Jump to content

Welcome. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest which does not give you access to all the great features at GolfWRX such as viewing all the images, interacting with members, access to all forums and eligiblility to win free giveaways. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free. Create a FREE GolfWRX account here.

- - - - -

Most Wins on Tour (with strength of field adjustments)


43 replies to this topic

#1 Golfnutgalen

Golfnutgalen

    Major Winner

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,057 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 147351
  • Joined: 11/18/2011
  • Location:kalispell, MT USA
GolfWRX Likes : 296

Posted 13 March 2018 - 06:09 PM

Yes, I'm going down this rabbit hole!

First off, a refresher for the total number of wins in the PGA Tour's history:

1.    Sam Snead – 82 wins
2.    Tiger Woods – 79 wins
3.    Jack Nicklaus – 73 wins
4.    Ben Hogan – 64 wins
5.    Arnold Palmer – 62 wins
6.    Byron Nelson – 52 wins
7.    Billy Casper – 51 wins
8.    Walter Hagen 45 wins
9.    Phil Mickelson 43 wins
10.   Carey Middlecoff  40 wins
11.   Gene Sarazen 39 wins
12.   Tom Watson 39 wins
13.   Lloyd Mangrum 36 wins
14.   Vijay Singh 34 wins
15.   Horton Smith 32 wins
16.   Harry Cooper 31 wins
17.   Jimmy Demaret 31 wins
18.   Leo Diegel 30 wins
19.   Gene Littler 29 wins
20.   Paul Runyan  29 wins
21.   Lee Trevino 29 wins
22.   Henry Picard 26 wins
23.   Tommy Armour 25 wins
24.   Johnny Miller 25 wins
25.   Gary Player 24 wins


Now it's taken me a while to get this far, but I truly believe now we overvalue Snead, Hogan, and even my favorite Nelson. I am going to attempt to reconcile this disparity by assigning a point formula which artificially lowers the totals the farther back in history we go. This is something a bit akin to the owgr formula in which you lose points over a 2 year stretch. In no way am I saying this is definitive because many of the numbers were chosen by guesswork. I believe this is actually being generous to the old timers (pre-Nicklaus) and the actual truth of the matter would be skewed further towards the modern players. Nevertheless here we go:

Wins in each decade valued at:

1890s - 1900s, = .25
1910s, 1920s, = .3-.4
1930s, 1940s, = .5-.6
1950s, 1960s, = .65-.7
1970s, 1980s = .75-.8
1990s, 2000s, = .85- .90
2010s, = .95

1.    Tiger Woods 70.75 wins
2.    Jack Nicklaus 62.5 wins
3.    Sam Snead 49.35 wins
4.    Arnold Palmer 42.3 wins
5.    Ben Hogan 38.85 wins
6.    Billy Casper 38.35 wins
7.    Phil Mickelson 37.4 wins
8.    Tom Watson 30.4 wins
9.    Byron Nelson 30.25 wins
10.   Vijay Singh 30.2 wins,
11.   Carey Middlecoff 24.9 wins
12.   Lloyd Mangrum, 22.45 wins
13.   Lee Trevino 21.85 wins
14.   Gene Littler 19.95 wins
15.   Johnny Miller 19.15 wins
16.   Walter Hagen 18 wins
17.   Gene Sarazen 17.6 wins
18.   Jimmy Demaret 17.5 wins
19.   Gary Player 17.3 wins
20.   Ernie Els 16.9 wins
21.   Raymond Floyd 16.85 wins
22.   Greg Norman 16.6 wins
23.   Davis Love III 16.45 wins
24.   Dustin Johnson 16.05 wins
25.   Nick Price 15.3 wins

Remove Tiger and Nicklaus' position is totally dominant Using this method. Using this formula for the majors we get:


1.    Jack Nicklaus 14.05 majors
2.    Tiger Woods 12.5 majors
3.    Gary Player 6.45 majors
4.    Tom Watson 6.25 majors
5.    Ben Hogan  5.7 majors
6.    Bobby Jones 5.6 majors (including the Amateurs)  
7.    Nick Faldo 5.0 majors
8.    Arnold Palmer  4.85 majors
9.    Phil Mickelson 4.6 majors
10.   Lee Trevino 4.5 majors
11.   Sam Snead 4.35 majors
12.   Walter Hagen 4.2 majors
13.   Seve Ballesteros 3.95 majors
14.   Rory McIlroy  3.8 majors
15.   Ernie Els 3.6 majors
16.   Bobby Locke 3.2 majors
17.   Gene Sarazen 3.2 majors
18.   Peter Thompson 3.3 majors
19.   Raymond Floyd 3.05 majors
20.   Jordan Spieth 2.85 majors
21.   Byron Nelson 2.7 majors
22.   Padraig Harrington 2.7 majors
23.   Vijay Singh 2.65 majors
24.   Nick Price  2.55 majors
25.   Billy Casper 2.1 majors

And again the official tally for comparison:


