John Higgins vs Steve Davis - Discussion

[Nugget]

Great match. Only clouded by Davis's inability to call a fall on himself when brushing the red. Strange that Willie Thorne and Ken Docherty made light of it, too.

No way he felt that. Steve badly wants to win but he would never be dishonest. If he'd felt it he would have called it without even thinking about it.

[montoya10]

Montoya... coming from you, who reliably make some of the
most essential observations and comments on the forum...
I consider this high praise and feel very flattered.

Thank you!



=o)

Nioel

Not at all, noel

I've not been on the forum during the course of the match, but still enjoyed every bit of the game and I could only say that this is one of the most amazing achievements I've ever witnessed!

Maybe this is the fire snooker had to wait for many years, and the sport will get onto a new wave of rise finally

[Black_cat]

Thank you, Mr. Davis! Reminded me of why I fell in love with snooker.
Everything has already been said before about this match.
I only wish I were this passionate about my work and gift when I'm 52.

Respectful congrats, Steve!
Hats off for the attitude at the end of the match, John!

[stephenm2682]

that foul didn't really change anything cause higgins won that frame anyway

[baldycelt]

despite the 'findings' of the WPBSA in his recent scandal, I remain unconvinced that Higgins didn't throw that match. Sorry - realise this is a contentious perspective, but I saw every shot of every frame in that match and cannot believe that Higgins is/was capable of the misses he made without deliberate effort. Which begs the question, how and why and were both players 'in on it'. In order - Barry Hearn 'approached' Higgins...they had a chat, and talked about the future of the game - Hearn suggested how good it would be to see Davis get through - why? Massive boost in interest for the (at that time, slowly dying) game - this result was achieved, with snooker getting more column inches than in many years. Finally, were both players involved? No, I don't think so - I don't think Davis would need to be and indeed was not. Higgins on the other hand....

In his interview afterwards, he seemed to me sheepish and evasive - no sign of annoyance/disappointment/anger, which should have been present in some degree at some point - i didn't spot a trace myself.

And what about Davis's match with Robertson in the following round? Robertson is a devastating scorer, and his safety game is very strong also...but it's not in league with Davis's - Higgins on the other hand is one of the modern-day titans in the strategy/safety part of the game - yet Robertson goes on to completely trounce Davis...in exactly the manner that Higgins should have.

So what if this is actually definitely what happened, more or less, rather than the ramblings of a cynical observer? What harm, right? It did the game a great amount of 'good', from a publicity perspective, right?

Hmmmmm......

[Steve748]

You certainly choose a contentious subject for your first post!

[Rane]

Interesting view. There might always be a shadow hanging over Higgins head from now on, but not in that match.

I saw a sky high favorit (Higgins) struggling to find his A-game against a "sleeping lion" who had already done more than most people had expected by winning his first round match in style. Davis didn´t have anything to prove and got into John Higgins head plus he found a bit of the play that earned him 6 world titles and got all the audience behind him, and that proved to be the difference.

[Rane]

And Higgins was up against a boyhood hero, where Robertson are too young to remember Steve Davis at his best, that could do a difference as well.

If Higgins had opened a 6 - 2 lead after first session, I think he would have run away just like Robertson did.

[miscuehamburg]

I suspect the upcoming meeting in Ukraine spooked in JH's head thus resulting to the incredible misses. That the meeting would have been held regardless whenever I take for granted & do not believe he was spontanuously allured by Pat after he lost to Steve. This, however, doesn't diminish the great performance Steve put on the table that day

[matoski]

Steve Davis had 95% pot success in that match. How can you fix that?

[Acrowot]

I am not a Higgins fan, although he is a brilliant player. For anyone to suggest that he threw the game against Davis is a downright wicked thing to say. There is no way that he did that.
:snooker:

[spike]

For anyone to suggest that he threw the game against Davis is a downright wicked thing to say. There is no way that he did that.
:snooker:

And the fact that at the time he was defending champion even less likely so..

[baldycelt]

I was and am shocked myself, don't get me wrong - i've loved snooker my whole life - but the misses got so bad in that match, that Doherty and Thorn actually stopped passing comment on some of them - not even 'i didn't expect him to miss that' - just stony silence - there's no doubt whatsoever in my mind that there was some strong silence-inducing doubt in one or both of theirs.

Re it being a wicked thing to say? I don't agree - I'm expressing an opinion - this expression should not be regarded as good/bad - it's incredibly saddening. I 'voiced' this opinion well before the whole News of the World/Ukraine story came out incidentally (http://www.intertopspintour.net/foru...ht=steve+davis).

I do find myself wondering how much time Davis has spent wondering if Higgins threw it, and indeed what conclusion HE has come to - i'm 100% definitely settled that Higgins threw it, taking all available 'evidence' into consideration.

[Giggity1984]

In the first 8 frames of that match Steve Davis did not miss a ball. No way that was rigged.

[Acrowot]

Sorry about that baldycelt. Maybe I did go over the top a bit, but was not really nice to say that.

I do not think that Higgins missed any ball in that game on purpose, but not going to say he would not have done after visiting Kiev, if NOTW had kept quiet about it for a while. The thing now is that it is over and he will be playing again soon.
:snooker: