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.

- - - - -

Brandel Chamblee Podcast (EP 1 Tiger vs Jack)


43 replies to this topic

#1 Golfnutgalen

Golfnutgalen

    Major Winner

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,228 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 147351
  • Joined: 11/18/2011
  • Location:kalispell, MT USA
GolfWRX Likes : 381

Posted 27 January 2019 - 01:59 AM

Anybody else listen to the new podcast with Brandel Chamblee and Jaime Diaz? https://www.golfchan...1-tiger-vs-jack

They go over quite a bit in a little over an hour, but of course the main talking point is the endless Tiger-Jack Debate. In fact, though I don't want to misrepresent Brandel here it sounds like he has totally bought into the new golf z score book (which you can find previews on google and amazon:  https://www.amazon.com/Hole-Truth-Determining-Greatest-Sabermetrics/dp/1496206541) and even went as far to say that Tiger is no longer in 2nd place in the GOAT list and has been overtaken by Walter Hagen and possibly Sam Snead based on the books z score list. With Hagen he additionally cited the 5 Western Opens which would give him 16 majors placing him second to Jack. He even went as far as to say if Tiger won 5 more majors that it would not in itself be enough to overtake Jack as #1. I'll repost that list for you to be the judge. I haven't read the book and this part is already available in the preview:


Top 25 Players of All Time (career)

Player                 Career Years    Z score  
1.    Jack Nicklaus 1962-1989    -104.81
2.    Walter Hagen 1913-1940    -73.94
3.    Patty Berg   1935-1968    -73.21
4.    Sam Snead    1937-1962    -68.69
5.    Tiger Woods  1997-2017    -64.62
6.    Louise Suggs 1949-1972   -60.31
7.    Mickey Wright 1954-1984   -59.67
8.    Annika Soren  1994-2008   -59.16
9.    Gene Sarazen 1920-1951  -58.09
10.   Ben Hogan 1938-1962   -53.09
11.  Byron Nelson  1933-1961   -44.88
12.  Jim Barnes   1913-1932   -43.84
13. Sandra Haynie  1961-1989  -43.61
14. Macdonald Smith 1910-1937 -43.15
15. JoAnne Carner   1970-1989 -43.04
16. Gary Player   1956-1984   -40.86
17. Bobby Jones    1916-1630   -39.62
18. J.H. Taylor 1983-1921   -38.69
19. Julie Inkster     1984-2007   -38.34
20. Harry Vardon 1894-1920   -37.88
21. Inbee Park   2007-2017   -36.80
22. Arnold Palmer    1955-1980   -36.67
23. Babe Zaharias  1935-1956    -35.77
24. Kathy Whitworth 1959-1989   -34.68
25. Lloyd Mangrum   1937-1962   -34.49

What do you guys think? Brandel also seems to have done away with strength of field arguments. Also for people who know more about z-scores is this based of every event or just the majors?


By now we all know that Tiger won a larger percentage of tournnaments while Jack performed better in the majors. Here are the actual numbers for those who enjoy them. Jack had 3 more top 10s just outside the top 5 after this period.


Jack Nicklaus 1957- 1986 (age 46)
Starts: 494
1st 73 (14.78%)
Top 2’s: 138 (27.94%)
Top 3’s: 188 (41.85%)
Top 10’s: 295 (59.72%)
Top 25’s: 391 (79.15%)

Major Performance: 18 out of 108 wins (16.67%)
Top 2’s: 37 (34.26%)
Top 3’s: 46 (42.49%)
Top 10’s: 70 (64.81%)
Top 25’s: 92 (85.19%)

Tiger Woods 1992-2018 (age 42)
Starts: 347
1st 80 (23.05%)
Top 2’s: 111 (31.99%)
Top 3’s: 130 (37.46%)
Top 10’s: 193 (55.62%)
Top 25’s: 260 (74.93%)

Major Performance: 14 out of 80 wins (17.5%)
Top 2’s: 21 (26.25%)
Top 3’s: 24 (30.0%)
Top 10’s: 40 (50.0%)
Top 25’s: 57 (71.25%)

Hope you guys don't mind yet another Jack vs Tiger thread!


