Worst Player to win a Major?

[Petunia Sprinkle]

Brittany Lang

[Shilgy]

 

Dead Hogan beats Dead Fleck 99 times out of 100. Your boy, half dead Tiger Woods, is still trying to figure out how to hit a 100 yard wedge shot over water.

Since when does 99 times out of 100 matter if the one is the US Open?

[Boxman5]

Does the name Orville Moody ring a bell??

[mikpga]

Although I understand the premise of this question...

 

Any player who wins a Major was the BEST that week, and that is all that matters...

 

I will select Olin Dutra...

[playa]

Although I understand the premise of this question...

 

Any player who wins a Major was the BEST that week, and that is all that matters...

 

I will select Olin Dutra...

Not always the case. In the Open especially, there is a certain amount of luck involved as morning and afternoon conditions can vary greatly. A couple years ago when Rory won, Scott was arguably the best player but got absolutely hosed by the weatherthe first two days. He was in the opposite side of the draw ro Rory and had horrendous afternoon conditions Thursday, then it flipped on Friday and the bad weather was in the morning. Despite all that Rory only just beat him.

[mikpga]

Disagree.

[ronnbee]

Ben Curtis

[short game]

Ok.

 

Rich Beem.

 

But, what we ought to be talking about is how did faldo win so many majors?

[jrazz16]

My buddy was her caddy that week, worked out well for him. The rest of the time.. Not so much. Still a memory that he will have for the rest of his life.

 

 

 

Steve Jones won 8 PGA Tour events over a 10-year period. Take him off the list.

 

Everyone who won a Major deserved it, that week.

[smeech8000]

Ok.

 

Rich Beem.

 

But, what we ought to be talking about is how did faldo win so many majors?

 

Beem didn't pan out, but he never struck me as a guy who would simply because of his obvious lack of drive. I highly recommend you read Shipnuck's Bud, Sweat, & Tees - a behind-the-scenes of Beem's early struggles to make it as a professional centered around his maiden win at the 1997 Kemper Open. Steve Duplantis offers an interesting perspective on the hardscrabble life of a tour caddie.

 

But gotta give respect to a guy who went toe-to-toe with TW and came out on top during his era of dominance. Same with Y.E. Yang (and Bob May, although he didn't get the win).

 

RE: Faldo - that guy was all-world and a solid #1 ranking for nearly 2 consecutive years... so I don't understand your question. He won a ton of majors by pairing the most technically sound golf action of his day with a killer instinct mentality. Tiger basically copied Faldo's playbook - stoic, intimidating presence backed up by an unmatched work ethic and incredible amount of talent.

[Jwin323]

What do Beem and Yang have in common? They both beat Tiger on the same course, Hazeltine National. I guess it's just not Tiger's favorite track. Good thing he's not a Ryder Cupper this year.

[MattyO1984]

But, what we ought to be talking about is how did faldo win so many majors?

 

You are kidding right?

 

He was never the flashiest of players but he did things right. I always looked at him and Greg Norman as Maverick and Ice Man from Top Gun. Everyone wanted to be Maverick, Maverick was probably better but Ice Man had a better way of going about things. Just like Norman and Faldo.

[avrag]

There is no discussion about that, because the answer is so clear: Andy North.

 

Andy North has 2 Majors. 3 PGA wins. 14 wins as a professional. Five top 10's in a major. You may not be overly impressed, but it's very clearly a stat line that does NOT qualify as the worst career that still includes a major.

 

YE Yang took out Tiger head to head, so he gets points for that. And does have another PGA victory. Rich Beam has 3 victories on the PGA tour.

 

Shaun Micheel would be the most obvious answer.

 

If you had bothered to read and quote my comment in context, it would have been clear that it was in response to the question why there was no discussion about who was the worst player with more than one major.

And since Andy North did not even win two different majors, but the same one twice and since he only won one other tournament in addition to those two, I still think that the answer is pretty obvious.

[smeech8000]

There is no discussion about that, because the answer is so clear: Andy North.

 

Andy North has 2 Majors. 3 PGA wins. 14 wins as a professional. Five top 10's in a major. You may not be overly impressed, but it's very clearly a stat line that does NOT qualify as the worst career that still includes a major.

