Snooker loopy

That's the problem isn't it? His record suggests that for the length of time required to win tournaments, he doesn't stay close enough to his 'a' game, long enough, often enough.

There's a lot of professionals now, and you can play as an amateur. For me your status in that doesn't make you a hardened professional, playing every match professionally. He goes out and chucks his arm. When it works, great, because the talent is enormous (I don't subscribe to 'natural' - snooker is one of those games where nothing is natural, it's a disservice to player or viewer to suggest these things are easy for some people. They are hard. It's just that some people progress further and quicker with hard work). When it doesn't work he's not a top player.

It doesn't work a lot more than it does.

Totally agree. I have stuck with triangle green. I've got a big box of the original dating back to the nineties. It tickles me that the players still on kicking chalk are Ronnie, Brecel,.......and me.

Yet amongst the best 'a' game players, he's won a minimal number of tournaments. Which is my point. Consistency and winning when playing badly is also an ability.

I didn't say that. It's most likely that the players with the most natural ability have never even played the game. If you were able to select the very best natural ability player, and drop them into a match with a pro, they would be absolutely hapless. Without having spent hours learning the table, controlling spin, adjusting for different run and bounce, learning angles, judging pace, controlling emotion, match psychology, reading your opponent, learning risk reward percentage.

There are players with ability, that outperform 'natural ability' players because they have trained on with graft. Compare a Lisowski with a Selby, for example.

The natural abilities that help you, are that your body and sight lines mean that you can get down 'naturally' and everything lines up. Because of my handedness and dominant eye on the other side, I struggle these days (as I'm getting older) to even be able to line up because of the contortions that needs. You might have a 'feel' for the timing of the ball, and naturally read potting angles. But this is just a start. There's a long way to go to be a complete snooker player. Which is why Brecel is miles behind a lot of less 'naturally' able players. Unless he's potting everything, for two weeks. Which rarely happens.

Natural attributes play a part in snooker, as they do in football. It determines progression and ceiling. Training and knowledge of the game makes the player. With all the natural ability in the world you won't make a great footballer training by eating crisps while watching porn all day, and your in game play won't come to much if all you do is smash the ball at the goal every time you see it. Even if you hit it lovely and sometimes it goes in.

Trump has, in recent years, put a lot more effort in to strategy, safely, and shot evaluation. Allied to how he hits the ball he's now world number one. Ronnie, the greatest player to play the game, only became a mature complete player after specifically taking time to learn these things under Reardon.

Brecel is nowhere near them. Except on days when everything goes in.

It's a very fan thing to judge players, in whatever sport, on things they do when everything is running for them. Coaches and players look for consistency and if necessary winning ugly. Competitive sport is about competing every day. Just ask Nuno.

It may help. I would never do it. I perhaps have the advantage of a natural dry hand ability (slightly aided by assiduously washing and drying my hands, and the cue, including cleaning and drying it, keeping it perfectly oiled, and carrying a cloth and towel when I play).

I like that natural connection between hand and stick.

Anyway. Ronnie fell over the line, and Brecel had his pants pulled down in the final session. He seemed delighted that he'd managed to throw his arm a bit, and now could go home and watch it on telly. Said he was pleased with his season. What's that, provisional 41 or some such?

That's the problem with natural ability. It doesn't scale.

I saw a suggestion that he was unhappy with not only his tip, but also his ferrule. The bonkers thing was there was a suggestion that he would change overnight from titanium to brass ferrule, and replace the tip. That is quite ridiculous as it would completely change how the cue would play. I don't know if he did, but if he did I would expect it to look a lot like this.

I don't think I have a verdict. They are quite different. I personally prefer the traditional brass....on how i have my cues set up (I have ten's of cues, all around the same weight, balance point, and ferrule and tip size. They all play slightly different).

The technical difference is largely that titanium is both strong and light. Brass is heavy and softer. With titanium the head is lighter, so there's less throw. So it slightly corrects off-centre striking, and gives a surer straight line cue ball. Which is great - unless you want to use throw and side to create or exaggerate an angle, something most pros spend tens of thousands of hours perfecting. Seems a bit mad to take that club out of the bag in case occasionally you hit the ball like a novice. Because of the weight of brass I perceive more 'feel' on the strike (I'm also an 'old' chalk person, which plays a bit part in this - being a tad more grippy, which helps with shots that throw), with titanium feeling a bit pingy to me. But it's hard to say...because you can't compare the exact same cue, side by side, with different ferrules. All cues are different. A whippy cue, with a titanium ferrule, might play with similar characteristics to hendry's broomstick with a brass ferrule. The only way to really know, and really get used to a cue, is to practice and play matches with it. There's no right and wrong, it's personal preference.

What is definitely wrong is making a cue definitely play differently, not being used to how it will work, and go out into the second session of a world championship semi-final with it.

I am never going to be an elite snooker player. I get my enjoyment from trying to get better, and having feel on the ball, the ability to work it, and the fun of wrestling with the variables. A lot of pros like to take as many of the variables out as possible, or minimise them (stiff cues, titanium ferrules, hard tips, modern resin based no kick less grip finer chalk). Snooker is a game of straight line reproducability, far removed from the whippy workable skills required of billiards. As modern snooker cues are far removed from old billiard cues. I quite like wrestling with more traditional equipment.

Ronnie is quite far to the feel end of the spectrum for a snooker player (hence amazing skill in the balls, more variable long game). In that respect I quite understand why he might think that this titanium bollocks just wont do....but he should have decided that a few weeks ago, and never changed mid-match.

Williams bringing out the bugs bunny face, as a result of the increasing number of missed high cuts that he's been moving on.

Not looking good for him, unless he can put together a string of birdee's.