from 10 attempts

Ive done this, but im a big fan of darts

just wanted to post my feat


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: stonecoldkiller on September 22, 2010, 11:27:39 PM
id like to see anyone on here disrespcting darts players throw 501 in 12 darts - from 10 attempts

Ive done this, but im a big fan of darts

just wanted to post my feat

Ton plus 3 dart average imo.


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: Scottish Dave on September 23, 2010, 03:39:38 AM
id like to see anyone on here disrespcting darts players throw 501 in 12 darts - from 10 attempts

Ive done this, but im a big fan of darts

just wanted to post my feat

Ton plus 3 dart average imo.

125+ avg

I was usually about 50-60 when i used to play a lot.


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: Girgy85 on September 23, 2010, 05:20:11 AM
I threw a 180 at Darts once!


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: sovietsong on September 23, 2010, 07:47:05 AM
I threw a 180 at Darts once!

In how many darts, 26?


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: RED-DOG on September 23, 2010, 08:14:42 AM
Mrs Red asks: Is motor racing a sport?


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: kinboshi on September 23, 2010, 09:53:24 AM
Snooker = a sport.

Darts = a game.

Source: wikipedia!!

Seems obvious to me tho. Snooker requires you to be physically fit and is competitive in the sense you're playing against another player. It's also a game that requires a lot of skill. Darts doesn't require the same level of fitness and is just two people taking turns to throw darts at a board. I'm not denying that to get good at darts requires skill but it's not in the same league.

Calling darts a sport is a bit like trying to call Counter-Strike a sport because there's professional leagues for it.




Bill Werbeniuk was world number 8 and reached the quarters at the world champs 4 times. I very much doubt he was physically fit in anyones language.

Sandy

Think people need to consider what the word 'fit' means.  Pretty much means 'suitable for purpose', and that's why you can be fit to play darts when you might struggle a little at the decathlon.  The same way as Gebrselassie is one of the best long-distance runners of all time, but he'd be pretty naff at weightlifting or the shot-putt. 

Think some people need to consider reading lessons.

Sandy

Yes, I read it.  Physically fit = physically suited for purpose.  My post still stands.


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: kinboshi on September 23, 2010, 09:59:14 AM
Are sumo wrestlers fit?

Is sumo wrestling a sport?

Can the average sumo wrestler eat more hot dogs than the average snooker player?

Interesting one Sumo.  They train with more dedication that most sports people.  They live in a 'heya' - a stable for want of a better word, where they eat, sleep and train almost everyday.  Some are exceptionally agile, supple and tremendously strong.  Of course, they're also fat bastards.  But that's part of being 'fit' for the sport.  The bigger the bulk, the harder they are to shift, and the more momentum they produce during an attack - simple physics.  Obviously, without technique this weight won't help.  Part of their training is to eat huge amounts of food - chicken being a main part of their diet.  If you look at the young sumo coming through the amateur ranks, they're often tall and relatively 'trim' blokes - often with a judo, karate or MMA background.  As they progress in their career they 'bulk up'. 

They're definitely sportsmen.  I'd also back the sumo to eat more hot dogs than the average snooker player, but probably back the snooker player to do more coke.

I don't reckon many sumo would be great at the 1,500m though.



Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: kinboshi on September 23, 2010, 10:03:22 AM
Mrs Red asks: Is motor racing a sport?

It is, and I'm sure that all F1 drivers are very fit as I believe it's very physically demanding to drive an F1 car.  As an aside, how fit does a jockey have to be?  I know they need to keep their weight down, but how strong and fit do you need to be to drive a horse?  Is Laz around to answer this one?


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: TightEnd on September 23, 2010, 10:35:25 AM
Motor racing is a sport. Yes they need a car, and yes technology means that driver aids have diluted the purity of that sport, but its a sport

Horse racing, jockeys are phenomenally fit, imo.


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: kinboshi on September 23, 2010, 10:58:53 AM
Motor racing is a sport. Yes they need a car, and yes technology means that driver aids have diluted the purity of that sport, but its a sport

Horse racing, jockeys are phenomenally fit, imo.

Well, I know Laz is.  But didn't know if he was the exception or the rule.


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: boldie on September 23, 2010, 11:22:09 AM
Motor racing is a sport. Yes they need a car, and yes technology means that driver aids have diluted the purity of that sport, but its a sport

Horse racing, jockeys are phenomenally fit, imo.

Fit and hard IMO..McCoy/Walsh and co are ridiculously tough.

Jockeys and Tour de France cyclists are on a par IMO.


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: Girgy85 on September 23, 2010, 11:38:48 AM
I threw a 180 at Darts once!

In how many darts, 26?

No actually it was 3 consecutive darts!


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: TightEnd on September 23, 2010, 11:40:36 AM
Motor racing is a sport. Yes they need a car, and yes technology means that driver aids have diluted the purity of that sport, but its a sport

Horse racing, jockeys are phenomenally fit, imo.

Fit and hard IMO..McCoy/Walsh and co are ridiculously tough.

Jockeys and Tour de France cyclists are on a par IMO.


tough, fit and hard yes

TourDeF cyclist fit? nope..imo


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: gatso on September 23, 2010, 11:52:49 AM
Jockeys and Tour de France cyclists are on a par IMO.

as I said on the other thread, your jokes just keep getting better and better. good work


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: boldie on September 23, 2010, 01:27:20 PM
Motor racing is a sport. Yes they need a car, and yes technology means that driver aids have diluted the purity of that sport, but its a sport

Horse racing, jockeys are phenomenally fit, imo.

Fit and hard IMO..McCoy/Walsh and co are ridiculously tough.

Jockeys and Tour de France cyclists are on a par IMO.


tough, fit and hard yes

TourDeF cyclist fit? nope..imo


Really? the tour is one of the most gruelling events someone can do..you have to be in remarkable shape to even complete it.



Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: buzzharvey22 on September 23, 2010, 01:33:10 PM
put a cyclist and a jockey thru a triathlon (maybe just a biathlon as the cycling is a bit unfair) and a cyclist would piss it


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: TightEnd on September 23, 2010, 01:33:41 PM
I meant a jockey is not in the same league as a TDF cyclist..


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: Jamier-Host on September 23, 2010, 02:59:33 PM
Who would you rather fight? 50 sumo sized snooker players or 1 hot dog sized sumo wrestler?

How many five year olds?


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: Jamier-Host on September 23, 2010, 03:03:25 PM
Just in case people think i've randomly come out as a paedo in a sports thread:

How Many Five Year Olds (http://archives1.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=0&Number=1556673&page=0&fpart=all&vc=1)


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: mondatoo on September 23, 2010, 09:08:43 PM
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/other_sports/snooker/9027943.stm


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: boldie on September 24, 2010, 10:13:09 AM
I meant a jockey is not in the same league as a TDF cyclist..

Ah, fair enough.


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: dizeeG on September 24, 2010, 10:43:12 AM
ronnie is pure genius / sick talent !


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: DaveShoelace on September 24, 2010, 01:07:15 PM
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/other_sports/snooker/9027943.stm

Don't hate him quite as much, he seems ok in this interview, obviously he was having a good day or was off his head.

lol at 'not caring about the money' while wearing a Money Shop logo


Title: Re: ronnie`s latest 147
Post by: TheChipPrince on September 24, 2010, 02:07:40 PM
More importantly than any of this Ronny rubbish...

Tabb has disappointingly chubbed out!!!