Ronnie O Sullivan - Ali Carter - final

[montoya10]

as he should hes underachieved higgins has overachieved

I have to disagree. I'd say Higgins was far more of an underachiever compared to O'Sullivan. His and Williams' dip in forms lasted far more and only in recent years, they have had somewhat of a revival.

[LittleMissAlexa]

Ronnie has underachieved to a far higher extent Ronnie has the most talent of the 3 argubaly on talent O'Sullivan should of dominated the sport

[PatBlock]

....this might be Ronnie's last appearance here.

You're not falling for that very old chestnut are you?

-

[Ronnie's tip]

Williams at the very top his game in his heyday was on par with O'Sullivan and Higgins, if not better. But his certain period of drought dropped him behind those two in the consideration.
Still, if we are talking about absolute best, he isn't behind.

It's interesting how all 3 of the 'special' players this past generation have all had problems. Ronnie's are well documented, Williams lacked motivation for about 7 years (won only 1 ranking title from 03-10) and Higgins went through a period where he was drinking a bit too much apparently.

I think that in terms of how good each player is/was at their best, it goes O'Sullivan > Williams > Higgins, but Higgins mentally is much stronger than either O'Sullivan/Williams IMO.

Had any one of those three had the mentality of a Hendry/Davis they would have dominated a lot more. In fairness Higgins from 07-11 was basically like that though.

It really wouldn't surprise me if Higgins ended with with 6 world championships.

[FOXMULDER]

Wasn't Higgins also on 24? I thought so, but could well be mistaken about that.

You're correct. So, they would be level on 24 events each.

I don't count minor ranking events, and I'm not too concerned about breaks/147's either.

And, yes, they are both a level above Williams.

[montoya10]

He got what he gave to the sport. He never had the determination showed by Higgins until he was well into his thirties, so, no, he hasn't underachieved.
Mental side of a sport is as important as the physical, as well. If one cannot pull himself together to play to the maximum degree of his physical ability, then, it's his mistake in failing to do so.

[doorag]

He got what he gave to the sport. He never had the determination showed by Higgins until he was well into his thirties, so, no, he hasn't underachieved.
Mental side of a sport is as important as the physical, as well. If one cannot pull himself together to play to the maximum degree of his physical ability, then, it's his mistake in failing to do so.

Agree with all of that.

[montoya10]

It's interesting how all 3 of the 'special' players this past generation have all had problems. Ronnie's are well documented, Williams lacked motivation for about 7 years (won only 1 ranking title from 03-10) and Higgins went through a period where he was drinking a bit too much apparently.

I think that in terms of how good each player is/was at their best, it goes O'Sullivan > Williams > Higgins, but Higgins mentally is much stronger than either O'Sullivan/Williams IMO.

Had any one of those three had the mentality of a Hendry/Davis they would have dominated a lot more. In fairness Higgins from 07-11 was basically like that though.

It really wouldn't surprise me if Higgins ended with with 6 world championships.

Imagine you could merge all of their talents into one player.
That would be an unreal level of break building, tactical play and long potting combined in one single player. That's like a better tactician version of Hendry.
Now, that man would dominate.

[FOXMULDER]

The definition of "underachieving" is not fulfilling one's potential.

O'Sullivan surely qualifies for that.

[montoya10]

You know what, I never get a hold of this "underachiever" concept. For me, one can never count Jimmy White as an underachiever. He has 10 ranking titles to his name, got the UK and the Masters and reached the world final on six occasions.
For me, the real and perhaps the only underachiever is Paul Hunter, because he didn't fulfill his potential and there was nothing he could do about that.

[snookerfran]

Had any one of those three had the mentality of a Hendry/Davis they would have dominated a lot more.

I don't buy this. The reason none of those three dominated is simple: the other two were playing the same tournaments at the same time.

[LittleMissAlexa]

it was to put it simply a golden generation the players who turned professional that season O'Sullivan, Higgins, Williams, Lee, Perry, Dale, Burnett (All have made north of 100 century breaks) (5 have won ranking events) (3 World Champions) (5 Have made the top 16 in their careers) Burnett is the only player in a professional tournament to make a higher break than 147

[snookerfran]

It's starting!!

[montoya10]

I don't buy this. The reason none of those three dominated is simple: the other two were playing the same tournaments at the same time.

The number of ranking finals one lost to the other two is 5 for Higgins, 4 for Williams, and 3 for O'Sullivan, if I'm not wrong.
And these numbers are just for the finals, so, your point is definitely correct.

[montoya10]

What a standing ovation to Stephen Hendry.