Faldo vs. Mickelson, who was better?

[Body_Visions]

Hanging out with a buddy, nothing better to do.

 

I am keeping my opinion to myself for now, but how do you rank them?

 

 

 

 

[Hawkeye77]

Faldo

[dalillama47]

Faldo

[Old Tom Morris]

If Mickleson had Faldo’s mental discipline he could have won as many majors as Tiger. That being said, Phil can still win the Masters or PGA Championship the next few years.

[Bigjim1022]

I’d say Faldo also. Similar # of career wins, Faldo has one more Major but Phil won 3 of the 4. Edge still goes to Faldo, 97 weeks at #1 in the world is not nothing.

[bscinstnct]

I’d go with Phil.

 

And you couldn’t ask for 2 guys with more disparate dispositions on the game. Yet, who did it “their way” and rose to the very top of their games.

 

California Phil, devil may care, roll the dice, what’s a fairway? Hit that driver, shoot the gap in the trees, it’s the thrill he lives for.

 

Then we have....Sir Nick. Stoic, Steely eyed, planned, prepared, stick the the script, let the others make mistakes.

 

Thats what makes sports so great. The expression of the “artist”. Phil is Picasso, no rules. Faldo is Giotto, disciplined is his scope. Yet both breathtaking in their craft.

 

I give the edge to Phil because we will never know how great he would have been had he not been in the TW era prime.

 

Plus, he has won 3 or the 4 majors (Faldo has won 2 of them) including an Open which he said was a true culmination of everything he learned playing golf and the decades he spent playing in the U.K.

[LifeStory]

Mickelson

[OldTomMorris]

Faldo by a whisker.

[Golfingfanatic]

Faldo

[Ferguson]

Sir Nick.

 

Phil is not even falcon close.

 

 

[the bishop]

Interesting question. If it were just a question of skillset I'd say Phil easily. Not a knock on Faldo but Phil has a lot more tools in the toolbox. If I had to pick one I'd say Faldo by a whisker but can't argue with those who pick Phil.

[gvogel]

No chance.

[MattyO1984]

I’m going with Faldo but not by much. Phil is a more complete player physically but Faldo got more out of the ability he had and his mind is well above and beyond Phil.

[Fuscinator]

Phil and Faldo are like what MCU Thor and Loki were like as kids.

[tiderider]

phil ... his prime years were during tiger's rise to dominance ... tough ask for anyone to reach #1 ... plus, he had an outstanding amateur career ...

[dmac4g]

Faldo wins easily based solely on the crazy girlfriend category. Anyone else remember the girlfriend taking a 7-iron to his car..............

[Lark]

Phil. If Faldo played the prime years of his career at the same time that Tiger was in his prime, I don't think he would have had the same accomplishments.

[cdnglf]

Phil won The Match. What did Faldo ever do?

[disco111]

Faldo: Six wins, three seconds, three thirds, 19 top-fives, 24 top-10s.Mickelson: Five wins, nine seconds, seven thirds, 28 top-fives, 38 top-10s.

Those are for the Majors

Faldo - 41 total wins (30 on the Euro Tour)

Mickelson - 44 total wins (PGA Tour)

I go with Phil..........

[RainShadow]

Honestly hard to compare.

Faldo more like Hogan in his precision approach.

Phil more like Arnie with his go for it style.

Phil wins on overall record in majors and longevity IMO

Sir Nick was no slouch, though.

[nitram]

Faldo was a boa constrictor with the lead. While not as exciting as Phil, he knew how to close.

[VNutz]

These two couldn't be more different, the yin and yang of golf the last 30+ years.

 

I go with Faldo. In the late 80s thru the mid 90s he was just so solid, such a terminator, albeit not much fun. He was a true professional at a time when course management actually meant something, unlike today. I think his career arc would have been significantly different had the game not changed so drastically as he got older. Between his 96 Masters victory and Tiger's in 97 the sun set on his type very quickly. He was a man who played with precision and control, which the game suddenly no longer valued, and was too old to become a bomber.

 

Somebody stated above something along the lines that if Phil had Faldo's determination or work ethic he could have eclipsed him by far, and I fully agree. Just compare the 87 Open final round in which Faldo won with 18 straight pars vs Phil's approach down the stretch at Winged Foot; they couldn't be more different of players. There were also several comments that Phil could have been so much more without Tiger in his way, which I think is true, but at the same time I'm not sure he would have raised his game to that level without the drive to chase Tiger down.

[mizuno player]

Phil.

[Dpavs]

Hard to compare because we are comparing stats accumulated from two different tours essentially.

But I am going to go with Phil based on the PGA stats and given that the combined 1st and 2nd place finish percentages on the European tour are not nearly that different.

Nick 306 events won 9, finished second in 7 = 16 total 1st or 2nd place.. =16/306=5.5%

Phil 622 events won 44, second in 36 total of 80 1st or second place. =80/622=12.8%

Euro Stats-

Nick 33 wins, 33 seconds out of 440 events =66/440=15%

Phil 10 wins, 15 seconds out of 192 events =25/192=13%

 

[dalehead]

Depends on how you define better. Based on playing record they’re close. Phil 5 majors and 44 PGA Tour victories. Nick 6 majors 41 professional victories. Phil has him on longevity. Nick was the better thinker and strategist. Nick had a great all around game but nothing stood out. Phil had the phenomenal short game. Nick was number one in the world for a total of 97 weeks, but he didn’t have to compete with Tiger for that spot. Commercial success inside and outside of golf? Phil. Fan appeal? I know the Brits will disagree, but Phil. I guess you could say I feel very strongly both ways.

[PhilWhitUK]

This is such an easy yet hard question!! I would rather watch Phil in his prime but do respect Faldo and love watching him on the repeats of Golf Academy that are being shown during lockdown here in the UK.

If Phil had Faldo’s mental game - wow that would have been something.....

It is also amazing how quickly Faldo dropped away having handed the Green Jacket to Tiger. If I recall correctly within a few years they were playing at Bethpage Black and Faldo was claiming he couldn’t reach the fairway on a couple of holes. Worth remembering though that in his book Faldo mentions he gave up length when working with Leadbetter to gain a solid reliable swing.

So my answer is:

Respect - Faldo

Watch - Phil

[puttingmatt]

Both have their own specific skill sets and play the game from different sides of the tee.

For me, its to close to compare, Faldo was from the persimmons era and Phil from the more modern equipment era. So I am left with undecided.

[Christosterone]

kind of a photo finish...

phill has 33 or so top 10 finishes in majors to falcons 25 or so...

though nick closed one more time...

 

id go with Phil....he won more on his primary tour and 1 more than nick on their respective second tours...

but it’s really close imho

[Hawkeye77]

The number one carries some weight with me.

Faldo also had to deal with Norman who dominated number one for a long, long time, so yes, Phil had Tiger out there but that is making excuses.

Phil had plenty of opportunities to rise to #1 and simply never managed.

Just my view on that one aspect of what colors it for me a bit.

Hardly a nickel’s worth of difference, IMO.

[Dan Drake]

Great question! My answer is that Mickelson's greater body of work TIES Faldo's additional major and #1 ranking.

But Phil isn't finished.......

I genuinely believe that Phil's "A" game is still good enough to put him in contention on the back 9 on a Sunday at certain majors held at certain courses.