Remove This Advertisement Viewing As Guest

    GolfWRX Forums

    Advertisement


1

#2 A.Princey

A.Princey

    Major Hacker

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,822 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 396630
  • Joined: 09/20/2015
  • Location:Twilight Zone
  • Handicap:3
GolfWRX Likes : 1016

Posted 27 January 2019 - 02:37 AM

This reeks of funny Maltby math to me..... Zscore and MPF are neck and neck in the relevance debate.
Ping G 10.5*, Fuji Pro 63-R 43"
'16 M1 3w HL 17*, Xcon 7-S(untipped) 41"
Ping Rapture 3i, AWT-R
Ping G25 4-G, DG-R400
Vokey 56(57*), 60(63*) DG-R400
Byron DH89 Longneck 33" (or any of 10 other putters...)

2

#3 Finleychips

Finleychips

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 3 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 510134
  • Joined: 08/15/2018
GolfWRX Likes : 3

Posted 27 January 2019 - 02:39 AM

In my opinion they don't take enough into account strength of field. I think the 2nd youngest male golfer on that list is Jack Nicklaus. It's become harder to win over time as the competition has gotten stiffer over the last 100 plus years.
Why are Jim Barnes and MacDonald Smith rated so high?? They are both better than Bobby Jones!??
Lloyd Mangrum has one major victory and 36 PGA Tour wins, although he has a ton of top 10s in majors. I would probably put Phil, Faldo, and Tom Watson just off the top of my head above him.

Edited by Finleychips, 27 January 2019 - 02:40 AM.


3

#4 mosesgolf

mosesgolf

    Hall of Fame

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,668 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 6303
  • Joined: 09/28/2005
GolfWRX Likes : 1954

Posted 27 January 2019 - 06:32 AM

Bramble yapping nonsense again.  We disrespect Skip Bayless by comparing him to Bramble Yamblee.
Titleist 917D3 9.5 Fujikura Tour Spec 74 Stiff
Titleist 917F2 15* Project X 75 Stiff
Titleist 910H 19* Project X 6.0
Titleist 910H 23  Project X 6.0
Titleist 714MB DGS300 4-9
Titleist Vokey 48 54 60
Titleist Scotty Futura 34

4

#5 Hawkeye77

Hawkeye77

    King and The Chairman of the Board

  • ClubWRX Charter Members
  • 16,735 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 100868
  • Joined: 12/27/2009
  • Location:Iowa
GolfWRX Likes : 13350

Posted 27 January 2019 - 06:46 AM

Brandel onto a new "thing" and the Western Open was not a major. Even in the 1940s the 4 majors were the 4 majors (study the newspaper accounts of the day when Hogan was winning) and the Western was still a top tier tourney but the idea it was a "major" gets exaggerated quite a bit these days by revisionist golf historians who act like they just "discovered" it existed.

Yes, a significant event but it would have survived as a major and continued to have major status throughout history had it really been a major. It wasn't.  Can't just call it one now.

Edited by Hawkeye77, 27 January 2019 - 06:50 AM.


5

#6 golfandfishing

golfandfishing

    Major Winner

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,006 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 381948
  • Joined: 06/22/2015
  • Location:AZ
  • Handicap:4
GolfWRX Likes : 5345

Posted 27 January 2019 - 07:56 AM

Lol. Patty Berg is on the list.

6

#7 Hawkeye77

Hawkeye77

    King and The Chairman of the Board

  • ClubWRX Charter Members
  • 16,735 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 100868
  • Joined: 12/27/2009
  • Location:Iowa
GolfWRX Likes : 13350

Posted 27 January 2019 - 07:58 AM

View Postgolfandfishing, on 27 January 2019 - 07:56 AM, said:

Lol. Patty Berg is on the list.