1.    Jack Nicklaus 18 majors
2.    Tiger Woods 14 majors
3.    Bobby Jones 13 majors
4.    Walter Hagen 11 majors
5.    Ben Hogan 9 majors
6.    Gary Player 9 majors
7.    Tom Watson 8 majors
8.    Sam Snead 7 majors
9.    Arnold Palmer 7 majors
10.   Gene Sarazen 7 majors
11.   Harry Vardon 7 majors
12.   Lee Trevino 6 majors
13.   Nick Faldo 6 majors
14.   Phil Mickelson 5 majors
15.   Seve Ballesteros 5 majors
16.   Byron Nelson 5 majors
17.   James Braid 5 majors
18.   J H Taylor 5 majors
19.   Peter Thompson 5 majors
20.   Ernie Els 4 majors
21.   Rory McIlroy 4 majors
22.   Raymond Floyd 4 majors
23.   Willie Anderson 4 majors
24.   Jim Barnes 4 majors
25.   Bobby Locke 4 majors
26.   Tom Morris Sr. 4 majors
27.   Tom Morris Jr. 4 majors
28.   Willie Park Sr. 4 majors

The tally of majors for Hogan or Hagen seems a bit unfair I know, but the truth is they hardly played in any! Hogan for example won his 9 majors in just 33 starts whereas Nicklaus won his 18th in his 106th event.

Alright, I expect to get flamed for this.

Edited by Golfnutgalen, 13 March 2018 - 06:57 PM.


Remove This Advertisement Viewing As Guest

    GolfWRX Forums

    Advertisement


1

#2 The Mad Bomber

The Mad Bomber

    I seem to not like new things. Get off my lawn...

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 979 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 80811
  • Joined: 04/21/2009
  • Location:Calgary, Alberta
GolfWRX Likes : 892

Posted 13 March 2018 - 06:39 PM

Right...

You're going to get flamed because your arbitrary formula doesn't make any sense. Simply saying someone's win is somehow worth less is 1965 than it is in 1989 because you decided it was is out there with the flat earthers - you just don't have any proof of your ridiculous claims.
915 D3 7.5º w/ Grafalloy blue
909F2 15.5º w/ Grafalloy blue
T-MB 2 iron C-Taper
Mizzy MP-5 4-9 C-Taper
SM6 47º, 52º, 56º, 60º C-Taper
Scotty Newport 2, 35" Tour Issue X7, Hard stepped x2, Tipped 2"


WITB link

2

#3 santasquatcha

santasquatcha

    Member

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 183 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 418640
  • Joined: 04/01/2016
  • Location:Detroit
  • Handicap:20+
GolfWRX Likes : 99

Posted 13 March 2018 - 07:00 PM

Good conversation piece and pretty thorough calculations.

The problem doesn’t lie in the calculations, it’s the initial assumption that it is ok to degrade wins in a qualitative fashion as you go back in time, as opposed to using some real data to justify your multipliers.

You have skewed your results prior to comparing eras...

Perhaps a strength of field calculation would be more appropriate.  In my opinion, if you played in a era and in events with a greater number of players that were “very good”, or had a lower adjusted scoring average, the win could be weighted more than a win in an era and/or event with a smaller number of “very good” players.

For example
https://www.pgatour....est-fields.html



To measure player quality, we calculate each player’s adjusted scoring average (adjusted for course difficulty) in the year 2017. We normalize all scoring averages so that they indicate how many strokes better a player performed than the average player in a regular PGA TOUR event (i.e. non-major, non-WGC). The strength of a field is then defined as the average of the adjusted scoring averages for all players in the field”

Edited by santasquatcha, 13 March 2018 - 07:08 PM.

Mini-Driver, Taylormade Aeroburner,14*, Matrix 60g S
4h - 5h, Adams Tech V4.0, S
6 - PW, Titleist 712CB, modus120S
GW, 49*, Adams Tech V4.0, S
GW, 51*, Cleveland 588
SW, 56-11*, Titleist Vokey SM4
LW, 60-07*, Titleist Vokey SM4
Putter, Odyssey White Hot #6

3

#4 fairways4life

fairways4life

    Major Winner

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,183 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 103145
  • Joined: 02/08/2010
GolfWRX Likes : 599

Posted 13 March 2018 - 07:07 PM

Must be a lot of snow on the ground up there in Montana. You sir have a lot of free time on your hands. :read:

4

#5 lowheel

lowheel

    LOWHEEL

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,930 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 193008
  • Joined: 07/18/2012
GolfWRX Likes : 5449

Posted 13 March 2018 - 07:13 PM

jesus christ...


5

#6 Golfnutgalen

Golfnutgalen

    Major Winner

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,057 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 147351
  • Joined: 11/18/2011
  • Location:kalispell, MT USA
GolfWRX Likes : 296

Posted 13 March 2018 - 07:17 PM

View Postsantasquatcha, on 13 March 2018 - 07:00 PM, said:

Good conversation piece and pretty thorough calculations.

The problem doesn't lie in the calculations, it's the initial assumption that it is ok to degrade wins in a qualitative fashion as you go back in time, as opposed to using some real data to justify your multipliers.

