10 best players in the world

jbart65 said:
I watched Filler's run, sjm, and it was very impressive. No disputing that.

I still think the sets format favors Filler more than a race to 11, relative to other players. He's hard enough to beat in one set, never mind two or three. There is a bit more margin for error. Not so in a single race, as we saw again in Sarajevo.

As I said, I do not sense the same pressure at a big Predator event as I do at a legit MR major. Yes, the pressure in still very intense. But I have seen players at big Matchroom events shake like a leaf, wilt even, in ways I seldom see at a Predator event. Yapp and SVB in the Florida final last year both had the shakes in the final racks.

Why, I don't know. The setup? The cameras? The crowds?

Splitting hairs? Maybe. That's just how I see it.
Click to expand...
Let's face it, this is a matter of opinion. Tough to say for sure. I attended the last two Las Vegas Opens, and felt the intensity was ramped up.

Per Mike Page at Fargo, the best two out of three races to four with possible shootout is, in terms of probability of winning, the same as a race to eight. I think the favorites are a bit ore vulnerable than in a race to 11.

By every reckoning, Filler played an awful match in the European Open semis. Did you think he'd win every rotation match he played in 2026? He won, if memory serves, the only 14 matches in which he played at the Derby City 9ball, all 8 matches he played at the Las Vegas Open 10ball and his first 6 matches at the European Open. To be fair, 28 in a row really isn't too shabby, yet you seem to be questioning his pedigree and readiness to win right now. In fact, Josh has not lost in 2026 to a single player that made your Top 20 list in Post #3. The biggest stars are falling to him time and time again, and often by lopsided scores. Nobody knows what's next for Josh, but I think sounding an alarm here is premature.
 
Jaden said:
I think it's foolish to judge best player on wins alone. I would give more weight to wins but how deep they go and who they lose to are also important factors.

I mean who would argue that jose parica wasnt one of the best players in the 90s? If you go by majors won he might not crack top 20.
Click to expand...
I've seen people run away from a game with Jose in his prime. That says a lot when there is a room full of champions and no one steps up getting offered weight.
 
jbart65 said:
One assumes a new generation of talent is coming to the fore. Some of these names will drop out of the top 20 in the next five years.

David Alcaide won’t be on the list. Yet as he has shown, players can still be among the world’s best, even in today’s game, into their late 40s if they stay committed. Oi, Biado and SVB are all in their early 40s. I am not about to write them off.

Looking ahead, I wonder if there is another FSR ready to emerge. A really good player in his late 20s who suddenly breaks through to become one of the game’s elite.

You could argue such a player did come along: Aloysius Yapp. He had won a few International opens before 2025, but last year was when he snapped off three Matchroom majors.

Other candidates?

Pijus Labutis and Daniel Maciol come to mind. What about Eklent Kaci? He was briefly a superstar. Can he return to his pre-injury form and take down a bunch of majors?
Click to expand...
Another promising player in that age range starting to show top form is Wu Kun Lin. Robbie Capito, to me, has the talent to be a superstar, but his game has largely stopped developing and his tactical weaknesses may limit him. Mickey Krause might have what it takes, but he looks like he has plateaud.

Younger candidates to be the next Josh or Fedor include Kural, Van Berkel, Vogel, Pongers, Kledio, and Januarta. They are all developing nicely.
 
sjm said:
Let's face it, this is a matter of opinion. Tough to say for sure. I attended the last two Las Vegas Opens, and felt the intensity was ramped up.
Click to expand...
Agreed. Not saying Predator events aren't intense. They are. But they seem different compared to Matchroom. Last year's 10 ball WPA World Championship in Vietnam was the first Predator event I thought matched a Matchroom major in intensity and nerves.

