Post a reply

Re: All-time ranking list

Postby SnookerEd25

Juddernaut88 wrote:Jamie Burnett the forgotten man.


Who? :chin: I don’t remember him :sad:

:chuckle:

Of course I do, mainly for a statistical mark he made in the history of the game.

He was the last man Terry Griffiths beat at the Crucible in 1996. It was also Terry’s 14th consecutive 1st round win, a then record which stood for another 22yrs, until ROS beat it.

Re: All-time ranking list

Postby chengdufan

All-time rank 102
Name: Mark Bennett
d.o.b. 23/09/1963
Years as professional: 1986 - 2001

All-time ranking points: 345401

Number of days ranked: 5425
3650-day ranking range: 15-71
Highest rank: 15
Days at highest rank: 8 (03/11/1990 - 11/11/1990)
Age at highest rank: 27
Full ranking events played: 125
First event: 1986 International Open (aged 23)
Last event: 2001 Welsh Open (aged 37)
Best ranking finish: Semi Final - 1996 Grand Prix

Best three events by rankings revisit points:
1. 531 - 1990 World Championship
L96 w 10-3 v Eric Lawlor
L64 w 10-1 v Murdo MacLeod
L48 w 10-9 v Rex Williams
L32 l 9-10 v John Parrott

2. 523 - 1996 Grand Prix
L96 w 5-1 v Darryn Walker
L64 w 5-3 v Peter Ebdon
L32 w 5-0 v Chris Small
L16 w 5-3 v Steve Davis
QF w 5-1 v Tony Drago
SF l 3-6 v Euan Henderson

3. 501 - 1988 UK Championship
L96 w 9-7 v Vic Harris
L64 w 9-4 v David Taylor
L32 w 9-6 v Jimmy White
L16 l 4-9 v Barry West

Re: All-time ranking list

Postby chengdufan

Going through Bennett's record, he feels more like a 120 than a 102, but there he is. The numbers are what they are.

Re: All-time ranking list

Postby SnookerEd25

I remember his run to the Grand Prix SF. He played some really sublime stuff that week. Never before, and never after, but great while it lasted. He would have been a worthy winner of that tournament. Also remember that, at the time, he owned a Bookmakers in Wales.

Re: All-time ranking list

Postby HappyCamper

mark bennett is also the name of a scottish rugby player.

Re: All-time ranking list

Postby SnookerEd25

Also a guy who used to be our plumber, but largely irrelevant so I didn’t mention it :chuckle:

Re: All-time ranking list

Postby chengdufan

All-time rank 101
Name: Michael Judge
d.o.b. 12/06/1975
Years as professional: 1992 - 2011 | 2021 - Present
Current rank: 142

All-time ranking points: 346091

Number of days ranked: 6533
3650-day ranking range: 10-53
Highest rank: 10
Days at highest rank: 66 (17/03/2001 - 07/05/2001 | 01/12/2001 - 16/12/2001)
Age at highest rank: 25-26
Full ranking events played: 163
Minor ranking events played: 8
First event: 1992 Grand Prix (aged 17)
Best ranking finish: Semi Final - 2004 Grand Prix

Best three events by rankings revisit points:
1. 743 - 2001 World Championship
L96 w 10-1 v Paul McPhillips
L64 w 10-9 v Anthony Davies
L48 w 10-7 v Jimmy White
L32 w 10-6 v John Parrott
L16 l 7-13 v Ken Doherty

2. 501 - 2007 Grand Prix
Qualifying group (L96):
l 1-4 v Fergal O'Brien
w 4-1 v Drew Henry
w 4-2 v Kevin van Hove
w 4-1 v Rodney Goggins
w 4-3 v David Roe
w 4-1 v Matthew Selt
w 4-1 v Joe Jogia

Group (L48):
w 4-3 v Ken Doherty
w 4-2 v Mark Allen
l 2-4 v Mark Williams
w 4-3 v Ian McCulloch
w 4-2 v Ricky Walden

L16 l 2-5 v Ronnie O'Sullivan

3. 495 - 2000 UK Championship
L96 w 5-2 v Craig Harrison
L64 w 6-4 v Jason Prince
L48 w 9-3 v Terry Murphy
L32 w 9-6 v Paul Hunter
L16 l 6-9 v Stephen Hendry

Re: All-time ranking list

Postby chengdufan

Looks like when Judge was 25, everything just came together and he started producing snooker at the highest level, but before and since that one or two year peak, his form has been patchy or non-existent.

