John Higgins: Triple Crown underachiever?

Higgins has won four World Championships, only three UK Championships, and only two Masters titles. That's nine Triple Crowns. For a player like Higgins, that's just not good enough, in my opinion. I think he should have won a lot more than that. I mean, Ronnie is the same age as Higgins, he became pro in the same year, and he has twenty Triple Crown titles! Now that is a respectable number for an all-time great. Mark Selby is eight years younger and he already has as much Triple Crown titles as Higgins. That's not right. I mean Selby is great, but is he better than John Higgins? I think Higgins is an underachiever. And that's really strange to me because he's such a great all-round player.

Having said that, I think there is a good chance we will see Higgins win another World Title. He looks like he has worked hard on his health and on his game. It looks like he has his eyes on another World Title to me. As soon as I saw the new skinny Higgins I was thinking he's going to win at the Crucible again.

And for the people who are about to say Triple Crown titles are made up by the BBC and nobody cares: all players including Hendry, Davis, Ronnie, MJW, Higgins, Selby, and lots more, have said many times those three tournaments are top priority. Only Trump disagrees with that, or at least that's what he wants us to think.

Even if we look at just the World Championship, four titles really is not good enough for a player like Higgins is it?

I agree with his ability he has underachieved and should have won more Triple Crown titles. But he hasnt and he is far behind Ron,Hendry and Davis. Selby will probably end up with more Triple Crown titles than Higgins which wouldnt be a fair reflection in my eyes but it is what it is.

Stephen Hendry,Ronnie O'Sullivan and Steve Davis in my eyes as well are for sure above Higgins in the All-Time Great list.

Hard to believe he only won the Masters twice. That is a strange statistic.

Yeah, that's a fair assessment, but most players are 'under achievers'. If Higgins had won more triple crown titles who would have lost out? Ronnie, Selby, Trump? In many ways they are underachievers too. That's the nature of the sport, you've got lots of very talented people but there can only be one winner.

I suppose the old argument is relevant here that three of the very best in the game (CO92) were in direct competition for a large proportion of their careers.

If Ronnie never existed, how many TCs would Higgins be on? If Higgins never existed… and so on. It’s not exactly the most pragmatic way of looking at things; it’s not as simple as assuming any one player would definitely win certain titles in the absence of others, but it must be a factor to some extent.

I don’t have the stats at hand, but it’d be interesting to know how many TC finals certain players have reached, and their conversion rate. Ron and Higgins are still knocking on the door. I’m sure they’ll both add more before they’re done.

Prop wrote:
If Ronnie never existed, how many TCs would Higgins be on? If Higgins never existed… and so on. It’s not exactly the most pragmatic way of looking at things; it’s not as simple as assuming any one player would definitely win certain titles in the absence of others, but it must be a factor to some extent.

The thing is that Ronnie and Higgins have had a rivalry for almost 30 years but they barely met in the TC events. Only 10 times in 30 years. 4 of them finals. Only one match at the UK. It wasnt really Ronnie that stopped Higgins in the TC events, nor did Higgins stop Ronnie.

What we can say is that Ronnie does better and has had more success against the field while Higgins is more prone to lose to a journeyman and lets say 2nd and 3rd tier topplayers (like Carter,Hawkins category). They are the ones you have to beat consistently to win tournaments.

TheRocket wrote:
It wasnt really Ronnie that stopped Higgins in the TC events, .

He did stop Higgins from winning a World title in 2001 and two Masters titles in 1995 and 2005.

Holden Chinaski wrote:

TheRocket wrote:
It wasnt really Ronnie that stopped Higgins in the TC events, .

He did stop Higgins from winning a World title in 2001 and two Masters titles in 1995 and 2005.

Yes but thats only three tournaments in like 30 years. Higgins just didnt excel in the TC events like Ronnie or Hendry did. He hasnt won a Triple Crown event for 10 years now.

I don’t think Higgins has underachieved in the Worlds. I’d say four of each would be about “right”. But as others have said it would probably mean discussing others’ underachievement.

Iranu wrote:I don’t think Higgins has underachieved in the Worlds. I’d say four of each would be about “right”. But as others have said it would probably mean discussing others’ underachievement.

I think the reason why people think he has underachieved (myself included) is because his style of play is perfectly suited for the Worlds you'd think. Just the ultimate matchplayer.

TheRocket wrote:

Iranu wrote:I don’t think Higgins has underachieved in the Worlds. I’d say four of each would be about “right”. But as others have said it would probably mean discussing others’ underachievement.

I think the reason why people think he has underachieved (myself included) is because his style of play is perfectly suited for the Worlds you'd think. Just the ultimate matchplayer.

That’s true. To be fair he’s reached as many finals as Davis and only one less than Hendry and I think only 2017 you could say he “should” have won. It’s fine margins, as they say.

The Masters, though. He rarely even threatens to win that. I know that sounds stupid with him getting to this year’s final but over the 30 years I do think that’s the biggest mark against him.