Keep in mind, I am viewing from a distance. You have been to these events. That carries weight.
sjm said:
Per Mike Page at Fargo, the best two out of three races to four with possible shootout is, in terms of probability of winning, the same as a race to eight. I think the favorites are a bit ore vulnerable than in a race to 11.
Click to expand...
Stats are great and probabilities are important too. But no, I do not think Filler is more vulnerable in a sets matchup. Probabilities can't prove it one way or another - and neither can my opinion. It's simply that.
sjm said:
By every reckoning, Filler played an awful match in the European Open semis. Did you think he'd win every rotation match he played in 2026? He won, if memory serves, the only 14 matches in which he played at the Derby City 9ball, all 8 matches he played at the Las Vegas Open 10ball and his first 6 matches at the European Open. To be fair, 28 in a row really isn't too shabby, yet you seem to be questioning his pedigree and readiness to win right now.
Click to expand...
Not questioning Filler. Not at all. He damn near won the Euro Open not playing anything close to his best. The season is still early, but no one in the world has played better so far in 2026, as you point out. It's always hard to see him losing any match. I can't say that about Gorst or Yapp.
sjm said:
In fact, Josh has not lost in 2026 to a single player that made your Top 20 list in Post #3. The biggest stars are falling to him time and time again, and often by lopsided scores. Nobody knows what's next for Josh, but I think sounding an alarm here is premature.
Click to expand...
Definitely not sounding any alarm. Yet I was puzzled by Filler's inconsistency in Sarajevo vs Van Berkel and Mario He given his great performance so far this year. It seemed like he either wasn't confident in his equipment or perhaps the Matchroom setup (especially the CPBA cloth). You saw it, too. He had a handful of shocking misses or position plays. Very odd.
 
Last edited:
Didn't WPA have Kazakis as the "#1 player in the world" last year? That alone is laughable and their ranking should not be taken seriously. WNT and Fargo is the way to go.
 
iusedtoberich said:
The "tour" ratings were never correct in the history of the sport, because they reward participation. WPA rewards it even more than WNT because it gives points for showing up, WNT only does if a player cashes.

Nothing is more accurate than FargoRate. Nothing is even close.
Click to expand...

FargoRate is great, but how you actually play in big events has to be taken into account. Participation does in fact matter.

At the moment, Neuhausen's Fargo lags his actual results. He is playing like a top 5 or top 10 player in the world, based on actual performance.
 
Kris_b1104 said:
Didn't WPA have Kazakis as the "#1 player in the world" last year? That alone is laughable and their ranking should not be taken seriously. WNT and Fargo is the way to go.
Click to expand...

yep. he did make the world 8b final though. but the 8b is a wonky event. albin broke and ran 8 racks in the L16 or QF, and also won the thing. but he's not showing much prowess in other disciplines.

fargo is great, as a general rating product. but i think "what have you done lately" matters. what money have you won. that's where a ranking is more up to date. but as jbart says, it's split between WPA and WNT. the 9-ball feels more like a proper tour, and it's a moneyboard system, so i put value in their ranking.
 
jbart65 said:
Agreed. Not saying Predator events aren't intense. They are. But they seem different compared to Matchroom. Last year's 10 ball WPA World Championship in Vietnam was the first Predator event I thought matched a Matchroom major in intensity and nerves.

Keep in mind, I am viewing from a distance. You have been to these events. That carries weight.

Stats are great and probabilities are important too. But no, I do not think Filler is more vulnerable in a sets matchup. Probabilities can't prove it one way or another - and neither can my opinion. It's simply that.

Not questioning Filler. Not at all. He damn near won the Euro Open not playing anything close to his best. The season is still early, but no one in the world has played better so far in 2026, as you point out. It's always hard to see him losing any match. I can't say that about Gorst or Yapp.

Definitely not sounding any alarm. Yet I was puzzled by Filler's inconsistency in Sarajevo vs Van Berkel and Mario He given his great performance so far this year. It seemed like he either wasn't confident in his equipment or perhaps the Matchroom setup (especially the CPBA cloth). You saw it, too. He had a handful of shocking misses or position plays. Very odd.
Click to expand...
Nice post. well said. Actually, I thought Josh played quite well vs Van Berkel. He raced out, with excellent play to a 7-2 lead and when he scratched on a jump shot in rack 10, he didn't return to the table until it was 7-6. Yes, he made one bad error down the stretch, but I thought this match was one of Josh' better efforts this past weekend. Van Berkel, who played Filler-esque pool in the match, was just sensational, and his fine play had a couple of forum members whining that the USA might never win another Mosconi Cup. Like Neuhausen, Van Berkel was a World Junior 9ball champion, so perhaps we shouldn't be too surprised.

