Worst WC winners 1990- Present

And the candidates are:

Dott

Ebdon

Bingham

Docherty - If Hendry pots that red down the cushion when he was on one of his famous comeback charges I suspect he may have gone on to win, think the score was 15 - 12 at the time so it would have brought him within 2.

Murphy - His safety game was non existent, his cue ball control wasn't top class then as it isn't now but for the duration of that tournament all of those long pots just kept going in, kind of took the field by surprise to a certain extent, he couldn't be condescending to a wider audience as he was not really known before this surprise victory.

I think Dott is the winner as he literally had never won anything before or since. That's my opinion, any other views most welcome, I may do a worst finalist soon, I think Hawkins and Bond are going to be vying for the top prize somehow!

Erm Dott has won the China Open too.

As much as Dott has played some good stuff over the years, I think he’s certainly the weakest of that group of players. Ebdon, Bingham, Doherty and Murphy are all a class above.

Whilst Dott has won another ranker, Joe Johnson and Terry Griffiths didnt win ant other tournaments whilst Thorburn and Taylor only won one other, like Dott, so these should be in the mix.

The Hurricane didn't win any other rankers either, if thats the barometer you are using

SteveJJ wrote:Whilst Dott has won another ranker, Joe Johnson and Terry Griffiths didnt win ant other tournaments whilst Thorburn and Taylor only won one other, like Dott, so these should be in the mix.

The Hurricane didn't win any other rankers either, if thats the barometer you are using

The salient period is winners 1990 - present, that's why I included it in the title, I didn't realise that Dott had won the China Open, probably would have been easy to forget though, I mean he isn't ever going to produce anything that will really turn you on like Ronnie Or Trump

Whoever wins this year will inevitably go down as 'The Worst World Champion' ever. That is assuming that they haven't won it before.

If going by overall career then Dott. If it's by the actual World Championship win itself then I don't know. A multiple winner could have a title win that was relatively poor.

vodkadiet1 wrote:Whoever wins this year will inevitably go down as 'The Worst World Champion' ever. that is assuming that they haven't won it before.

It depends who wins it I suppose. If Ding wins it, then no he shouldn’t be considered ‘The Worst World Champion’ ever.

I haven’t seen a World Championship yet where the winner didn’t deserve it over the 2 weeks.

Therefore they have all hit the pinnacle of their profession and should be congratulated for it.

They are all Champions, in the truest sense of the word.

if dott is the 'worst' world champion then that just demonstrates there are no bad world champions.

SnookerEd25 wrote:I haven’t seen a World Championship yet where the winner didn’t deserve it over the 2 weeks.

Therefore they have all hit the pinnacle of their profession and should be congratulated for it.

They are all Champions, in the truest sense of the word.

I’d have to disagree with this. There have been a number of matches over the past decade where I think the best player during the tournament hasn’t gone on to win the title. I think the following players played a better tournament than the eventual champion; 2011 Judd, 2014 Ronnie, 2015 Murphy/Judd, 2016 Ding.

Doherty was a fine player at his peak and beating Hendry in best of 35 was no mean feat. He did lose many major finals. If he had a better finals record we would be rating him higher in any list of greats. And as I say beating Hendry when Hendry was almost unbeatable over the distance was a great achievement.

Ebdon is a tool, but was seriously talented and a savage competitor. It didn't surprise me he won a world title.

No doubt Murphy was helped by meeting Stevens in the final. But his record over the years is good and has won a fair amount of events.

Leaving Dott. Fair play to him winning the ultimate prize. He's not particularly gifted. So he did it by grittiness, hard work and determination. But I can't say he's as good as other winners. And the 2006 final was woeful to be fair.

I enjoyed the 2006 final more than any of Selby’s wins. There is something very watchable about Dott’s grittiness (and he gave a superb attacking display in the 3rd session of the SF against RO’S), but Selby’s approach is like watching teeth being pulled in my opinion.

2002 world Snooker championship final still annoys me lol. I don't think I'll ever get over it.

Juddernaut88 wrote:2002 world Snooker championship final still annoys me lol. I don't think I'll ever get over it.

