News:

This discussion group is best enjoyed using Google Chrome, Firefox or Safari.


jeffwarne

  • Karma: +0/-0
When we get a Major winner who doesn't have a ton of PGA Tour success, it simply makes me think that perhaps many Tour sites don't ask the right questions.



"Let's slow the damned greens down a bit, not take the character out of them." Tom Doak
"Take their focus off the grass and put it squarely on interesting golf." Don Mahaffey

M. Shea Sweeney

  • Karma: +0/-0
...and it looks like we are well on the way for another one this year.


Harman has been great at every single level


he has played on the pga tour almost his entire career


2nd in the US OPEN, 6th Open, Top 15 in PGA and the Masters
Lot of great players


2,3,4,5,6 are superstars







« Last Edit: July 22, 2023, 02:40:14 PM by M. Shea Sweeney »

mike_beene

  • Karma: +0/-0
And the top 10 seldom looks fluky.

Kalen Braley

  • Karma: +0/-0

...and it looks like we are well on the way for another one this year.


Harman has been great at every single level

he has played on the pga tour almost his entire career

2nd in the US OPEN, 6th Open, Top 15 in PGA and the Masters
Lot of great players

2,3,4,5,6 are superstars

So Harman is "great" with two PGA Tour wins in over 10+ years on Tour.
And in Majors, he's missed the cut in nearly half of em and has 3 top 10 finishes in 30 appearances.

Meanwhile.

Retief Goosen is somehow a "fluke" despite:
- 7 PGA Tour wins
- 14 European Tour wins
- 5 Asian Tour wins
- 2 Majors wins
- 16 top 10s in majors



Jim Hoak

  • Karma: +1/-0
As I understand the quoted assertion, it is meant to glorify a criticized course as "great" because a string of great players have won there.  I believe this assertion is silly and not true.  With Harman's win, it looks once again to be a statement that is not true.
Hoylake may be a great course for other reasons, but its ability to identify great players isn't one of them.
I have no reason not to congratulate Harman on his win, but this was one of the least exciting majors I have ever seen.  Sorry I got up so early for several days
« Last Edit: July 23, 2023, 02:21:30 PM by Jim Hoak »

Ira Fishman

  • Karma: +0/-0
...and it looks like we are well on the way for another one this year.


Well, Brian Harman has contended in two or three previous majors.  He led for a round or two at Erin Hills, and played well recently at LACC.  He's also [historically] a bit of a short hitter in modern golf, and short hitters have their best chance at The Open, where the firmness of the ground minimizes the need for length and emphasizes the need for control.


If he wins, it won't be a fluke.


This.


Plus he won by six.

Edward Glidewell

  • Karma: +0/-0
Retief Goosen is somehow a "fluke" despite:
- 7 PGA Tour wins
- 14 European Tour wins
- 5 Asian Tour wins
- 2 Majors wins
- 16 top 10s in majors


Goosen definitely wasn't a fluke -- I was going to point that out as a strange statement. When he won at Shinnecock, it was his second US Open victory and he'd also had four top 10s at the Open and a runner-up finish at the Masters. He won the Tour Championship later that year, too.


Even if he meant the first US Open victory at Southern Hills instead of the one at Shinnecock, Goosen already had four European Tour victories and two Open Championship top 10s at that point. He also finished first on the European Tour money list that season. He wouldn't have been one of the favorites but it's not like he was a random guy who made it through local qualifying, and obviously it wasn't a fluke win in retrospect when considering the whole of his career.


Daryl David

  • Karma: +0/-0

...and it looks like we are well on the way for another one this year.


Harman has been great at every single level

he has played on the pga tour almost his entire career

2nd in the US OPEN, 6th Open, Top 15 in PGA and the Masters
Lot of great players

2,3,4,5,6 are superstars

So Harman is "great" with two PGA Tour wins in over 10+ years on Tour.
And in Majors, he's missed the cut in nearly half of em and has 3 top 10 finishes in 30 appearances.

Meanwhile.

Retief Goosen is somehow a "fluke" despite:
- 7 PGA Tour wins
- 14 European Tour wins
- 5 Asian Tour wins
- 2 Majors wins
- 16 top 10s in majors


I think you need to look at why Goosen might have been considered a fluke winner when he won his first major.


His record going into the the 2001 US Open at Southern Hills was.


No PGA tour wins
4 European tour wins
No Asian Tour wins
2 top 10s in Majors


Yes, Retief was not a fluke winner given we have the ability so see his career following his first major victory. At the time no one had the benefit of seeing the future. Maybe the same will be true for Brian Harman or maybe not. Regardless, it was a hell of a performance.






Niall C

  • Karma: +0/-0
I'm not sure I understand the meaning of fluke winner the way others do as none of Curtis, Hamilton, Lawrie or Goosen were fluke winners in my view and neither was Harman. Each of them played the best golf that week. Yes, this Open was perhaps the least exciting for a while but that was down to Harmans dominant display. His level of control was simply a class apart and if you get frustrated by guys playing bomb and gouge winning all the time then surely you have to applaud Harmans display.