Re: All-time ranking list

Postby chengdufan

We've reached the half-way point! Here is a recap of the players ranked 101-200 (+201 and 202 who were covered but have since dropped out of the top 200). I've added in their place of birth as a point of interest, where the information is available:

101 12/06/1975 Dublin, Ireland Michael Judge 346091
102 23/09/1963 Newport, Wales Mark Bennett 345401
103 07/07/1969 ?, Scotland Billy Snaddon 344848
104 16/09/1975 Hamilton, Scotland Jamie Burnett 343045
105 15/10/1951 Dublin, Ireland Patsy Fagan 342324
106 28/05/1960 Swansea, Wales Tony Chappel 340448
107 12/09/1985 Longton, England Jamie Cope 340004
108 16/07/1968 Tiptree, England Brian Morgan 334595
109 21/04/1956 Neath, Wales Steve Newbury 333308
110 07/03/1985 London, England Matthew Selt 332465
111 05/07/1991 Neath, Wales Michael White 332119
112 04/11/1955 Dublin, Ireland Eugene Hughes 331360
113 08/03/1995 Dilsen-Stokkem, Belgium Luca Brecel 329862
114 22/06/1970 Cardiff, Wales Paul Davies 328873
115 04/06/1977 Wagga Wagga, Australia Quinten Hann 328814
116 26/03/1971 Wellingborough, England Rory McLeod 324948
117 03/05/1986 Bexhill-on-Sea, England Jimmy Robertson 323698
118 08/08/1983 London, England Kurt Maflin 322786
119 14/02/1988 Neath, Wales Jamie Jones 318188
120 31/05/1969 Mansfield, England Jason Ferguson 313873
121 02/06/1966 Nuneaton, England Mick Price 312187
122 27/02/1968 Worcester, England Dave Finbow 309478
123 10/04/1953 Brisbane, Australia John Campbell 306281
124 18/04/1985 Bangkok, Thailand Thepchaiya Un-Nooh 302811
125 11/08/1983 Walsall, England Mark Joyce 302347
126 24/04/1975 Preston, England Stuart Pettman 301479
127 20/11/1971 Middlesbrough, England Mike Dunn 300793
128 11/08/1985 Wallsend, England Gary Wilson 299076
129 11/02/1954 Southport, England Les Dodd 298468
130 24/08/1972 Telford, England Adrian Gunnell 294666
131 16/08/1987 Dalian, China Tian Pengfei 293920
132 06/12/1969 Cardiff, Wales Anthony Davies 293790
133 05/05/1937 Glasgow, Scotland Eddie Sinclair 293368
134 09/05/1948 ?, England Dave Martin 293156
135 04/08/1971 Pontefract, England Jimmy Michie 293026
136 18/05/1958 Greater Sudbury, Canada Bob Chaperon 290682
137 12/12/1923 Teignmouth, England John Pulman 289851
138 20/09/1969 Dungannon, Ireland Patrick Wallace 289693
139 08/09/1953 Georgetown?, Canada Mario Morra 289103
140 14/12/1976 London, England Alfie Burden 288647
141 15/02/1968 Middlesbrough, England Jonathan Birch 287211
142 06/03/1972 Derry, Northern Ireland Terry Murphy 286480
143 11/02/1976 Newbridge, Wales Lee Walker 284737
144 14/01/1947 Edinburgh, Scotland Murdo MacLeod 282356
145 28/12/1968 Bristol, England Mark Johnston-Allen 281039
146 11/12/1969 Leeds, England Peter Lines 279268
147 07/01/1943 Belfast, Northern Ireland Paddy Morgan 278810
148 06/04/1921 Dungannon, Ireland Jackie Rea 277932
149 04/10/1990 Jinzhou, China Li Hang 277604