He just doesn't want Randell Mell spouting off with another useless editorial piece.

7

#8 ItIsJack

ItIsJack

    Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 72 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 503792
  • Joined: 06/05/2018
  • Location:Canada
  • Handicap:3
GolfWRX Likes : 52

Posted 27 January 2019 - 11:46 AM

I just wish people would think more when they use statistics. Like hmm 11 of the top 25 players of all time played in the 1930s... Maybe something is wrong with this way of comparing?

8

#9 Golfnutgalen

Golfnutgalen

    Major Winner

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,228 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 147351
  • Joined: 11/18/2011
  • Location:kalispell, MT USA
GolfWRX Likes : 381

Posted 27 January 2019 - 12:33 PM

View Postgolfandfishing, on 27 January 2019 - 07:56 AM, said:

Lol. Patty Berg is on the list.

Patty is super underrated though! 15 wins in so called majors, 60 wins total while competing in fewer events than later LPGA stars.

View PostFinleychips, on 27 January 2019 - 02:39 AM, said:

In my opinion they don't take enough into account strength of field. I think the 2nd youngest male golfer on that list is Jack Nicklaus. It's become harder to win over time as the competition has gotten stiffer over the last 100 plus years.
Why are Jim Barnes and MacDonald Smith rated so high?? They are both better than Bobby Jones!??
Lloyd Mangrum has one major victory and 36 PGA Tour wins, although he has a ton of top 10s in majors. I would probably put Phil, Faldo, and Tom Watson just off the top of my head above him.

Absolutely. Bobby is 17th in this list with very few tournament entries used to define his career which obviously works against him. I've said this before, Jones is better than Tiger and Jack if results are all that matter. I know Hagen whipped him good in a one on one match 12 & 11, but in the majors which both attended (US and Open) Hagen got the better of him only twice compared to Jones 13. Lloyd is an interesting one, like you I was shocked by how many top 10s he had with a ludicrous 26 top 10s in 33 majors played (79%) from 1940-1956 with only one major win to show for it. And here I was feeling bad for Phil notching 'only' 5 big ones.

Edited by Golfnutgalen, 27 January 2019 - 01:31 PM.


9

#10 Darth Putter

Darth Putter

    Major Winner

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,826 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 466932
  • Joined: 05/09/2017
  • Location:Central Illinois
  • Handicap:10.8
GolfWRX Likes : 4878

Posted 27 January 2019 - 02:51 PM

I have the book.

I was wondering how he was going to produce Z scores for all those tournaments around the world since 1860.

He didn't, this book only measures golfers performances in the majors.

He explains that career Z scores can be misleading. They are cumulative, so when Tiger isn't playing in majors, he isn't making his Z score better. If you play a lot of majors after your best years are over (Tom Watson) your career Z score declines dramatically. That's why so many old golfers that rarely played beyond age 40 are in the top of the career Z scores.

The author's solution is sort of an extended "peak period" score. A five year peak if you play in the 4 major era and a longer era if you play back in the days of Vardon with fewer majors. He describes it as taking your best ten rounds out of twenty to determine your handicap.

Here is the author's REAL Top 25

1. Tiger Woods
2. Annika Sorenstam
3. Jack Nicklaus
4. Arnold Palmer
5. Yani Tseng
6. Karrie Webb
7. James Braid
8. Tom Watson
9. Ben Hogan
10. Bobby Jones
11. Walter Hagen
12. Sam Snead
13. Mickey Wright
14. Harry Vardon
15. Ayako Okamoto
15. Ralph Guldahl
17. Phil Mickelson
18. Cristie Kerr
19. Laura Davies
20. Inbee Park
21. Byron Nelson
22. Pat Bradley
23. Gene Sarazen
24. Nick Faldo
24. Betsy King


"The Hole Truth" has some interesting factoids and is a decent first shot, but there is a lot more work to be done to get a fuller picture. The collected data is not nearly what it needs to be and the continuing problem of match play in determining Z scores won't go away. This project is going to take a lot more data and a lot more people working on it from around the world to come up with something like baseball's WAR stat. That said, those of you that want insight into the improvement in field strength on the PGA Tour between 2007 and 2015 are going to want to read chapter 2.

