which was the most competitive era in snooker and why ?

TheRocket wrote:I just watched the 2002 quarterfinal between Hendry and Doherty. Incredible standard. No doubt prime Doherty would do a lot of damage in the current era.

Pink Ball wrote:I'm not sure why we're comparing the last era's 'big four' (Trump, Robertson, Selby, Ding) to Doherty, who was in the chasing pack in the '90s and '00s. I agree those four players are better than Doherty, but I think they only really put that beyond doubt in the last five years. Compared to Hendry, Higgins, Williams and O'Sullivan, I don't think any of the four of them outrank the '90s and '00s big four. You could argue that none of the four have outranked even present-day Ronnie O'Sullivan.

Iranu wrote:

cupotee wrote:i saw plenty of doherty in the 90's and i wouldn't put him in the same class as selby robertson and trump , and i don't see at all what would be wrong with o sullivan higgins and williams hanging around in what is a physically negligible game with their practice facilities and vast experience , and none of these three are any lesser than when they were playing in the mid 00's , higgins in the early to mid 00's may have had one eye on his family which is why he didn't do much at the crucible between 02 to 06 , and stevens somewhat epitomises the very weakness in tactical astuteness , strenght of character , competiveness and killer instinct which is why he certainly to the casual observer at least has done next to nothing in the last fifteen years , again just an opinion .

See? Told you I wouldn’t get you to agree with me

The point isn’t that they’re hanging around, it’s that they’re winning tournaments with semi-regularity (Ronnie with actual regularity). I’d say Higgins and Williams are definitely lesser than they were 15 years ago. Ronnie probably a lesser player BUT much stronger mentally which counteracts that. Not just them but Hawkins, Perry etc being regular top 16 players.

If it’s a stronger era, why is Michael Holt for example in pretty much the same ranking as he was 15 years ago? He’s 42 and it’s not like he’s a special case like the all-time greats. Theoretically he should be getting pushed down the rankings, unless you think he’s improved in the last 10 years to stagnate at late-20s to early-30s (OK he’s dropped to 44th this season).

Yes, Stevens did lack strength of character and killer instinct. That’s my point. If he was playing the likes of Gilbert, Lisowski etc in finals he’s have won more because they all lack bottle but he was a better player than them. In 5 of Stevens’ 8 ranking finals he played Ronnie, Williams, Higgins and Hendry. He also beat Doherty in the final of the Masters.

I think if Doherty was in today’s era his ranking record would be comparable to Robbo’s, Selby’s and Trump’s (not saying he’d have three world titles of course.) Don’t forget this is the guy who broke Hendry’s stranglehold on the World Title.

cupotee wrote:well michael holt has his own table at home and with his experience it's hardly a surprise his still in the top 64 , also the fact that stevens wasn't a great steely matchplayer yet had a strong crucible record in the early 00's hints that those years may be a little lighter than people think , doherty had plenty of years between say 96 and 04 to really put in a good record , he didn't because he just wasn't that good and certainly not as good as selby and trump , also anthony hamilton was tenth in the world rankings in 2000 , a regular type lower 16 player now like perry hawkins and bingham is better than him and it isn't very close , again hints at a slightly lighter qualifying rounds back then , last 64 last 32 and 16's .

Iranu wrote:

cupotee wrote:well michael holt has his own table at home and with his experience it's hardly a surprise his still in the top 64 , also the fact that stevens wasn't a great steely matchplayer yet had a strong crucible record in the early 00's hints that those years may be a little lighter than people think , doherty had plenty of years between say 96 and 04 to really put in a good record , he didn't because he just wasn't that good and certainly not as good as selby and trump , also anthony hamilton was tenth in the world rankings in 2000 , a regular type lower 16 player now like perry hawkins and bingham is better than him and it isn't very close , again hints at a slightly lighter qualifying rounds back then , last 64 last 32 and 16's .

You’re missing my point about Holt, I think. Until this season (which could well be a blip) he’s been around late20s to early30s in the rankings for most of the last decade. Even with his own table, if the quality of the tour has increased, he would have to improve as a player just to stay still in the rankings. I’ve seen enough of Holt to be pretty confident that’s not the case. So why hasn’t he dropped in the last decade as the standard around him has improved?