150 04/03/1970 Accrington, England Shokat Ali 275854
151 16/08/1974 Espoo, Finland Robin Hull 273785
152 07/11/1929 London, England Pat Houlihan 273171
153 20/03/1959 Bedford, England Nigel Gilbert 271598
154 30/06/1945 Connah's Quay, Wales Colin Roscoe 271273
155 17/06/1970 Belfast, Northern Ireland Jason Prince 269079
156 19/12/1969 Manchester/Hessle/Bury/Macclesfield?, England Nick Dyson 264796
157 25/01/1936 London?, England Mark Wildman 260404
158 30/06/1967 Melbourne, Australia Euan Henderson 259745
159 14/11/1944 Salford, England Paul Medati 252368
160 10/04/1958 ?, England Steve Duggan 251871
161 19/03/1994 Perth, Scotland Scott Donaldson 251126
162 05/03/1929 Tumble, Wales Gary Owen 249076
163 01/12/1990 Swindon, England Liam Highfield 248947
164 14/07/1990 Grimsby, England Stuart Carrington 244928
165 08/01/1962 Derry, Northern Ireland Tommy Murphy 244291
166 04/08/1973 Chester, England Nick Walker 242743
167 19/08/1971 Scunthorpe, England Sean Storey 242552
168 15/09/1967 ?, England Nick Terry 242256
169 30/06/1974 Scunthorpe, England Matthew Couch 242131
170 28/12/1986 Wallasey, England Robbie Williams 241010
171 24/01/1998 Chengdu, China Zhou Yuelong 236216
172 29/01/1959 ?, Northern Ireland Jack McLaughlin 234812
173 17/06/1988 Uffculme, England Sam Baird 233917
174 25/12/1991 Shaoguan, China Zhang Anda 233852
175 15/04/1971 Bournemouth, England Paul Wykes 231848
176 31/07/1988 Neath, Wales Daniel Wells 225823
177 23/04/1938 Tredegar, Wales Roy Andrewartha 225750
178 04/09/1976 Turnhout, Belgium Bjorn Haneveer 225593
179 27/06/1980 Bristol, England Andrew Norman 222915
180 08/12/1983 Tianjin, China Liu Song 218932
181 24/10/1958 ?, England Barry West 218760
182 16/05/1974 Ipswich, England Bradley Jones 216084
183 27/11/1988 Kilkenny, Ireland David Morris 214166
184 12/03/1956 Liverpool?, England Bob Harris 213943
185 03/12/1948 Southport?, England Bill Oliver 208932
186 11/03/1985 Preston, England Ian Burns 208032
187 05/07/1976 Limerick, Ireland Leo Fernandez 206680
188 15/07/1992 Mueang Samut Prakan, Thailand Noppon Saengkham 205938
189 21/05/1922 Toowoon Bay, Australia Warren Simpson 205567
190 03/04/1997 Xi'an, China Zhao Xintong 204829
191 16/02/2000 Zibo, China Yan Bingtao 204547
192 01/04/1965 Dublin, Ireland Paddy Browne 203935
193 11/10/1987 Taiyuan, China Yu Delu 202564
194 04/08/1972 Dublin, Ireland Joe Delaney 202449
195 09/01/1955 ?, Canada Marcel Gauvreau 198969
196 14/07/1982 Farnworth, England Craig Steadman 198699
197 08/12/1954 Skegness, England Graham Cripsey 197405
198 08/02/1976 Bradford, England Simon Bedford 196789
199 27/10/1990 Guangzhou, China Cao Yupeng 196480
200 05/05/1985 Leeds, England David Grace 196325
201 17/01/1975 ?, England Gary Ponting 196058
202 03/05/1969 ?, England John Read 192870

Re: All-time ranking list

Postby chengdufan

Surprisingly, there have been no fewer than 4 players from Neath covered so far.

