Faldo vs. Mickelson, who was better?

[cdnglf]

Figjam: 1 New World 5th major

Sir Nick: 4 Old World 5th majors

[braincramp52]

No brainer. Phil did what he did playing against Tiger.

[MountainGoat]

Faldo, and it’s not close.

[CasualLie]

Figjam comfortably; just ask him.

The 1 less major is overcome by Phil's 10x number of wins on the PGA Tour, winning at TPC, and 2 WGC events. Faldo played his prime years in the minor leagues - big fish in small pond.

And as others pointed out, the longevity. Once Faldo hit age 39 and saw the new crop of bombers on tour, particularly Tiger, he was out.

[bscinstnct]

 

How ya figure?

 

Similar victory count, majors included. And Faldo only has 2 sides of the career Impregnable Quadrilateral.

 

Phil has 3 sides.

 

How is it “not even close”?

 

I mean, Tiger vs Faldo, now that’s “not even close” ; )

[MountainGoat]

It's an unsupported opinion. That's what we do here. Faldo was an executioner; Mickelson cracks under pressure and makes stupid decisions. We just like to laud him for the ones that worked out. Faldo had more craftsmanship; Mickelson had more talent. Faldo will play a hole 3-iron, 3-iron, putter to make a birdie if that's what the hole called for. Mickelson would hit a tree with a wild drive, sneak a SW thru a small gap, and drain a long putt to make one on the same hole. I would pick Faldo in his prime to play for my life.

[PowderedToastMan]

Phil is criminally underrated on this forum, that’s what I know for sure.

[braincramp52]

Sorry, I don't buy it. You don't win 45 times with 5 majors and "crack" under pressure. All golfers have cracked at one time or another. Phil choked at one U.S. Open, the rest he was beaten.

[bscinstnct]

 

Thats not unsupported, you make good points. I’d just counter that Phil has closed 44 pga tour wins, 9th all time, so he doesn’t “crack under pressure” as a rule.

 

His style suits his game. Or perhaps it’s his game that suits his style.

 

Faldo doesn’t take this shot, Phil does. Who’s better for it? ; )

 

Im just saying that while their methods differ greatly, the results are very close.

 

 

 

[gvogel]

Phil, immensely talented, didn't quite live up to expectations.

Faldo, through grit and determination, able to raise his game in some to most important events.

Now, that might be the scribe's narrative, but i think that it rings true.

[Darth Putter]

Phil's non major record makes him the winner.

 

 

Faldo's six major wins

1987 British Open: Azinger bogeys 17 and 18, Faldo wins by 1 with 18 pars.

1989 Masters: Scott Hoch misses a two footer

1990 Masters: Ray Floyd splash

1990 British Open: Nick rolls by 5

1992 British Open: John Cook 3 putts at 17 and bogeys 18

1996 Masters: Greg Norman

 

Feasting on the wounded like a true predator, he should have been called the Great White Shark

 

 

 

 

 

[Darth Putter]

Not to mention Nick's massive swing change in 1985. He had a good career up to that point, Order of Merit winner, lots of Euro Tour titles, but he wanted majors.

 

And it worked.

[Darth Putter]

 

Nick had to get up into the trees

 

[deadsolid...shank]

Roy Macavoy and David Simms!?

[Philomathesq]

One is a knight, the other has nice calves.

Sir Nick by a mile.

[freowho]

I was undecided until your post. Easy to forget how often Phil put himself in the picture.

[grm24]

Phil didn't live up to expectations??? There is nobody and I repeat nobody that ever expected Phil to win as much as he actually did on tour. What expectations are you assigning to Phil that he didn't live up to?

[iBanesto]

Faldo had an 81 week streak where he was the best player in the world during the Norman era.

It counts for a lot when you can say you are the best the player in the world.

Europe at a certain point had Ballesteros, Langer, Lyle, Woosnam and Olazabal competing on the ET. The tour was probably more competitive than what most people think.

[OldTomMorris]

You could make that hypothetical argument for every player in history including Woods and I don't believe it's valid at all. Here's one, Woods the same time as Hogan I don't think he would have the same accomplishments.

[Golfingfanatic]

ET during the Faldo Era was pretty top heavy. Very stiff competition.

[the bishop]

Maybe criminally underrated, but Fergeson doesn't underrate him criminally.

[Lark]

But Faldo never played his prime years at the same time against anyone near the level of Tiger. Phil did. When comparing Faldo and Phil, IMO that is a valid and important consideration.

[Hawkeye77]

Phil was a phenom. Phil won early and often but couldn't win majors. Came out with 10 wins (not including his am win) in his first 5 years on Tour. Who was number one Phil's first few seasons? Faldo - the phenom couldn't overtake him. From '92 and through 2005 and beyond, number ones included Faldo, Price, Norman, Els, Lehman, Singh, Duval, Westwood, Donald - they manage to get to number one during the Tiger era, Phil couldn't manage it. Just food for thought.

And still Tiger or no, why comparing players of different eras (although Phil and Faldo overlapped a bit) just doesn't get very far because of all the hedging and qualifying either way, but it's still fun to do.

[OldTomMorris]

That's true but you could make a case that Faldo played against a better group in Norman, Seve, Langer, Watson, Price etc.

Phil and Tiger were barely on at the same time in regular events let alone majors.

It can be interesting to compare across eras but I think it's unfair and massively flawed.

[Lark]

Phil hit his prime, best play in his 30s. Like Ben Hogan. Hogan never beat Nelson early in his career, but most consider Hogan better overall.

[Lark]

Better than Tiger, Els, Vijay, Duval, Rory, Rose, etc? Tough case to make overall, but Tiger gives Phil’s era the edge

[OldTomMorris]

I get the argument but still don't agree with your logic. I think most would concede it's a very close call regardless of whoever one decides in favour of.

[PowderedToastMan]

Who won 9 times in a season during Faldo’s career? Vijay Singh did it in 2004 during Tiger AND Phil’s prime. It’s hard to get to number 1 when you’re competing against two players who’ve flirted with double digit wins in a single season.

Being the consistent number 2 to Tiger Woods during Tigermania for the better part of a decade should be equivalent to being a world number 1.

[disco111]

Now add in Phil's 10 ET wins and lets see if that changes anyone's position..................

[bscinstnct]

 

Ernie Els has 28 Euro Tour wins (7th all time) and 19 PGA Tour wins. He has 4 Majors. You could argue that Ernie himself gives Faldo a run for his money.

 

Then, VJ, 47 combined PGA Tour/Euro wins and 3 Majors.

 

And then TW himself, of course, who basically has won as much as 3 or 4 HoF players...all by himself, lol. I mean, Phil was playing a guy who was winning ine out of three events he played in, inclining majors, for like 10 years...

 

That’s like playing against 2 or three guys with 5 Majors and 30 wins each! Then add Ernie and VJ and the rest.

 

I think they both had stiff competition and are of similar caliber overall. And it’s cool that they are so different in how they play the game but both were very elite players.