Post a reply

Well done John Higgins

Postby Rocket_ron

Well Done John Higgins

For overcoming your recent troubles and sadness by defending your Welsh open Crown and in doing so you have now become the 3rd best ever player with 23 ranking tournament victories

Re: Well done John Higgins

Postby Witz78

Sirius B wrote:Well Done John Higgins

For overcoming your recent troubles and sadness by defending your Welsh open Crown and in doing so you have now become the 3rd best ever player with 23 ranking tournament victories


WUM :no:

as i said earlier he is not the 3rd best ever player cos hes 3rd in the ranking events won list <doh>

Re: Well done John Higgins

Postby Witz78

Caledonian Craig wrote:Great win and I get the feeling that John Higgins is a long way from finished yet. I now make him favourite to lift a 4th world title.


who was your favourite for the Worlds before tonight then?

I saw Higgins as being weak and vulnerable tonight and i think someone mentally stronger than Maguire would have saw him off in this final <ok>

Re: Well done John Higgins

Postby Rocket_ron

Witz78 wrote:
Sirius B wrote:Well Done John Higgins

For overcoming your recent troubles and sadness by defending your Welsh open Crown and in doing so you have now become the 3rd best ever player with 23 ranking tournament victories


WUM :no:

as i said earlier he is not the 3rd best ever player cos hes 3rd in the ranking events won list <doh>

Witz stop trying to cause trouble

Re: Well done John Higgins

Postby GJ

witz deals in hard hitting views

FACT

Re: Well done John Higgins

Postby Witz78

Sirius B wrote:
Witz78 wrote:
Sirius B wrote:Well Done John Higgins

For overcoming your recent troubles and sadness by defending your Welsh open Crown and in doing so you have now become the 3rd best ever player with 23 ranking tournament victories


WUM :no:

as i said earlier he is not the 3rd best ever player cos hes 3rd in the ranking events won list <doh>

Witz stop trying to cause trouble


you started it by putting this thread up to provoke a reaction.

3rd best player ever <doh>

maybe he is, but the ranking list isnt the basis of that verdict <doh>

Re: Well done John Higgins

Postby Rocket_ron

I haven't put this thread up for any reaction witz,

I have put it up to congratulate Higgins on coming through his problems this year and played some godlike snooker

Re: Well done John Higgins

Postby Witz78

Sirius B wrote:I haven't put this thread up for any reaction witz,

I have put it up to congratulate Higgins on coming through his problems this year and played some godlike snooker


there was nothing godlike about his snooker this week

worst ive seen him play in a while

he just seems to have some kinda mental hold over so many of the other players

Re: Well done John Higgins

Postby Caledonian Craig

True he wasn't at his best but where was your favourite this week? An early early exit perhaps?

People have different agendas/standards they judge snooker players by to measure their greatness. The least relevant is centuries and maximums as it wins you one frame and that is it. Using that system it would suggest Stuart Bingham is a better player than Steve Davis, Jimmy White, Shaun Murphy. Mark Selby, Neil Robertson etc etc etc as he has made more 147's than them. If you look at centuries in their careers you could suggest James Wattana was a better player than Ali Carter, Paul Hunter, Mark Selby, Tony Drago etc etc simply because he scored more centuries. All maximums and centuries show is the player has excellent cue ball control.

That is why the best system and more accurate system is ranking titles won as they are what the players strive for, take total concentration, you have to beat the best to win them, tests nerve and composure. Basically, the complete test of a player. From that system you get a far more accurate picture.

From the modern era that gives us a list that looks like this:-

1st. Stephen Hendry with 36 ranking titles
2nd. Steve Davis with 28 ranking titles
3rd. John Higgins with 23 ranking titles
4th. Ronnie O'Sullivan with 22 ranking titles
5th. Mark Williams with 18 ranking titles
6th. Jimmy White with 10 ranking titles
7th. John Parror with 9 ranking titles
8th. Peter Ebdon with 8 ranking titles
9th. Ray Reardon with 7 ranking titles
10th. Ken Doherty with 6 ranking titles
10th=. Neil Robertson with 6 ranking titles

That list at the top end is a very accurate depiction and titles are the be all and end all for players. Ask them and those will tell you that winning a title gives them more pleasure and swense of achievement than a 147.

Re: Well done John Higgins

Postby GJ

Caledonian Craig wrote:True he wasn't at his best but where was your favourite this week? An early early exit perhaps?