Niall

M. Shea Sweeney

  • Karma: +0/-0

...and it looks like we are well on the way for another one this year.


Harman has been great at every single level

he has played on the pga tour almost his entire career

2nd in the US OPEN, 6th Open, Top 15 in PGA and the Masters
Lot of great players

2,3,4,5,6 are superstars

So Harman is "great" with two PGA Tour wins in over 10+ years on Tour.
And in Majors, he's missed the cut in nearly half of em and has 3 top 10 finishes in 30 appearances.

Meanwhile.

Retief Goosen is somehow a "fluke" despite:
- 7 PGA Tour wins
- 14 European Tour wins
- 5 Asian Tour wins
- 2 Majors wins
- 16 top 10s in majors




Who said Goosen was a fluke?


How bout now?
Is Harman a great PGA Tour player?
Brian Harman is not the Champion Golfer of the Year because of a stroke of luck


This topic was  discussed after the US Open- the best player of the week wins the event- some courses and conditions set up for players better than others, not that complicated.
« Last Edit: July 23, 2023, 09:40:08 PM by M. Shea Sweeney »

Jason Topp

  • Karma: +0/-0
Certain courses diminish the advantage long hitters have and Royal Liverpool seemed, based on my limited viewing, to do the same.  Many fairways were pinched at points that prevented players from simply hitting driver as far as they could.


It makes sense to me that such a course will yield a more varied list of winners. 

Niall C

  • Karma: +0/-0
Jason


Can't you say the same thing most weeks about pinch points ? Admittedly I don't watch much apart from the majors but is it not true that most weeks they tend to bring the fairways in for the bombers but that more often than not one of them wins anyway. If that is the case then the question is why didn't that happen at Hoylake ?


Niall

Kalen Braley

  • Karma: +0/-0

...and it looks like we are well on the way for another one this year.


Harman has been great at every single level

he has played on the pga tour almost his entire career

2nd in the US OPEN, 6th Open, Top 15 in PGA and the Masters
Lot of great players

2,3,4,5,6 are superstars

So Harman is "great" with two PGA Tour wins in over 10+ years on Tour.
And in Majors, he's missed the cut in nearly half of em and has 3 top 10 finishes in 30 appearances.

Meanwhile.

Retief Goosen is somehow a "fluke" despite:
- 7 PGA Tour wins
- 14 European Tour wins
- 5 Asian Tour wins
- 2 Majors wins
- 16 top 10s in majors


Who said Goosen was a fluke?


How bout now?
Is Harman a great PGA Tour player?
Brian Harman is not the Champion Golfer of the Year because of a stroke of luck

This topic was  discussed after the US Open- the best player of the week wins the event- some courses and conditions set up for players better than others, not that complicated.


Go check reply 20.  Tom also called two other Champion Golfers of the Year flukes in that same post.

I actually only disagree with him on Retief, and would probably add a dozen or so more to the fluke list, including BH of course.  ;)   History has a lot of One Major winners, a lot more than you would think.

Niall C

  • Karma: +0/-0
Kalen


There have been loads of one major winners and some of them have only shone brightly for that one week, Todd Hamilton and Ben Curtis among them, but I just don't see them as fluke winners when they prevailed over the best in the world over the course of 4 rounds (and in some cases a play off also).


I'm not sure how you'd have a fluke winner other than perhaps someone winning because the guy with the better score managed to get himself disqualified. But then again, abiding by the rules is also part of it.


Niall

Kalen Braley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Niall,

You bring up good points here.  It is difficult to determine a "fluke" in this context, and there is no shortage of one time major winners. (146 in total, and 43 of them are Open winners.)

Perhaps the algorithm would/should include some combination of "other wins".   Guys like Furyk, Sergio, Rose, Cink, Duval, and Day are also one time winners and given their other wins I certainly wouldn't put them in that category.

Tommy Williamsen

  • Karma: +0/-0
We really don't know who might be a "fluke" until their career is over. Harmon has been a solid player, just not a prolific winner to this point in his career. Winning the Open is a surprise, but these guys are so good that many could catch fire one week.
Where there is no love, put love; there you will find love.
St. John of the Cross

"Deep within your soul-space is a magnificent cathedral where you are sweet beyond telling." Rumi

Matt_Cohn

  • Karma: +0/-0

The question I keep returning to is: Ought a great (tournament) course to necessarily test ALL parts of a player's game? Or ought the course to decide for itself which skills are tested, and in what proportion?


Is Pinehurst #2 a less complete test, and therefore less capable of identifying the "best" players, because one can always putt from off the green, and therefore avoid chipping for 72 holes if desired? Or is it okay that chipping simply isn't required in that week's examination? Could the same be asked of Harbour Town in not testing a player's ability in uphill, downhill, or sidehill golf? And most commonly these days, is it okay if driving accuracy just isn't an important part of that week's test? Or does that actually make it a worse test?

