Post a reply

Who is the greater player?

Poll ended at 27 Nov 2020

Alex Higgins
9
60%
Terry Griffiths
6
40%
 
Total votes : 15

ATWSC Group C: Alex Higgins v Terry Griffiths

Postby Pink Ball

Alex Higgins v Terry Griffiths (Best of 20 frames)
Group: C
Date: November 26
Match: Four of six
Match day: Two of three
Venue: Tower Circus, Blackpool, United Kingdom

Vote for which of the two players you think was greater. Vote honestly, and leave your bias out of it. Don’t vote for a player just because you like them, don’t vote against a player just because you dislike them.

Consider the table conditions to be whatever conditions would have the least impact on the result.

You can use your own personal criteria for measuring greatness once it’s free of any bias towards/against (delete as applicable) players you like/dislike (delete as applicable).

Re: ATWSC Group C: Alex Higgins v Terry Griffiths

Postby Pink Ball

badtemperedcyril wrote:Alex will probably edge it on sentimental grounds and because of his cult status but Griffiths certainly had the better of him on their career head-to-heads, especially at the Crucible.

This isn't about who was better when the two faced each other head to head. There are some funny head-to-heads out there. It's about who was better overall. And Higgins was better than Griffiths.

Re: ATWSC Group C: Alex Higgins v Terry Griffiths

Postby badtemperedcyril

Pink Ball wrote:
badtemperedcyril wrote:Alex will probably edge it on sentimental grounds and because of his cult status but Griffiths certainly had the better of him on their career head-to-heads, especially at the Crucible.

This isn't about who was better when the two faced each other head to head. There are some funny head-to-heads out there. It's about who was better overall. And Higgins was better than Griffiths.

Your argument should stand up after the said players have completed their group matches but in a straight contest between two players, it’s hard not to give some consideration to head-to-heads. To be fair, on titles and career longevity there isn’t actually that much between these two. Alex, of course scores on his influence and legendary status.

Re: ATWSC Group C: Alex Higgins v Terry Griffiths

Postby LDS

I'm going to have to agree with BTC on this one.

Higgins and Griffiths both played at a time when they were both on form and both top seeds for tournaments they entered for many years, and the stats do favour Griffiths in head to heads, particularly in the bigger games, and this is a bigger game.

WSC: Griffiths QF - 13-12, L16 13-7, L16 13-12, L16 13-10,
UK: Griffiths QF 9-7, F 16-15, Higgins SF 9-4
Masters: Griffiths F 9-5, SF 6-4, QF 5-1, L16 5-4, Higgins F 9-6, L16 5-4

So for the big events, Griffiths thumps Higgins 10-3

Higgins was definitely a great player of immense talent, but even the best guys have players that Paper, Scissors, Stone them, and Higgins just didn't fare well against Griffiths. And there's very little speculation here.

So, by the rules of voting head over heart (and yes, I'd probably be wanting to see Higgins magic if I watched them play as well), it has to be Griffiths.

So Pink not following his own rules here.

Re: ATWSC Group C: Alex Higgins v Terry Griffiths

Postby Pink Ball

LDS wrote:So, by the rules of voting head over heart (and yes, I'd probably be wanting to see Higgins magic if I watched them play as well), it has to be Griffiths.

So Pink not following his own rules here.

There isn't a player in history I hate more than Alex Higgins. A bucking scumbag.

Re: ATWSC Group C: Alex Higgins v Terry Griffiths

Postby Pink Ball

But having watched both of them, I'm in no doubt as to which of the two was the better player. That is Higgins.

In head-to-head, yes, Higgins had major trouble with Griffiths. But this, to me, isn't about head to head. Michael Holt isn't a greater player than Ronnie O'Sullivan.

Re: ATWSC Group C: Alex Higgins v Terry Griffiths

Postby LDS

Pink Ball wrote:In head-to-head, yes, Higgins had major trouble with Griffiths. But this, to me, isn't about head to head. Michael Holt isn't a greater player than Ronnie O'Sullivan.


Michael Holt hasn't played him 13 times in big events. So you're being either deliberately disingenuous or simply making a very weak point.