Re: All-time ranking list

Postby gmg

Many thanks Chengdufan, really enjoying this list and as promised, here are my views on the most underrated and overrated players thus far:

Underrated
-As you’ve mentioned, there are some flaws with the list, which means that several younger players are highly underrated. Even so I’d have expected Yan Bingtao and Luca Brecel to be higher as they already appear to have achieved more than most other players that have appeared so far and Brecel must have a decades worth of points to his name by now. But they’re only going to get higher so it won’t be long before their overall ranking becomes more accurate.

-The opposite is also true in that players who were at their peak prior to the introduction of the rankings are either missing (e.g. Joe Davis) or lower than they should be in terms of their overall impact on the game. It feels like a bit of an insult to have John Pulman at 137 for instance and I guess even players like John Spencer, Ray Reardon and even Alex Higgins will end up being a bit lower on this list than if the rankings had commenced in the early-70’s rather than the mid-70’s. It would still have been nice to have found some way of taking account for this and including the great Joe and others amongst the list.

-I’ve compared notes with Hamlyn’s 1988 book Who’s Who in Snooker to see if there are any notable absentees from the list and probably the most notable is the late Steve Longworth who was a regular top-32 player back in the 80’s and made quite a few TV appearances and even beat Kirk Stevens at the Crucible one year. I’m fairly certain that he won’t be appearing in the top 100 but to not appear in the top 200 is a surprise as in my book he achieved more than several names who have already appeared on the list even if some of his best performances came in non-ranking events (1985 English Championship, 1991 Mita Masters). For the record the others who appeared in Hamlyn’s book without appearing on this list are Roger Bales, Dave Gilbert (the 80’s version), Ken Owers, Joe O’Boye and Jon Wright. Of these, Owers and maybe O’Boye were the only other ones I may have expected to scrape into the top 200.

-The two other most underrated players who do actually appear on the list for me are Barry West (181) and Bob Chaperon (136). West broke into the top 32 after only one season on the circuit and remained there for the rest of the decade. He made quite a few TV appearances in the 80’s and a few winning ones as well but Chengdufan has already pointed out that a swift rise and fall do not do much for a players position on this all-time list. I guess Chaperon’s career followed a similar path even though he went all the way to winning a major ranking tournament and was also on the winning Canadian team in the (non-ranking) World Cup shortly afterwards.

Overrated
-Paul Medati (159): really not sure how he got this high. Only made 1 or 2 TV appearances, none of which he came close to winning. Much more renowned for owning a snooker club and for giving Alex Higgins a shiner after an argument.

-Paddy Morgan (147): Played in the Australian Masters a few times and represented Australia in the World Team Championship on a few occasions but I can’t really remember him doing anything much at all in World ranking events. I notice he did beat Cliff Thorburn in the 1974 World Championship but probably at a time when Thorburn was getting used to the British tables. He did very little else though so is probably my vote for most overrated player.

-Mario Morra (139): Was originally my vote for most overrated player until I noticed that he beat Jimmy White to make the TV stages of his maiden ranking tournament back in 1983. Made a hanful of TV appearances in total but lost all of them.

-Eddie Sinclair (133): Somehow manages to be three places above a World ranking event winner and eleven places above Murdo Macleod who was widely regarded as the best Scottish player for most of the 80’s until Stephen Hendry emerged. V bizarre that he is this high especially as my main memory of him is when he turned Steve Davis over 3-1 in the non-ranking 1985 World Cup. Even then Scotland still went on to lose 5-4 to England.

-Adrian Gunnell (130): I recall Gunnell during the 00’s but not really a whole lot good about him at all.

-Mike Dunn (127): journeyman pro who seemed to hang on to his pro card for years without doing anything remotely spectacular but I guess a sustained spell of plodding like this has helped his cause.

-Paul Davies (114): a couple of good runs in overseas ranking events in the very early stages of his career but barely ever seen on British TV and therefore a widely unknown quantity even amongst snooker enthusiasts.

There are definitely a few that I would have expected to have appeared by now who haven’t so I'm guessing they must have made it into the top 100 and will therefore be going down on my next overrated list.

