Alex Higgins overrated

Johnny Bravo wrote:

Dragonfly wrote:I have been an avid snooker watcher for almost 4 decades. Now I will probably get roasted for this, but someone has to say it. Alex Higgins was overrated. True, winning world title in 72 at very young age was a fine achievement. But you can hardly say he had a glittering career after that. He was a gritty competitor, good tactician and wasn't short of bottle. But overall his results are poor. You could say he would have won more only for Davis. So would White, Thorburn and Griffiths. Too often he just wasn't good enough and while capable of some good results on his day, was just as capable of losing to anyone (bob chaperon). I know he was edgy and made for exciting viewing at times, but I just don't think he is up there with the all time greats. Ultimately he just didn't win enough

Greatness is the result of adding 3 major factors: achievements+peak form+ impact on the sport.

1. His achievements are pretty good. After all, the man was a 2 time world champion. Plus he also won the Uk and the Masters and played a few more finals of these 3 majors.

2. His peak form is weak by modern standards, but more than good enough for his era, and that's what he should be judged upon.

3. His impact on the sport is probably greater than any other player in history. He put snooker on the map, he took it out of the shady pubs to the TV audiences and large masses. For that alone, he is a top 10 player.