People have different agendas/standards they judge snooker players by to measure their greatness. The least relevant is centuries and maximums as it wins you one frame and that is it. Using that system it would suggest Stuart Bingham is a better player than Steve Davis, Jimmy White, Shaun Murphy. Mark Selby, Neil Robertson etc etc etc as he has made more 147's than them. If you look at centuries in their careers you could suggest James Wattana was a better player than Ali Carter, Paul Hunter, Mark Selby, Tony Drago etc etc simply because he scored more centuries. All maximums and centuries show is the player has excellent cue ball control.

That is why the best system and more accurate system is ranking titles won as they are what the players strive for, take total concentration, you have to beat the best to win them, tests nerve and composure. Basically, the complete test of a player. From that system you get a far more accurate picture.

From the modern era that gives us a list that looks like this:-

1st. Stephen Hendry with 36 ranking titles
2nd. Steve Davis with 28 ranking titles
3rd. John Higgins with 23 ranking titles
4th. Ronnie O'Sullivan with 22 ranking titles
5th. Mark Williams with 18 ranking titles
6th. Jimmy White with 10 ranking titles
7th. John Parror with 9 ranking titles
8th. Peter Ebdon with 8 ranking titles
9th. Ray Reardon with 7 ranking titles
10th. Ken Doherty with 6 ranking titles
10th=. Neil Robertson with 6 ranking titles

That list at the top end is a very accurate depiction and titles are the be all and end all for players. Ask them and those will tell you that winning a title gives them more pleasure and swense of achievement than a 147.



craig <cool>

jimmy only has 10 titles the way people talk i thought he would have way more ;) <laugh>

Re: Well done John Higgins

Postby Witz78

GJ wrote:
Caledonian Craig wrote:True he wasn't at his best but where was your favourite this week? An early early exit perhaps?

People have different agendas/standards they judge snooker players by to measure their greatness. The least relevant is centuries and maximums as it wins you one frame and that is it. Using that system it would suggest Stuart Bingham is a better player than Steve Davis, Jimmy White, Shaun Murphy. Mark Selby, Neil Robertson etc etc etc as he has made more 147's than them. If you look at centuries in their careers you could suggest James Wattana was a better player than Ali Carter, Paul Hunter, Mark Selby, Tony Drago etc etc simply because he scored more centuries. All maximums and centuries show is the player has excellent cue ball control.

That is why the best system and more accurate system is ranking titles won as they are what the players strive for, take total concentration, you have to beat the best to win them, tests nerve and composure. Basically, the complete test of a player. From that system you get a far more accurate picture.

From the modern era that gives us a list that looks like this:-

1st. Stephen Hendry with 36 ranking titles
2nd. Steve Davis with 28 ranking titles
3rd. John Higgins with 23 ranking titles
4th. Ronnie O'Sullivan with 22 ranking titles
5th. Mark Williams with 18 ranking titles
6th. Jimmy White with 10 ranking titles
7th. John Parror with 9 ranking titles
8th. Peter Ebdon with 8 ranking titles
9th. Ray Reardon with 7 ranking titles
10th. Ken Doherty with 6 ranking titles
10th=. Neil Robertson with 6 ranking titles

That list at the top end is a very accurate depiction and titles are the be all and end all for players. Ask them and those will tell you that winning a title gives them more pleasure and swense of achievement than a 147.



craig <cool>

jimmy only has 10 titles the way people talk i thought he would have way more ;) <laugh>



Craig, Reardon only has 5 ranking titles, not 7.

the list is full of flaws, as i said big deal if Higgins equals Davis total of 28. Davis has actually won 73 titles in his career, not his fault a good few of them werent rankers.

GJ, Jimmy has always said that he burned the candles at both ends and this was why he didnt win as much as he should have done. Its well known that the WC was the only tournament he really ever prepared for properly.

Anyway hes made 23 ranking finals and in total he has won 27 non ranking events which is way more than most.

Re: Well done John Higgins

Postby Caledonian Craig

GJ, The reason Jimmy White won ten titles was testament to Steve Davis and Stephen Hendry's domination. He was competing with two of the greatest players to play the game so it is actually to his credit he won ten

Non ranking events for me are very much secondary. Why? Well I'll bet quite a bit of money that you never got a full quota of all pros taking part but like Premier Titles Ronnie has won - how can these seriously be counted when several players never play in them. Ranking events attract all the seeds (barring illness or injury of course and are what all pros strive to win).

