by Andre147 » 15 Mar 2021 Read
Another bull article. Same as when some pundits were clearly claiming Higgins was the GOAT after his 2011 World title.
-
Andre147
- Posts: 41673
- Joined: 09 October 2011
- Snooker Idol: Ronnie and Luca
- Highest Break: 27
- Walk-On: Spies - Coldplay
by McManusFan » 15 Mar 2021 Read
Andre147 wrote:Another bull article. Same as when some pundits were clearly claiming Higgins was the GOAT after his 2011 World title.
It's not really the same as that, this has a lot of scientific analysis behind it. It still doesn't feel like the right result, the algorithm probably puts undue importance on something.
-
McManusFan
- Posts: 7606
- Joined: 03 October 2018
- Snooker Idol: Alan McManus
- Highest Break: 8
by Andre147 » 15 Mar 2021 Read
When you have Hendry as the 4th greatest player, you just know that's bull and I didn't even look at the full list.
-
Andre147
- Posts: 41673
- Joined: 09 October 2011
- Snooker Idol: Ronnie and Luca
- Highest Break: 27
- Walk-On: Spies - Coldplay
by TheRocket » 15 Mar 2021 Read
Its not just Hendry. How can anyone put Carter above the likes of Ding,Ebdon,Doherty or Bingham? Why is Ryan Day in the Top20 but not John Parrott? Maguire on 11? And why is Ronnie only the 8th best player in the 2010-2019 decade if he was the most successful player next to Selby?
Its just nonsense from top to bottom.
-
TheRocket
- Posts: 16339
- Joined: 23 September 2012
- Snooker Idol: Federer-ROS-Messi
by SnookerFan » 16 Mar 2021 Read
Wasn't Ali Carter like 18th?
-
SnookerFan
- Posts: 148403
- Joined: 13 December 2009
- Snooker Idol: Michaela Tabb
- Walk-On: Entry Of The Gladiators
-
by SnookerFan » 16 Mar 2021 Read
Lies, damn lies and statistics.
-
SnookerFan
- Posts: 148403
- Joined: 13 December 2009
- Snooker Idol: Michaela Tabb
- Walk-On: Entry Of The Gladiators
-
by Prop » 16 Mar 2021 Read
Andre147 wrote:Another bull article. Same as when some pundits were clearly claiming Higgins was the GOAT after his 2011 World title.
I remember Steve Davis getting all emotional and saying that at the end of the final. Made me laugh
-
Prop
- Posts: 25045
- Joined: 16 December 2015
- Highest Break: 65
- Walk-On: Papua New Guinea - FSOL
by SnookerFan » 16 Mar 2021 Read
SnookerFan wrote:Wasn't Ali Carter like 18th?
Higher than that. He was 12th.
Good list.
-
SnookerFan
- Posts: 148403
- Joined: 13 December 2009
- Snooker Idol: Michaela Tabb
- Walk-On: Entry Of The Gladiators
-
by SnookerFan » 16 Mar 2021 Read
Andre147 wrote:Another bull article. Same as when some pundits were clearly claiming Higgins was the GOAT after his 2011 World title.
That's just commentary waffle, isn't it?
As soon as Ronnie started winning again, they all forgot who Higgins was. In 2008, when Judd knocked Ronnie out of the Grand Prix, the BBC started spunking themselves about how Judd had overtaken Ronnie's mantle. That was before Judd had won anything.
Not having a go at Higgins, Ronnie or Trump because they're obviously all amazing players. But the pundits do tend to overstate these things. The BBC in particular. I wouldn't place any importance on it.
-
SnookerFan
- Posts: 148403
- Joined: 13 December 2009
- Snooker Idol: Michaela Tabb
- Walk-On: Entry Of The Gladiators
-
by vodkadiet1 » 16 Mar 2021 Read
You cannot argue against the science. And the beauty of the study is there isn't any personal bias.
Johm Higgins is the greatest snooker player ever!!!
-
vodkadiet1
- Posts: 4538
- Joined: 20 April 2019
- Location: London
- Snooker Idol: Kirk Stevens
- Highest Break: 48
- Walk-On: Crazy (Seal)
by HappyCamper » 16 Mar 2021 Read
vodkadiet1 wrote:You cannot argue against the science. And the beauty of the study is there isn't any personal bias.
Johm Higgins is the greatest snooker player ever!!!
So is four greater than seven now.
-
HappyCamper
- Posts: 18376
- Joined: 05 November 2018
- Location: Edinburgh
- Snooker Idol: Graeme Dott
- Walk-On: Banana Chips by Shonen Knife
by SnookerFan » 16 Mar 2021 Read
vodkadiet1 wrote:You cannot argue against the science. And the beauty of the study is there isn't any personal bias.