Anyone that is going to use this book to definitively claim that Jack is the best of all time is a damn fool.

swing is irrelevant, score is everything

just say NO.... to practice swings

Remove This Advertisement Viewing As Guest

    GolfWRX Forums

    Advertisement


10

#11 bscinstnct

bscinstnct

    Legend

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 23,561 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 77664
  • Joined: 03/17/2009
GolfWRX Likes : 20508

Posted 27 January 2019 - 02:56 PM

The author also ranks

U2 over Led Zeppelin

so Id take it with a grain of salt.

11

#12 Golfnutgalen

Golfnutgalen

    Major Winner

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,228 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 147351
  • Joined: 11/18/2011
  • Location:kalispell, MT USA
GolfWRX Likes : 381

Posted 27 January 2019 - 02:58 PM

View PostDarth Putter, on 27 January 2019 - 02:51 PM, said:

I have the book.



Thanks for all this info! I thought the majors were the only ones being counted, but had doubts because the years active portion didn't always have majors played. Indeed, that list is based off only a 5 year period. I'm happy to see Tiger at the top, but that list completely excludes Byron Nelson's 1945 season in his prime years which is utterly baffling to me (it lists his prime years from 1937-1941). I understand now why it was excluded because the author doesn't value regular events in these two lists.

According to that prime years list Jack and Arnie are nearly identical.

Player    Peak Years   Z score   Effective stroke average

1.    Tiger Woods   1998-2002   -2.60   68.15
2.    Annika Sorenstam 2002-2006 -2.49 68.31
3.    Jack Nicklaus   1971-1975 -2.302         68.59
4.    Arnold Palmer    1960-1964 -2.301    68.59
5.    Yani Tseng   2008-2012 -2.29   68.60
6.    Karie Webb 2000-2004 -2.28    68.62
7.    James Braid 1901-1910 -2.18   68.76
8.    Tom Watson   1977-1981 -2.17     68.78
9.    Ben Hogan   1950-1954 -2.13              68.84
10.   Bobby Jones    1926-1930 -2.11     68.87

Edited by Golfnutgalen, 27 January 2019 - 03:29 PM.


12

#13 fairways4life

fairways4life

    Major Winner

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,497 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 103145
  • Joined: 02/08/2010
GolfWRX Likes : 852

Posted 27 January 2019 - 04:58 PM

The original list of the top 25 posted by the OP doesn't include Phil, Seve, Tom Watson, or Nick Faldo. Not to mention it has Tiger 5th. I know what the math says, but that just doesn't pass the smell test for me.

13

#14 tphilp

tphilp

    Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 67 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 490890
  • Joined: 01/13/2018
  • Location:Burlington,Ontario
  • Handicap:12
GolfWRX Likes : 24

Posted 27 January 2019 - 10:51 PM

One thing that is interesting here Zscore aside is the number of starts that Jack has over Tiger up till age 46. Even if tiger plays a full schedule moving forward he wont hit that many starts. Guess I never put into prospective the number of tournaments injury cost him

14

#15 Railroading13

Railroading13

    Tour Winner

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 554 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 356851
  • Joined: 01/06/2015
  • Location:Nebraska
  • Handicap:2
GolfWRX Likes : 320

Posted 27 January 2019 - 11:41 PM

Like other sports, modern athletes and players are better, the ironic thing is they are better because the forerunners helped evolved their games. I don't think Jerry West would be a start in todays NBA, I don't think Johnny Unitas would be a starter in the NFL, and I don't think Walter Hagen would win a major today. Equipment or not, todays players are just generally better

Edited by Railroading13, 27 January 2019 - 11:41 PM.