You have skewed your results prior to comparing eras...

Perhaps a strength of field calculation would be more appropriate.  In my opinion, if you played in a era and in events with a greater number of players that were "very good", or had a lower adjusted scoring average, the win could be weighted more than a win in an era and/or event with a smaller number of "very good" players.

For example
https://www.pgatour....est-fields.html


"
To measure player quality, we calculate each player's adjusted scoring average (adjusted for course difficulty) in the year 2017. We normalize all scoring averages so that they indicate how many strokes better a player performed than the average player in a regular PGA TOUR event (i.e. non-major, non-WGC). The strength of a field is then defined as the average of the adjusted scoring averages for all players in the field"

If we have the data going back far enough I would love to see how that would look.

View Postfairways4life, on 13 March 2018 - 07:07 PM, said:

Must be a lot of snow on the ground up there in Montana. You sir have a lot of free time on your hands. :read:
That's for sure! I want to play golf already!!

6

#7 mwkbmw

mwkbmw

    Play. Fast.

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,476 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 184910
  • Joined: 06/07/2012
  • Location:North Carolina
  • Handicap:5.5
GolfWRX Likes : 1559

Posted 13 March 2018 - 07:20 PM

Where's Richie when you need him?!!
Ping i25 9* Tour Stiff
Callaway 3Deep w/PX 6.0
Ping i20 2 Hy & Idea Pro 4 Hy
Ping i25 5-UW
Scotty Cameron Notchback
Ping Tour Gorge 54 & 58

7

#8 Petunia Sprinkle

Petunia Sprinkle

    Future King of France

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,407 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 397380
  • Joined: 09/25/2015
GolfWRX Likes : 4584

Posted 13 March 2018 - 07:27 PM

So, Byron Nelson comes in at 11th in some tournament while everyone else was ‘playing’ in Europe?

8

#9 bladehunter

bladehunter

    I have a great profile! Especially from the side !

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,500 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 291449
  • Joined: 01/12/2014
  • Location:south carolina
  • Handicap:NONE
GolfWRX Likes : 18988

Posted 13 March 2018 - 07:33 PM

View Postmwkbmw, on 13 March 2018 - 07:20 PM, said:

Where's Richie when you need him?!!


Still calculating how tiger played to lose on 18 Sunday.

Sorry man.  Usually agree with your stats.  But we differ on last Sunday.

Edited by bladehunter, 13 March 2018 - 07:34 PM.

Nike TW Oven Vapor Speed Aldila Synergy 70TX
TM 17 M1 Tour 14.5*  Graphite Design ADDI 8X
TM M3 Tour  19* Fuji Pro white 95X
Titliest 681 proto 3-pw Modus 130X
Vokey Tour raw 54 60 M Modus 130S
GSS 009 1.5  Beached Tungsten weights
Bidgestone RXS

9

#10 knock it close

knock it close

    Hall of Fame

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,239 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 101876
  • Joined: 01/13/2010
  • Location:Calgary, Alberta
  • Handicap:+2.4
GolfWRX Likes : 5795

Posted 13 March 2018 - 07:42 PM

Wow what a waste of time, thank god I have nothing better to do or else I'd be irate with myself for wasting those 4 minutes

M2, maybe
915 FD
913 HD
712u 3
714 AP2 4-p
SM5 53, 59
Circa62

Remove This Advertisement Viewing As Guest

    GolfWRX Forums

    Advertisement


10

#11 Golfnutgalen

Golfnutgalen

    Major Winner

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,057 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 147351
  • Joined: 11/18/2011
  • Location:kalispell, MT USA
GolfWRX Likes : 296

Posted 13 March 2018 - 07:44 PM

Come on guys, I'm not being that dishonest am I? Just take a second and breath and tell me straight up that 54 wins by Byron Nelson in 1935-1946 is just as impressive as 54 wins today by, I don't know, Jordan Spieth? And I like Nelson, I've mentioned many times that his records and scoring average in 195 is the most impressive thing in golf.

It may not be linear, but strength of field arguments are very common to the point that many people will concede that today's players are simply better as a whole than those from yesteryear. My list(s) above is simply an exercise in comparing the greats of golf and pointing out that Phil (and of course Tiger) are absolutely awesome at golf and perhaps better than even we realize.

11

#12 C Bird

C Bird

    Member

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 200 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 386928
  • Joined: 07/20/2015
  • Location:Phoenix
GolfWRX Likes : 39

Posted 13 March 2018 - 08:23 PM

Not a good post. Gotta show your work dude.
Cobra LTD Pro KK TiNi proto 60x
Nike VR Ltd 3 KK TiNi proto 70x
Nike VR Ltd 5 MRC Diamana BB 70x
Cleveland 588cb 4-pw X-100
Nike VR Forged 52/56
Scratch 60
Nike Method Converge b1-01/Nike Method Origin b1-01/Scotty Cameron Oil Can NP2

12

#13 knock it close

knock it close

    Hall of Fame

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,239 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 101876
  • Joined: 01/13/2010
  • Location:Calgary, Alberta
  • Handicap:+2.4
GolfWRX Likes : 5795

Posted 13 March 2018 - 08:27 PM

View PostGolfnutgalen, on 13 March 2018 - 07:44 PM, said:

Come on guys, I'm not being that dishonest am I? Just take a second and breath and tell me straight up that 54 wins by Byron Nelson in 1935-1946 is just as impressive as 54 wins today by, I don't know, Jordan Spieth? And I like Nelson, I've mentioned many times that his records and scoring average in 195 is the most impressive thing in golf.