Johm Higgins is the greatest snooker player ever!!!
Who is Johm Higgins?
-
SnookerFan
- Posts: 148403
- Joined: 13 December 2009
- Snooker Idol: Michaela Tabb
- Walk-On: Entry Of The Gladiators
-
by Wildey » 20 Mar 2021 Read
vodkadiet1 wrote:You cannot argue against the science. And the beauty of the study is there isn't any personal bias.
Johm Higgins is the greatest snooker player ever!!!
This study shows how bad scientific modelling is.
-
Wildey
- Posts: 64104
- Joined: 02 October 2009
- Location: North Wales
- Snooker Idol: Mark Selby
- Highest Break: 25
- Walk-On: the one and only
by Pink Ball » 20 Mar 2021 Read
The fact that everyone seems so upset about O'Sullivan being behind Higgins is quite telling about where people's priorities lie, really.
Yeah, that's bullocks, but it's nowhere near the greatest source of bullocks in this thing. Ali Carter the 12th greatest player of all time? Ahead of Peter Ebdon and Ken Doherty? Five places ahead of Ding Junhui, who's even better than Ebdon and Doherty?
And that's not even the worst bit. Where the hell are Ray Reardon and Alex Higgins? I don't know, but they're behind Ryan Day, apparently.
Scientific modelling is grand, but it does ultimately depend on what humans tell the system to do. And therein lies its fatal flaw.
-
Pink Ball
- Posts: 22231
- Joined: 07 April 2015
- Location: Galway city, Ireland
- Snooker Idol: You are a banker
- Walk-On: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kkfgIUiCiUQ
by vodkadiet1 » 20 Mar 2021 Read
The algorithm only works 100% when comapring players of the same era. Therefore Higgins is greater than O'Sullivan but you cannot make a comparison with Higgins and for example Hendry or Steve Davis.
-
vodkadiet1
- Posts: 4538
- Joined: 20 April 2019
- Location: London
- Snooker Idol: Kirk Stevens
- Highest Break: 48
- Walk-On: Crazy (Seal)
by SnookerFan » 20 Mar 2021 Read
Pink Ball wrote:The fact that everyone seems so upset about O'Sullivan being behind Higgins is quite telling about where people's priorities lie, really.
Yeah, that's bullocks, but it's nowhere near the greatest source of bullocks in this thing. Ali Carter the 12th greatest player of all time? Ahead of Peter Ebdon and Ken Doherty? Five places ahead of Ding Junhui, who's even better than Ebdon and Doherty?
And that's not even the worst bit. Where the hell are Ray Reardon and Alex Higgins? I don't know, but they're behind Ryan Day, apparently.
Scientific modelling is grand, but it does ultimately depend on what humans tell the system to do. And therein lies its fatal flaw.
I pointed out how stupid the Carter thing was.
-
SnookerFan
- Posts: 148403
- Joined: 13 December 2009
- Snooker Idol: Michaela Tabb
- Walk-On: Entry Of The Gladiators
-
by Prop » 20 Mar 2021 Read
Pink Ball wrote:The fact that everyone seems so upset about O'Sullivan being behind Higgins is quite telling about where people's priorities lie, really.
Yeah, that's bullocks, but it's nowhere near the greatest source of bullocks in this thing. Ali Carter the 12th greatest player of all time? Ahead of Peter Ebdon and Ken Doherty? Five places ahead of Ding Junhui, who's even better than Ebdon and Doherty?
And that's not even the worst bit. Where the hell are Ray Reardon and Alex Higgins? I don't know, but they're behind Ryan Day, apparently.
Scientific modelling is grand, but it does ultimately depend on what humans tell the system to do. And therein lies its fatal flaw.
Zaccly.
-
Prop
- Posts: 25045
- Joined: 16 December 2015
- Highest Break: 65
- Walk-On: Papua New Guinea - FSOL
by Holden Chinaski » 20 Mar 2021 Read
Pink Ball wrote:Scientific modelling is grand, but it does ultimately depend on what humans tell the system to do. And therein lies its fatal flaw.
Indeed. I was thinking about explaining this to Vodka, but I figured I had a better chance of explaining Newton's laws to a hamster.
-
Holden Chinaski
- Posts: 29705
- Joined: 26 July 2013
- Location: Belgium
- Snooker Idol: The Belgiums
- Walk-On: A little less conversation - Elvis
by Wildey » 20 Mar 2021 Read
Pink Ball wrote:The fact that everyone seems so upset about O'Sullivan being behind Higgins is quite telling about where people's priorities lie, really.
Yeah, that's bullocks, but it's nowhere near the greatest source of bullocks in this thing. Ali Carter the 12th greatest player of all time? Ahead of Peter Ebdon and Ken Doherty? Five places ahead of Ding Junhui, who's even better than Ebdon and Doherty?