WITB

Cobra King LTD 9.5   Fujikura Pro 73 X
Cobra Bio Cell 14.5   Diamana D+ 80 X
Cobra Bio Cell+ 18.5 Diamana Ahina 80X
Mizuno MP18 Fli Hi 4-5   KBS Tour 130X
Mizuno MP18 SC 6-PW  KBS Tour 130X
Mizuno S18 GW 52.9
Mizuno T5 SW 56.14
Callaway PM Grind 60.10
Odyssey O Works 7s W/ Superstroke 50G counterweight

15

#16 augustgolf

augustgolf

    Golf with dignity

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,783 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 438244
  • Joined: 08/25/2016
  • Location:Coastal NC
  • Ebay ID:augustgolf
GolfWRX Likes : 4482

Posted 27 January 2019 - 11:49 PM

You tremendously under estimate "The Haig", my friend
Pings from the beginning

OGA member 1415
or is it 1514...
I don't remember exactly

16

#17 PedronNiall

PedronNiall

    Major Winner

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,428 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 135461
  • Joined: 08/06/2011
GolfWRX Likes : 173

Posted 28 January 2019 - 12:49 AM

It sounds like a very poor use of what has been pointed out to be very incomplete data. If you're going to use stats for comparison, then those you compare need to be comparable in the right ways. If there were era-based comparisons of each relative to the overall abilities of their contemporaries it would make a lot more sense. Taking into account the actual depth of fields that each competed in and looking at how they scored against them would make a lot more sense. No one disputes that fields have become much tighter in ability from Jones' day to Jack's or from Jack's to Tiger's, and from my understanding of what's been posted that isn't taken into account at all by Chamblee.

It seems like he read the book and gleaned only what he wanted to without having an understanding of basic statistics and analysis, or if he did that he just ignored them. You don't try to pull those kind of conclusions from incomplete data, especially when you don't understand it yourself. It just adds more fuel to the fire for those who have constantly pointed out the clear bias he has against Tiger and makes me less inclined to listen to a word he has to say on broadcast.

Poor showing by someone who touts himself as a serious journalist.

17

#18 youdamantiger

youdamantiger

    Advanced

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 325 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 151439
  • Joined: 12/17/2011
  • Location:Destin, Florida
  • Handicap:6.8
GolfWRX Likes : 606

Posted 28 January 2019 - 01:09 AM

View PostRailroading13, on 27 January 2019 - 11:41 PM, said:

Like other sports, modern athletes and players are better, the ironic thing is they are better because the forerunners helped evolved their games. I don't think Jerry West would be a start in todays NBA, I don't think Johnny Unitas would be a starter in the NFL, and I don't think Walter Hagen would win a major today. Equipment or not, todays players are just generally better

Interesting how the scoring average hasn't markedly improved the past 40 years given the vast improvement in course conditions, the relative ease of modern tour life on the body and the mind, and the fact that the modern pro usually has flip wedges into the par fours and rarely faces a par five that they can't reach. If they're so much better, one would think the scoring average would be a lot lower than 71.

18

#19 fairways4life

fairways4life

    Major Winner

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,497 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 103145
  • Joined: 02/08/2010
GolfWRX Likes : 852

Posted 28 January 2019 - 07:56 AM

^^^ It is kind of weird, and worth pointing out. But courses have gotten longer. Greens have gotten quicker. Lies have gotten tighter.

Arnold Palmer was once asked what he thought which piece of equipment had changed the game the most (drivers, balls, cavity back irons, etc.). His response was "The lawnmower."

Edited by fairways4life, 28 January 2019 - 07:56 AM.


19

#20 Ferguson

Ferguson

    Major Winner

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,091 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 371587
  • Joined: 04/16/2015
  • Location:VA
  • Handicap:7.1
GolfWRX Likes : 6068

Posted 28 January 2019 - 08:38 AM

Here is my take on numbers and stats:


This is a cube. No matter from what direction or orientation - it's still a cube.


cube.png




The Jack / Tiger debate will end when Tiger retires and we can do an actual side by side comparison.