It may not be linear, but strength of field arguments are very common to the point that many people will concede that today's players are simply better as a whole than those from yesteryear. My list(s) above is simply an exercise in comparing the greats of golf and pointing out that Phil (and of course Tiger) are absolutely awesome at golf and perhaps better than even we realize.
No probably not but you can't just make up numbers to make you're point, that's not how this works.
M2, maybe
915 FD
913 HD
712u 3
714 AP2 4-p
SM5 53, 59
Circa62

13

#14 widow-maker

widow-maker

    Major Winner

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,572 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 309105
  • Joined: 04/16/2014
  • Location:Michigan
  • Handicap:2.7
  • Ebay ID:reiner53brown
GolfWRX Likes : 1691

Posted 13 March 2018 - 08:35 PM

You can't compare eras... so stop trying.  Golfers have obviously gotten better with equipment, fitness, technology, swing coaches.  But, all you can really do is compare how the best of their era did against the competition in front of them.  What you are trying to do is conjecture and hypothesis.  Might be fun for discussion, but it doesn't have an ounce of truth to it.  You have no idea how Hogan Snead would do if alive today so making a chart based on musings really means nothing.

14

#15 hdr_ric

hdr_ric

    Major Winner

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,464 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 323261
  • Joined: 06/25/2014
  • Location:VA
  • Handicap:6.1
GolfWRX Likes : 735

Posted 13 March 2018 - 08:35 PM

Massive problems here.  Already well stated by many others.

However, even if you buy the premise that fields were weaker in say 1935 or 1965 than present day ....  it is insane to think that the fields in the 2000s were anyway materially different (weaker) than fields in 2015.

Edited by hdr_ric, 13 March 2018 - 08:38 PM.


15

#16 tiderider

tiderider

    Major Winner

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,072 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 320763
  • Joined: 06/13/2014
  • Location:b'ham
  • Handicap:5ish
GolfWRX Likes : 922

Posted 13 March 2018 - 09:08 PM

i think the pt is a bit absurd, but i understand the infatuation golfers have with trying to compare eras ... i will absolutely credit the op with one significant piece of data, however ... bobby jones has 13 majors, regardless if they are professional or not ... that's the number i grew up with, the number my golf encyclopedia had and the number nicklaus used (whether he admits it or not) ... i find the majors comparison esp humorous ... if we're going to use arbitrary numbers for arbitrary reasons, hogan and snead get a major bump since they grew up dirt poor, unlike phil and jordan ... larry nelson should also get a major bump since he didn't swing a club until he was 21 and won 3 majors, and calvin peete gets the biggest bump of all since he was dirt poor and didn't swing a club till his 20s, but had 10 pga tour wins ...

16

#17 Crazy About Golf

Crazy About Golf

    Member

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 185 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 484454
  • Joined: 10/16/2017
  • Location:Virginia Beach, VA
  • Handicap:1.1
GolfWRX Likes : 178

Posted 13 March 2018 - 09:14 PM

View PostGolfnutgalen, on 13 March 2018 - 06:09 PM, said:

Yes, I'm going down this rabbit hole!

First off, a refresher for the total number of wins in the PGA Tour's history:

1.    Sam Snead – 82 wins
2.    Tiger Woods – 79 wins
3.    Jack Nicklaus – 73 wins
4.    Ben Hogan – 64 wins
5.    Arnold Palmer – 62 wins
6.    Byron Nelson – 52 wins
7.    Billy Casper – 51 wins
8.    Walter Hagen 45 wins
9.    Phil Mickelson 43 wins
10.   Carey Middlecoff  40 wins
11.   Gene Sarazen 39 wins
12.   Tom Watson 39 wins
13.   Lloyd Mangrum 36 wins
14.   Vijay Singh 34 wins
15.   Horton Smith 32 wins
16.   Harry Cooper 31 wins
17.   Jimmy Demaret 31 wins
18.   Leo Diegel 30 wins
19.   Gene Littler 29 wins
20.   Paul Runyan  29 wins
21.   Lee Trevino 29 wins
22.   Henry Picard 26 wins
23.   Tommy Armour 25 wins
24.   Johnny Miller 25 wins
25.   Gary Player 24 wins


