Davis: Although his temperament was good, I don't think it was exceptional. In his prime he seemed to rely on his all around superior play, and there were a few times when his opponents managed a surprising fightback that he seemed to wilt (83 UK final and 85 World final most famously). Winning the 07 Masters from 8-4 down is perhaps one of Steve's most famous comebacks, but I think O'Sullivan gave him some help.
Hendry: Temperament was considered rock solid during his most dominant years. Many players were afraid of him, and sometimes they would surprise themselves and find they were a few frames in front. Few players had the guts to convert their lead though, and Hendry was like a shark when he sensed blood. Perhaps his comebacks against Hallett in 91 Masters, and White in 92 Worlds are most well known. My only criticism is that he seemed to lose this edge once that the O'Sullivan, Higgins and Williams trio had matured. Hendry was a bully on the table, and I don't think he had quite the same confidence when he was up against players who weren't afraid of him.
Higgins: I think his temperament has improved with age. He has obviously had some amazing fightbacks in the last decade, and a knack of finding his best snooker when it matters the most. Some great comebacks against top level opposition including Maguire 07 WC, Williams 10 UK, Trump 12 Shanghai. Higgins has also converted some classic matches in terms of the playing standard, especially the 06 Masters final (10-9) and his World Q-Final against Selby (13-12) (Selby made 5 centuries and played incredibly).
Reardon: He was before my time, so I can't legitimately comment.
Selby: In a sense I think his temperament has indirectly led to the hate that many snooker followers feel towards his game. When Selby is in trouble he keeps things tight. Any player can attempt to do this in theory, but it requires incredible tactical nounce, patience and temperament to make this strategy work. So a Selby comeback will be slow, painful and inevitable. O'Sullivan calls him "The Torturer", and that's understandable when Ronnie seems to lead for a while nearly every time Selby beats him. Selby will happily grind down great tactical players too. He did this to Higgins in their 07 World final, converting a 12-4 deficit to 14-13 (before Higgins managed to break free). This time Higgins led 10-4, but wasn't able to hold Selby back.
Williams: In his prime he exemplified the person who could play like it means nothing when it means everything. Most players with a great temperament seem to carry an incredible intensity with their play (Hendry, Higgins, Ebdon etc). Williams just seemed so laid back in comparison. He had a major role dismounting Hendry from the top in the late 90s with some memorable wins. Obviously, there was the black ball final in the Masters 98, but perhaps more significantly the 97 British where he thrashed Hendry 9-2. The latter was a real shocker at the time because Hendry was way ahead at #1. Williams just didn't care, he had no respect for reputations.
Ebdon: If anything Ebdon may have relied more on the mental aspect of the game than any of the aforementioned players. He had an incredible self belief that seemed beyond what he could reasonably expect of his abilities as a player. Ultimately though, he has proved his doubters wrong with World and UK Championship wins, along with many ranking titles. With such impressive achievements it would be reasonable to consider Ebdon as a snooker great, but strangely it seemed that he was normally the underdog in his challenges – though I doubt Ebdon would see it that way.