I hate the “of all time” concept. Because it’s obvious that there have been advancements in the sport. Putting new players on old equipment. Putting old players on new equipment. Knowledge about jumping, kicking, racking, breaking, etc. Are we saying literally the best with a cue no matter what? That favors modern players. The best results against their peers? Or who built up the biggest reputations and legacy? Just tournaments or action too? Should we have a bias for verifiable results and video footage?
But for me as a person in my own little bubble of context. I like…
1. SVB (Rang every bell, dominated over generations, raised the bar)
2. Reyes (All around dominance, raised the bar, greatest hype)
3. Mosconi (Pool’s Babe Ruth)
4. Strickland (The SVB before SVB)
5. Sigel (The SVB before Earl)
I struggle with 4 & 5 because I think I have a recency bias. But so little footage and documentation exists prior. I really wanted to put Greenleaf in. I don’t buy into Worst at all. I wish I could say more about Parica or Varner. And honestly winning 5 US Opens means more when that was the only “world championship” level event in a year when now we clearly have 5+ events worthy of that strength of field. He’s not earned it yet but Filler damn near demands being on the list.