Re: All-time ranking list

Postby badtemperedcyril

Eddie Sinclair was a legend of Scottish snooker, albeit his professional accomplishments were modest. He was over 40 when he turned pro having been a stalwart of the Scottish team at the Home Internationals since their inception in 1968. He was one of the leading players in Britain from the early to mid 60’s but as we know, there was no professional game to progress to at the time. He was once reputed to have lost a drinking contest to Bill Werbeniuk, by 36 pints to 35!

Re: All-time ranking list

Postby gmg

Yes, the drinking match against Werbeniuk is now Sinclair's biggest legacy but am sure there are plenty other stories as well. There was talk of Alan McManus writing a book on Scottish snooker a couple of years ago and I really hope he gets around to finishing it as I'd love to read it and am sure Eddie would be a central figure. I am aware of how big a force he was in Scottish snooker back in the day but still surprised that he appears so high on the list regardless.

Re: All-time ranking list

Postby chengdufan

Before I go on, the half-way point provides a perfect time for pause and there are a few comments I'd like to make.
First is a big thank you to everyone who has been reading, getting some pleasure from the list, and dare I say it, learning a little about snooker history. It is the knowledge that the list is engaging people that makes all of this worthwhile in my mind.
In particular, I'd like to thank those who have added in their own comments through the journey, either just as a nod to check in to show they're reading, to let me know of typos, to challenge the rankings, or to add more information and background about particular players.
I'm most grateful to SnookerEd, Badtemperedcyril and GMG who have been very engaged with the list throughout and have contributed their knowledge, giving me smiles and teaching me things.

Re: All-time ranking list

Postby chengdufan

(1/2) As we head into the meat of the list, the top 100 ranked players of all-time, I'd like to go over how we have got to this point.

With my first introduction to rankings as a boy in the 1980s, watching the World Championships on the BBC, I couldn't quite wrap my head around the commentators' insistence on referring to the provisional end of season rankings when talking about the players, rather than their actual current rankings. I didn't really grasp that the provisional rankings were actually a better indicator of the quality of the player at the time than the actual rankings.
As an adult, I reflected on that childhood experience and began to research the rankings more carefully. I realised that the snooker ranking system and tour set-up was fundamentally flawed, not indicating the players' current ability as I believed a ranking list should, but created to preserve the professional status of the sport's stalwarts and longtime favourites. There were attempts by the governing bodies at various points to improve things; I think there was recognition that the system was flawed. But they have never managed to implement something which has addressed the problem to a satisfactory level. The official top 16 has in fact always been reasonably well put together, and as that group is all that the majority of people in the game care about, problems with the list lower down have been allowed to be ignored. For me though, as someone who cares deeply about fairness, seeing how critical those rankings from 40-80 are in determining people's lives, it makes me angry to see that those ranking positions in particular are not any reflection of a player's achievements.

In 2014, WST changed the way rankings worked again. This time though, rather than implementing a change to make an improvement in how the list is made up, the change was made for commercial reasons in an attempt to promote the sport. I could write another thousand words on what is wrong with the current system, but for the sake of brevity, I will simply state what is obvious to anyone with an ounce of snooker knowledge: The prize money rankings are bullocks.

In 2017, I had had enough and decided I would create my own ranking system so that at least I had something I could personally refer to to see where the two players I was watching were at.
I thought deeply about what data could be used, what factors contribute to indicate a player's ability, and the relative importance of each of these factors. I trialled a few different ideas over a period of 3 years and through statistical analysis, comparing my systems with the official rankings to see how accurately they could predict a match result, I found that my systems outperformed the official rankings. And each iteration of my system made a gradual improvement. I wasn't fully satisfied though, feeling that there was still room for improvement. In 2020 therefore, I decided I needed to go back in time.

I had realised that the current rank of a player's opponent was a key factor in determining how many points he should be awarded for his performance in a match. But what was the player's current rank? There needed to be a starting point, and I thought, 'Why not make the starting point the first ever ranking event?'
Those of you familiar with the 'Rankings Revisit' thread will know that I spent the next year inputting data from every single official ranking event match, from the 1974 World Championship up to the present day.

