Ranking the #1s in the history of OWGR

Clearly the best player in the history of the OWGR is in no doubt but what about the others?

For example, Luke Donald, actually has the 7th longest spell at world no. 1 but for me he is arguably the weakest player on the list. Donald and Westwood are the only two who are minus a major win. Tom Lehman was only #1 for one week total but does have a major win.

still astounds me how long luke donald was #1 and he's been virtually non-existent for the last ...how many years?

It's hard to say. Ernie Els had a better career than a lot of guys on here but was never #1 for an extended period. Similarly, there's no Phil Mickelson on the list. Both played their best at the same time as Tiger (generally speaking, although Vijay Singh managed to make it to #1 for a while). I think Phil he had a couple different chances to be #1 if he had won that week but never did it.

My guess is most would rank Donald and Westwood at the bottom. Maybe Tom Lehman there. He had a two or three year stretch where he was right there in the Masters and U.S. Open. But his overall career numbers are fairly limited. How you rank these three may have a lot to do with what continent you live on...

I'd also say that Kaymer, Adam Scott, and Justin Rose feel similar. They were ranked #1 but I'm not sure if people felt like they were that much better than everyone else (in contrast, Justin Thomas went crazy for a while to reach the #1 ranking).

> @agolf1 said:

> It's hard to say. Ernie Els had a better career than a lot of guys on here but was never #1 for an extended period. Similarly, there's no Phil Mickelson on the list. Both played their best at the same time as Tiger (generally speaking, although Vijay Singh managed to make it to #1 for a while). I think Phil he had a couple different chances to be #1 if he had won that week but never did it.

>

> My guess is most would rank Donald and Westwood at the bottom. Maybe Tom Lehman there. He had a two or three year stretch where he was right there in the Masters and U.S. Open. But his overall career numbers are fairly limited. How you rank these three may have a lot to do with what continent you live on...

>

> I'd also say that Kaymer, Adam Scott, and Justin Rose feel similar. They were ranked #1 but I'm not sure if people felt like they were that much better than everyone else (in contrast, Justin Thomas went crazy for a while to reach the #1 ranking).

Looking at the list, it's astonishing that Phil never made it to #1. Seems like he would have made it at some time even if by accident. He's hasn't been out of the top 50 in the past 26 years. It's got to bother him that he would have made it, save for the efforts of a certain golfer who may or may not be at the top of this list.

> @"Birdie Mac" said:

> > @agolf1 said:

> > It's hard to say. Ernie Els had a better career than a lot of guys on here but was never #1 for an extended period. Similarly, there's no Phil Mickelson on the list. Both played their best at the same time as Tiger (generally speaking, although Vijay Singh managed to make it to #1 for a while). I think Phil he had a couple different chances to be #1 if he had won that week but never did it.

> >

> > My guess is most would rank Donald and Westwood at the bottom. Maybe Tom Lehman there. He had a two or three year stretch where he was right there in the Masters and U.S. Open. But his overall career numbers are fairly limited. How you rank these three may have a lot to do with what continent you live on...

> >

> > I'd also say that Kaymer, Adam Scott, and Justin Rose feel similar. They were ranked #1 but I'm not sure if people felt like they were that much better than everyone else (in contrast, Justin Thomas went crazy for a while to reach the #1 ranking).

> Looking at the list, it's astonishing that Phil never made it to #1. Seems like he would have made it at some time even if by accident. He's hasn't been out of the top 50 in the past 26 years. It's got to bother him that he would have made it, save for the efforts of a certain golfer who may or may not be at the top of this list.

>

Phil is simply a victim of the era in which he played. Reminds me of the Vikings teams that went to 4 Super Bowls and never won. In all 4 of them, they played arguably 4 of the top 15 teams of all time.

Luke Donald - felt like he got to #1 through attrition more than anything else. He just exploited the mathematical part of the criteria, high finishes in heavily weighted events coincided with weak finishes dropping off from 2 years prior. He was keeping his divisor the same while replacing the low points with high figures and his ranking took off. Other players got to #1 by stomping everyone’s dicks into the dirt. Luke got there by replacing 50th place finishes with a bunch of 3rds.

Beyond the length of time Tiger has been number 1, the most astounding thing is that Duval and Singh were number 1 for 15 and 32 weeks respectively back when Tiger was Tiger.

> @MattyO1984 said:

> Beyond the length of time Tiger has been number 1, the most astounding thing is that Duval and Singh were number 1 for 15 and 32 weeks respectively back when Tiger was Tiger.

Duval was awesome for a period and probably should have won at least one more major, he had a few real good chances at Augusta. Of course, credit to Singh too.

OK here we go, I have gotten bed up of being at work and I am on a mini-strike so here is my list...tell me why I am wrong :)

1. Tiger

2. Faldo

3. Norman

4. Seve

5. McIlroy

6. Koepka

7. Singh

8. Els

9. Spieth

10. Price

11. Duval

12. DJ

13. Couples

14. Langer

15. Scott

16. Day

17. JT

18. Rose

19. Kaymer

20. Woosnam

21. Lehman

22. Westwood

23. Donald

^^ Is this an attempt to rank the careers of the various #1's or their play leading up to and during their stay at the top? For example...how is Duval ranked above so many with more wins and/or majors?