Get over it. You’ll end up bitter & twisted like GallantRabbit if you dont

SnookerEd25 wrote:

Juddernaut88 wrote:2002 world Snooker championship final still annoys me lol. I don't think I'll ever get over it.

Get over it. You’ll end up bitter & twisted like GallantRabbit if you dont

Is he the one that kept going on about "match fixing" in the tour championship final?

SnookerEd25 wrote:I enjoyed the 2006 final more than any of Selby’s wins. There is something very watchable about Dott’s grittiness (and he gave a superb attacking display in the 3rd session of the SF against RO’S), but Selby’s approach is like watching teeth being pulled in my opinion.

Was it the 2006 match against Dott when ROS basically stopped trying for the whole afternoon session which gave Dott a lead of something like 12-4 going into the final evening session? Ronnie then starting trying and playing properly in the evening session but had left himself too much to do, if that was the year Dott won it or made the final then it effectively makes it hollow because Ronnie had one of his funny turns which meant that whoever his opponent had been was getting a bye into the next round, go back and listen to the commentators in that afternoon session as Ronnie stops trying and keeps conceding frames only needing one snooker or even worse sometimes conceding when he could still win the frame? (I'm not 100 % sure if he conceded when he could still win the frame but it's the kind of thing he would have done regularly around that time and I don't think the players were fined back then for conceding early?)

Juddernaut88 wrote:

SnookerEd25 wrote:

Juddernaut88 wrote:2002 world Snooker championship final still annoys me lol. I don't think I'll ever get over it.

Get over it. You’ll end up bitter & twisted like GallantRabbit if you dont

Is he the one that kept going on about "match fixing" in the tour championship final?

Yep, & started again when he re-surfaced last week. Think he is banned at the moment.

shanew48 wrote:

SnookerEd25 wrote:I enjoyed the 2006 final more than any of Selby’s wins. There is something very watchable about Dott’s grittiness (and he gave a superb attacking display in the 3rd session of the SF against RO’S), but Selby’s approach is like watching teeth being pulled in my opinion.

Was it the 2006 match against Dott when ROS basically stopped trying for the whole afternoon session which gave Dott a lead of something like 12-4 going into the final evening session? Ronnie then starting trying and playing properly in the evening session but had left himself too much to do, if that was the year Dott won it or made the final then it effectively makes it hollow because Ronnie had one of his funny turns which meant that whoever his opponent had been was getting a bye into the next round, go back and listen to the commentators in that afternoon session as Ronnie stops trying and keeps conceding frames only needing one snooker or even worse sometimes conceding when he could still win the frame? (I'm not 100 % sure if he conceded when he could still win the frame but it's the kind of thing he would have done regularly around that time and I don't think the players were fined back then for conceding early?)

Completely inaccurate. Dott went from 7-8 to 16-8 up playing some damn good stuff. The pressure got to O'Sullivan in that session and he cracked

shanew48 wrote:

SnookerEd25 wrote:I enjoyed the 2006 final more than any of Selby’s wins. There is something very watchable about Dott’s grittiness (and he gave a superb attacking display in the 3rd session of the SF against RO’S), but Selby’s approach is like watching teeth being pulled in my opinion.

Was it the 2006 match against Dott when ROS basically stopped trying for the whole afternoon session which gave Dott a lead of something like 12-4 going into the final evening session? Ronnie then starting trying and playing properly in the evening session but had left himself too much to do, if that was the year Dott won it or made the final then it effectively makes it hollow because Ronnie had one of his funny turns which meant that whoever his opponent had been was getting a bye into the next round, go back and listen to the commentators in that afternoon session as Ronnie stops trying and keeps conceding frames only needing one snooker or even worse sometimes conceding when he could still win the frame? (I'm not 100 % sure if he conceded when he could still win the frame but it's the kind of thing he would have done regularly around that time and I don't think the players were fined back then for conceding early?)

I was a big Ronnie fan at the time, and didn’t see it that way. Dott simply played him off the table.

SnookerEd25 wrote:

shanew48 wrote:

SnookerEd25 wrote:I enjoyed the 2006 final more than any of Selby’s wins. There is something very watchable about Dott’s grittiness (and he gave a superb attacking display in the 3rd session of the SF against RO’S), but Selby’s approach is like watching teeth being pulled in my opinion.