What this resulted in was a historical log of players' rankings all the way back to 1974. And not the fundamentally flawed official rankings, but the much more accurate 'Chengdufan' rankings. I did periodical statistical checks as the rankings progressed and continually found that my rankings could much more accurately predict the winner of any given match than the official rankings.

...

Re: All-time ranking list

Postby chengdufan

...

(2/2) I chose the official ranking events to provide the data for my rankings and did not include any other competitions. What I like about this is that I know that all professionals had the opportunity to play in the competitions used, and (aside from the first couple of World Championships) those players who entered knew that their performance would contribute to their ranking. There are drawbacks to this. Those who are professional are not necessarily the best players at any given time. And there have been too many points in snooker history at which the frequency of ranking events has been sparse or non-existent.

While I firmly believe that using only the official ranking events to create the rankings is the best that can possibly be done, I recognise that it does not result in perfection, and there will certainly be some people ranked too high or too low at any given time.
The Chengdufan rankings since 2011 have a very high degree of validity, while those from 1974-1984 have a very low degree of validity (while still being better than the official rankings).

This now brings us to the all-time ranking list. It is important to recognise what this list is, and what it is not. It does not list the players in order of greatness and it does not list the players in order of their peak ability. What it does do is list the players in order of how well they performed in ranking events over the course of their career. I have deliberately chosen the name all-time ranking list for this reason.
I have rather arbitrarily chosen a player's best ten years as the basis of their rank. I think that 10 years is about right in terms of assessing someone's career performance. However, it is worth recognising that if I had chosen 5 years, or 8 or 15 ... the list would be different. It is certainly up for debate if for example you think that someone who was at the top for 3-5 years but nowhere to be seen otherwise should be ranked higher than someone who was a ten year journeyman, consistently around the 40-60 ranking range. My all-time rankings reward sustained mediocrity over flashes-in-the-pan.

I hope you find the top 100 interesting. Please keep the comments coming.

Re: All-time ranking list

Postby chengdufan

gmg wrote:Many thanks Chengdufan, really enjoying this list and as promised, here are my views on the most underrated and overrated players thus far

This is a fantastic post. Thank you for taking the time to put it together and share it. In response, I will provide something of a critique of your comments. What I will say is in the spirit of debate.

Underrated/Overrated
It is important to recognise that the list is not an attempt to rate each player, rather it is an assessment of their overall career performance in ranking events.

For (most of) the players you have highlighted, it may be better to say that they under- or overperformed in the ranking events they took part in in their career.

As you’ve mentioned, there are some flaws with the list
Yes and no. The list does what it says on the tin and ranks the players' performance in ranking events. But we cannot say that the list is 100% accurate in indicating who was a better player than who. I would argue that it is probably the best all-time ranking list that has ever been produced though.

several younger players are highly underrated
I disagree. Would you have a young player come in and move up and down the list as their career becomes calibrated? Should a player who wins the first event he ever plays immediately go in to the number one spot on the list until his performance is calibrated? No, I don't think so. A player's personal points total should only be able to increase, not decrease. Yan and Brecel are far too early in their careers to be able to say where they will end up on the list.

It feels like a bit of an insult to have John Pulman at 137 for instance and I guess even players like John Spencer, Ray Reardon and even Alex Higgins will end up being a bit lower on this list than if the rankings had commenced in the early-70’s rather than the mid-70’s. It would still have been nice to have found some way of taking account for this and including the great Joe and others amongst the list.
I kind of agree. But I blame the organisers of the game, in its early days especially. If you look at football, there was an organised league structure back in the 19th century. It took far too long for snooker to sort itself out. What it means for this list is that players born before 1955 have not been given a fair crack of the whip.

players who were at their peak prior to the introduction of the rankings are either missing (e.g. Joe Davis) or lower than they should be in terms of their overall impact on the game.
Sure, but this all-time ranking list is not a measure of a person's impact on the game. That is not its intention.

absentees from the list and probably the most notable is the late Steve Longworth
Yes, Longworth is at number 213 on the all-time ranking list, despite having a Chengdufan ranking high of 21 in October 1985. He played in 76 events in the 11 years between 1984 and 1994 but was only ranked in my top 64 between January 1985 and December 1988 (4 years).

