By Elliott West
Introduction
Much has changed in snooker over the years and the standard has vastly improved. Centuries in yesteryear were almost as rare as hen’s teeth and a maximum break was like searching for the holy grail. So with all that in mind, what if Joe Davis or Alex Higgins could come back and play a match against Judd Trump or Ronnie O’Sullivan? Would there be a resounding victory for the modern player or could the former professional fair better than you would have thought?
The Hypothetical Match
The best way to tackle this snooker experiment is to make it as hard as possible for both players. For this situation, let’s play it over the same number of frames as the first World Championship final in 1927, a best of 31 frames but using a current match table to play it on. The match is televised and there is an audience. To make this as realistic as possible, I have chosen Alex Higgins at his prime against Judd Trump. Both are World Champions and have been chosen because they play a very similar type of play, attacking and definitely naughty!
With a smoking ban and a no alcohol policy now in operation, Higgins has to play with only the aid of a glass of water. A big ask but something he could have probably done as he was too good a player. Like many former players, Alex would probably have struggled with the pace of the modern table and some of his flair shots may not have been pulled off on a Star table. However both players would have tried to split the reds at the earliest opportunity.
In a match that is the best of 31 frames, Alex would have had the experience in this type of match situation. Having played in the 1970s, he would already have the stamina and mental strength to cope with the long match. Used to the shorter matches, Trump could easily have struggled with the fatigue factor and Alex would have fed off this, picking off the frames when his opponent made elementary mistakes. This would have annoyed Judd and put him in a negative mindset.
Alex was a high break scorer on occasion and probably wouldn’t be able to sustain the number of high breaks that Trump is used. Perhaps he may have used his rarely seen safety game to try and unsettle the Bristolian. Perhaps a few years ago, Trump would have struggled with this approach but thanks to analysis of his weaknesses, he has built up and strengthened his game in every department.
Ultimately though, this may be a close match. Trump is notorious for having a stutter in a match. A period that allows his opponent to steal frames but then he kicks into gear and wins the match. It’s whether Alex could hold onto his coattails or fade away in the match. A fired up Higgins would pull shots out of nowhere but he may struggle with different weighted balls and pockets that would refuse many of his powered shots.
Of course these are players from different eras and both have had periods at the top of the sport. Trump’s spell of victories, vastly outstrips his opponent and he is a lot younger than Alex. Although some of the players still at the top, are a lot older than Judd.
Who would win?
If I had to put my neck on the line, I would say that Judd would steal it on top form. Alex wouldn’t be able to play his ‘B’ game against this very talented player. Picking a scoreline out of the air is hard and I could be very wrong but this is a fantasy match and realistically it could never happen. The purpose of this exercise is just to see whether it is plausible and how both eras of the game shape up against each other. In 1927, the final was played over four days and so both players would have to remain focused to get over the winning line. In the end, though, Judd defeated Alex 16-12.