Last week, Brian Harman played amazingly, AND his skills were an excellent match for that particular course. As well as he played, he might not have won at Augusta. But I think that's good, as opposed to being an indictment of one or the other. My hunch is that it's better if some courses require different skill sets, or at least in different proportions. In tennis, the very greatest players are those who win on grass, clay, and hardcourt, where skills are valued in different proportions. I think having something similar in golf is good.




Of course, the silly reply is that based on identifying Tiger as the best player, Bay Hill and Torrey Pines must be incredible courses, while Riviera must be no good at all!


Duncan Cheslett

  • Karma: +0/-0
I was out on the course all week operating a boom mic for the World Feed. I witnessed from a couple of yards away approach shots from all the players.


Harmon stood out from the practice round onwards. While most players had me scurrying around in the semi rough on occasions looking for their ball Harmonís was always in the middle of the fairway in an ideal position.


My job was to pick up the sound of the second shot which I could hear through my headphones. I heard many different kinds of sound but Harmonís was constantly among the sweetest. I canít remember him missing a green while I was covering him.


He was also one of the nicest most unassuming guys.


This was no fluke win.


If it made for a dull spectacle donít blame the guy who won. Blame the rest of them!
« Last Edit: July 25, 2023, 03:25:55 AM by Duncan Cheslett »

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +1/-1

Go check reply 20.  Tom also called two other Champion Golfers of the Year flukes in that same post.

I actually only disagree with him on Retief, and would probably add a dozen or so more to the fluke list, including BH of course.  ;)   History has a lot of One Major winners, a lot more than you would think.




If you go back and re-read what I said, my point was that none of these guys are really "flukes" just because they weren't one of the favorites.  Most golf fans would say Mickelson should have beaten Goosen, just like they think Arnie should have beaten Billy Casper at Olympic, so Olympic must not be a great course.  [And Billy Casper had a lot greater career record than Retief Goosen, albeit with less depth of competition.]


I also said [on Friday] that if Harman won, it wouldn't be a fluke, either.  He just outplayed everyone else, by a lot.  It certainly helped him that the course wasn't set up to punish shorter hitters, as some major championship venues are, but do we think that's a bad thing?  I love The Open precisely because the conditions allow for different players to show their strengths.  This week, hitting fairways DID matter, especially when the rough got wet on Sunday.

Ken Moum

  • Karma: +0/-0
Let's not forget that he was ranked 26th in the OWGR the week before The Open, some


Ben Curtis was playing in his first major in 2003 and was ranked 396th.


Hamilton was much higher, ranked 56th, and had been well into the top 50 earlier in the year.


Goosen was 44th in June of 2001
Over time, the guy in the ideal position derives an advantage, and delivering him further  advantage is not worth making the rest of the players suffer at the expense of fun, variety, and ultimately cost -- Jeff Warne, 12-08-2010

Jason Topp

  • Karma: +0/-0
Jason


Can't you say the same thing most weeks about pinch points ? Admittedly I don't watch much apart from the majors but is it not true that most weeks they tend to bring the fairways in for the bombers but that more often than not one of them wins anyway. If that is the case then the question is why didn't that happen at Hoylake ?


Niall


Niall - my perception is that there are many courses that do not pinch at driver length.  Augusta National is one example and the winner there is usually a big name and a long hitter.   By contrast TPC Sawgrass, Colonial, Harbor Town are examples of fairways that do pinch and shorter hitters win more often at those venues than they do in general.   


Added driver length is an advantage on any course but it diminishes when the opportunity to use driver is reduced.




I like the perspective in Mattís post that courses should test different things so I do not believe it is a criticism at all.  The Open Champion was a very worthy winner. 

Mark_Fine

  • Karma: +0/-0
Horses for courses.  Same often goes for golfers.  Shinnecock Hills and The National Golf Links are both considered by many as 10s!  If the top players in the world played both courses it is highly likely the leader boards might look very different.  What does that say about great courses identifying the greatest players?  Sometimes it happens and sometimes it doesnít.  These players are all amazing and we often forget there is the weather, the draw, rub of the green and old fashion luck that is very much a part of it.  Inches can be the difference between a putt going in and missing, an unplayable lie vs no problem, OB vs IB, Öthe list goes on. 

Tommy Williamsen

  • Karma: +0/-0
I think the more likely scenario is, great championships identify great players.
Where there is no love, put love; there you will find love.
St. John of the Cross

"Deep within your soul-space is a magnificent cathedral where you are sweet beyond telling." Rumi

Jim Hoak

  • Karma: +1/-0
Tommy, please elaborate.

John Bouffard

  • Karma: +0/-0
Great courses are sought after to host prestigious championships, and I think these tournaments create the most pressure and motivate the top players the most. If in fact great players win more often on great courses, maybe this is the reason why.





Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back