2017 World Championship - Main Event

[The Rook]

I don't want to go too far off topic, but I spent a few days last year ranking the players based on a formula where points are scored for winning, being runner-up, or making the semi-final of a triple crown event and winning or being the runner-up of a full ranking event. (No PTC) I used 12, 7, and 3 for the WC, 8, 5, and 2 for both the UK and Masters, and 2 and 1 for a full ranking event. I haven't updated my spreadsheet since earlier this year, but this is how it worked out. I think it's a decent list.

Hendry - 309
O'Sullivan - 263
Davis - 238
J. Higgins - 188
White - 135
Reardon - 123
Williams - 123
A. Higgins - 113
Selby - 110
Parrott - 81
Robertson - 79
Doherty - 77
Murphy - 76
Griffiths - 75
Thorburn - 72
Ebdon - 69
Spencer - 65
Ding - 63
Stevens - 57
Trump - 48

The problem with assigning points for finishes is that the system is entirely based on the creator's subjective opinions. Personally, I think you rate losing finalists and semi finalists far too highly. Is a losing World finalist really worth 3.5 ranking tournaments, or a Masters semi worth a whole ranked win? I should think most players would much sooner be a 3 time World winner than a 6 time loser, although the loser would be ahead with this system. No disrespect to Jimmy, but surely Reardon, Williams and Selby should be well in front, I mean these guys have all been ranked #1 for years and have at least 6 Triple Crowns each.

[itsnoteasy]

Yeh Ding needed that, looks super confident and calm, nothing like previous years where he would have looked under so much pressure, it's good to see.

[stephenm2682]

Good reply from Ronnie too,how's he playing?

[bullen3]

Best player to have ever picked up a cue.

[itsnoteasy]

Wow!!, no one else who has ever picked up a cue can do that. Looked like a practice knock.

[VillaGuy]

Brilliant break, just a shame he didn't quite get the action on the 3rd from last red to get on the black though

[TheIslandProf]

A 146 at the Crucible by Ronnie O'Trollivan. (I'm kidding, he meant to be on black)

[Erwan_BZH]

Pretty sure he "missed" that penultimate red on purpose, I mean the replacement. He knew what he was doing....Prize money is only 5 grand for a maxi....pretty sure he didn't want to bother! lol

[JimMalone]

Also a nice break. He really makes it look pretty easy.

[VillaGuy]

Looks like the 'hot' Maguire has turned up today

[Stony152]

The problem with assigning points for finishes is that the system is entirely based on the creator's subjective opinions. Personally, I think you rate losing finalists and semi finalists far too highly. Is a losing World finalist really worth 3.5 ranking tournaments, or a Masters semi worth a whole ranked win? I should think most players would much sooner be a 3 time World winner than a 6 time loser, although the loser would be ahead with this system. No disrespect to Jimmy, but surely Reardon, Williams and Selby should be well in front, I mean these guys have all been ranked #1 for years and have at least 6 Triple Crowns each.

I'm the creator, and yes it's my subjective opinion.

You make some very valid points. I'd be interested in how you'd assign the points. I'd run them through the formula to see how the list is different than mine. Having said that, I think you really underestimate how difficult it is to make a world final. Jimmy lost a couple of finals by the slimmest of margins. You can't be an all time great without a world title, but based on longevity and quantity of very good performances he deserves to be in the top 8-10.

[stephenm2682]

Another 3_1 and we're all square

[daffie]

I have a nasty feeling ROS will come out on top, but really hoping Ding can keep it together and progress to the Semi final.

[mikeyd100]

Yes, I've noticed that mannerism and didn't realise it was when he's under pressure.

Yeah seen it too often and me and mates chuckle about it.
Good match on now.... pressure on Ding, great 146 with humour by Ronnie.

[The Rook]

I'm the creator, and yes it's my subjective opinion.

You make some very valid points. I'd be interested in how you'd assign the points. I'd run them through the formula to see how the list is different than mine. Having said that, I think you really underestimate how difficult it is to make a world final. Jimmy lost a couple of finals by the slimmest of margins. You can't be an all time great without a world title, but based on longevity and quantity of very good performances he deserves to be in the top 8-10.

I think it is very difficult to come up with a points system for ranking the greats. I could give you some numbers, but I'd have to test them first and do some curve fitting to make sure that my favourites are near the top. I'm guessing that you are a Jimmy White fan.

Off the top of my head I'd say count wins only and award:
WC: 4 points
Masters/UK: 2 points
Ranking: 1 point
Edit: perhaps you could award one point for a World final, making it equal to a ranked win.

Even if we could agree on the relative values of tournament placings, there is also the question of the strength of a given era. Does winning a tournament today count the same as 30 years ago? On the one hand Steve Davis played in a weaker era, but on the other he was a pioneer for today's players. Also, Davis should probably have more than 28 ranked wins on principle, as many of his early victories were from a time that the World Championship was the only ranking tournament. Anyway, I suppose what I'm trying to say is that I think it is problematic trying to meaningfully rank the greats.