Hendry Names the 'Superpowers' That Make O'Sullivan, Higgins and Williams Irreplaceable
A Trio Unlike Any Other
Stephen Hendry has offered his clearest assessment yet of what separates Ronnie O'Sullivan, John Higgins and Mark Williams from every other generation of professional snooker player — and why he believes the sport may never again produce three players of comparable sustained quality emerging at the same time.
Speaking on his Cue Tips YouTube channel, the seven-time world champion broke down what he described as the defining 'superpowers' of each member of the so-called Class of '92, a cohort that has collectively accumulated 14 world titles, 39 Triple Crown titles and 101 ranking crowns across more than three decades at the top of the professional game. All three have also held the world number one ranking at some stage of their careers.
Hendry's Verdict: Three Distinct Qualities
Hendry, who turned 57 this year, is among the few people in the sport positioned to make such an assessment with genuine authority. His own record — seven Crucible titles and 36 ranking event victories compiled during the 1990s — places him firmly in the conversation about snooker's all-time greats, and he spent years competing directly against all three players at the sport's biggest venues.
On O'Sullivan, Hendry was unequivocal. "Ronnie has cue-ball control. He is the best break-builder of all time," he said, framing natural talent as the Englishman's primary weapon. That assessment is well supported by the statistics. According to CueTracker, O'Sullivan holds the all-time records for ranking titles, Triple Crown victories and century breaks in professional snooker history. His 153 break at the World Open last season — a new competition record — served as a reminder, if one were needed, that his shot-making remains in a category of its own even into his fifties.
Hendry also singled out Higgins for a quality he considers equally rare, though the full detail of his remarks was not available at time of publication. What is clear from his wider comments is that he regards the nerve and tactical intelligence Higgins brings to high-pressure situations as something the sport has rarely seen replicated. The fellow Scot reached three finals during the most recent campaign, including the Masters at Alexandra Palace, demonstrating that his capacity to compete at the very highest level remains entirely intact.
Williams, meanwhile, provided arguably the most remarkable story of last season when he became the oldest ranking event winner in snooker history, claiming the Xi'an Grand Prix title at the age of 50. It was the sort of achievement that would have seemed implausible even a decade ago, yet for Williams it felt consistent with a career defined by confounding expectations.
The Statistics Behind the Longevity
What makes the Class of '92 genuinely extraordinary, beyond the sheer volume of titles, is the consistency with which all three have continued producing elite-level snooker deep into their fifties. The 2024–25 season offered fresh evidence on multiple fronts: O'Sullivan compiled two maximum 147 breaks in the same match at the Saudi Arabia Masters — an achievement without precedent in professional competition — while Williams' ranking title triumph in Xi'an pushed the boundaries of what is considered physically and mentally possible at this level of sport.
For context on just how dominant this group has been, consider that their combined tally of 101 ranking titles (source: CueTracker) represents a substantial proportion of all ranking events staged since the format was established. No other trio of contemporaries comes close to matching that collective output over a comparable period.
Will Snooker Ever See the Like Again?
Hendry's broader suggestion — that snooker may not produce a comparable triumvirate — inevitably invites scrutiny. The current generation includes genuinely elite performers in Judd Trump, Kyren Wilson and others, and the depth of the professional tour has never been greater. Yet the argument for the Class of '92's uniqueness rests not just on individual brilliance but on the combination: three players of world-championship calibre, shaped by the same era, who have pushed one another and the sport forward across more than 30 years.
Whether that particular alignment of talent, temperament and longevity can be replicated is, of course, unknowable. What Hendry's analysis does reinforce is that the contributions of O'Sullivan, Higgins and Williams deserve to be assessed not only in terms of titles won, but in terms of what each brought stylistically and competitively to the fabric of the modern game. On that measure, the case for their collective status as absolute legends of the sport — to use Hendry's own framing — is difficult to dispute.
