Rout wrote:All this Top 16 talk is actually a bit of an insult to Bunting's current ability and future potential. There are only 2 players in the world definitely better than Bunting at this moment in time. 3 at a push. Top 16 is already a foregone conclusion.
Rout, who are the top 2 if U may ask if for you Bunting is number 3?
Rout wrote:All this Top 16 talk is actually a bit of an insult to Bunting's current ability and future potential. There are only 2 players in the world definitely better than Bunting at this moment in time. 3 at a push. Top 16 is already a foregone conclusion.
Rout, who are the top 2 if U may ask if for you Bunting is number 3?
Bunting is very obviously a much better player than he is showing just now. Nevertheless I stand by my assertion he was never as good as some said he was. He is PDC top 16. On consistent form top maybe 10 or 12. I don't see him as a contender for a major anytime soon even if he finds his best form. I don't think my comparison with Ian White was too far out. It certainly doesn't look ridiculous in hindsight.
Rout wrote:I remember loads of people saying Bristow was the best player in the world.
Have you seen him play recently? He can't even average in the 60s. How anyone can say he was the best player in the world is beyond me.
FFS Mark. Surely you can't believe that this comparison bears any relevance to the discussion on Bunting's poor form over the past couple of years.
He is pointing out that a comment made on a player years ago is not relevant today, it's quite simple.
I would be pretty confident that Rout is more than capable of answering for himself.
He has multiple times yet you still insist on jumping in with the idiots.
Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
Unlike some of our posters on the forum, I always use the quote function to respond to the specific post I am commenting on. As yet have seen zero response from Mark in relation to the reply which you refer to, and if and when he does, will respond to that post accordingly.
Therefore do not have a scooby re your assertion that he responded multiple times.
ssjsa wrote:
FFS Mark. Surely you can't believe that this comparison bears any relevance to the discussion on Bunting's poor form over the past couple of years.
He is pointing out that a comment made on a player years ago is not relevant today, it's quite simple.
I would be pretty confident that Rout is more than capable of answering for himself.
He has multiple times yet you still insist on jumping in with the idiots.
Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
Unlike some of our posters on the forum, I always use the quote function to respond to the specific post I am commenting on. As yet have seen zero response from Mark in relation to the reply which you refer to, and if and when he does, will respond to that post accordingly.
Therefore do not have a scooby re your assertion that he responded multiple times.
Yes that is quite clear.
Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
"it's the same trolls spouting the same crap every other post.... you have to be some kind of sad act to watch nearly 8 hours of darts a day for 9 days just to post about how crap it is"
Murphio wrote:Bunting is very obviously a much better player than he is showing just now. Nevertheless I stand by my assertion he was never as good as some said he was. He is PDC top 16. On consistent form top maybe 10 or 12. I don't see him as a contender for a major anytime soon even if he finds his best form. I don't think my comparison with Ian White was too far out. It certainly doesn't look ridiculous in hindsight.
Great post from Murph. When you set aside the bullshit of the pro/anti Bunting factions, it is clear that currently he is performing way below the levels he was playing at when he won Lakeside and had such a great first year in the PDC. Hopefully he can get his game back on track and get back to his best.
Except White is not a World Champion. So the comparison is not a great example. Maybe Walton, Webster, Klaasen or Kist? I will leave out Hankey and Fordham.
ChrisW wrote:Except White is not a World Champion. So the comparison is not a great example. Maybe Walton, Webster, Klaasen or Kist? I will leave out Hankey and Fordham.
What are you on about? The point, at the time, was purely about form. The stuff Bunting was throwing may have been good enough to win the Masters and Lakeside but I said, standard wise, he would find a level between 16 and 10 in the world. He was not good enough to beat the likes of Lewis, Anderson, Wright, Taylor, Wade, Chisnall, Barney etc etc to win majors and would find a level alongside good but solid players like Ian White. I think that has been vindicated. It has nothing to do with Hankey or Klassen..
ChrisW wrote:Except White is not a World Champion. So the comparison is not a great example. Maybe Walton, Webster, Klaasen or Kist? I will leave out Hankey and Fordham.
What are you on about? The point, at the time, was purely about form. The stuff Bunting was throwing may have been good enough to win the Masters and Lakeside but I said, standard wise, he would find a level between 16 and 10 in the world. He was not good enough to beat the likes of Lewis, Anderson, Wright, Taylor, Wade, Chisnall, Barney etc etc to win majors and would find a level alongside good but solid players like Ian White. I think that has been vindicated. It has nothing to do with Hankey or Klassen..
Ah, but winning the Lakeside affirmed a level of inherent greatness in Bunting that makes it impermissible to compare him to riffraff like Ian White.
ChrisW wrote:Except White is not a World Champion. So the comparison is not a great example. Maybe Walton, Webster, Klaasen or Kist? I will leave out Hankey and Fordham.
What are you on about? The point, at the time, was purely about form. The stuff Bunting was throwing may have been good enough to win the Masters and Lakeside but I said, standard wise, he would find a level between 16 and 10 in the world. He was not good enough to beat the likes of Lewis, Anderson, Wright, Taylor, Wade, Chisnall, Barney etc etc to win majors and would find a level alongside good but solid players like Ian White. I think that has been vindicated. It has nothing to do with Hankey or Klassen..