If we are truly searching for GOAT (then it is Greatest Of All Time) which means you have to count all eras. Now for Davis he was the king of the 80's then form dipped from the early to mid-90's but we still count his stats in his weak run of form, likewise with Hendry who was king of the 90's we still count his stats even though his form has dipped from around 2003 onwards. That being the case we count the 90's stats of Higgins, Williams and O'Sullivan even though some claim they weren't at their prime which I debate as they were already multiple title winners in the 90's plus their stronger spell of form in the 00's. Doing that then the stats show that Stephen Hendry is tops and that is if you want to put together all relevant facts such as ranking titles won, centuries made, maximums made, centuries average per year, world titles won, uk titles won and Masters titles won.

Re: Well done John Higgins

Postby Witz78

Caledonian Craig wrote:GJ, The reason Jimmy White won ten titles was testament to Steve Davis and Stephen Hendry's domination. He was competing with two of the greatest players to play the game so it is actually to his credit he won ten

Non ranking events for me are very much secondary. Why? Well I'll bet quite a bit of money that you never got a full quota of all pros taking part but like Premier Titles Ronnie has won - how can these seriously be counted when several players never play in them. Ranking events attract all the seeds (barring illness or injury of course and are what all pros strive to win).

If we are truly searching for GOAT (then it is Greatest Of All Time) which means you have to count all eras. Now for Davis he was the king of the 80's then form dipped from the early to mid-90's but we still count his stats in his weak run of form, likewise with Hendry who was king of the 90's we still count his stats even though his form has dipped from around 2003 onwards. That being the case we count the 90's stats of Higgins, Williams and O'Sullivan even though some claim they weren't at their prime which I debate as they were already multiple title winners in the 90's plus their stronger spell of form in the 00's. Doing that then the stats show that Stephen Hendry is tops and that is if you want to put together all relevant facts such as ranking titles won, centuries made, maximums made, centuries average per year, world titles won, uk titles won and Masters titles won.


What about these events Steve Davis won then that are classed as non ranking?

International Open 1981 (became a ranking event in 1982 and later known as Scottish Open and Players Championship and existed until 2004)

UK Championship 1980, 1981 (one of the games 3 majors, it became a ranking event in 1984)

British Open 1981, 1983, 1984 (became a ranking event in 1985 and existed until 2004)

Classic 1981, 1983 (became a ranking event in 1984 and existed until 1992)

China Open 1997 (became a ranking event in 1998 and still exists)


thats 9 events that were rankers in all but name when Davis won them and in subsequent seasons they became rankers and Hendry, Higgins, Ronnie and others benefited from these being rankers and being added to their rankings tallies whilst Davis missed out on these 9.

28+9 = 37 = 1 more than 36 <ok>

Also you mention non ranking events as being unimportant, not proper events with top players etc. Well i put this to you, in addition to 4 Masters titles, Davis also won the following events exclusive to the top players who all took part.

Australian Masters x 1
Scottish Masters x 3
Irish Masters x 8 :scared:
Hong Kong Masters x 2
Singapore Masters x 1
Canadian Masters x 1
China Masters x 1
London Masters x 1

thats 18 additional Masters events featuring the top players, plus 4 Premier League titles and a lucrative World Matchplay title.

I feel on the basis of all this, that Davis is the greatest winning machine in the modern era and the ranking title comparison (36 v 28) is misleading.

Re: Well done John Higgins

Postby Caledonian Craig

Yes but you could add to Hendry's total of other events (non-ranking) with all the top players there such as:-

Masters Titles = 6
Scottish Masters = 3
Irish Masters = 3
Malta Grand Prix = 2

An extra 14 titles so still places him above Steve Davis.

Ask snooker players and the key events are in order of importance: World Championship, UK Championship and UK Masters. Those are key events and the ones all players want to win. I put together a table with the following details included:-

Ranking Title Wins:- Hendry comes out top.

World Titles:- Hendry comes out on top.

UK Titles:- Davis comes out on top.

UK Masters Titles:- Hendry comes out on top.

And if you are interested in other relevant stats:-

World Finalist:- Hendry comes out on top.

World Semi-Finalist:- Hendry comes out on top with 12

Career 147:- O'Sullivan and Hendry level.

Career 100's:- Hendry comes out on top with 751.

Average 100's per season in career:- O'Sullivan comes out on top with an average of 32.68.

