Ronnie O'Sullivan v John Higgins

It's always a subject that gets me a bit tetchy I suppose, but honest opinions would be appreciated.

I like both players, and they're both fantastic at their profession. I don't think it's ever really been doubted that I'm a bit of a Ronnie fan, but my respect for Higgins is there.

For me, O'Sullivan will always be the better of the two players, IMO. He has acheived more than Higgins with far less commitment and effort. I expect Higgins to overtake O'Sullivan in terms of ranking wins, and right now I think he's the more likely to win a fourth World Title... but nothing will change my opinion.

At his best, I've always maintained I've never seen anything like Ronnie in any sport. He's ahead of Higgins right now in nearly every head-to-head, and I think that's a testament to him considering he's had a lot less interest and commitment, IMO.

I haven't watched much snooker this week. I'm very sad to see O'Sullivan struggling, and winding down. To watch him against Bingham the last night, a player he has always crushed, was sickening and left me thoroughly snake hissed off. But my love for the game won't fade with the decline of my favourite all time player...

Its ronnies problem if he is less committed.

I base it on what they have won and what they are likely to win in the future.

So i say higgins will be seen as the better player when both have retired.

My argument GJ is that he has acheived more than Higgins with less commitment... ahead with less effort...

Higgins may pass him out in a couple of head-to-heads, but it won't be by much at this stage. I think you've always had a dislike for Ronnie anyway. You placed Higgins ahead of him in player-of-last-decade even though by your criteria, O'Sullivan snake hissed all over him?

I should hope not too. Snooker is bigger than Ronnie although what he's given us in performances over the years is something I'll forever be grateful for. If you compare them they've been overtaking each other throughout their careers in terms of who's the best between them. On his day Ronnie can beat anybody including Higgins but it has to be on his day.

I wouldn't worry too much, we'll see plenty more of O'Sullivan on television. And for me personally I think something definitely occurred during the MSI of his match against Bingham. We'll probably never find out exactly what but he was trying to lose in the end and it was sad to see.

i dislike both

so inpartial in this

GJtheaussiestud wrote:i dislike both

so inpartial in this

But your criteria of 'won most' would have Higgins behind O'Sullivan for the 00's... even though you say Higgins was the best player of the 00's?

At the minute Ronnie is ahead. However I think Higgins will finish his career with more ranking titles. To overtake Ronnie in terms of achievement John will have to win 1 more world title.

In the big matches John has come out on top more often than not with a head to head lead of 15-9 in ranking matches and Masters.

Tubber you question Ronnie's commitment but don't forget John also slipped for many years in the mid 00's when he was known to be drinking heavily. That was a good 4-5 years in his prime were he heavily underachieved. however like Ronnie that was his fault.

Very hard to say until they both retire so i'm not going to say for certain but what I will say is Higgins has made much more of his talent so far and for that I respect him a lot, though O'Sullivan at his best is better to watch

case_master wrote:At the minute Ronnie is ahead. However I think Higgins will finish his career with more ranking titles. To overtake Ronnie in terms of achievement John will have to win 1 more world title.

In the big matches John has come out on top more often than not with a head to head lead of 15-9 in ranking matches and Masters.

Tubber you question Ronnie's commitment but don't forget John also slipped for many years in the mid 90's when he was known to be drinking heavily. That was a good 4-5 years in his prime were he heavily underachieved. however like Ronnie that was his fault.

casey

Didn't answer my question at all GJ... why do you place Higgins as the player of the noughties when O'Sullivan was ahead in every department? Including three world titles to two...

Anyway, feeling a bit tetchy, so I'll get away before I make a few enemies

thetubberlad wrote:Didn't answer my question at all GJ... why do you place Higgins as the player of the noughties when O'Sullivan was ahead in every department? Including three world titles to two...

i base it over their whole career tubbs for me they have achieved equal amount and so the deciding factor for me is who is likelyto achieve more big titles for the rest of their career's and that player shades the other

higgins

Well, I was referring to you rating Higgins as player of the 00's when I posed the question last year. It contradicts your criteria.

I'm not very hopeful for Ronnie. Achievement isn't the be all and end all of judging players. Higgins will overtake him in that respect, but O'Sullivan will forever be the better player in my mind. What he has done on a snooker table and for the game of snooker blows Higgins away every time for me... as much as I respect Higgins.

It will happen, but it will be an injustice. Then again... O'Sullivan has nobody to blame for the injustice but himself, and leaving this open to debate when it really shouldn't have been.

Goodnight all...

GJtheaussiestud wrote:i dislike both

so inpartial in this

Indeed

One of them decides to throw the match away when things aren't going his way , the other one throws it away if you give him 261,000 big ones

A bit like saying who's better between Hitler and Stalin

I didn't exactly back Higgins to the hilt with his case, and I'm not the biggest fan of his as a player. But Christ, this is really getting tedious. Hitler and Stalin? What have their misdemeanours got to do with anything I've asked? They're both class.

thetubberlad wrote:My argument GJ is that he has acheived more than Higgins with less commitment... ahead with less effort...