I would label those with 12 or fewer as _incidental_. I don't think those guys held the top spot long enough to be historically significant. It's a notable achievement in one's career to have gotten to the top for even 1 week but those guys who were there for a month or so won't be remembered for being a #1. For example, I don't remember Justin Thomas getting to #1 although it says he was there for 4 weeks. Who cares besides him, right?

And judging by the list, there are several guys that spent ~4-6 months at the top. Again, I don't remember Jordan Spieth being #1. Lee Westwood's reign was also pretty unremarkable. But they were still there for a while. So I'd put the 25-75 crowd together. Those guys held onto the spot long enough to be there for a period of a year (give or take). They were the #1 for long enough that you knew it. They had some period where they were a really, really solid player that had earned the #1 rank.

100 also seems to be a significant number. All 3 that are approaching that (McIlroy, Faldo, and DJ) are/were players who were seen as special relative to their competition. While Faldo didn't have the power of the other two he was a prolific winner, right?

Norman and Woods...just ridiculous.

> @MattyO1984 said:

> Beyond the length of time Tiger has been number 1, the most astounding thing is that Duval and Singh were number 1 for 15 and 32 weeks respectively back when Tiger was Tiger.

That's very true. Maybe those numbers should be doubled to add some perspective?

> @MattyO1984 said:

> OK here we go, I have gotten bed up of being at work and I am on a mini-strike so here is my list...tell me why I am wrong :)

>

> 1. Tiger

> 2. Faldo

> 3. Norman

> 4. Seve

> 5. McIlroy

> 6. Koepka

> 7. Singh

> 8. Els

> 9. Spieth

> 10. Price

> 11. Duval

> 12. DJ

> 13. Couples

> 14. Langer

> 15. Scott

> 16. Day

> 17. JT

> 18. Rose

> 19. Kaymer

> 20. Woosnam

> 21. Lehman

> 22. Westwood

> 23. Donald

Koepka over Els and Singh? Vijay has something like 50 wins between the two tours!

Spieth over Price?

> @cdnglf said:

> > @MattyO1984 said:

> > OK here we go, I have gotten bed up of being at work and I am on a mini-strike so here is my list...tell me why I am wrong :)

> >

> > 1. Tiger

> > 2. Faldo

> > 3. Norman

> > 4. Seve

> > 5. McIlroy

> > 6. Koepka

> > 7. Singh

> > 8. Els

> > 9. Spieth

> > 10. Price

> > 11. Duval

> > 12. DJ

> > 13. Couples

> > 14. Langer

> > 15. Scott

> > 16. Day

> > 17. JT

> > 18. Rose

> > 19. Kaymer

> > 20. Woosnam

> > 21. Lehman

> > 22. Westwood

> > 23. Donald

>

> Koepka over Els and Singh? Vijay has something like 50 wins between the two tours!

> Spieth over Price?

>

Let's see your list then...

> @Shilgy said:

> ^^ Is this an attempt to rank the careers of the various #1's or their play leading up to and during their stay at the top? For example...how is Duval ranked above so many with more wins and/or majors?

Whole career.

Of those I have ranked below DD, only two have won more majors (Langer & Kaymer) and in thinking about him I was basing it on the fact that he made it to number 1 when Tiger was on the scene and pretty much at his absolute best. He was one of few at the time who could hang with him. That was worth a lot to me.

Tom Lehman had almost as much heartache at the US Open as Mickelson has had. He played in the final group four years in a row, and never won, including once losing to... Steve Jones.

> @Potatohead said:

> Tom Lehman had almost as much heartache at the US Open as Mickelson has had. He played in the final group four years in a row, and never won, including once losing to... Steve Jones.

>

>

>

It is still remarkable that Steve Jones is a US Open winner and Lehman and Love both missed out that year.

> @MattyO1984 said:

> Beyond the length of time Tiger has been number 1, the most astounding thing is that Duval and Singh were number 1 for 15 and 32 weeks respectively back when Tiger was Tiger.

Them being #1 coincided when Tiger was making swing changes. Duval was #1 when Tiger was changing from his natural swing with Butch and Singh was #1 when Tiger was changing to his Hank Haney swing.

> @cdnglf said:

> > @MattyO1984 said:

> > OK here we go, I have gotten bed up of being at work and I am on a mini-strike so here is my list...tell me why I am wrong :)

> >

> > 1. Tiger

> > 2. Faldo

> > 3. Norman

> > 4. Seve

> > 5. McIlroy

> > 6. Koepka

> > 7. Singh

> > 8. Els

> > 9. Spieth

> > 10. Price

> > 11. Duval

> > 12. DJ

> > 13. Couples

> > 14. Langer

> > 15. Scott

> > 16. Day

> > 17. JT

> > 18. Rose

> > 19. Kaymer

> > 20. Woosnam

> > 21. Lehman

> > 22. Westwood

> > 23. Donald

>

> Koepka over Els and Singh? Vijay has something like 50 wins between the two tours!

> Spieth over Price?