Re: Well done John Higgins

Postby Wildey

Witz

Steve Davis was a great winner however its no shock to anyone that he had no competition at all in the early 80s when your imaginary Ranking Events has materialized From.

seriously im not knocking the guy but he played the old fashion way with the potting and breakbuilding of later generation at that time nobody and i do meen nobody could live with him. Alex Higgins only beat him twice UK 1983 16-15 and Masters 1985 5-4...He was just to good for the players of that time.

Hendry came along and nullified his best game by being attacking it took hendry not that long to beat him on a consistent level because he was just a better player full stop.

yes Steve did beat him on ocations because Steve was still playing to a very high level when Hendry was Dominating.

Re: Well done John Higgins

Postby Wildey

i dont think many people remember just how close Steve got to reclaim the World no 1 ...

Steve and Stephen entered the 1994 WC Very close in the rankings and both made it to the semi finals of the WC and met hendry won 16-9 but had Steve won that match he would have been WN 1 again but when the chips are down ive honestly not seen any player John Higgins included that responded like him.

John does a bit of Grinding and Falls back on his B Game to get the job done... Hendry just Blitz players when under pressure or he used to.

Re: Well done John Higgins

Postby Witz78

Caledonian Craig wrote:Yes but you could add to Hendry's total of other events (non-ranking) with all the top players there such as:-

Masters Titles = 6
Scottish Masters = 3
Irish Masters = 3
Malta Grand Prix = 2

An extra 14 titles so still places him above Steve Davis.



I didnt include the 27 Major non ranking events (UK Masters, International Masters events, Premier League etc) Davis won onto my amended total so if i add these would be 37+27 = 64

and if we do a like for like comparison and add your 14 extra titles onto Hendrys 36 then thats 50 so the arguments becoming even more conclusive.

Re: Well done John Higgins

Postby Wildey

Witz78 wrote:
Caledonian Craig wrote:Yes but you could add to Hendry's total of other events (non-ranking) with all the top players there such as:-

Masters Titles = 6
Scottish Masters = 3
Irish Masters = 3
Malta Grand Prix = 2

An extra 14 titles so still places him above Steve Davis.



I didnt include the 27 Major non ranking events (UK Masters, International Masters events, Premier League etc) Davis won onto my amended total so if i add these would be 37+27 = 64

and if we do a like for like comparison and add your 14 extra titles onto Hendrys 36 then thats 50 so the arguments becoming even more conclusive.

only 3 Tournaments has been played while both were players

World
UK
Masters

Hendry has won the events that matters most.

in the Masters hes Lost twice in finals to Mark Williams 18 Ranking Titles. in the UK hes lost Twice in Finals to Ronnie 22 Ranking Titles and Ebdon 8 Ranking Titles hes Lost to Ebdon and Doherty in World Finals 14 Ranking titles between them.

its Pretty conclusive when you look at Joe Johnson and Dennis Taylor who the Best Player was <ok>

Re: Well done John Higgins

Postby Witz78

Steve Davis was a great winner however its no shock to anyone that he had no competition at all in the early 80s when your imaginary Ranking Events has materialized From.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
They are not imaginary ranking events, they are established events that Hendry had the benefit of winning when they were ranking events that Davis didnt win. Even you must admit the likes of Davis first 2 UKs being non ranking and Alex only having 1 ranking title to his name are a nonsense. I only selected the 9 events Davis won that werent exclusive to the the elite that would soon become rankers.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

seriously im not knocking the guy but he played the old fashion way with the potting and breakbuilding of later generation at that time nobody and i do meen nobody could live with him. Alex Higgins only beat him twice UK 1983 16-15 and Masters 1985 5-4...He was just to good for the players of that time.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

so what if he played a different style? styles of sport evolve and change over time.

and who says he had no competition just cos he was winning everything? Its funny how when people slate the early 90s cos Hendry was winning everything you go mad and deny it was a weak era devoid of competition :john:


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hendry came along and nullified his best game by being attacking it took hendry not that long to beat him on a consistent level because he was just a better player full stop.

yes Steve did beat him on ocations because Steve was still playing to a very high level when Hendry was Dominating.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Davis has had a decade of domiance and was 33 by 1990 so it was probably to be expected that hed tail off.

Does that mean then that when Ronnie, Higgins etc came along they nulified Hendry cos they were taking the game to another level?



the problem is you want these arguing points to work when it suits your side of the debate but you dont like the same arguing points being flipped over against your viewpoint

Re: Well done John Higgins

Postby Caledonian Craig

Neither did I add any of Hendry's other excess titles.