Higgins may pass him out in a couple of head-to-heads, but it won't be by much at this stage. I think you've always had a dislike for Ronnie anyway. You placed Higgins ahead of him in player-of-last-decade even though by your criteria, O'Sullivan snake hissed all over him?

To be honest i dont think between 2000 and say 2006 John was not that commited either. I and many other people thought before the 2007 world John was Finished a spent force in the game with only 5 Ranking Titles Between 2000 and 2006 his Last Major World or UK Coming in 2000.

so had John had the Drive at that time god knows what he would have won.

Between 1992 and 2004 Mark Williams was the Most Successful of the 3 of them god knows how much he would have won had he not got other intrests and lost motivation.

its 2 easy to say Ronnie had less motivation or commitment than John or Mark all 3 Been up and down Regarding comitment to the Game however at this Moment in time Ronnie is the most Successful but lets not lose Track John Higgins will be playing in his 36th Ranking Final on Sunday Ronnie has only reached 33 Ranking Finals.

and if John Wins he will be Level with Ronnie on 22 Ranking Tournaments.

That's why for me the darkest period I can remember is around 2006. Paul Hunter died, Williams had faded away and was losing everything, Higgins was a spent force, O'Sullivan seemed like he couldn't care less and everyone was moaning about the Dott v Ebdon world final and Hendry regained the WN1 spot when he was far from the best player. Strange times and it's a credit to Higgins and O'Sullivan that they regained their focus and got back to dominating again.

thetubberlad wrote:Anyway, feeling a bit tetchy, so I'll get away before I make a few enemies

I don't know why though Tubber, Higgins is a lot closer to Ronnie than Ronnie is to Hendry

Anyway, alot could happen before they retire, either of them could win another 2 World titles.

to be honest the last couple of years i dont really see any proper resistance being put up to the likes of higgins and o sullivan

the majority of todays younder players are one dimensional maybe with the excusion of selby and robertson they know how to mix it up tactically to an extent then you have the likes of maguire carter allen day cope even trump the rave reviews he been receiving but none when the going gets tough can really produce when you need to work hard when things arent going well they nowhere to be seen

all good and well having potential and class and flair making big breaks when things are going well but in snooker you need a lot more

i fear higgins and o sullivan will win a lot more titles yet in my opinion head to head i think only selby and robertson have a decent chance against them two otherwise higgins and o sullivan will win the vast majority of matches against the other players

murphy talk big in the sun if thats all to be believed well i for one agree with most of what he said if its true now he has a chance to let his cue do the talking first aginst williams i expect him to win then higgins

the match against robertson highlights in a way murphys one dimensional game because had he not been potting them off the lampshades what would he have fallen back on ? much can be said of the majority of todays youngsters

i can go on with the likes of liang wenbo and ding but ding i think the masters final a few years ago affected him he not properly recovered so i dont know what the score with him is

anyhow if todays generation players in their twenties want to make an impact they need to realise snooker is more than just about potting balls and show some guts and know how when things arent going their way not just fold

Ronnie vs Higgins is my favourite match. Remember last year's UK Semi, when we were all on here? Every Higgins fan thought Ronnie would win, and vice-versa.

There's not enough needle between Higgins and O'Sullivan to make it a classic rivalry.

have to agree with sonny

we should have a thread where we can discuss possible rivilaries developing

like robbo v murphy needle there

GJtheaussiestud wrote:have to agree with sonny

we should have a thread where we can discuss possible rivilaries developing

like robbo v murphy needle there

yes your right

Sonny wrote:There's not enough needle between Higgins and O'Sullivan to make it a classic rivalry.

totally agree just to much respect and mutual love between them

but

Mark Williams and Stephen Hendry are Great Friends but there was a feel of a great rivalry between them still does but i think they create a rivalry by taking the snake hiss out of each other.

but for me Ronnie v Selby is the tops at the moment but Robbo v Murphy could be a classic over the next few years.

Yes top of the shop in today's game has to be O'Sullivan v Selby. Second for me is Murphy v Maguire and I can't think of a third. I'm hoping Selby v Robbo will become a prominent one over the next few years.

That's a good point though from SnookerFan, the Higgins v O'Sullivan rivalry is a good rivalry based on the fans aspect rather than the players themselves.

Murphy v Robertson is a good rivalry and you could tell from Robbo's reaction during an unfunny Murphy quip in their match what he thinks of Murphy, and his subsequent remarks in a post match interview (which I'm taking from posts on here and haven't actually seen what he said) about Murphy's game being one-dimensional. Well it's fair to say Williams proved Robbo right tonight but there is definitely a rivalry between Murphy and Robbo going on. I remember in a BBC interview a few years ago Murphy was saying how he couldn't understand why he had such a problem in beating Neil Robertson when the pair of them spent their apprenticeship in the 17-48 bracket for a few seasons. They have history.

I think a needle rivalry thread is called for.

IMO Ronnie is just the more talented player.

BUT....I think John is a far more professional professional than Ronnie will ever be and is a harder match.

Might seem strange but I'd rather play against Ronnie for a few quid than Higgins......for the record I'm not keen on playing either for anything significant

Who would you fancy your chances against sickpotter if you had to name a player?

I'd fancy my chances against Joe Delaney at the Crucible