Now it's taken me a while to get this far, but I truly believe now we overvalue Snead, Hogan, and even my favorite Nelson. I am going to attempt to reconcile this disparity by assigning a point formula which artificially lowers the totals the farther back in history we go. This is something a bit akin to the owgr formula in which you lose points over a 2 year stretch. In no way am I saying this is definitive because many of the numbers were chosen by guesswork. I believe this is actually being generous to the old timers (pre-Nicklaus) and the actual truth of the matter would be skewed further towards the modern players. Nevertheless here we go:

Wins in each decade valued at:

1890s - 1900s, = .25
1910s, 1920s, = .3-.4
1930s, 1940s, = .5-.6
1950s, 1960s, = .65-.7
1970s, 1980s = .75-.8
1990s, 2000s, = .85- .90
2010s, = .95

1.    Tiger Woods 70.75 wins
2.    Jack Nicklaus 62.5 wins
3.    Sam Snead 49.35 wins
4.    Arnold Palmer 42.3 wins
5.    Ben Hogan 38.85 wins
6.    Billy Casper 38.35 wins
7.    Phil Mickelson 37.4 wins
8.    Tom Watson 30.4 wins
9.    Byron Nelson 30.25 wins
10.   Vijay Singh 30.2 wins,
11.   Carey Middlecoff 24.9 wins
12.   Lloyd Mangrum, 22.45 wins
13.   Lee Trevino 21.85 wins
14.   Gene Littler 19.95 wins
15.   Johnny Miller 19.15 wins
16.   Walter Hagen 18 wins
17.   Gene Sarazen 17.6 wins
18.   Jimmy Demaret 17.5 wins
19.   Gary Player 17.3 wins
20.   Ernie Els 16.9 wins
21.   Raymond Floyd 16.85 wins
22.   Greg Norman 16.6 wins
23.   Davis Love III 16.45 wins
24.   Dustin Johnson 16.05 wins
25.   Nick Price 15.3 wins

Remove Tiger and Nicklaus' position is totally dominant Using this method. Using this formula for the majors we get:


1.    Jack Nicklaus 14.05 majors
2.    Tiger Woods 12.5 majors
3.    Gary Player 6.45 majors
4.    Tom Watson 6.25 majors
5.    Ben Hogan  5.7 majors
6.    Bobby Jones 5.6 majors (including the Amateurs)  
7.    Nick Faldo 5.0 majors
8.    Arnold Palmer  4.85 majors
9.    Phil Mickelson 4.6 majors
10.   Lee Trevino 4.5 majors
11.   Sam Snead 4.35 majors
12.   Walter Hagen 4.2 majors
13.   Seve Ballesteros 3.95 majors
14.   Rory McIlroy  3.8 majors
15.   Ernie Els 3.6 majors
16.   Bobby Locke 3.2 majors
17.   Gene Sarazen 3.2 majors
18.   Peter Thompson 3.3 majors
19.   Raymond Floyd 3.05 majors
20.   Jordan Spieth 2.85 majors
21.   Byron Nelson 2.7 majors
22.   Padraig Harrington 2.7 majors
23.   Vijay Singh 2.65 majors
24.   Nick Price  2.55 majors
25.   Billy Casper 2.1 majors

And again the official tally for comparison:


1.    Jack Nicklaus 18 majors
2.    Tiger Woods 14 majors
3.    Bobby Jones 13 majors
4.    Walter Hagen 11 majors
5.    Ben Hogan 9 majors
6.    Gary Player 9 majors
7.    Tom Watson 8 majors
8.    Sam Snead 7 majors
9.    Arnold Palmer 7 majors
10.   Gene Sarazen 7 majors
11.   Harry Vardon 7 majors
12.   Lee Trevino 6 majors
13.   Nick Faldo 6 majors
14.   Phil Mickelson 5 majors
15.   Seve Ballesteros 5 majors
16.   Byron Nelson 5 majors
17.   James Braid 5 majors
18.   J H Taylor 5 majors
19.   Peter Thompson 5 majors
20.   Ernie Els 4 majors
21.   Rory McIlroy 4 majors
22.   Raymond Floyd 4 majors
23.   Willie Anderson 4 majors
24.   Jim Barnes 4 majors
25.   Bobby Locke 4 majors
26.   Tom Morris Sr. 4 majors
27.   Tom Morris Jr. 4 majors
28.   Willie Park Sr. 4 majors

The tally of majors for Hogan or Hagen seems a bit unfair I know, but the truth is they hardly played in any! Hogan for example won his 9 majors in just 33 starts whereas Nicklaus won his 18th in his 106th event.

Alright, I expect to get flamed for this.

Interesting topic/discussion....however, your methodology made me throw up in my mouth a little bit.

You can't arbitrarily reduce the value of a win because it happened in the past....even if you put it on some kind of negative linear scale.  That's no different than saying Muhammad Ali's wins in the ring are somehow less significant than those of, say, Evander Holyfield or today's Anthony Joshua......there's a reason Ali is still called The Greatest.

A better method would be to evaluate the strength of the field in different eras.  For example, the 60s and 70s had several notable top players (Nicklaus, Palmer, Player, Watson, Trevino, Floyd and Miller).  In the 2000s, you had Tiger and his only competition was Phil and Vijay....maybe you could include Els.  Today there is more parity and talent than ever before.