Roger Bales, Dave Gilbert (the 80’s version), Ken Owers, Joe O’Boye and Jon Wright.
Bales is down at 263 having peaked at 42 in my rankings.
Gilbert is 248th, with a peak rank of 47.
Owers is 243rd, peaking at 50.
O'Boye is 209th. He got up to 22nd in March 1988.
Wright is 239th with a high rank of 32.

All these players had relatively short careers and fall foul of the ten year criteria.

The two other most underrated players who do actually appear on the list for me are Barry West (181) and Bob Chaperon (136). West ...but Chengdufan has already pointed out that a swift rise and fall do not do much for a players position on this all-time list. I guess Chaperon’s career followed a similar path even though he went all the way to winning a major ranking tournament and was also on the winning Canadian team in the (non-ranking) World Cup shortly afterwards.
Indeed.

West broke into the top 32 after only one season on the circuit and remained there for the rest of the decade. He made quite a few TV appearances in the 80’s and a few winning ones as well
True, but these facts are largely irrelevant in assessing a player.

Overrated
-Paul Medati (159)
-Paddy Morgan (147)
-Mario Morra (139)
-Eddie Sinclair (133)
-Adrian Gunnell (130)
-Mike Dunn (127)
-Paul Davies (114)

The rankings of these players are all quite faithful and accurate representations of their performances. I wonder if you have considered that what the list tells you is that perhaps you have been underestimating the ability of these players? And perhaps over-estimating in your mind players like West and Chaperon? Your reflections apear to be a combination of anecdotal evidence based on some specific matches which you remember seeing on TV, and the official ranking lists (which are and always have been codswallop). Meanwhile, the position of the players on this all-time list is based on the statistical evidence of every frame that they ever played in a ranking event.

Your mindset seems to be that you already know the relative abilities of every player ever and this list is there to either confirm what you already know, or is in some way wrong. I would encourage you to approach it more open-mindedly. If someone is positioned unexpectedly in your mind, have another look at their record on cuetracker and be prepared to have your mind changed.

In saying this, I don't want to discourage you from sharing your opinion. You are likely very correct in saying a player should be ranked higher or lower because of their ability. Though I put forward that this is because they simply didn't perform as well in matches as their ability suggested they maybe could or should have, rather than the list not being an accurate reflection of their actual results.

There are definitely a few that I would have expected to have appeared by now who haven’t so I'm guessing they must have made it into the top 100 and will therefore be going down on my next overrated list.
It is great to hear from someone who has followed snooker in depth for so long and has such a deep knowledge of the game. I look forward to your continued contributions, which have added to this thread immensely.

Re: All-time ranking list

Postby chengdufan

All-time rank 100
Name: Rod Lawler
d.o.b. 12/07/1971
Place of birth Liverpool, England
Years as professional: 1990 - 2021
Current rank: 122

All-time ranking points: 346612

Number of days ranked: 11382
3650-day ranking range: 11-47
Highest rank: 11
Days at highest rank: 91 (15/09/1996 - 15/12/1996)
Age at highest rank: 25
Full ranking events played: 297
Minor ranking events played: 52
First event: 1990 Grand Prix (aged 19)
Last Event: 2021 Championship League (aged 50)
Best ranking finish: Runner Up - 1996 International Open

Best three events by rankings revisit points:
1. 693 - 1996 International Open
L96 w 5-3 v Chris Shade
L64 w 5-0 v Martin Clark
L32 w 5-3 v Stephen Hendry
L16 w 5-3 v Billy Snaddon
QF w 5-1 v Dave Finbow
SF w 6-5 v Nick Pearce
F l 3-9 v John Higgins

2. 666 - 1996 World Championship
L96 w 10-8 v Darren Clarke
L64 w 10-6 v Wayne Brown
L48 w 10-5 v Dennis Taylor
L32 w 10-6 v John Parrott
L16 l 6-13 v Dave Harold