And that's not even the worst bit. Where the hell are Ray Reardon and Alex Higgins? I don't know, but they're behind Ryan Day, apparently.
Scientific modelling is grand, but it does ultimately depend on what humans tell the system to do. And therein lies its fatal flaw.
yea Top 4 is neither here or there but Carter being so far ahead of Ding and Bingham makes the whole thing flawed as a method.
-
Wildey
- Posts: 64104
- Joined: 02 October 2009
- Location: North Wales
- Snooker Idol: Mark Selby
- Highest Break: 25
- Walk-On: the one and only
by Prop » 20 Mar 2021 Read
I get the feeling that this project was quite precious to the statisticians. And there was there moment when the results came back, they knew deep down it was questionable, but they had to push it through and run with the results because it was their baby. To abandon it at that point wouldn’t have been a favourable option to them. But they know it’s not right.
-
Prop
- Posts: 25045
- Joined: 16 December 2015
- Highest Break: 65
- Walk-On: Papua New Guinea - FSOL
by TheRocket » 20 Mar 2021 Read
As I said, from top to bottom nonsense list. Neither is John Higgins the greatest nor are Maguire and Carter above the likes of Ding, Ebdon or Doherty or Bingham. And Day doesnt belong into the Top20 while Reardon,Alex Higgins or Parrott definitely do but they are not there.
To me it looks like the creators wanted to create "controversy" and seek attention with the whole thing and thats what they've done.
-
TheRocket
- Posts: 16339
- Joined: 23 September 2012
- Snooker Idol: Federer-ROS-Messi
by vodkadiet1 » 20 Mar 2021 Read
TheRocket wrote:As I said, from top to bottom nonsense list. Neither is John Higgins the greatest nor are Maguire and Carter above the likes of Ding, Ebdon or Doherty or Bingham. And Day doesnt belong into the Top20 while Reardon,Alex Higgins or Parrott definitely do but they are not there.
To me it looks like the creators wanted to create "controversy" and seek attention with the whole thing and thats what they've done.
Using the rule of reporting by exception - 'The algorithm only works in its entirety when comparing players whose careers run directly parellel.' Therefore a comparison between Higgins, Williams, and O'Sullivan is 100% accurate. But comparing Higgins with Hendry or Davis leaves a margin of error which needs to be taken in to account when interpreting the data.
-
vodkadiet1
- Posts: 4538
- Joined: 20 April 2019
- Location: London
- Snooker Idol: Kirk Stevens
- Highest Break: 48
- Walk-On: Crazy (Seal)
by TheRocket » 20 Mar 2021 Read
I agree. A comparison between O'Sullivan,Higgins and Williams is absolutely accurate. They're from the same generation and they have played in the very same era. You cant really compare Rod Laver with Roger Federer but you can and should compare Federer with Nadal and Djokovic.
And while Federer,Nadal,Djokovic are still battling it out , O'Sullivan will probably end his career with more World titles than Higgins and Williams.
-
TheRocket
- Posts: 16339
- Joined: 23 September 2012
- Snooker Idol: Federer-ROS-Messi
by HappyCamper » 20 Mar 2021 Read
did any of youse actually read the paper? they just took a mathematical tool which was developed for ranking academic papers by citations, or web pages by links; that had been applied to some other sports. then they scraped snooker results from cuetracker and plugged them in to see what happens to snooker matches. before performing some simple comparisons to the official rankings, and a ranking based purely on number of match wins. at no point does it claim to be some definite or objective truth.
-
HappyCamper
- Posts: 18376
- Joined: 05 November 2018
- Location: Edinburgh
- Snooker Idol: Graeme Dott
- Walk-On: Banana Chips by Shonen Knife
by lhpirnie » 20 Mar 2021 Read
TheRocket wrote:I agree. A comparison between O'Sullivan,Higgins and Williams is absolutely accurate. They're from the same generation and they have played in the very same era. You cant really compare Rod Laver with Roger Federer but you can and should compare Federer with Nadal and Djokovic.
And while Federer,Nadal,Djokovic are still battling it out , O'Sullivan will probably end his career with more World titles than Higgins and Williams.
Indeed. There was a tennis study a few years ago that 'proved' Jimmy Connors was the best tennis player of all time. It was done by the University of Illinois...
I really don't think GOAT debates go anywhere, because of the problem of different eras. Objectively, the standard improves over time (with ups and downs of course). There will be players in the future who play to a higher standard than anyone past or present today. And so on, so long as snooker is a healthy sport.
Does that detract from the achievements of today's players? No. We are lucky to have witnessed some
great players. Future generations should have their greats too.