There's another hole in your method....back in the day, the US Amateur and British Amateur were considered majors...however, pros like Walter Hagen could not participate in those tournaments.

Go back to the drawing board and let us know when you come up with something new.
Callaway GBB Epic Sub Zero 9 degree, Mitsubishi Kuro Kage 60g x-flex
Callaway X2 Hot Pro 12.5 degree, Aldila Tour ATX-75 x-flex
Cobra Baffler 16 degree hybrid, Fujikura Speeder s-flex
Mizuno MP18 3-PW, Dynamic Gold x-100
Mizuno T7  52 degree, 56 degree, 60 degree
Bobby Grace 18 Blade putter
​Titleist Pro-V1x

17

#18 bscinstnct

bscinstnct

    Legend

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 23,015 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 77664
  • Joined: 03/17/2009
GolfWRX Likes : 19525

Posted 13 March 2018 - 09:27 PM

I like it!

Good stuff Gng.



18

#19 cdnglf

cdnglf

    Major Winner

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,468 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 139540
  • Joined: 09/20/2011
GolfWRX Likes : 1975

Posted 13 March 2018 - 09:31 PM

View PostCrazy About Golf, on 13 March 2018 - 09:14 PM, said:

Interesting topic/discussion....however, your methodology made me throw up in my mouth a little bit.

You can't arbitrarily reduce the value of a win because it happened in the past....even if you put it on some kind of negative linear scale.  That's no different than saying Muhammad Ali's wins in the ring are somehow less significant than those of, say, Evander Holyfield or today's Anthony Joshua......there's a reason Ali is still called The Greatest.

A better method would be to evaluate the strength of the field in different eras.  For example, the 60s and 70s had several notable top players (Nicklaus, Palmer, Player, Watson, Trevino, Floyd and Miller).  In the 2000s, you had Tiger and his only competition was Phil and Vijay....maybe you could include Els.  Today there is more parity and talent than ever before.

There's another hole in your method....back in the day, the US Amateur and British Amateur were considered majors...however, pros like Walter Hagen could not participate in those tournaments.

Go back to the drawing board and let us know when you come up with something new.

Go back to the drawing board and let us know when you know anything about golf in the 2000s.

Edited by cdnglf, 13 March 2018 - 09:32 PM.


19

#20 Golfnutgalen

Golfnutgalen

    Major Winner

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,057 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 147351
  • Joined: 11/18/2011
  • Location:kalispell, MT USA
GolfWRX Likes : 296

Posted 13 March 2018 - 09:40 PM

I guess I blew it and went a step too far out of my league. Pretty brutal take down by the crowd here.

View Postbscinstnct, on 13 March 2018 - 09:27 PM, said:

I like it!

Good stuff Gng.

Thanks I need the support!

This is just PGA Tour data which obviously leaves out much of the great play by Ballesteros, Langer, or Els.

Edited by Golfnutgalen, 13 March 2018 - 09:41 PM.


Remove This Advertisement Viewing As Guest

    GolfWRX Forums

    Advertisement


Wanna get rid of this ugly yellow box? And remove other annoying "stuff" in between posts? Create a FREE GolfWRX account here.

20

#21 bscinstnct

bscinstnct

    Legend

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 23,015 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 77664
  • Joined: 03/17/2009
GolfWRX Likes : 19525

Posted 13 March 2018 - 10:53 PM

View PostGolfnutgalen, on 13 March 2018 - 09:40 PM, said:

I guess I blew it and went a step too far out of my league. Pretty brutal take down by the crowd here.

View Postbscinstnct, on 13 March 2018 - 09:27 PM, said:

I like it!

Good stuff Gng.

Thanks I need the support!

This is just PGA Tour data which obviously leaves out much of the great play by Ballesteros, Langer, or Els.

Look, most people agree that its harder to win decade to decade based on larger talent pools coming to play.

Is Gary Player winning 9 majors if he plays today?

Your formula puts him at 6.45. That strikes me as good. Especially since it puts him closer to Phil.

You put Phil back in Players day?

He beats Gary 5/10 and thats generous to Gary.

Sorry, Gary.

Hey, you know, not many "Garys" these days ; )

Id even agree with taking TWs major count down per your formula.

Its not perfect. But its simple and closer to the truth, I think.

21

#22 Shilgy

Shilgy

    Legend

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,487 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 235237
  • Joined: 03/07/2013
  • Location:Phoenix
  • Handicap:3.1
GolfWRX Likes : 7090

Posted 13 March 2018 - 11:00 PM

View PostGolfnutgalen, on 13 March 2018 - 09:40 PM, said:

I guess I blew it and went a step too far out of my league. Pretty brutal take down by the crowd here.

View Postbscinstnct, on 13 March 2018 - 09:27 PM, said:

I like it!

Good stuff Gng.

Thanks I need the support!

