Stevens is weird but still quite good choice. Because he also has that bottle and a good nerve-control. There could be named at least 30 current pro-players with an ability to a world beaters yet absolutely no results. Basically all those players if anything they really frustrates me. It is always at that point of the match where their shot choices starts to go astray. They will go for the most outrageous shots that they shouldn’t be going for and that is the only reason they don´t have success. I am talking about the sizeable breaks. Because only a one player can win a tournament, and only a few to have a consistent success. If thinking about the ranking points. But they are wasting their talent just otherwise. Not performing as well as they well could, or making the big breaks consistently. So I don´t think the overall standard have quite sky-rocketed as some people seems to be thinking. For example Peter Ebdon (a good player) won Jack Lisowski 10-9 without making a single century. Well Peter has always been like that, but obviously if some wasted talent would make century or a two to take a 6-2 lead, and then starting to play rubbish and losing it to some good player; it wouldn´t be any good would it. And it happens time after time. Perhaps weighting all the pros and cons before going for those "obvious" shots would help. If you could get them down to my club for 12 months weighting those pros and cons I think all those players COULD be a tournament winners. They know that, and they know that, and they even know that, but they don´t know THAT.. Obviously they don´t mean to play so poorly as the matches progresses. It is just problem that they don´t know all the things that for example people like Mark Allen or Judd Trump do know.