Goosen replaces Horton Smith, welcome to the tournament to end all tournaments, Goose.

Move to its own thread pls

Fowler is definitely top 50. He might not do great on this tournament but I bet nobody will want to see the SUNDAY ORANGE near the top on the leaderboard.

Lol

sorry I need to post in the "arbitrary reasons to hate pro athletes" thread.

Vijay Singh should earn an age exemption--he only had 3 total victories at age 32, but had a Tiger-esque year at age 41

I would switch Mickelson and Rory's seedings. It is too early to say what Rory will accomplish or where he will rank all time, but there is just no way anyone would rather face a prime Rory than a prime Mickelson. Considering Phil never spent a single week at #1, and never won a Player of Year, it is easy to argue Rory has already accomplished more, and only in his mid 20s while Phil is in the twilight of his career.

Dustin Johnson also has done nothing to belong in such a tournament. Seeded higher than a 3 major winner like Harrington!?!

This is going to be an 8,000 yard course, his length is going to give him a chance.

Also, those aren't seedings.

Also also, Clark has expressed interest in not posting about this tournament anymore itt. When this tournament happens, it'll have its own thread.

A lot of the old school guys, el pato and fowler shouldn't be on the list.

Not really fair to hold that against Phil considering his prime basically coincided with the prime of a guy who was #1 for 680+ weeks and was player of the year 11 times.

Twilight of the career is irrelevant. This is a theoretical tourney of players at an age representative of their peak.

And didn't Rory admit that he lost his motivation for a while? That is a huge strike against him. Losing your motivation that early in his career means that it's extremely unlikely that he'll come within sniffing distance of Phil's 42 titles, much less Tiger's 79 titles. That'd be like Tiger losing his motivation in 1999.

Definitely in:

José María Olazábal

Consideration:

Chi Chi Rodriguez
Ian Woosnam
Jesper Parnevik

Bernhard langer needs to be on list. 2nd most wins all time euro tour. Goat champions tour player, and imo top 10 player oat

Someone like Zach Johnson needs to be on the list before Rickie Fowler, Matsuyama, or even John Daly who I think kinda stunk at age 32. ZJ has like 11 wins with a major, is 39 years old and has been a good pro in the toughest era for many many years and doesn't show signs of worsening anytime soon. We can pretend in this tourney that he doesn't have a harelip.

Ya. John daly shouldn't even be on the list. He has two majors from an era where no one was good at golf. Did nothing for years then won the nissan. Jordan spieth at 21 already has john daly's career lol

Though it is an 8,000 yard course. Big fat John might fare better than short-hitting ZJ. But if it's a regular course then ZJ>>>Daly. ZJ doesn't hit it long but there's basically not course in the world where straight 270 yard drives, impeccable wedge play and putting don't fare well.

Actually completely fair when players like Harrington, Sings, Mark O Meara, Ernie Els all spent time at #1 and were Player of the Year atleast once (minus Els I believe) during the long Tiger reign. Even Rory himself since Tiger had a better year in 2012 in finishing #2 (both in the rankings and Player of Year awards) behind 22 year old Rory than many of his years at #1, including ones he was #1 over Phil.

There is no excuse at all for Phil to have never done either one. There was even a time several years ago he had about 6 chances to #1 and one of them only needed a mediocre finish of a tournament to get it and choked.

Considering Rory only has 1 less major than Phil, and has already been Player of the Year twice and spent significant time at #1, it is easy to argue he has already surpassed Phil's career and he is TWENTY years younger. :lol:

of course and only a fool would think that peak Phil is better than peak Rory, a player who despite being a whopping 20 years younger already has almost the same # of major titles (5 to 4) and many other achievements Phil never attained.

I only mentioned twilight of his career in that Phil's career is almost over, and Rory has already achieved about the same success overall when his has barely started. That says it all about who is the better player prime for prime. No contest at all.

Keep dreaming. Rory will easily eclipse any mark Phil holds, including tournament wins. He probably will be ahead in everything but tournament wins (including major wins) by the end of next year.

You are being way too hard on Phil for not attaining World Number One. Jack never attained it.