This is just PGA Tour data which obviously leaves out much of the great play by Ballesteros, Langer, or Els.
Don't listen to the naysayers, it's a good start. Some folks like to ignore the facts. 19 of the top 37 all time winners were born over a century ago. Each era has fewer and fewer players with win totals that many use as a measuring stock for the Hall of Fame. Meaning 20+ wins and multiple majors.

Now what exactly seems more likely? That professional golf is the only sport where the quality of play is going backwards or that with the advent of players from all over the globe coming on a weekly basis the wins are more spread amongst more players?
TM M3 440 10* Graphite Design AD IZ 6x
TM M1 3w 14*  Graphite Design BB7s
TM M2  5w 18* Fujikura Atmos TS Blue 8S or Srixon U65 18° Atmos Red 7s
Adams A12 UST Silver S 21°
Srixon Z765 5-AW Nippon Pro Modus3 125S
Titleist Vokey 54*F  58*S
Toulon Garage Rochester flow neck H5/ Toulon Rochester stock

To paraphrase Dr Seuss: Don't cry because the round of golf is over-smile because it happened .  :)

22

#23 Crazy About Golf

Crazy About Golf

    Member

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 185 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 484454
  • Joined: 10/16/2017
  • Location:Virginia Beach, VA
  • Handicap:1.1
GolfWRX Likes : 178

Posted 13 March 2018 - 11:11 PM

View Postcdnglf, on 13 March 2018 - 09:31 PM, said:

View PostCrazy About Golf, on 13 March 2018 - 09:14 PM, said:

Interesting topic/discussion....however, your methodology made me throw up in my mouth a little bit.

You can't arbitrarily reduce the value of a win because it happened in the past....even if you put it on some kind of negative linear scale.  That's no different than saying Muhammad Ali's wins in the ring are somehow less significant than those of, say, Evander Holyfield or today's Anthony Joshua......there's a reason Ali is still called The Greatest.

A better method would be to evaluate the strength of the field in different eras.  For example, the 60s and 70s had several notable top players (Nicklaus, Palmer, Player, Watson, Trevino, Floyd and Miller).  In the 2000s, you had Tiger and his only competition was Phil and Vijay....maybe you could include Els.  Today there is more parity and talent than ever before.

There's another hole in your method....back in the day, the US Amateur and British Amateur were considered majors...however, pros like Walter Hagen could not participate in those tournaments.

Go back to the drawing board and let us know when you come up with something new.

Go back to the drawing board and let us know when you know anything about golf in the 2000s.


Not looking at Euro Tour or Sunshine Tours (bc doing so wouldn't make sense), Els had 9 PGA Tour victories from 2000-2009
Vijay had 26 during that period
Mickelson had 25 during that period
Furyk had 9 wins during that period
Goosen had 7 wins during that period

Tiger won 56 times, with 12 of them being majors.

So.....yeah, as I stated, the only real standout players Tiger had to face on the PGA Tour were Phil Mickelson and Vijay Singh....and maybe you could include Els....you know what, I'll even throw Furyk in there just for kicks.

As I said before, interesting topic and idea......The point of my post was that any sort of weighting should look at the different eras and evaluate the level of competition so we can try to obtain a legitimate comparison.

Thanks for testing my knowledge of golf history.  You just lost at your own game.
Callaway GBB Epic Sub Zero 9 degree, Mitsubishi Kuro Kage 60g x-flex
Callaway X2 Hot Pro 12.5 degree, Aldila Tour ATX-75 x-flex
Cobra Baffler 16 degree hybrid, Fujikura Speeder s-flex
Mizuno MP18 3-PW, Dynamic Gold x-100
Mizuno T7  52 degree, 56 degree, 60 degree
Bobby Grace 18 Blade putter
​Titleist Pro-V1x

23

#24 Hawkeye77

Hawkeye77

    Happy Holidays!

  • ClubWRX Charter Members
  • 15,733 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 100868
  • Joined: 12/27/2009
  • Location:Iowa
GolfWRX Likes : 12173

Posted 13 March 2018 - 11:23 PM

You beat the guys that show up for the tournament.
"We've Got That Holiday Feeling!"

24

#25 Shilgy

Shilgy

    Legend

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,487 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 235237
  • Joined: 03/07/2013
  • Location:Phoenix
  • Handicap:3.1
GolfWRX Likes : 7090

Posted 13 March 2018 - 11:38 PM

It's possible that in 30 years or so we'll look back and discuss how this era was lacking. Perhaps out of the 2.5 billion folks in China and India new stars will emerge. But for now we can see that each successive era has become stronger and stronger. The idea of pure win totals because you beat whoever is in the field does not work. Is a club championship won at Oakmont against 50 plus caps the same as winning at Podunk club against a dozen 10 handicappers? Of course not. So beating a handful of US club pros is not the same as beating a world class field today.
  Further, fields were decimated by two world wars. Yes, perhaps a few majors were not added to totals because they were not held in those years but then it's also really hard to call a win in 1945 the equal of a win today.

