How many World titles to become an ATG?

Ronnie agrees with the poll results.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JoYQLorRWd4#t=3m24s

Dragonfly wrote:I voted 3. Williams is certainly an all time great. Won loads of other stuff too.

I have always struggled with the whole Alex Higgins legend thing. Ok he won 2 and not a huge amount otherwise. His win in 82 was hugely helped by Davis early exit. Is he better than Robertson with 1 win. Absolutely no way.

I think anyone who wins 3 is up there with the best of the best.

Higgins won the UK Championship, the Masters (twice), British Open and Irish Masters (twice). He had an incredible career.

Pink Ball wrote:

Dragonfly wrote:I voted 3. Williams is certainly an all time great. Won loads of other stuff too.

I have always struggled with the whole Alex Higgins legend thing. Ok he won 2 and not a huge amount otherwise. His win in 82 was hugely helped by Davis early exit. Is he better than Robertson with 1 win. Absolutely no way.

I think anyone who wins 3 is up there with the best of the best.

Higgins won the UK Championship, the Masters (twice), British Open and Irish Masters (twice). He had an incredible career.

People forget that Alex was at his best in the 70's when there were very few tournaments. Yet he still won plenty of majors in the 80's when he'd come to rely more on a shrewd tactical game.

Pink Ball wrote:

Dragonfly wrote:I voted 3. Williams is certainly an all time great. Won loads of other stuff too.

I have always struggled with the whole Alex Higgins legend thing. Ok he won 2 and not a huge amount otherwise. His win in 82 was hugely helped by Davis early exit. Is he better than Robertson with 1 win. Absolutely no way.

I think anyone who wins 3 is up there with the best of the best.

Higgins won the UK Championship, the Masters (twice), British Open and Irish Masters (twice). He had an incredible career.

A. Higgins might have won 3 worlds. He started playing to the crowd in 1980, & Thorburn ground him down in the final session.

Not my opinion, the words if Clive Everton on the History of Snooker video / DVD - & he generally knows what he is talking about.

I've watched a majority of the 1980 World Final on YT and fair to say once Alex had a huge lead on Thorburn, he started to take on ridiculous long pot attempts at pace.

He missed most of them, and left Thorburn plum in the balls.

Once Alex started to treat his opponent with respect again, it was already too late, Thorburn had all the confidence he needed to become world champ.

Yeah but if he’d won in 80 would he have had the motivation to win in 82? I think it’s doubtful.

Iranu wrote:Yeah but if he’d won in 80 would he have had the motivation to win in 82? I think it’s doubtful.

This is very true. History would have been different - perhaps Jimmy White would have won one (or more)...

TheRocket wrote:Ronnie agrees with the poll results.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JoYQLorRWd4#t=3m24s

Ronnie bum licks Higgins, for a change.

Such a delicate turn of phrase you have SF

If only Alex Higgins would have won 2 more world titles at least.

SnookerEd25 wrote:

Pink Ball wrote:

Dragonfly wrote:I voted 3. Williams is certainly an all time great. Won loads of other stuff too.

I have always struggled with the whole Alex Higgins legend thing. Ok he won 2 and not a huge amount otherwise. His win in 82 was hugely helped by Davis early exit. Is he better than Robertson with 1 win. Absolutely no way.

I think anyone who wins 3 is up there with the best of the best.

Higgins won the UK Championship, the Masters (twice), British Open and Irish Masters (twice). He had an incredible career.

A. Higgins might have won 3 worlds. He started playing to the crowd in 1980, & Thorburn ground him down in the final session.

Not my opinion, the words if Clive Everton on the History of Snooker video / DVD - & he generally knows what he is talking about.

A while ago, I constructed my own rankings from 1969 onwards taking into account all the professional tournaments. It's far from perfect, of course, because some events were invitational or a select group anyway but nonetheless, I feel it offers a more accurate feel of the balance of play than the official world rankings did, which counted just the previous three World Championships.

What is even more remarkable is that Higgins scored very lowly in the 78 and 79 World's in which he lost in the last 16 and quarter final and yet is still miles ahead at the top of the list. My point to all this, is Alex probably could've gone on to win in 77, 78 and 79 had he not gone out 13-12 on each occasion (his opponents being Mountjoy, Fagan and Griffiths). Reardon were Spencer were starting to decline; Davis was yet to arrive and thus, Higgins have seized the opportunity.