 

YE Yang took out Tiger head to head, so he gets points for that. And does have another PGA victory. Rich Beam has 3 victories on the PGA tour.

 

Shaun Micheel would be the most obvious answer.

 

If you had bothered to read and quote my comment in context, it would have been clear that it was in response to the question why there was no discussion about who was the worst player with more than one major.

And since Andy North did not even win two different majors, but the same one twice and since he only won one other tournament in addition to those two, I still think that the answer is pretty obvious.

 

I fail to see how the fact that a player won the same major diminishes the quality of the win(s). Especially the U.S. Open, which is arguably the hardest to win: largest field with the most difficult course setup, separated from the Open Championship by the fact that "The Draw" is not a perennial quirk that effectively eliminates a portion of the field from contention.

 

The fact that he only has two other full-field, individual professional wins certainly has merit, however.

[avrag]

There is no discussion about that, because the answer is so clear: Andy North.

 

Andy North has 2 Majors. 3 PGA wins. 14 wins as a professional. Five top 10's in a major. You may not be overly impressed, but it's very clearly a stat line that does NOT qualify as the worst career that still includes a major.

 

YE Yang took out Tiger head to head, so he gets points for that. And does have another PGA victory. Rich Beam has 3 victories on the PGA tour.

 

Shaun Micheel would be the most obvious answer.

 

If you had bothered to read and quote my comment in context, it would have been clear that it was in response to the question why there was no discussion about who was the worst player with more than one major.

And since Andy North did not even win two different majors, but the same one twice and since he only won one other tournament in addition to those two, I still think that the answer is pretty obvious.

 

I fail to see how the fact that a player won the same major diminishes the quality of the win(s). Especially the U.S. Open, which is arguably the hardest to win: largest field with the most difficult course setup, separated from the Open Championship by the fact that "The Draw" is not a perennial quirk that effectively eliminates a portion of the field from contention.

 

The fact that he only has two other full-field, individual professional wins certainly has merit, however.

 

Tell that (the bolded part) to every player who (aside from Tiger's stellar play) did not have a chance at the 2000 US Open because of extremely different conditions for early and late starters on Thursday and Friday.

And yes, I strongly believe that winning two US Opens in the 70s or 80s, when the courses were always set up in exactly the same way, so that it did not really matter, which course they were playing, is less of an achievement than winning an Open and a Masters for instance.

Besides, I can't think of any other player who has won more than one major but only one other tournament worldwide on the biggest tours.

[cdnglf]

There is no discussion about that, because the answer is so clear: Andy North.

 

Andy North has 2 Majors. 3 PGA wins. 14 wins as a professional. Five top 10's in a major. You may not be overly impressed, but it's very clearly a stat line that does NOT qualify as the worst career that still includes a major.

 

YE Yang took out Tiger head to head, so he gets points for that. And does have another PGA victory. Rich Beam has 3 victories on the PGA tour.

 

Shaun Micheel would be the most obvious answer.

 

If you had bothered to read and quote my comment in context, it would have been clear that it was in response to the question why there was no discussion about who was the worst player with more than one major.

And since Andy North did not even win two different majors, but the same one twice and since he only won one other tournament in addition to those two, I still think that the answer is pretty obvious.

 

I fail to see how the fact that a player won the same major diminishes the quality of the win(s). Especially the U.S. Open, which is arguably the hardest to win: largest field with the most difficult course setup, separated from the Open Championship by the fact that "The Draw" is not a perennial quirk that effectively eliminates a portion of the field from contention.

 

The fact that he only has two other full-field, individual professional wins certainly has merit, however.

 

The PGA has the best field and is thus the hardest to win - normally it has everyone from 51 to 100, while the US Open has a bunch of qualifying randos instead. Open Championship field is typically a bit better than the US Open field too. Things were different in North's time though, I think.

 

Conventional thought is that winning different majors on different courses demonstrates greater versatility and skill. In other words:

2 different majors > same major, 2 different courses > 2 wins on the same course

 

So for example, that makes Trevino's 6 majors (3 different majors, 6 different courses) better than Faldo's (2 different majors, only 3 different courses).