Of course Davis was disadvantaged by the game not having so many ranking events at that time but in that time (from early 80's to the current day) one thing has remained constant and that is the main titles or at least the most prized are:-

World Championships
UK Championships
UK Masters

Going by those alone as that is all that has remained a constant then here is how things pan out:-

World Championships

Stephen Hendry 7 wins twice runner-up
Steve Davis 6 Wins twice runner-up
Ronnie O'Sullivan 3 wins never a runner-up
John Higgins 3 wins once runner-up
Mark Williams 2 wins once runner-up

(Just to show how modern greats fare)

UK Championships

Steve Davis 6 wins four times runner-up
Stephen Hendry 5 wins five times runner-up
Ronnie O'Sullivan 4 wins never runner-up
John Higgins 3 wins two times runner-up
Mark Williams 2 wins two times runner-up

UK Masters

Stephen Hendry 6 wins three times runner-up
Ronnie O'Sullivan 4 wins five times runner-up
Steve Davis 3 wins never runner-up
John Higgins 2 wins twice runner-up
Mark Williams 2 wins once runner -up

Re: Well done John Higgins

Postby Wildey

Witz

there is absalutly no arguament about it just factual statement on my part.

i was watching the tournaments steve was winning and believe me if you thought hendry had no compatition you missed out with Steve then <ok>

Re: Well done John Higgins

Postby Wildey

Caledonian Craig wrote:Neither did I add any of Hendry's other excess titles.

Of course Davis was disadvantaged by the game not having so many ranking events at that time but in that time (from early 80's to the current day) one thing has remained constant and that is the main titles or at least the most prized are:-

World Championships
UK Championships
UK Masters

Going by those alone as that is all that has remained a constant then here is how things pan out:-

World Championships

Stephen Hendry 7 wins twice runner-up
Steve Davis 6 Wins twice runner-up
Ronnie O'Sullivan 3 wins never a runner-up
John Higgins 3 wins once runner-up
Mark Williams 2 wins once runner-up

(Just to show how modern greats fare)

UK Championships

Steve Davis 6 wins four times runner-up
Stephen Hendry 5 wins five times runner-up
Ronnie O'Sullivan 4 wins never runner-up
John Higgins 3 wins two times runner-up
Mark Williams 2 wins two times runner-up

UK Masters

Stephen Hendry 6 wins three times runner-up
Ronnie O'Sullivan 4 wins five times runner-up
Steve Davis 3 wins never runner-up
John Higgins 2 wins twice runner-up
Mark Williams 2 wins once runner -up

yes but point out also the players Hendry played in thoes Finals he lost and won No Joe Johnson or Dennis Taylor in sight <ok>

Re: Well done John Higgins

Postby Caledonian Craig

Another thing often looked is that Stephen Hendry somewhat revolutionised the sport as he was the first to play the short of screwing into the pack of reds to develop chances and now that is a key shot in every player's armoury. Steve Davis I hold a lot of admiration for and I would argue with anyone who tries saying his was a weak era. Jimmy White and Alex Higgins (still recognised as legends of the game) plied their trade then as did some very solid match players such as Cliff Thorburn, John Parrott, Neal Foulds etc. Nowadays you have similar type players in the form of Graeme Dott, Peter Ebdon and Mark Selby - very solid all-round game and great match players and contenders for titles but not quite in the all-time greats category.

Re: Well done John Higgins

Postby Witz78

Wild wrote:Witz

there is absalutly no arguament about it just factual statement on my part.

i was watching the tournaments steve was winning and believe me if you thought hendry had no compatition you missed out with Steve then <ok>


Funny how in 1994 when Hendry had already had the bulk of his dominance that the same no hopers Davis has to contend with a decade earlier were among the elite and Hendrys main rivals, except they were even more past their bests.

1993/94 -
Thorne 7th in the world
Griffiths 8th
Foulds 14th
Taylor 15th

you had the likes of Davis (past his peak) White and Parrot as rival to Hendry then even though these guys had all been around a good while too then such illustrious names as Roe, James, Clark, Morgan, Wilkinson as the other threats.

Only once Doherty, Ebdon, Ronnie, Williams, Higgins emerged properly into top players did the old guard and these non entities listed above rapidly decline, and coincidentally Hendry also declines suddenly as some serious competition arrives.

I maintain that Davis had far greater competition than Hendry did. Davis dominace was more impressive and conclusive IMO.