3. 521 - 2012 PTC Event 3
L128 w 4-1 v Ian Glover
L64 w 4-1 v Stuart Carrington
L32 w 4-2 v Simon Bedford
L16 w 4-3 v Stuart Bingham
QF w 4-3 v Stephen Lee
SF w 4-0 v Dominic Dale
F w 4-2 v Marco Fu

Re: All-time ranking list

Postby chengdufan

For Rod, I've created a chart of rank against age, which is chronologically linear. This kind of representation will make comparisons between players much easier and is generally just better than what I have been doing. I took me bloody ages though (fitting, given the player!), so I'm not sure it is sustainable. I'll need to get more efficient if I'm to continue doing this for the whole top 100

Image

Re: All-time ranking list

Postby SnookerEd25

chengdufan wrote:Looks like when Judge was 25, everything just came together and he started producing snooker at the highest level, but before and since that one or two year peak, his form has been patchy or non-existent.


Although, I have to say, some of the snooker he’s been playing in the Seniors in recent years has been pretty impressive, and he’s done well to carry that over and secure a Tour place. A mini-revival for a canny veteran.

Re: All-time ranking list

Postby SnookerEd25

Juddernaut88 wrote:I never knew Rod Lawler reached a ranking final before.


You never asked :shrug:

Re: All-time ranking list

Postby Juddernaut88

SnookerEd25 wrote:
Juddernaut88 wrote:I never knew Rod Lawler reached a ranking final before.


You never asked :shrug:


I'll ask you next time if I have questions about certain players <ok>

Re: All-time ranking list

Postby chengdufan

All-time rank 99
Name: Peter Francisco
d.o.b. 13/02/1962
Place of birth Cape Town, South Africa
Years as professional: 1984 - 1995

All-time ranking points: 347705

Number of days ranked: 4340
3650-day ranking range: 12-55
Highest rank: 12
Days at highest rank: 24 (02/10/1986 - 26/10/1986)
Age at highest rank: 24
Full ranking events played: 87
First event: 1984 International Open (aged 22)
Last Event: 1995 World Championship (aged 33)
Best ranking finish: Semi Final x 2 - 1986 International Open | 1987 Grand Prix

Best three events by rankings revisit points:
1. 566 - 1986 International Open
L64 w 5-2 v Mark Wildman
L32 w 5-4 v Alex Higgins
L16 w 5-2 v Marcel Gauvreau
QF w 5-3 v Silvino Francisco
SF l 7-9 v Cliff Thorburn

2. 467 - 1987 Grand Prix
L64 w 5-3 v John Rea
L32 w 5-2 v Joe Johnson
L16 w 5-1 v Graham Cripsey
QF w 5-3 v Willie Thorne
SF l 4-9 v Dennis Taylor

3. 378 - 1995 World Championship
L96 w 10-4 v Joe Jogia
L64 w 10-6 v Anthony Hamilton
L48 w 10-8 v Mick Price
L32 l 2-10 v Jimmy White

Re: All-time ranking list

Postby chengdufan

I've made a further slight change to the graph, by making it run from ages 17-50. This should cover the majority of players (with a few notable exceptions), and will make it easier to compare.

Here's Peter Francisco:

Image

Re: All-time ranking list

Postby gmg

Thanks Chengdufan. Fair enough points mostly but by your own admission no ranking system is flawless so will always overestimate some and underestimate others. On that basis I make no apologies for my approach being solely based on anecdotal/ observational evidence even though I accept that I may be over/underestimating certain players myself. True, TV appearances could never be used as specific criteria in any ranking system but they do give some gauge of how players have fared under the severest of pressure. And the early system placed a heavy emphasis on this as (with the odd exception) players in the 70's and 80's only tended to earn ranking points if they reached the TV stages. So in that sense I do believe they have some relevance in such arguments.

One thing I do disagree with is dismissing previous versions of the official ranking list as ‘codswallop’. Yes, they’ve often been far from perfect, particularly in the early days but in my view they’ve always done a reasonably good job at placing players in roughly the right positions and in that sense I think they've largely been useful overall.


   

cron