(Leaving era considerations aside, at least)

 

But don't ask me how to rank Lucas Glover if he wins the PGA at Bethpage in 2019.

[jmck]

Ok.

 

Rich Beem.

 

But, what we ought to be talking about is how did faldo win so many majors?

 

Beem didn't pan out, but he never struck me as a guy who would simply because of his obvious lack of drive. I highly recommend you read Shipnuck's Bud, Sweat, & Tees - a behind-the-scenes of Beem's early struggles to make it as a professional centered around his maiden win at the 1997 Kemper Open. Steve Duplantis offers an interesting perspective on the hardscrabble life of a tour caddie.

 

But gotta give respect to a guy who went toe-to-toe with TW and came out on top during his era of dominance. Same with Y.E. Yang (and Bob May, although he didn't get the win).

 

RE: Faldo - that guy was all-world and a solid #1 ranking for nearly 2 consecutive years... so I don't understand your question. He won a ton of majors by pairing the most technically sound golf action of his day with a killer instinct mentality. Tiger basically copied Faldo's playbook - stoic, intimidating presence backed up by an unmatched work ethic and incredible amount of talent.

 

Bud, Sweat, and Tees is a great golf book. Wildly underrated.

[jmck]

 

The PGA has the best field and is thus the hardest to win - normally it has everyone from 51 to 100, while the US Open has a bunch of qualifying randos instead. Open Championship field is typically a bit better than the US Open field too. Things were different in North's time though, I think.

 

Conventional thought is that winning different majors on different courses demonstrates greater versatility and skill. In other words:

2 different majors > same major, 2 different courses > 2 wins on the same course

 

So for example, that makes Trevino's 6 majors (3 different majors, 6 different courses) better than Faldo's (2 different majors, only 3 different courses).

(Leaving era considerations aside, at least)

 

But don't ask me how to rank Lucas Glover if he wins the PGA at Bethpage in 2019.

 

Disagree about the PGA being the hardest to win. IMO it's the easiest because there's less mental strain/choke potential. It's the closest of the four majors to being 'just another regular tournament.' There aren't little kids on putting greens thinking to themselves "this putt is to win the PGA." They're all thinking about winning the US or British Open or the Masters. If you want to go by strength of field alone, the Players should be the hardest to win because there aren't any club pros who are taking up spots, but again there's a lot less pressure coming down the stretch at the Players than there is at either of the Opens or the Masters. Personally I'd say the US Open is the hardest to win, followed by the British and then Augusta and the PGA. And yet Andy North and Orville Moody are out there somewhere. Go figure.

[smeech8000]

There is no discussion about that, because the answer is so clear: Andy North.

 

Andy North has 2 Majors. 3 PGA wins. 14 wins as a professional. Five top 10's in a major. You may not be overly impressed, but it's very clearly a stat line that does NOT qualify as the worst career that still includes a major.

 

YE Yang took out Tiger head to head, so he gets points for that. And does have another PGA victory. Rich Beam has 3 victories on the PGA tour.

 

Shaun Micheel would be the most obvious answer.

 

If you had bothered to read and quote my comment in context, it would have been clear that it was in response to the question why there was no discussion about who was the worst player with more than one major.

And since Andy North did not even win two different majors, but the same one twice and since he only won one other tournament in addition to those two, I still think that the answer is pretty obvious.

 

I fail to see how the fact that a player won the same major diminishes the quality of the win(s). Especially the U.S. Open, which is arguably the hardest to win: largest field with the most difficult course setup, separated from the Open Championship by the fact that "The Draw" is not a perennial quirk that effectively eliminates a portion of the field from contention.

 

The fact that he only has two other full-field, individual professional wins certainly has merit, however.

 

Tell that (the bolded part) to every player who (aside from Tiger's stellar play) did not have a chance at the 2000 US Open because of extremely different conditions for early and late starters on Thursday and Friday.

And yes, I strongly believe that winning two US Opens in the 70s or 80s, when the courses were always set up in exactly the same way, so that it did not really matter, which course they were playing, is less of an achievement than winning an Open and a Masters for instance.

Besides, I can't think of any other player who has won more than one major but only one other tournament worldwide on the biggest tours.