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 Golfnutgalen

Golfnutgalen

    Major Winner

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,228 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 147351
  • Joined: 11/18/2011
  • Location:kalispell, MT USA
GolfWRX Likes : 381

Posted 28 January 2019 - 02:19 PM

I compiled this data and there may be some flaws and possibly even some missing players, but I thought it was interesting. Let's say Tiger plays a full schedule of 18 events the next 4 years (up until age 46 to make it more fair to Jack) and doesn't win any more. His win percentage would still be an astronomical 19.14%. Woods' win percentage peaked at the end of 2009 around 28%. Jack was about 19% in the mid 70s.

Here are the best win percentages since 1945. I removed the events played after a player's final win because guys often play a bunch of events after which shouldn't be held against them. Obviously I didn't do that for Tiger and Phil because they still have a good chance to rack up some more wins.


1. Tiger Woods (age 43) 1996-2019 - 80 wins in 347 events (23.05%)

2. Jack Nicklaus (46) 1961-1986 - 73 wins in 494 events (14.78%)

3. Carey Middlecoff (40) 1947-1961 40 wins in 285 events (14.04%)

4. Arnold Palmer (44) 1954-1973 - 62 wins in 496 events (12.5%)

5. Billy Casper (44) 1954-1975 - 51 wins in 467 events (10.92%)

6. Vijay Singh (45) 1992-2008 - 34 wins in 410 events (8.29%)

7. Greg Norman (42) 1979-1997 - 20 wins in 270 events (7.41%)

8. Phil Mickelson (48) 1991-2019 - 43 wins in 597 events (7.20%)

9. Seve Ballesteros (38) 1977-1995 - 9 wins in 131 starts (6.87%)

10. Tom Watson (48) 1971-1998 - 39 wins in 576 events (6.77%)

11. Lee Trevino (44) 1962-1984 - 29 wins in 429 events (6.76%)

12. Gary Player (42) 1957-1978 24 wins in 360 events (6.67%)

13. Johnny Miller (42) 1969-1994 25 wins in 426 events (5.87%)

14. Ernie Els (42) 1990-2012 19 wins in 347 events (5.48%)

15. Gene Littler (47) 1954-1977 29 wins in 530 events (5.47%)



Here are some of the current crop of players for comparison. Just note that their win percentages will more likely than not drop in the coming years.


1. Rory McIlroy (29) 2007-2019 - 14 wins in 152 events (9.21%)

2. Dustin Johnson (34) 2009-2019 - 19 wins in 243 events (7.82%)

3. Jordan Spieth (25) 2010-2019 - 11 wins in 154 events (7.14%)

4. Bryson Dechambeau (25) 2015-2019 - 5 wins in 75 events (6.67%)

5. Adam Scott (38) 2000-2019 - 13 wins in 306 events (4.25%)

6. Justin Rose (38) 1998-2019 – 10 wins in 326 evens (3.07%)



In the beginning you probably noticed I cutoff at 1945. Here are just a few notables from that era.


1. Bobby Jones (28) 1920-1930 - 13 wins in 31 majors (41.94%)

2. Harry Vardon (44) 1893-1914 - 7 wins in 24 majors (29.17%)

3. Walter Hagen (43) 1915-1936 - 45 wins in 189 events (23.81%)

4. Ben Hogan (45) 1932-1959 - 64 wins in 270 events (23.7%)

5. Byron Nelson (39) 1933-1951 52 wins in 246 events (21.14%)

6. Sam Snead (52!) 1931-1965 82 wins in 440 events (18.64%)

7. Gene Sarazen (39) 1920-1941 39 wins in 286 events (13.34%)


If you want to double check the data (which could well be wrong in places) just remember to add the Open Championship to the pgatour's starts. They are not included in any player's official starts until 1995.

Edited by Golfnutgalen, 28 January 2019 - 03:28 PM.