But seriously, attaining World Number One is... arbitrary isn't the right word... but there is plenty of variance wrt how things shake out. And it's still formula-based, and that formula is never going to be 100% perfect. It's silly to hold that against Phil in the Tiger/Vijay/Ernie/Phil/Rory era. I mean who cares?

Also it's just silly to say Rory will easily eclipse Phil's total tourneys won. For reasons I've already stated. He might. It's just too hard to say. You can't just project forward that easily. Two years ago a lot of people didn't know who Spieth was and now he's #2 and a Masters champion, threatening Rory's reign at the top. You just never know who is about to come through the pipeline, and the competition is getting more global every day and just tougher.

Harrington and O'Meara were never #1. Els was #1 in 1997 and 98 (since OWGR covers the previous two years, he was #1 for achievements earned pre-Tiger. I assume you mean Singh as the other guy. It took him 9 wins in a calendar year to reach #1. He basically had the best year of any non-Tiger player ever. Even then, he was only #1 for 32 weeks.

As for PotY, Els never won it. Harrington, O'Meara, and Singh each did it once.

Moral of the story, it was difficult to win Poty when Tiger was at his peak.

As for Phil, according to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Officia...nkings_archive, he finished the year #2 on the OWGR 4 times, each time to Tiger.

Rory has had a better peak than Phil. But Phil's peak is so long that it'll take a heck of a career by Rory to finish with a better career than Phil.

And Rory is miles away from Tiger. Rory turns 26 next week, has 16 career wins and 4 majors. By the time Tiger was 26, he had 37 wins (PGA + Europe) and 6 majors.

It's so sad that a discussion of Tiger's future has devolved into this.

Daly was so talented

But so, so drunk

LOL getting to #1 isnt arbitrary. Especialy in golf rankings when it is based on a 2 year system. It is about playing good enough golf over a sustained period to be worthy of #1. Phil never was able to do it. Els did it multiple different times. Singh did it multiple different times, won Player of the Year once and the Vardon Trophy for lowest scoring average twice (Phil never even did that). Harrington didnt get to #1 I believe but won Player of the Year. Mark O Meara both had a dominant year and reached #1 two different times after the Tiger reign began, and he was old at that point. Phil probably is better than all of those yes, which makes it even worse he could never do it. He even had numerous chances to take the #1 ranking during one of Tiger's worst slumps when he dropped out of the top 10, and still couldnt do it. He kept choking.

And who cares if by some chance Rory doesnt pass Phil's tournament titles by some chance (unlikely IMO but lets go along just for the sake of argument). He will blow him away in every other stat- major wins, time at #1 (already does), dominance, Player of Years, scoring averages, and of course he plays around the world unlike Phil which affects his PGA tour win stats anyway.

All that is obvious is prime Rory is a better player than prime Phil comfortably. That is why despite being 20 years younger he has almost the same # of majors and has done many things Phil could never do.

Morale of the story even Els, O Meara, Harrington, Singh, and very young Rory himself achieved atleast one of POY or the #1 ranking during the Tiger reign. Singh and Rory did both. Moral of the story- your alibi is full of ****.

ROTFL, as I already broke down you could already easily argue Rory's career is ALREADY better than Phil's. In the most important things he is only 1 major behind, has won 3 of the 4 already just like Phil, has tons of time at #1 vs none for Phil, has POY twice vs 0 for Phil. All those things are far more important than winning some of the smaller golf tournaments. So even though he arguably already had a better than Phil at age 25, it will be hard for him to ever catch Phil's career. You are as drunk as that guy in your avatar.

Who cares, I never said anything about Rory vs Tiger. I was only comparing Rory to Phil. Although there is a good chance Rory will end up aging better than Tiger has.

The official world golf rankings did not start until 1986. So before that getting to #1 was somewhat arbitrary.

And Mark O'Meara never reached #1. Els was #1 for a grand total of 9 weeks.

I dont see how he is be top 10 of all time. Nicklaus, Woods, Hogan, Jones, Palmer, Snead, Watson, Player, Nelson, Sarazen, Trevino, Hagen, maybe even Faldo and Ballesteros have all been ranked above him in most all time lists I have seen, and I agree all those guys had better careers. I have seen numerous expert lists on the top 10, top 15, or top 20 all time, and only a couple of them had Phil at 10th or so, but the vast majority have him lower.

I think he probably makes top 15, but not top 10.