Who was the better snooker player?

Please include reasons

Is this a trick question?

Cloud Strife wrote:Is this a trick question?

No - genuine question.

Why?

Badsnookerplayer wrote:

Cloud Strife wrote:Is this a trick question?

No - genuine question.

Why?

I wanted to make sure it was a genuine question before taking the time to vote. Thanks for clarifying.

I went for Steve James. I know Wilko won a ranker and James didn't, but I do feel Steve's peak level was higher than Wilko's and his win over Hendry at the Crucible was a finer achievement than anything Wilko did in his career IMO.

As ROS would put it, they're both numpties.

Johnny Bravo wrote:As ROS would put it, they're both numpties.

Even if they're both numpties, one has to be the best.

SnookerFan wrote:

Johnny Bravo wrote:As ROS would put it, they're both numpties.

Even if they're both numpties, one has to be the best.

Who is your opinion SF?

I don't really know anything about either of them.

Hard to say... ROS in his book describes Wilkinson as a fine player, he said when he first turned pro he found pro level was way above amateur and mentioned Wilkinson as a top player back then and hard to beat.

Steve James however best achievemtn was beating Hendry and denying him the chance to break Crucible Curse. But because Wilkinson won a ranker, I'll have to go with him.

Steve James was a brilliant player. Such a talent. Saw him take apart Davis I think if I rememebr correctly. His career sadly cut short by a car crash. He never got it back after that.

Cloud Strife wrote:I know Wilko won a ranker and James didn't

Andre147 wrote:But because Wilkinson won a ranker, I'll have to go with him.

Is Snooker Island located in an alternative universe?

Koninkaulus wrote:

Cloud Strife wrote:I know Wilko won a ranker and James didn't

Andre147 wrote:But because Wilkinson won a ranker, I'll have to go with him.

Is Snooker Island located in an alternative universe?

Edit: After Wildey's post I realise your point - that James won one and Wilkinson did not.

Good knowledge

Cloud Strife wrote:

Badsnookerplayer wrote:

Cloud Strife wrote:Is this a trick question?

No - genuine question.

Why?

I wanted to make sure it was a genuine question before taking the time to vote. Thanks for clarifying.

I went for Steve James. I know Wilko won a ranker and James didn't, but I do feel Steve's peak level was higher than Wilko's and his win over Hendry at the Crucible was a finer achievement than anything Wilko did in his career IMO.

Gary Wilkinson never won a ranker Best he did was reach the final of the British Open in 1991.


Steve James did win a ranker in 1990 the Mercantile Credit Classic Beating Australian Warren King in the final

Thanks for thoughts.

I could never really separate them but I do remember James being a great breakbuilder.

From the evidence presented thus far, I am convinced James deserves the nod.

Thanks everybody

Koninkaulus wrote:

Cloud Strife wrote:I know Wilko won a ranker and James didn't

Andre147 wrote:But because Wilkinson won a ranker, I'll have to go with him.

Is Snooker Island located in an alternative universe?

With snark like that you'll fit right in here

Badsnookerplayer wrote:Thanks for thoughts.

I could never really separate them but I do remember James being a great breakbuilder.

From the evidence presented thus far, I am convinced James deserves the nod.

Thanks everybody

According to cue Tracker Steve James made 72 centuries and Gary Wilkinson 69.


Gary Wilkinson had the better career if anything won the World Matchplay beating Steve Davis 18-11 in the final.

But for me Steve James was a superb cueist and one of the greatest Long Potters the game has seen id put him in the Williams, Robbo, Trump and Hendry league of Long potter.


I Would just favour Steve James but its extremely close

Iranu wrote:

Koninkaulus wrote:

Cloud Strife wrote:I know Wilko won a ranker and James didn't

Andre147 wrote:But because Wilkinson won a ranker, I'll have to go with him.

Is Snooker Island located in an alternative universe?

With snark like that you'll fit right in here

Thank you.

I have to be honest here. I only knew James was the one with a ranking title because I enjoy stats like that. I'm too new to snooker to have ever seen either of these guys play.

In that case Steve James gets the nod from me.

A lot was made of Hendry's breakthrough when he won the 1989 UK Championship by beating Steve Davis in the final. The match almost never happened. Gary Wilkinson almost beat Davis. He was leading Davis 8-7 and Davis needed 2 snookers on the final pink in frame 16. Davis got the snookers and won the frame on the black, before winning the decider. In the quarter final, Wilkinson had thrashed Jimmy White 9-0.

Earlier that year, the 1989 World Championship, Wilkinson fought back in his first round match with Hendry, only to lose 10-9. He was a class player.

vodkadiet wrote:A lot was made of Hendry's breakthrough when he won the 1989 UK Championship by beating Steve Davis in the final. The match almost never happened. Gary Wilkinson almost beat Davis. He was leading Davis 8-7 and Davis needed 2 snookers on the final pink in frame 16. Davis got the snookers and won the frame on the black, before winning the decider. In the quarter final, Wilkinson had thrashed Jimmy White 9-0.

Earlier that year, the 1989 World Championship, Wilkinson fought back in his first round match with Hendry, only to lose 10-9. He was a class player.

He also beat Hendry 6-5 from 5-1 down in the Scottish Masters no mean feat that was

Wildey wrote:

Cloud Strife wrote:

Badsnookerplayer wrote:

Cloud Strife wrote:Is this a trick question?

No - genuine question.

Why?

I wanted to make sure it was a genuine question before taking the time to vote. Thanks for clarifying.

I went for Steve James. I know Wilko won a ranker and James didn't, but I do feel Steve's peak level was higher than Wilko's and his win over Hendry at the Crucible was a finer achievement than anything Wilko did in his career IMO.

Gary Wilkinson never won a ranker Best he did was reach the final of the British Open in 1991.


Steve James did win a ranker in 1990 the Mercantile Credit Classic Beating Australian Warren King in the final

Fair enough, it seems like I got them both mixed up. In any case, it further reiterates my view that Steve James was the better player.

vodkadiet wrote:A lot was made of Hendry's breakthrough when he won the 1989 UK Championship by beating Steve Davis in the final. The match almost never happened. Gary Wilkinson almost beat Davis. He was leading Davis 8-7 and Davis needed 2 snookers on the final pink in frame 16. Davis got the snookers and won the frame on the black, before winning the decider. In the quarter final, Wilkinson had thrashed Jimmy White 9-0.

Earlier that year, the 1989 World Championship, Wilkinson fought back in his first round match with Hendry, only to lose 10-9. He was a class player.

Blimey Vodka - that has re awoken a memory. I watched that but had forgotten in which year or tournament it was.

Johnny Bravo wrote:As ROS would put it, they're both numpties.

Your a numptie.

sas6789 wrote:

Johnny Bravo wrote:As ROS would put it, they're both numpties.

Your a numptie.

^ You're

Hate to say it but Wilkinson. He could get under top players' skins at times and had a more all round game. Steve James could devastate anyone, but would only turn it on occasionally.

Who is Gary Wilkinon?

sas6789 wrote:

Johnny Bravo wrote:As ROS would put it, they're both numpties.

Your a numptie.

Decline.

SnookerFan wrote:Who is Gary Wilkinon?

If SF doesn't know who he is, than he is definitely a numpty.