Twice now you've just said "Higgins was the greater player" without justification. Just an opinion, but an opinion stated as fact. Something you propose as fact but offer zero justification for. You said the purpose of the competition was to raise interesting debate, then offer zero.

The competition appears to offer player-versus-player situations where we are supposed to decide who would win the given match, but then you say its not about that. If it's not about that then why are players going head to head in this competition, why not have one single poll of everyone where people can vote for their winner.

If your intention is for people to vote on who won the most tournaments then, surely, we could all just look at wikipedia.

If you don't want to debate your autocratic opinion on this match, then perhaps you could at least give people a clue as to what it is we're supposed to be voting on? Who wore the snazziest clothing? Then why isn't Dominic Dale in the running?

Re: ATWSC Group C: Alex Higgins v Terry Griffiths

Postby Pink Ball

Higgins won the most sought-after title in snooker twice. Griffiths won it once.
Higgins won the three most sought-after titles in snooker five times. Griffiths, three times.
Higgins won, I think, 25 professional titles during his career. Griffiths, I think, won fewer than 20.

There's not a huge gap between the two by any means, but the above records tally with how I remember both players. Both very good, but Higgins better.
Last edited by Pink Ball on 26 Nov 2020, edited 2 times in total.

Re: ATWSC Group C: Alex Higgins v Terry Griffiths

Postby Pink Ball

LDS wrote:
Pink Ball wrote:In head-to-head, yes, Higgins had major trouble with Griffiths. But this, to me, isn't about head to head. Michael Holt isn't a greater player than Ronnie O'Sullivan.


Michael Holt hasn't played him 13 times in big events. So you're being either deliberately disingenuous or simply making a very weak point.

Twice now you've just said "Higgins was the greater player" without justification. Just an opinion, but an opinion stated as fact. Something you propose as fact but offer zero justification for. You said the purpose of the competition was to raise interesting debate, then offer zero.

The competition appears to offer player-versus-player situations where we are supposed to decide who would win the given match, but then you say its not about that. If it's not about that then why are players going head to head in this competition, why not have one single poll of everyone where people can vote for their winner.

If your intention is for people to vote on who won the most tournaments then, surely, we could all just look at wikipedia.

If you don't want to debate your autocratic opinion on this match, then perhaps you could at least give people a clue as to what it is we're supposed to be voting on? Who wore the snazziest clothing? Then why isn't Dominic Dale in the running?

Ok.

Re: ATWSC Group C: Alex Higgins v Terry Griffiths

Postby Pink Ball

Cloud Strife wrote:Voted for Higgins. Griff might have been slightly the better player of the two, but in terms of sheer greatness there is no doubt who should come out on top between the two.

Higgins was a better player. To me, being greater and better are the same thing.

Re: ATWSC Group C: Alex Higgins v Terry Griffiths

Postby chengdufan

I went with Griffiths, based on the rankings revisit. I must admit to some bias, in that I haven't really looked at the earlier history. But I'm pretty sure Griffiths has been in the top 16 for the entire ranking history so far (for 20 years, up to near the end of 1994).
As conditions have changed, and playing style has changed, Griffiths has remained a constant.

And we can't forget his significance to the game in recent years, when he has been the coach acting as a significant catalyst in rebuilding numerous top players' careers.

Re: ATWSC Group C: Alex Higgins v Terry Griffiths

Postby Pink Ball

chengdufan wrote:I went with Griffiths, based on the rankings revisit. I must admit to some bias, in that I haven't really looked at the earlier history. But I'm pretty sure Griffiths has been in the top 16 for the entire ranking history so far (for 20 years, up to near the end of 1994).
As conditions have changed, and playing style has changed, Griffiths has remained a constant.

And we can't forget his significance to the game in recent years, when he has been the coach acting as a significant catalyst in rebuilding numerous top players' careers.

That, to me, is not relevant. It makes him more iconic, certainly, but greatness, to me, is simply about how good you were at the game.

I have left this open, intentionally, for people to use their own criteria for greatness within reason. I don't mind people voting for Griffiths. It's just disagreement, at the end of the day.


   

cron