Was it the 2006 match against Dott when ROS basically stopped trying for the whole afternoon session which gave Dott a lead of something like 12-4 going into the final evening session? Ronnie then starting trying and playing properly in the evening session but had left himself too much to do, if that was the year Dott won it or made the final then it effectively makes it hollow because Ronnie had one of his funny turns which meant that whoever his opponent had been was getting a bye into the next round, go back and listen to the commentators in that afternoon session as Ronnie stops trying and keeps conceding frames only needing one snooker or even worse sometimes conceding when he could still win the frame? (I'm not 100 % sure if he conceded when he could still win the frame but it's the kind of thing he would have done regularly around that time and I don't think the players were fined back then for conceding early?)

I was a big Ronnie fan at the time, and didn’t see it that way. Dott simply played him off the table.

I was referring to a quarter final match where Ronnie gave up in the afternoon session so when they came back for the concluding evening session Dott was 12-4 up so only needed one frame, in the semi final that you are referring to i would still maintain that a peak Ronnie would never be played off the table by a peak Grahame Dott, it just wouldn't be possible.

shanew48 wrote:

SnookerEd25 wrote:

shanew48 wrote:

SnookerEd25 wrote:I enjoyed the 2006 final more than any of Selby’s wins. There is something very watchable about Dott’s grittiness (and he gave a superb attacking display in the 3rd session of the SF against RO’S), but Selby’s approach is like watching teeth being pulled in my opinion.

Was it the 2006 match against Dott when ROS basically stopped trying for the whole afternoon session which gave Dott a lead of something like 12-4 going into the final evening session? Ronnie then starting trying and playing properly in the evening session but had left himself too much to do, if that was the year Dott won it or made the final then it effectively makes it hollow because Ronnie had one of his funny turns which meant that whoever his opponent had been was getting a bye into the next round, go back and listen to the commentators in that afternoon session as Ronnie stops trying and keeps conceding frames only needing one snooker or even worse sometimes conceding when he could still win the frame? (I'm not 100 % sure if he conceded when he could still win the frame but it's the kind of thing he would have done regularly around that time and I don't think the players were fined back then for conceding early?)

I was a big Ronnie fan at the time, and didn’t see it that way. Dott simply played him off the table.

I was referring to a quarter final match where Ronnie gave up in the afternoon session so when they came back for the concluding evening session Dott was 12-4 up so only needed one frame, in the semi final that you are referring to i would still maintain that a peak Ronnie would never be played off the table by a peak Grahame Dott, it just wouldn't be possible.

Again, that never happened

SnookerEd25 wrote:

shanew48 wrote:

SnookerEd25 wrote:I enjoyed the 2006 final more than any of Selby’s wins. There is something very watchable about Dott’s grittiness (and he gave a superb attacking display in the 3rd session of the SF against RO’S), but Selby’s approach is like watching teeth being pulled in my opinion.

Was it the 2006 match against Dott when ROS basically stopped trying for the whole afternoon session which gave Dott a lead of something like 12-4 going into the final evening session? Ronnie then starting trying and playing properly in the evening session but had left himself too much to do, if that was the year Dott won it or made the final then it effectively makes it hollow because Ronnie had one of his funny turns which meant that whoever his opponent had been was getting a bye into the next round, go back and listen to the commentators in that afternoon session as Ronnie stops trying and keeps conceding frames only needing one snooker or even worse sometimes conceding when he could still win the frame? (I'm not 100 % sure if he conceded when he could still win the frame but it's the kind of thing he would have done regularly around that time and I don't think the players were fined back then for conceding early?)

I was a big Ronnie fan at the time, and didn’t see it that way. Dott simply played him off the table.

There wasn't a quarter final match between Ronnie and Dott where Ronnie gifted Dott the afternoon session with the commentators remarking on Ronnie conceding frames without trying? are you saying that that didn't happen?

shanew48 wrote:

SnookerEd25 wrote:

shanew48 wrote:

SnookerEd25 wrote:I enjoyed the 2006 final more than any of Selby’s wins. There is something very watchable about Dott’s grittiness (and he gave a superb attacking display in the 3rd session of the SF against RO’S), but Selby’s approach is like watching teeth being pulled in my opinion.