21

#22 redfirebird08

redfirebird08

    Hall of Fame

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,551 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 91707
  • Joined: 08/14/2009
GolfWRX Likes : 2447

Posted 28 January 2019 - 03:23 PM

View PostHawkeye77, on 27 January 2019 - 06:46 AM, said:

Brandel onto a new "thing" and the Western Open was not a major. Even in the 1940s the 4 majors were the 4 majors (study the newspaper accounts of the day when Hogan was winning) and the Western was still a top tier tourney but the idea it was a "major" gets exaggerated quite a bit these days by revisionist golf historians who act like they just "discovered" it existed.

Yes, a significant event but it would have survived as a major and continued to have major status throughout history had it really been a major. It wasn't.  Can't just call it one now.

But the 1940's was after the Masters came along. I think the bigger issue would be the 1910's and 1920's when Hagen was winning Western Opens and there was no Masters on the schedule. I tend to think Walter gets the short stick in these GOAT conversations, especially when people mention Bobby Jones' performance in amateur "majors." Hagen was his strongest opponent, but not allowed to play in those amateur events.

22

#23 cardoustie

cardoustie

    haha, we don't play for 5's

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,823 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 65255
  • Joined: 09/09/2008
  • Location:Tasmania to Canada
  • Handicap:3.6
GolfWRX Likes : 8014

Posted 28 January 2019 - 03:32 PM

It is amazing how revered the Western Open was .. from the old stuff I have read it was the 4th big event for players .... followed in 5th place by (gasp)  The CANADIAN Open
Ping G400 LST 11.0* Oban Revenge Green 65.05
Ping G400 3w 15.1* Oban Kiyoshi Purple 55.05
Ping G400 5w 17.5* Oban Kiyoshi White 65.04
Callaway Apex 3h 20* Matrix MFS Orange 85x
Callaway Apex 4h 23* Matrix Altus Red 92x
Callaway UT 24* Matrix Altus Red 92x
Callaway Steelhead XR Pro 6-PW TT 105
Ping iWedge 50* Steelfiber 125s
Ping Glides wrx 53* & 59* Steelfiber 125s
Ping Tour W 64* DG s400
Piretti Matera Elite (torched)

23

#24 MelloYello

MelloYello

    Major Winner

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,789 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 152687
  • Joined: 12/29/2011
  • Location:Upstate, SC
GolfWRX Likes : 1430

Posted 28 January 2019 - 04:06 PM

If he's not using z-scores as they're defined statistically he's just wrong for using that language.

There is a fixed definition for "z-scores" in the world of statistics. A z-score is simply the number of standard deviations away from the mean a given data point is. That sounds applicable to ranking players. The question is how you define the "mean."

If he's trying to redefine what a "z-score" is let's stop talking right now, never mind the fact he's only talking about majors and all that.

Edited by MelloYello, 28 January 2019 - 04:07 PM.

Driver: TaylorMade M3 460
Fairway: TaylorMade M3 HL Fwy
Hybrid: Mizuno MP Fli Hi (2)

Irons: Titleist 716 T-MB (4, 5), 716 MB (6-P)
Wedges: Vokey SM6  52.12 (F)  /  56.14 (F)  /  60.10 (S)
Putter: Odyssey O-Works 2-Ball Red

24

#25 PedronNiall

PedronNiall

    Major Winner

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,428 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 135461
  • Joined: 08/06/2011
GolfWRX Likes : 173

Posted 29 January 2019 - 12:06 AM

View Postyoudamantiger, on 28 January 2019 - 01:09 AM, said:

View PostRailroading13, on 27 January 2019 - 11:41 PM, said:

Like other sports, modern athletes and players are better, the ironic thing is they are better because the forerunners helped evolved their games. I don't think Jerry West would be a start in todays NBA, I don't think Johnny Unitas would be a starter in the NFL, and I don't think Walter Hagen would win a major today. Equipment or not, todays players are just generally better

Interesting how the scoring average hasn't markedly improved the past 40 years given the vast improvement in course conditions, the relative ease of modern tour life on the body and the mind, and the fact that the modern pro usually has flip wedges into the par fours and rarely faces a par five that they can't reach. If they're so much better, one would think the scoring average would be a lot lower than 71.