I know where you are coming from regarding the Fargo probabilities. While it represents a giant leap over any rating I've seen in my lifetime, Fargo is built on binary probability theory (which is as it should be) but also carries the assumption that successive trials (racks in the context of pool) are statistically independent (not something I feel is reconcilable with my observations). As you suggest, getting to the bottom line invloves utilizing Fargo and also factoring observation and expereince.

I can't say I don't share at least a little bit of your concern about Josh. I've never seen him, widely regarded by commentators as the world best ball pocketer, miss so many shots in one set. Looking for a deeper meaning, I feel, is reasonable. I just feel like we must both reserve judgment and await further evidence.
 
jbart65 said:
FargoRate is great, but how you actually play in big events has to be taken into account. Participation does in fact matter.

At the moment, Neuhausen's Fargo lags his actual results. He is playing like a top 5 or top 10 player in the world, based on actual performance.
Click to expand...
I agree, and I really like your choice to call his play tidy, because that describes it. He's not flashy like a Filler or a Pagulayan, but he's super-efficient at the table, like a Ralf Souquet or a Nick Varner.
 
jbart65 said:
My last list. Who are the emerging young stars in the game? I am unaware of generational talent like Filler or Gorst coming up through the ranks.

Clearly Moritz Neuhausen is the best under-23 player in the world. After that it’s a scramble.

My Top 10 players under 23:

  1. Moritz Neuhausen (22)
  2. Kledio Kaci (20)
  3. Bernie Regalario (21)
  4. Szymon Kural (21)
  5. Albert Januarta (17)
  6. Arseni Sevastyanov (22)
  7. AJ Manas (18)
  8. Felix Vogel (18)
  9. Yannick Pongers (21)
  10. Mika Van Berkel (19)
Click to expand...

Nice list!
Mine is mostly similar but a few new names

(1) Moritz (22)
(2) Szymon (21)
(3) Bernie (21)
(4) Kledio (20)
(5) Felix (18)
(6) Albert (17)
(7) Yannick (21)
(8) Manas (18)
(9) Maks Benko (16)
(10) Dennis Laszkowski (20)

Then Arseni (22), Karl Gnadeberg (20), Mika (19), Walter Laikre (17) , Riku (16)

CORRECTION: I forgot Yuma Doerner (21). Insert him between Albert and Yannick
 
Last edited:
all subjective ,looking at tournament results and interpretation of what you want from them.

fargo, is an objective rating so you go by that list, and be done with it.

the old days, the best players were the ones that stood up and said ill play anyone in the room for all their cash.
and no one took them up on it.
 
maha said:
all subjective ,looking at tournament results and interpretation of what you want from them.

fargo, is an objective rating so you go by that list, and be done with it.

the old days, the best players were the ones that stood up and said ill play anyone in the room for all their cash.
and no one took them up on it.
Click to expand...
I"m sorry but fargo is not the be all end all. It's good and arguably necessary, and it could be better if it could be broken down based on the pressure level of the matches somehow and other factors.

Best player insinuates highest skill and fargo is just the best overall average performance in all reported play.
 
Jaden said:
I"m sorry but fargo is not the be all end all. It's good and arguably necessary, and it could be better if it could be broken down based on the pressure level of the matches somehow and other factors.

Best player insinuates highest skill and fargo is just the best overall average performance in all reported play.
Click to expand...
And how exactly would you quantify something like "pressure level"? There is no mathematical equation to calculate that.
 
Kris_b1104 said:
And how exactly would you quantify something like "pressure level"? There is no mathematical equation to calculate that.
Click to expand...
Exactly, you can't. That's why I said IF you could. You could do something like have levels of the competition for a given set of data, but there is ALWAYS going to be an unquantifiable subset of relevant data.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top