 

"Aside from Tiger's stellar play"... he won by 15 shots! You could've had the rest of the field playing in sunny 75* and they would not have sniffed the lead. Besides, that is a single instance; the Open Championship gets stuck with this phenomenon every year (hence "perennial"), and it weakens the field considerably.

 

To clarify - I don't doubt that Andy North is a runaway for "worst player to win 2 majors", I'm simply taking issue with the claim that 2 U.S. Opens < 1 U.S. Open+anyothermajor.

 

Can you elaborate a bit more on your statement "the courses were always set up in exactly the same way, so that it did not really matter, which course they were playing"?

[cdnglf]

"Aside from Tiger's stellar play"... he won by 15 shots! You could've had the rest of the field playing in sunny 75* and they would not have sniffed the lead. Besides, that is a single instance; the Open Championship gets stuck with this phenomenon every year (hence "perennial"), and it weakens the field considerably.

 

To clarify - I don't doubt that Andy North is a runaway for "worst player to win 2 majors", I'm simply taking issue with the claim that 2 U.S. Opens < 1 U.S. Open+anyothermajor.

 

Can you elaborate a bit more on your statement "the courses were always set up in exactly the same way, so that it did not really matter, which course they were playing"?

 

While it probably happens most frequently at the Open, it doesn't happen every year. And it does happen at other majors too - Tiger got a big boost from the weather at the 2005 Masters for example.

[smeech8000]

"Aside from Tiger's stellar play"... he won by 15 shots! You could've had the rest of the field playing in sunny 75* and they would not have sniffed the lead. Besides, that is a single instance; the Open Championship gets stuck with this phenomenon every year (hence "perennial"), and it weakens the field considerably.

 

To clarify - I don't doubt that Andy North is a runaway for "worst player to win 2 majors", I'm simply taking issue with the claim that 2 U.S. Opens < 1 U.S. Open+anyothermajor.

 

Can you elaborate a bit more on your statement "the courses were always set up in exactly the same way, so that it did not really matter, which course they were playing"?

 

While it probably happens most frequently at the Open, it doesn't happen every year.

 

This is true; some years have absolutely perfect weather and the scores show it - without heavy winds many courses in the rota are nigh defenseless.

 

Bad weather at some point on Thursday or Friday seems to occur more often than not to the point that it is a common characteristic of the tournament that sets it apart from the other three majors.

 

 

And it does happen at other majors too - Tiger got a big boost from the weather at the 2005 Masters for example.

 

That year's tournament was plagued with intermittent delays that forced some participants to sit around and wait one day, then play a lot of golf the rest. Conditions-wise, the entire field was playing a soft, lengthened golf course (due to excessive rain), at times in the rain.

 

In all fairness, that is not the same thing as the Open where on any given day you might see the morning wave in relatively benign conditions but the afternoon wave in and 20 mph winds and 30+ mph gusts (or vice-versa). Wind is the most difficult variable for players to deal with; rain can compound the difficulty but in and of itself it has far less impact on the quality of play.

[kyle75]

Shawn Micheel for the men and Birdie Kim for the women

[playa]

But, what we ought to be talking about is how did faldo win so many majors?

 

You are kidding right?

 

He was never the flashiest of players but he did things right. I always looked at him and Greg Norman as Maverick and Ice Man from Top Gun. Everyone wanted to be Maverick, Maverick was probably better but Ice Man had a better way of going about things. Just like Norman and Faldo.

Faldo is luckiest player ever in the majors. Won two Masters courtesy of epic chokes. He was certainly a great player and good enough to put himself in position to cash in on the chokes, but imo he is without doubt the worst 5 plus major champion.

[Gem]

But, what we ought to be talking about is how did faldo win so many majors?

 

You are kidding right?

 

He was never the flashiest of players but he did things right. I always looked at him and Greg Norman as Maverick and Ice Man from Top Gun. Everyone wanted to be Maverick, Maverick was probably better but Ice Man had a better way of going about things. Just like Norman and Faldo.

Faldo is luckiest player ever in the majors. Won two Masters courtesy of epic chokes. He was certainly a great player and good enough to put himself in position to cash in on the chokes, but imo he is without doubt the worst 5 plus major champion.