Doherty’s been discussed to death so I won’t flog that particular horse any longer.

Hamilton was a great player and I’m not at all sure that Hawkins and Perry are better than him. Don’t forget that those players were around in the mid-00s themselves! But it’s only in the last decade they’ve become players you’d expect to see in the 16!

And Hamilton by the way won a ranking event in 2017 despite being a good 10 years past his best. Hamilton supports my point, he doesn’t refute it.

cupotee wrote:i think holt is simply a top 30 - 64 type player whatever form or luck besets him , with his experience and the amount of places say 30 - 64 equals 35 places he's good enough to stay on , i don't think any new standard is particularly strong enough to remove him unless there's 20 - 30 new zhou yuelong's or yan bingtao's coming in in the next few years , i never saw hamilton as a great player , and couldn't in a month of sunday's see him give an in form o sullivan as hard a match was it the 2012 world final , perry also simply a better stronger player , and that german master's final he won to all accounts ali carter was rubbish in the final , anyway decent chatting .

Iranu wrote:

cupotee wrote:i think holt is simply a top 30 - 64 type player whatever form or luck besets him , with his experience and the amount of places say 30 - 64 equals 35 places he's good enough to stay on , i don't think any new standard is particularly strong enough to remove him unless there's 20 - 30 new zhou yuelong's or yan bingtao's coming in in the next few years , i never saw hamilton as a great player , and couldn't in a month of sunday's see him give an in form o sullivan as hard a match was it the 2012 world final , perry also simply a better stronger player , and that german master's final he won to all accounts ali carter was rubbish in the final , anyway decent chatting .

Again, I’m not talking about Holt staying on tour. I’m talking about him staying in the same position in the rankings. So I’m not sure why you’re talking about knocking him off the tour.

Logically, unless Holt has improved his game over the last decade, which he hasn’t, he should be steadily slipping down the rankings as the general standard around him grows. Not necessarily off the tour, but it doesn’t make sense for him to stay (barring the odd blips) in the same ~24-33 ranking bracket for the last 15 years if today’s game is better than it was 15 years ago.

People talk about the strength of today’s tour as if there ARE 20-30 Zhou Yuelongs or Yan Bingtaos propping up the tour outside the top 32. There aren’t, that’s my entire point.

FWIW, Hawkins (2-13) and Hamilton (2-11) have very similar records against Ronnie. And Hamilton was a very heavy scorer, I could easily see him playing a good match against Ronnie but not quite being able to stop him pulling away.

Exactly. Carter, another player whose best days are behind him, also gets to the final and is beaten by Hamilton.

cupotee wrote:

CUE CRAFTY wrote:Yan Bing Tao!! Yay or no not really, groan i'm dying ZZzzzzzzzz.....

whats the point your making , do you want me to reply with a picture of alain robidoux , can't be asked .

Pink Ball wrote:I think if Doherty were in his prime these days, that big four of Selby, Trump, Robertson, Ding would probably have a fifth member. Not as good as the other four, but strong enough to be held in similar regard to them.

TheRocket wrote:the strength at the very top (Top 5 or Top 6) was probably better during the late 90's , early 00's, mainly because you had Hendry,O'Sullivan,Higgins and Williams all in their prime. You also had World champions like Ebdon or Doherty who would have won a lot more if they hadnt had to face the 4 legends all the time. Same for the other players like Hunter,Stevens or Lee.

But when it comes to strength in depth the current era is definitely stronger.

Johnny Bravo wrote:

TheRocket wrote:the strength at the very top (Top 5 or Top 6) was probably better during the late 90's , early 00's, mainly because you had Hendry,O'Sullivan,Higgins and Williams all in their prime. You also had World champions like Ebdon or Doherty who would have won a lot more if they hadnt had to face the 4 legends all the time. Same for the other players like Hunter,Stevens or Lee.

But when it comes to strength in depth the current era is definitely stronger.

Ronnie's prime was around 2012-2013, cause that's when his mental approach was the best.
Higgins's was 2007-2011.