It beats me why we need to choose anyway?

I have a huge respect and admiration for these two players - and a good few others too, I might add. But I can't see any merit whatsoever in trying to decide who is 'better' than who; in the first place there are a dozen different yardsticks to measure them by:

- how well they break
- break building
- positional play
- safety
- potting
- strategy
- nerves
- number of centuries
- number of tourney wins
- highest break
- ranking
- etc, etc, etc

in the second place people have good days and bad days. When do you measure it? Who knows, (dream on brass) on a good day I might beat one of those guys, if they were coincidentally having a bad day. That wouldn't make me *better* than them.

Lastly, comparisons of this sort can often lead to bad feeling and disagreements. Why not give credit where it's due and use game shouts to say how well someone has played, what a great break or win they had, etc. NOT to try and decide whether one is in some way better than another.

Maybe I'm just not as competitive as some, but i am always happy to watch a great player at work; one reason why I often watch a final; but I don't really want to try to decide who is best.

R

Edited at 09:55 Sat 1/09/07 (BST)

I totally agree with Brassraptor, i don't know _spursjay_ but i have felt the wrath of curtis and he is amazing, keep it up mate

Ok, Curtis, after seeing your break of 135. I have to give it to you. You are in fact amazing. Now, when I see you online, give me a game of original, and I will decide who is better out of you or _spursjay_, I managed to beat jay when I was 687... Will it be the same?

duplicate post

Edited at 09:25 Fri 21/09/07 (BST)