Rankings revisit - a trip through history

LDS wrote:More great stuff Chen. Just a quick question, after the last WC I was expecting a list-to-date of ranking title winners, but it never came, and your mentioning of Hendry's 33rd title reminded me to ask.

LDS wrote:Thanks for that, awesome.

So we're pretty much 10 years into the class of '92 being knocking around somewhere or other. And after 10 years, it clearly looks like John Higgins is the primary '92er, while Williams and O'Sullivan are relatively evenly matched.

And people wonder why O'Sullivan is so in awe of Higgins while being generally competitive with Williams, even after he surpasses both in the public mind and in total results and the like.

Well, for all of the first part of his career, John Higgins was the superior player, by pretty much all the metrics. No.1 for longer, more ranking titles, World Champ first, etc etc. So O'Sullivan would have spent a really huge amount of years looking up to John.

Williams on the other hand, is someone for whom O'Sullivan would always have seen as an equal, someone for whom their achievements are very similar up to this point and therefore someone he would have visualised as more within his basket of competition.

AKA: "I don't mind losing to Higgins, I expect to lose to Higgins, but I really should be beating Williams" and "Oh no, Williams has won again, no way am I letting him get one ahead of me" whereas with Higgins it would be simply "Higgins has won again? I expected that".

LDS wrote:Thanks for that, awesome.

So we're pretty much 10 years into the class of '92 being knocking around somewhere or other. And after 10 years, it clearly looks like John Higgins is the primary '92er, while Williams and O'Sullivan are relatively evenly matched.

And people wonder why O'Sullivan is so in awe of Higgins while being generally competitive with Williams, even after he surpasses both in the public mind and in total results and the like.

Well, for all of the first part of his career, John Higgins was the superior player, by pretty much all the metrics. No.1 for longer, more ranking titles, World Champ first, etc etc. So O'Sullivan would have spent a really huge amount of years looking up to John.

Williams on the other hand, is someone for whom O'Sullivan would always have seen as an equal, someone for whom their achievements are very similar up to this point and therefore someone he would have visualised as more within his basket of competition.

AKA: "I don't mind losing to Higgins, I expect to lose to Higgins, but I really should be beating Williams" and "Oh no, Williams has won again, no way am I letting him get one ahead of me" whereas with Higgins it would be simply "Higgins has won again? I expected that".

chengdufan wrote:I wonder if it was Williams' great 99-00 season that spurred Ronnie on to the 01 World title

Holden Chinaski wrote:But it was Ronnie who came out on top in their biggest match. He beat John 18-14 to win the World Championship.

LDS wrote:

chengdufan wrote:I wonder if it was Williams' great 99-00 season that spurred Ronnie on to the 01 World title

Yes, that's exactly what I was thinking.

Holden Chinaski wrote:But it was Ronnie who came out on top in their biggest match. He beat John 18-14 to win the World Championship.

I think it would take more than one result in one match to overturn 10 years of inferiority complex/fandom, however you want to phrase it.

You could still see the dynamic between them at this years Masters event, some thirty years after they both turned pro. Where most people complain about feeling intimidated by Ronnie, they forget so easily that Ronnie is human as well, and he has his players that he is subconsciously intimidated by/in awe of/ inferiority complex however you want to phrase it. And that John instinctively just isn't intimidated by Ronnie, and quite the reverse.

Holden Chinaski wrote:In the end, Ronnie won their biggest match, leads the head to head, has won 7 more rankers than John and won two more World Championships and ten more Triple Crown titles than John. There's no doubt Ronnie admires Higgins, and Higgins is definitely not intimidated by Ronnie. But Ronnie is much more successful and he has beaten John in some very big matches, including a world final.

LDS wrote:

Holden Chinaski wrote:In the end, Ronnie won their biggest match, leads the head to head, has won 7 more rankers than John and won two more World Championships and ten more Triple Crown titles than John. There's no doubt Ronnie admires Higgins, and Higgins is definitely not intimidated by Ronnie. But Ronnie is much more successful and he has beaten John in some very big matches, including a world final.

I don't think you understand what kind of conversation is taking place here...

Holden Chinaski wrote:If I read you posts correctly, I think you're saying Ronnie is intimidated by Higgins but Higgins is not intimidated by Ronnie. I'm saying that, while you may be right, this hasn't stopped Ronnie to have the upper hand in their head to head, to win some big matches against John including their biggest match, and to win a lot more titles than John. So, even though Ronnie admires John, it hasn't been that much of a problem. And when John looks at Ronnie's career records and compares them to his own records, he probably feels a bit inferior. Especially when he compares his Triple Crown titles to those of Ronnie. And you can bet your life they would both agree their biggest match was the World final, and Ronnie's admiration of Higgins didn't stop him to win that match.

Holden Chinaski wrote:Watache.

Juddernaut88 wrote:I'm sure many people would have felt that was hamiltons chance of landing a ranking title and was he ever going to have another chance again?