TheRocket wrote:

Iranu wrote:I don’t think Higgins has underachieved in the Worlds. I’d say four of each would be about “right”. But as others have said it would probably mean discussing others’ underachievement.

I think the reason why people think he has underachieved (myself included) is because his style of play is perfectly suited for the Worlds you'd think. Just the ultimate matchplayer.

Indeed.

https://wst.tv/selby-im-getting-stronger

Selby says that ROS,Hendry and Higgins are the only All-Time Greats in Snooker and the Triple Crown tournaments are more important than anything else. I agree with the second part and it shows one more time how highly players rate the UK and Masters.

But I'd disagree with the first because surely Steve Davis is an All-Time Great as well. And Selby and MJW belong to that category too.

TheRocket wrote:https://wst.tv/selby-im-getting-stronger

Selby says that ROS,Hendry and Higgins are the only All-Time Greats in Snooker and the Triple Crown tournaments are more important than anything else. I agree with the second part and it shows one more time how highly players rate the UK and Masters.

But I'd disagree with the first because surely Steve Davis is an All-Time Great as well. And Selby and MJW belong to that category too.

"The three Triple Crown events are the most important ones for me. I have achieved everything I wanted to in my career, my aim is to win more of those three events. At the start of each season my goal is to win one of the three, as difficult as it is to do that.”

And there you have it. All the top players have said this, I remember Hendry said the exact same thing. And still, some people act like the Triple Crown is something new invented by the BBC that players don't care about. This is why Ronnie is the greatest. Twenty Triple Crown titles is an amazing achievement. Those are the tournaments they all want to win, even if Tinpot Judd says otherwise.

Not winning any since his revival around 2015 is where he's underachieved. If it was a new player emerging at that time with the record he has had since it would be a big deal.

It's the 3 tournaments that have remained constant on the calendar.

Ok the UK Champs had it's format messed up, at the very least the semis should be Best of 17 but still... Worlds, Masters and UK remain the 3 biggest tournaments. Nothing to do with the BBC, it's just how it is and like Selby correctly says it's the 3 everybody aims at the start of each season.

Of course it's still a good season if you manage to win other events, but most players would swap one or more of those titles for one of these 3.

TheRocket wrote:https://wst.tv/selby-im-getting-stronger

Selby says that ROS,Hendry and Higgins are the only All-Time Greats in Snooker and the Triple Crown tournaments are more important than anything else. I agree with the second part and it shows one more time how highly players rate the UK and Masters.

But I'd disagree with the first because surely Steve Davis is an All-Time Great as well. And Selby and MJW belong to that category too.

Not sure how Selby can say that and exclude Davis, considering Selby has the same number of TCs as Higgins.

Higgy has also lost nine TC finals. That’s four World’s, three Masters and two UK’s. I’m not sure without looking it up but I’m guessing Selby’s rate of converting TC finals into titles is higher.

badtemperedcyril wrote:Higgy has also lost nine TC finals. That’s four World’s, three Masters and two UK’s. I’m not sure without looking it up but I’m guessing Selby’s rate of converting TC finals into titles is higher.

Doesn’t more finals and equal victories just mean Higgins’ record is better, though?

Iranu wrote:

badtemperedcyril wrote:Higgy has also lost nine TC finals. That’s four World’s, three Masters and two UK’s. I’m not sure without looking it up but I’m guessing Selby’s rate of converting TC finals into titles is higher.

Doesn’t more finals and equal victories just mean Higgins’ record is better, though?

Surely it does.

I’m sure Bingham would rather have Graeme Dott’s WC record than his own, for example.

badtemperedcyril wrote:Higgy has also lost nine TC finals. That’s four World’s, three Masters and two UK’s. I’m not sure without looking it up but I’m guessing Selby’s rate of converting TC finals into titles is higher.

Selby's conversion rate:

Worlds - 5 finals, 4 wins

UK - 3 finals, 2 wins

Masters - 5 finals, 3 wins

Approx. 69% or roughly he wins two of every three TC finals he's been in.

Iranu wrote:

badtemperedcyril wrote:Higgy has also lost nine TC finals. That’s four World’s, three Masters and two UK’s. I’m not sure without looking it up but I’m guessing Selby’s rate of converting TC finals into titles is higher.

Doesn’t more finals and equal victories just mean Higgins’ record is better, though?

Of course. I was just pointing out the fact that he could’ve won more TC titles if he’d converted just a few more of the finals he reached.

Higgins would be proper GOAT contender with a better final rate. But these 3 World final defeats in a row ruined it

TheRocket wrote:Higgins would be proper GOAT contender with a better final rate. But these 3 World final defeats in a row ruined it

Nah it was the WCs between 1998-2007 that ruined it.

You shouldn’t be relying on your 40s to cement your legacy.

If he won another now he’d be the oldest ever winner of a TC event.

badtemperedcyril wrote:If he won another now he’d be the oldest ever winner of a TC event.

And I think he will.