In your opinion, not shared by most (fanboys aside).
"it's the same trolls spouting the same crap every other post.... you have to be some kind of sad act to watch nearly 8 hours of darts a day for 9 days just to post about how crap it is"
Bunting may well have been the best of a poor bunch at the time, playing people he beat most times. Life is easy, nothing to worry about. Stood out a mile amongst the detritus.
Played against the big boys, climbed the rankings accordingly, won a couple of things and did well for himself.
Then had to defend the money he won, wasn't up to it and drifted away.
Did nothing in the PL of any note. Now his game has fallen off a cliff.
BlueSpark wrote:Bunting may well have been the best of a poor bunch at the time, playing people he beat most times. Life is easy, nothing to worry about. Stood out a mile amongst the detritus.
Played against the big boys, climbed the rankings accordingly, won a couple of things and did well for himself.
Then had to defend the money he won, wasn't up to it and drifted away.
Did nothing in the PL of any note. Now his game has fallen off a cliff.
This is the problem with you trolls, you slag off the players.
They are comparable, always have been and always will, the better ones drift away and are replaced, only the ignorant, dumb or just plain reaction seekers think otherwise.
Bunting played a "poor bunch" moved to the "big boys" and raped them, explain that.
"it's the same trolls spouting the same crap every other post.... you have to be some kind of sad act to watch nearly 8 hours of darts a day for 9 days just to post about how crap it is"
BlueSpark wrote:Bunting may well have been the best of a poor bunch at the time, playing people he beat most times. Life is easy, nothing to worry about. Stood out a mile amongst the detritus.
Played against the big boys, climbed the rankings accordingly, won a couple of things and did well for himself.
Then had to defend the money he won, wasn't up to it and drifted away.
Did nothing in the PL of any note. Now his game has fallen off a cliff.
This is the problem with you trolls, you slag off the players.
They are comparable, always have been and always will, the better ones drift away and are replaced, only the ignorant, dumb or just plain reaction seekers think otherwise.
Bunting played a "poor bunch" moved to the "big boys" and raped them, explain that.
He was winning more than he lost, was the best player amongst that lot by miles.
Winning breeds confidence.
Played the better players, won a few at the beginning, now losing badly week after week and falling down the rankings. Struggling to arrest the slide.
BlueSpark wrote:Bunting may well have been the best of a poor bunch at the time, playing people he beat most times. Life is easy, nothing to worry about. Stood out a mile amongst the detritus.
Played against the big boys, climbed the rankings accordingly, won a couple of things and did well for himself.
Then had to defend the money he won, wasn't up to it and drifted away.
Did nothing in the PL of any note. Now his game has fallen off a cliff.
This is the problem with you trolls, you slag off the players.
They are comparable, always have been and always will, the better ones drift away and are replaced, only the ignorant, dumb or just plain reaction seekers think otherwise.
Bunting played a "poor bunch" moved to the "big boys" and raped them, explain that.
He was winning more than he lost, was the best player amongst that lot by miles.
Winning breeds confidence.
Played the better players, won a few at the beginning, now losing badly week after week and falling down the rankings. Struggling to arrest the slide.
Yes, bloody long beginning though eh?
"it's the same trolls spouting the same crap every other post.... you have to be some kind of sad act to watch nearly 8 hours of darts a day for 9 days just to post about how crap it is"
Did the right thing by switching when he did and fair play to him.
He was hyped to the bollocks when he did, frankly a lot of the games he won were against players who you wouldn't consider hard to beat.
Found out now to be distinctly average.
Taken a couple of years to get there, but now he has found his true level.
BlueSpark wrote:Did the right thing by switching when he did and fair play to him.
He was hyped to the bollocks when he did, frankly a lot of the games he won were against players who you wouldn't consider hard to beat.
Found out now to be distinctly average.
Taken a couple of years to get there, but now he has found his true level.
I was there his first weekend, battered MVG but missed doubles and won one, yeah lol.
Ignorant i'm going for.
"it's the same trolls spouting the same crap every other post.... you have to be some kind of sad act to watch nearly 8 hours of darts a day for 9 days just to post about how crap it is"
Not that I'm doing this for trolling purposes, I couldn't care less what Stephen wins or loses.
He was hyped up far too much when he switched, easy to climb the PDC rankings when you aren't defending anything.
Lo and behold, when he has to defend money, he struggled, same old story with these switchers.
Now drifting around nowhere near the top, a pale shadow of the feared player he once was.
It's been said on here a few times by people who know him better than most that he changed his darts in an effort to continue improving which ultimately led to a quite sudden and dramatic drop in form and results. That's cost him and set him back years. Even if you go back to your old set up your confidence in your technique is shot to bits with no guarantee of ever coming back.
There's a lot of players who fall into this trap and some don't ever recover. Dudbridge for example.
Rout wrote:It's been said on here a few times by people who know him better than most that he changed his darts in an effort to continue improving which ultimately led to a quite sudden and dramatic drop in form and results. That's cost him and set him back years. Even if you go back to your old set up your confidence in your technique is shot to bits with no guarantee of ever coming back.
There's a lot of players who fall into this trap and some don't ever recover. Dudbridge for example.