My top 16 for 1979/80 was:

1 A Higgins 65
2 J Spencer 48
3 C Thorburn 47
4 R Reardon 38
5 T Griffiths 38
6 Den Taylor 35
7 D Mountjoy 33
8 J Virgo 27
9 G Miles 27
10 E Charlton 25
11 P Mans 25
12 S Davis 19
13 F Davis 19
14 K Stevens 17
15 B Werbeniuk 16
16 Dav Taylor 13

I excluded the UK because it was open only to UK residents.

Tournaments included:
World Championships (78 & 79), Masters, Canadian Open, Champion of Champions, Holsten Lager, Bombay International, Pontins Pro, Limosin, Wilsons, Padmore, B&H Irish, Gold Cup, Pontins Camber Sands.

Higgins never won the British open. He was beaten in the final by that all time legend Bob Chaperon.

Higgins had a long career. In that career he did win the triple crown. Hendry did that in 1 season. Higgins was plagued by inconsistencies throughout his career and his success rate was poor

Iranu wrote:Robertson is definitely an all-time great. If we agree that multiple world champions top the list in order of number of victories (which I partially agree with), Robertson is either the 14th or 15th most successful player ever with Judd the only single-time world champion with more ranking event wins but two fewer UK Championships, so it depends how much you value those. If we discount the pre-open-era players he’s in the top 10.

Denying Robertson is an all-time great is ridiculous.

Edit: Robbo’s also won two Champion of Champions which if it stays on the calendar, will be considered a larger factor alongside the TCs.

Robertson is no where close to being an ATG, he needs 2 more world titles. Same with Judd. No single-time WC champion can be an ATG otherwise what's the point of the term, it has to have meaning. Can't give it to everyone.

Robertson would swap his career with Selby's or Williams's in a heartbeat if you offered it to him today no matter how many ranking events he wins and 2 CoCs doesn't even equal 1/4 of a single WC, let alone 2 WCs

Saying Robertson is an all-time great is like saying Andy Murray is an all-time great LMAO

Ronnie laid out the correct benchmark during his 2020 WC presentation, 3+ tho he didn't mention Selby but put Williams in

0

it's only one tournament out of many. Domination and being considered a all-time great cant be measured by this one event however i do think you need to perform in these events but only one can win it per year. last season Ronnie won it for the 6th time, but id have preferred winning a lot of events like Judd did.

For me Jimmy White is a all-time great and not many would disagree with me on that.

Wildey wrote:0

it's only one tournament out of many. Domination and being considered a all-time great cant be measured by this one event however i do think you need to perform in these events but only one can win it per year. last season Ronnie won it for the 6th time, but id have preferred winning a lot of events like Judd did.

For me Jimmy White is a all-time great and not many would disagree with me on that.

Totally agree on Jimmy.

But not the Ronnie bit. As a Ronnie fan I'm much happier that he won the Worlds.

Jimmy White and Ding Junhui are the only two players never to have won the World Championship that I class as all-time greats, and I have no doubt in my mind that they are all-time greats.

Ronnie O'Sullivan, Stephen Hendry, John Higgins, Steve Davis, Mark Williams, Ray Reardon, Mark Selby, Neil Robertson, Judd Trump, Alex Higgins, Ding Junhui, Peter Ebdon, Jimmy White, John Parrott and John Spencer are the all-time greats as it stands, and nothing will take that away from any of those 15 players.

Dan-cat wrote:

Wildey wrote:0

it's only one tournament out of many. Domination and being considered a all-time great cant be measured by this one event however i do think you need to perform in these events but only one can win it per year. last season Ronnie won it for the 6th time, but id have preferred winning a lot of events like Judd did.

For me Jimmy White is a all-time great and not many would disagree with me on that.

Totally agree on Jimmy.

But not the Ronnie bit. As a Ronnie fan I'm much happier that he won the Worlds.

yea that is preferable as a fan possibly but as a player id rather be dominant than turn up in sheffield and win

Question

Had Ronnie won 6 ranking titles and all of them the World Title and thats it in 28 years basically one tournament win every 5 years would that be preferable to winning 37 and no TC event?

Wildey wrote:Question

Had Ronnie won 6 ranking titles and all of them the World Title and thats it in 28 years basically one tournament win every 5 years would that be preferable to winning 37 and no TC event?

I guess it wouldn't. Ronnie would be seen like Joe Davis whose only title wins are the World Title.

Yes I know back in Joe Davis there was only the world title to be won, but nowadays if Ronnie had done the same with 6 or more people would compare him to Davis.