 

If I thought you were being serious I would be worried

[Shilgy]

But, what we ought to be talking about is how did faldo win so many majors?

 

You are kidding right?

 

He was never the flashiest of players but he did things right. I always looked at him and Greg Norman as Maverick and Ice Man from Top Gun. Everyone wanted to be Maverick, Maverick was probably better but Ice Man had a better way of going about things. Just like Norman and Faldo.

Faldo is luckiest player ever in the majors. Won two Masters courtesy of epic chokes. He was certainly a great player and good enough to put himself in position to cash in on the chokes, but imo he is without doubt the worst 5 plus major champion.

 

If I thought you were being serious I would be worried��

Hmmm already am worried for him. :)

[kiteman]

I am not that young, but young in golf and honestly I didn't even watch Tiger win a single major. Yet now I know almost every golfer on Tour. From what I've witnessed, a small sample size mind you, is that Darren Clarke is the worst player to win a major. But maybe he was good back in the day, I'd really have no idea.

[playa]

But, what we ought to be talking about is how did faldo win so many majors?

 

You are kidding right?

 

He was never the flashiest of players but he did things right. I always looked at him and Greg Norman as Maverick and Ice Man from Top Gun. Everyone wanted to be Maverick, Maverick was probably better but Ice Man had a better way of going about things. Just like Norman and Faldo.

Faldo is luckiest player ever in the majors. Won two Masters courtesy of epic chokes. He was certainly a great player and good enough to put himself in position to cash in on the chokes, but imo he is without doubt the worst 5 plus major champion.

 

If I thought you were being serious I would be worried��

So Faldo is better than any of the likes of Jack, Tiger, Player, Hogan, Snead, Nelson, Palmer Player, Watson, Trevino, Seve etc?

Hoch missed a two foot putt and Norman choked away a 6 shot lead. Don't see how my comments are that outlandish. But you go ahead and make lame, worn out personal attacks.

[cdnglf]

But, what we ought to be talking about is how did faldo win so many majors?

 

You are kidding right?

 

He was never the flashiest of players but he did things right. I always looked at him and Greg Norman as Maverick and Ice Man from Top Gun. Everyone wanted to be Maverick, Maverick was probably better but Ice Man had a better way of going about things. Just like Norman and Faldo.

Faldo is luckiest player ever in the majors. Won two Masters courtesy of epic chokes. He was certainly a great player and good enough to put himself in position to cash in on the chokes, but imo he is without doubt the worst 5 plus major champion.

 

If I thought you were being serious I would be worried��

So Faldo is better than any of the likes of Jack, Tiger, Player, Hogan, Snead, Nelson, Palmer Player, Watson, Trevino, Seve etc?

Hoch missed a two foot putt and Norman choked away a 6 shot lead. Don't see how my comments are that outlandish. But you go ahead and make lame, worn out personal attacks.

 

Faldo might be second worst with 5+ majors, after Peter Thomson. The Open wasn't really a major back then.

[playa]

To be fair none of the majors were really majors back in those days, and the Open was a sought after trophy. Thompson played one season on the Senior Tour and had one of the most dominant seasons ever, so who knows what he would have done if he played in America.

[Gem]

But, what we ought to be talking about is how did faldo win so many majors?

 

You are kidding right?

 

He was never the flashiest of players but he did things right. I always looked at him and Greg Norman as Maverick and Ice Man from Top Gun. Everyone wanted to be Maverick, Maverick was probably better but Ice Man had a better way of going about things. Just like Norman and Faldo.

Faldo is luckiest player ever in the majors. Won two Masters courtesy of epic chokes. He was certainly a great player and good enough to put himself in position to cash in on the chokes, but imo he is without doubt the worst 5 plus major champion.

 

If I thought you were being serious I would be worried��

So Faldo is better than any of the likes of Jack, Tiger, Player, Hogan, Snead, Nelson, Palmer Player, Watson, Trevino, Seve etc?

Hoch missed a two foot putt and Norman choked away a 6 shot lead. Don't see how my comments are that outlandish. But you go ahead and make lame, worn out personal attacks.

 

You don't realise how silly it is to say that someone who has won six majors as 'lucky'?

Also to try and class anyone that has five+ majors in a worst off poll is also a bit bonkers.