TM M3 440 10* Graphite Design AD IZ 6x
TM M1 3w 14*  Graphite Design BB7s
TM M2  5w 18* Fujikura Atmos TS Blue 8S or Srixon U65 18° Atmos Red 7s
Adams A12 UST Silver S 21°
Srixon Z765 5-AW Nippon Pro Modus3 125S
Titleist Vokey 54*F  58*S
Toulon Garage Rochester flow neck H5/ Toulon Rochester stock

To paraphrase Dr Seuss: Don't cry because the round of golf is over-smile because it happened .  :)

25

#26 lowheel

lowheel

    LOWHEEL

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,930 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 193008
  • Joined: 07/18/2012
GolfWRX Likes : 5449

Posted 13 March 2018 - 11:55 PM

View PostShilgy, on 13 March 2018 - 11:00 PM, said:

View PostGolfnutgalen, on 13 March 2018 - 09:40 PM, said:

I guess I blew it and went a step too far out of my league. Pretty brutal take down by the crowd here.

View Postbscinstnct, on 13 March 2018 - 09:27 PM, said:

I like it!

Good stuff Gng.

Thanks I need the support!

This is just PGA Tour data which obviously leaves out much of the great play by Ballesteros, Langer, or Els.
Don't listen to the naysayers, it's a good start. Some folks like to ignore the facts. 19 of the top 37 all time winners were born over a century ago. Each era has fewer and fewer players with win totals that many use as a measuring stock for the Hall of Fame. Meaning 20+ wins and multiple majors.

Now what exactly seems more likely? That professional golf is the only sport where the quality of play is going backwards or that with the advent of players from all over the globe coming on a weekly basis the wins are more spread amongst more players?

Looks like you found your soul mate :) "nothing before 1997 counts!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

26

#27 lowheel

lowheel

    LOWHEEL

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,930 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 193008
  • Joined: 07/18/2012
GolfWRX Likes : 5449

Posted 13 March 2018 - 11:56 PM

View PostShilgy, on 13 March 2018 - 11:38 PM, said:

It's possible that in 30 years or so we'll look back and discuss how this era was lacking. Perhaps out of the 2.5 billion folks in China and India new stars will emerge. But for now we can see that each successive era has become stronger and stronger. The idea of pure win totals because you beat whoever is in the field does not work. Is a club championship won at Oakmont against 50 plus caps the same as winning at Podunk club against a dozen 10 handicappers? Of course not. So beating a handful of US club pros is not the same as beating a world class field today.
  Further, fields were decimated by two world wars. Yes, perhaps a few majors were not added to totals because they were not held in those years but then it's also really hard to call a win in 1945 the equal of a win today.

Its hard for you...

27

#28 santasquatcha

santasquatcha

    Member

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 183 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 418640
  • Joined: 04/01/2016
  • Location:Detroit
  • Handicap:20+
GolfWRX Likes : 99

Posted 14 March 2018 - 12:21 AM

Hey take it easy on the OP.  He started up a good discussion here.  I’d say minus some rough math, most of us agree that at least recently...

Tiger woods kicked up global appeal and participation in golf, while focusing on improved training, nutrition, physique... etc

So the fields of now are stronger than past decades...
Mini-Driver, Taylormade Aeroburner,14*, Matrix 60g S
4h - 5h, Adams Tech V4.0, S
6 - PW, Titleist 712CB, modus120S
GW, 49*, Adams Tech V4.0, S
GW, 51*, Cleveland 588
SW, 56-11*, Titleist Vokey SM4
LW, 60-07*, Titleist Vokey SM4
Putter, Odyssey White Hot #6

28

#29 iBanesto

iBanesto

    Niclas Fasth

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,230 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 18328
  • Joined: 08/24/2006
GolfWRX Likes : 1832

Posted 14 March 2018 - 04:47 AM

Flawed. Immensely flawed.

Grade: D minus.

29

#30 nichho

nichho

    Major Winner

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,761 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 75678
  • Joined: 02/19/2009
  • Location:Northern England
  • Ebay ID:nichho
GolfWRX Likes : 987

Posted 14 March 2018 - 04:53 AM

View Postsantasquatcha, on 14 March 2018 - 12:21 AM, said:

Hey take it easy on the OP.  He started up a good discussion here.  I'd say minus some rough math, most of us agree that at least recently...

Tiger woods kicked up global appeal and participation in golf, while focusing on improved training, nutrition, physique... etc

So the fields of now are stronger than past decades...

Gary Player

Ping G400 LST Fubuki ZT 60 Stiff
Mizuno JPX 850 Hybrid 16* Orochi stiff
Mizuno JPX Fli-Hi 19* TT XP

Ping Karsten 5 Hybrid
Ping i200  4 - PW Modus3 105 stiff

Ping i200 U wedge Modus3 105 stiff
Ping Glide 56* AWT Wedge flex
Scotty Cameron Select1

Remove This Advertisement Viewing As Guest

    GolfWRX Forums

    Advertisement


Wanna get rid of this ugly yellow box? And remove other annoying "stuff" in between posts? Create a FREE GolfWRX account here.

30



0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

GolfWRX Sponsors