But for instance, for me Ronnie's best ever season was when he won the UK and Worlds in the same season, and not the one when he won 5 ranking events, that for me goes 2nd.

Wildey wrote:Question

Had Ronnie won 6 ranking titles and all of them the World Title and thats it in 28 years basically one tournament win every 5 years would that be preferable to winning 37 and no TC event?

Yes

Acé wrote:Robertson is no where close to being an ATG, he needs 2 more world titles. Same with Judd. No single-time WC champion can be an ATG otherwise what's the point of the term, it has to have meaning. Can't give it to everyone.

Robertson would swap his career with Selby's or Williams's in a heartbeat if you offered it to him today no matter how many ranking events he wins and 2 CoCs doesn't even equal 1/4 of a single WC, let alone 2 WCs

Saying Robertson is an all-time great is like saying Andy Murray is an all-time great LMAO

Am I suggesting giving it to everyone? No. I’m suggesting that the (at worst) 15th most successful snooker player of all time out of many, many hundreds is an all-time great. It’s quite simple.

Did I say the CoC equalled a World Title? No. I was comparing him to Judd in terms of importance of events they’ve won, does Judd have two more World Titles? No. So why are you bringing up Williams and Selby? They’d each swap their careers with Ronnie’s in a heartbeat, does that mean they’re not all-time greats? No.

Another crowbarred tennis comparison and not even a good one. Someone like Becker or McEnroe would be a better comparison but it doesn’t make sense anyway because the sports’ achievements aren’t comparable.

Robertson’s clearly an all-time great. The most successful player not to be is probably Murphy.

I find it hard to put White and Ding in the all time great category. Obviously their lack of world titles is the reason why. Failure at the Worlds shows a shortcoming in a player. Could be lack of bottle, poor concentration over long distance events, inability to perform on the biggest stage of all and so on.

Both White and Ding are wonderful players. White is the most entertaining player to watch I've ever seen. But like I say the World championships exposed his weaknesses. An all time great doesn't get exposed like that. They keep their concentration, don't choke at the finish line and prove time and again how strong they are.

Wildey wrote:Question

Had Ronnie won 6 ranking titles and all of them the World Title and thats it in 28 years basically one tournament win every 5 years would that be preferable to winning 37 and no TC event?

What career would you choose if you were a pro?

I would take the 6 World Titles.

Holden Chinaski wrote:

Wildey wrote:Question

Had Ronnie won 6 ranking titles and all of them the World Title and thats it in 28 years basically one tournament win every 5 years would that be preferable to winning 37 and no TC event?

What career would you choose if you were a pro?

I would take the 6 World Titles.

Absolutely. 6 world titles beats 37 other events half of which Ronnie himself probably has forgotten about.

Holden Chinaski wrote:

Wildey wrote:Question

Had Ronnie won 6 ranking titles and all of them the World Title and thats it in 28 years basically one tournament win every 5 years would that be preferable to winning 37 and no TC event?

What career would you choose if you were a pro?

I would take the 6 World Titles.

+1

6 World titles vs 37 ranking titles & no TC events? I'd take the 6 World titles without any hesitation.

TheRocket wrote:

Holden Chinaski wrote:

Wildey wrote:Question

Had Ronnie won 6 ranking titles and all of them the World Title and thats it in 28 years basically one tournament win every 5 years would that be preferable to winning 37 and no TC event?

What career would you choose if you were a pro?

I would take the 6 World Titles.

+1

6 World titles vs 37 ranking titles & no TC events? I'd take the 6 World titles without any hesitation.

It would be such a weird CV though. Some kind of ridiculous Crucible Specialist. An anomaly that would forever be called into question.

Nobody's ever going to win six World Titles without being a reasonably consistent tournament winner outside it.

KrazeeEyezKilla wrote:Nobody's ever going to win six World Titles without being a reasonably consistent tournament winner outside it.

Krazee lays down some truth.

Dragonfly wrote:I find it hard to put White and Ding in the all time great category. Obviously their lack of world titles is the reason why. Failure at the Worlds shows a shortcoming in a player. Could be lack of bottle, poor concentration over long distance events, inability to perform on the biggest stage of all and so on.

Both White and Ding are wonderful players. White is the most entertaining player to watch I've ever seen. But like I say the World championships exposed his weaknesses. An all time great doesn't get exposed like that. They keep their concentration, don't choke at the finish line and prove time and again how strong they are.

Ricky Gervais voice: You're mental!!

Jimmy is a grand custodian of this sport and is up in the top tier of legends in this game.