>

Yea. Keopka doesn’t get up early enough for prime Vijay. Period.

I’d say the original list the OP posted is fairly good. Exception being Els. Switch him out with Westwood.

> @MattyO1984 said:

> > @cdnglf said:

> > > @MattyO1984 said:

> > > OK here we go, I have gotten bed up of being at work and I am on a mini-strike so here is my list...tell me why I am wrong :)

> > >

> > > 1. Tiger

> > > 2. Faldo

> > > 3. Norman

> > > 4. Seve

> > > 5. McIlroy

> > > 6. Koepka

> > > 7. Singh

> > > 8. Els

> > > 9. Spieth

> > > 10. Price

> > > 11. Duval

> > > 12. DJ

> > > 13. Couples

> > > 14. Langer

> > > 15. Scott

> > > 16. Day

> > > 17. JT

> > > 18. Rose

> > > 19. Kaymer

> > > 20. Woosnam

> > > 21. Lehman

> > > 22. Westwood

> > > 23. Donald

> >

> > Koepka over Els and Singh? Vijay has something like 50 wins between the two tours!

> > Spieth over Price?

> >

>

> Let's see your list then...

You said to tell you why you're wrong, so I picked the 3 most egregious. Koepka doesn't even have 10 wins.

I'd put Ernie and Vijay in the 2-4 range, along with Seve. After that, Faldo and Norman. Then Rory, then Price. After that, there's a bunch of guys you can probably put in nearly any order. Then there's JT, Westwood, Lehman, and Donald at the bottom.

> @bladehunter said:

> > @cdnglf said:

> > > @MattyO1984 said:

> > > OK here we go, I have gotten bed up of being at work and I am on a mini-strike so here is my list...tell me why I am wrong :)

> > >

> > > 1. Tiger

> > > 2. Faldo

> > > 3. Norman

> > > 4. Seve

> > > 5. McIlroy

> > > 6. Koepka

> > > 7. Singh

> > > 8. Els

> > > 9. Spieth

> > > 10. Price

> > > 11. Duval

> > > 12. DJ

> > > 13. Couples

> > > 14. Langer

> > > 15. Scott

> > > 16. Day

> > > 17. JT

> > > 18. Rose

> > > 19. Kaymer

> > > 20. Woosnam

> > > 21. Lehman

> > > 22. Westwood

> > > 23. Donald

> >

> > Koepka over Els and Singh? Vijay has something like 50 wins between the two tours!

> > Spieth over Price?

> >

>

> Yea. Keopka doesn’t get up early enough for prime Vijay. Period.

Fact.

> @MattyO1984 said:

> OK here we go, I have gotten bed up of being at work and I am on a mini-strike so here is my list...tell me why I am wrong :)

>

> 1. Tiger

> 2. Faldo

> 3. Norman

> 4. Seve

> 5. McIlroy

> 6. Koepka

> 7. Singh

> 8. Els

> 9. Spieth

> 10. Price

> 11. Duval

> 12. DJ

> 13. Couples

> 14. Langer

> 15. Scott

> 16. Day

> 17. JT

> 18. Rose

> 19. Kaymer

> 20. Woosnam

> 21. Lehman

> 22. Westwood

> 23. Donald

Really, really good list. Very similar to how I would rank them. Els, Singh, and Koepka could be shuffled. I’m putting Brooks at the bottom of those 3 till he does it for longer. I go Els first but it’s so close.

Oh, and I put Seve above Norman. Seve won 5 majors and was much more clutch. Norman could have been “Tiger great”. But just melted down mentally too often.

People forget that the ranking system had a large overhaul right around the time of TW's first (or second?) major win. Greg Norman had basically dropped off the planet and had been ranked in the top 5 for months afterward, I think. Marketing companies and media were clamoring for a clear number 1 with TW, and it didn't take long to redraw the lines.

> @golfer07840 said:

> > @MattyO1984 said:

> > Beyond the length of time Tiger has been number 1, the most astounding thing is that Duval and Singh were number 1 for 15 and 32 weeks respectively back when Tiger was Tiger.

>

> Them being #1 coincided when Tiger was making swing changes. Duval was #1 when Tiger was changing from his natural swing with Butch and Singh was #1 when Tiger was changing to his Hank Ernie's swing.

True. Ernie had crazy talent but didn’t seem to be 100% focused. Vijay tried to outwork everyone. Tiger was in Ernie's head, Vijay did all he could when he could but prime Tiger was much better. Phil is better than both but never reached #1.

Five wins is an epic year; Vijay won 9 in 2004.

Maybe the most under-appreciated season in golf history.

Ranking the rankings? Funny.

> @BMC said:

> Ranking the rankings? Funny.

It isn't ranked though, it's only ordered based on total duration as #1. Woods aside there is a lot more to consider and think about.

> @OldTomMorris said:

> > @BMC said:

> > Ranking the rankings? Funny.

> It isn't ranked though, it's only ordered based on total duration as #1. Woods aside there is a lot more to consider and think about.

Did you see this post that actually did rank the rankings of total duration at world number 1?

https://forums.golfwrx.com/discussion/comment/19045381#Comment_19045381

All No. 1.