Was it the 2006 match against Dott when ROS basically stopped trying for the whole afternoon session which gave Dott a lead of something like 12-4 going into the final evening session? Ronnie then starting trying and playing properly in the evening session but had left himself too much to do, if that was the year Dott won it or made the final then it effectively makes it hollow because Ronnie had one of his funny turns which meant that whoever his opponent had been was getting a bye into the next round, go back and listen to the commentators in that afternoon session as Ronnie stops trying and keeps conceding frames only needing one snooker or even worse sometimes conceding when he could still win the frame? (I'm not 100 % sure if he conceded when he could still win the frame but it's the kind of thing he would have done regularly around that time and I don't think the players were fined back then for conceding early?)

I was a big Ronnie fan at the time, and didn’t see it that way. Dott simply played him off the table.

There wasn't a quarter final match between Ronnie and Dott where Ronnie gifted Dott the afternoon session with the commentators remarking on Ronnie conceding frames without trying? are you saying that that didn't happen?

It was the semi-final you're thinking of. They never met in the quarters.

Cloud Strife wrote:

shanew48 wrote:

SnookerEd25 wrote:

shanew48 wrote:

SnookerEd25 wrote:I enjoyed the 2006 final more than any of Selby’s wins. There is something very watchable about Dott’s grittiness (and he gave a superb attacking display in the 3rd session of the SF against RO’S), but Selby’s approach is like watching teeth being pulled in my opinion.

Was it the 2006 match against Dott when ROS basically stopped trying for the whole afternoon session which gave Dott a lead of something like 12-4 going into the final evening session? Ronnie then starting trying and playing properly in the evening session but had left himself too much to do, if that was the year Dott won it or made the final then it effectively makes it hollow because Ronnie had one of his funny turns which meant that whoever his opponent had been was getting a bye into the next round, go back and listen to the commentators in that afternoon session as Ronnie stops trying and keeps conceding frames only needing one snooker or even worse sometimes conceding when he could still win the frame? (I'm not 100 % sure if he conceded when he could still win the frame but it's the kind of thing he would have done regularly around that time and I don't think the players were fined back then for conceding early?)

I was a big Ronnie fan at the time, and didn’t see it that way. Dott simply played him off the table.

There wasn't a quarter final match between Ronnie and Dott where Ronnie gifted Dott the afternoon session with the commentators remarking on Ronnie conceding frames without trying? are you saying that that didn't happen?

It was the semi-final you're thinking of. They never met in the quarters.

Ok well in that semi final, is it correct that Dott came into the evening session only needing one frame to win?

Yeah he only needed one frame.

Ronnie managed to make a mini comeback of sorts by winning the first three of the evening and he should have won the fourth as well, but he was never going to win from that position.

Cloud Strife wrote:Yeah he only needed one frame.

Ronnie managed to make a mini comeback of sorts by winning the first three of the evening and he should have won the fourth as well, but he was never going to win from that position.

Yes, in the afternoon session of that match Ronnie had one of his funny turns and was conceding frames when he shouldn't have, the commentators were saying that they couldn't understand why he was not even trying, so obviously a peak Ronnie who is actually trying would never lose to a peak graham Dott, especially a SF of a world championship.

shanew48 wrote:

Cloud Strife wrote:Yeah he only needed one frame.

Ronnie managed to make a mini comeback of sorts by winning the first three of the evening and he should have won the fourth as well, but he was never going to win from that position.

Yes, in the afternoon session of that match Ronnie had one of his funny turns and was conceding frames when he shouldn't have, the commentators were saying that they couldn't understand why he was not even trying, so obviously a peak Ronnie who is actually trying would never lose to a peak graham Dott, especially a SF of a world championship.

Also had issues with his tip, if I remember correctly.

His mind certainly wasn't focused on the job at hand, that's for sure.

Murphy is the worst winner of the Worlds but Bingham is surely up there

The_Abbott wrote:Murphy is the worst winner of the Worlds but Bingham is surely up there

Murphy has also won the UK and The Masters.

In fact Bingham has won The Masters too.

They're not mugs.