Think about the response when scores go lower, though: green complexes like those at Sawgrass that feed an approach shot from the front right side all the way off the back left just for sheer brutality, Tigerproofing to compensate for increased driving distances, teeny, tiny fairways with even narrower approach areas, Par 3s that require some in the field to use 3-woods, brutal rough, and more blind tee, layup, and approach shots than you can shake a club at. When equipment and regimens moved the yardstick courses and course designers have been sure to follow suit. Everything may be well manicured on the whole to keep play fair and level for everyone, but they've done a good job of keeping par an honest number most of the time, and a nearly impossible one for events like the US Open.


25

#26 lowheel

lowheel

    LOWHEEL

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,325 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 193008
  • Joined: 07/18/2012
GolfWRX Likes : 6018

Posted 29 January 2019 - 12:57 AM

View PostRailroading13, on 27 January 2019 - 11:41 PM, said:

Like other sports, modern athletes and players are better, the ironic thing is they are better because the forerunners helped evolved their games. I don't think Jerry West would be a start in todays NBA, I don't think Johnny Unitas would be a starter in the NFL, and I don't think Walter Hagen would win a major today. Equipment or not, todays players are just generally better

Theres no proof to anything you posted. Talented players who dominated for 15 years in any era wouldnt benefit from todays modern tech/coaching/nutrition/video/training etc??? Jerry west couldnt play today? Unitas? based on what exactly?

26

#27 sumadoggie

sumadoggie

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 21 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 341785
  • Joined: 09/26/2014
GolfWRX Likes : 2

Posted 31 January 2019 - 10:58 AM

TED talk on modern athletes.  Very interesting.

https://www.youtube....h?v=8COaMKbNrX0

27

#28 kyledeen

kyledeen

    Advanced

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 339 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 1978
  • Joined: 06/26/2005
  • Location:The ROCK, AR
  • Handicap:uno
GolfWRX Likes : 92

Posted 31 January 2019 - 10:59 AM

Lost me at "Brandel"
14 of these...
7.5 ping g400 lst kisyoshi black 65 04
13 cally 816 rombax 7w06x
18 cally 816 rombax f709s
3,4 mizuno mp h4 ftb 90s
5-P miura 501 cb s300 amt white
50ss, 56ss, 60es glide modus 3 130s
64 588 tg s200
pp delmar 3.5, pp midslant, og napa

28

#29 NoTalentLefty

NoTalentLefty

    Major Winner

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,372 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 204451
  • Joined: 09/24/2012
  • Location:Midwest
GolfWRX Likes : 1495

Posted 09 February 2019 - 10:21 AM

Let’s face it , it’s will always depend on opinion when deciding the GOAT.
Livin' proof that Lefties are not naturally talented.

Driver Titleist 913 D3 44 inches also a Cleveland Classic 310 43.5 inches
3 and 5 Wood Ping G15
3-5 Hybrids Cobra Baffler XL
6-GW Titleist AP1s
53 degree Wedge Titleist AP1
58 degree SW Vokey SM6
Putter White Hot V LINE Fang w/round Edel Grip

29

#30 Big Cat 3

Big Cat 3

    Advanced

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 376 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 496308
  • Joined: 03/15/2018
  • Location:Pasadena,California
  • Handicap:4
GolfWRX Likes : 224

Posted 09 February 2019 - 02:31 PM

Jack had to beat just a hand full of guys and usually went in protection mode and held on to win ... not the case with Tig. Try and hold on to a lead in Tigs day and you would lose to a no name Korean guy like that guy at Hazeltine in 2009. Fields were not nearly as strong in 60s and 70s. Hell not many played golf then.


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