|
By:
It would have Hendry top, but I'd probably have O'Sullivan second and Davis third - I will not include Higgins because in my opinion he shouldn't be allowed to play professional snooker.
Then I'd have Williams, Selby and White - I have to include Jimmy because he lost four finals to the greatest snooker player there has ever been and reached one final when he was 19. |
|
By:
Fair comment. Why Williams above Selby?
|
|
By:
jed - J.Higgins did win 3 World titles here before the scandal. I agree that he got off lightly, and I've always been of the opinion that B.Hearn took the easy way out banning him for 6 months. Either Higgins should have received no ban, as he did nothing improper, or he should have been banned for a similar length of time as Q.Hann, because he would have. You'd have to have him in the top 6 (4th) even if you leave out his 4th title and this year's appearance in the final.
|
|
By:
I didn't mean to place Williams above Selby, I'm undecided as to which one of them should be fourth. I would expect Selby to render the argument academic over the next three or four years, but right now it's a tough one because I think Williams beat stronger fields to win his titles.
I suppose so gobelins, just can't have the bloke personally, and he was chucking matches long before the NOTW got hold of him. |
|
By:
I would have Williams above Selby, even after he mops up a couple more from the weak minded wannabes.
Higgins at 41 should not be reaching finals. He was a shadow of his best and were he at it he smashes Selby each and every time. Say what you like about him his cue action is poetry in motion unlike the car crash that is Selby's. So was Williams, an absolute joy to watch, like therapy. Watching Selby makes me need therapy. The Chinese will never make it, they have not the mentality. Ding is as close as they will ever get. They are all gamblers, not chess players. Well actually they might because there is no young talent coming through here. Could completely change the landscape. |