-
lhpirnie
- Posts: 2393
- Joined: 06 April 2019
- Location: London, UK
- Highest Break: 132
-
by Holden Chinaski » 20 Mar 2021 Read
HappyCamper wrote:did any of youse actually read the paper? they just took a mathematical tool which was developed for ranking academic papers by citations, or web pages by links; that had been applied to some other sports. then they scraped snooker results from cuetracker and plugged them in to see what happens to snooker matches. before performing some simple comparisons to the official rankings, and a ranking based purely on number of match wins. at no point does it claim to be some definite or objective truth.
Good point.
-
Holden Chinaski
- Posts: 29705
- Joined: 26 July 2013
- Location: Belgium
- Snooker Idol: The Belgiums
- Walk-On: A little less conversation - Elvis
by TheRocket » 20 Mar 2021 Read
lhpirnie wrote:TheRocket wrote:I agree. A comparison between O'Sullivan,Higgins and Williams is absolutely accurate. They're from the same generation and they have played in the very same era. You cant really compare Rod Laver with Roger Federer but you can and should compare Federer with Nadal and Djokovic.
And while Federer,Nadal,Djokovic are still battling it out , O'Sullivan will probably end his career with more World titles than Higgins and Williams.
Indeed. There was a tennis study a few years ago that 'proved' Jimmy Connors was the best tennis player of all time. It was done by the University of Illinois...
I really don't think GOAT debates go anywhere, because of the problem of different eras. Objectively, the standard improves over time (with ups and downs of course). There will be players in the future who play to a higher standard than anyone past or present today. And so on, so long as snooker is a healthy sport.
Does that detract from the achievements of today's players? No. We are lucky to have witnessed some
great players. Future generations should have their greats too.
good point but when it comes to a higher standard in the future and the standard improving over time I'm not that sure. I think Snooker can become some sort of dead sport in the future. We're already watching how its becoming an old mans game and there is a lack of talents. Certainly from an UK point of view. Dont think Snooker will be ever a big thing in mainland Europe like people thought it could be after Brecel became pro.
Future will depend on the Chinese talents imo.
-
TheRocket
- Posts: 16339
- Joined: 23 September 2012
- Snooker Idol: Federer-ROS-Messi
by McManusFan » 20 Mar 2021 Read
HappyCamper wrote:did any of youse actually read the paper? they just took a mathematical tool which was developed for ranking academic papers by citations, or web pages by links; that had been applied to some other sports. then they scraped snooker results from cuetracker and plugged them in to see what happens to snooker matches. before performing some simple comparisons to the official rankings, and a ranking based purely on number of match wins. at no point does it claim to be some definite or objective truth.
-
McManusFan
- Posts: 7606
- Joined: 03 October 2018
- Snooker Idol: Alan McManus
- Highest Break: 8
by lhpirnie » 20 Mar 2021 Read
TheRocket wrote:lhpirnie wrote:TheRocket wrote:I agree. A comparison between O'Sullivan,Higgins and Williams is absolutely accurate. They're from the same generation and they have played in the very same era. You cant really compare Rod Laver with Roger Federer but you can and should compare Federer with Nadal and Djokovic.
And while Federer,Nadal,Djokovic are still battling it out , O'Sullivan will probably end his career with more World titles than Higgins and Williams.
Indeed. There was a tennis study a few years ago that 'proved' Jimmy Connors was the best tennis player of all time. It was done by the University of Illinois...
I really don't think GOAT debates go anywhere, because of the problem of different eras. Objectively, the standard improves over time (with ups and downs of course). There will be players in the future who play to a higher standard than anyone past or present today. And so on, so long as snooker is a healthy sport.
Does that detract from the achievements of today's players? No. We are lucky to have witnessed some
great players. Future generations should have their greats too.
good point but when it comes to a higher standard in the future and the standard improving over time I'm not that sure. I think Snooker can become some sort of dead sport in the future. We're already watching how its becoming an old mans game and there is a lack of talents. Certainly from an UK point of view. Dont think Snooker will be ever a big thing in mainland Europe like people thought it could be after Brecel became pro.
Future will depend on the Chinese talents imo.
Very possibly. Snooker could die out like billiards did. In which case names like Ronnie O'Sullivan and Stephen Hendry will be forgotten, as Tom Newman, Walter Lindrum, etc. have been. Then nothing matters.
As for snooker's globalisation, we have seen that it takes much longer than expected. No Chinese players have yet reached their full potential. But it's still basically a UK tour (even out of pandemic time), and the overseas guys are always 'playing away from home', in football terms. Maybe that will be different in the future.
-
lhpirnie
- Posts: 2393
- Joined: 06 April 2019
- Location: London, UK
- Highest Break: 132
-