MAJOR FLUKES

[sprtsfrek21]

According to majors, which champion was the biggest fluke.

[BRENTY]

BEN CURTIS

[wholeinwon]

Ben Curtis...and easy with the caps.

[choppy44]

I agree with Ben Curtis, but how about the double major fluke with Andy North?

[kkhere]

Shaun Micheel or Curtis. Some may feel Rich Beem but he won the Kemper before it and has had good finishes after his major and i don't think at all he is a fluke

[TReed]

I'll go with Ben Curtis

[magee99]

Don't foget about Paul Lawrie.

 

Does Francis Ouimette count?

[thejosh31]

Jack Fleck

[dux2000]

Jack Fleck. He beat Hogan straight up, which you can only do if youre a great player or have no idea what youre doing.

[golfsll]

i would have to say TIGER WOODS !!!! plus the three he will win this year. just kidding, that would have to be Ben Curtis/Rich Beem. but I only say BEEMER for the dance he graced us with.

[Cmack42976]

I'll go with Todd Hamilton

[Lord Thomas]

There have been a few very....unexpected.....major champions, recently guys like Ben Curtis / Todd Hamilton / Rich Beem / Shaun Micheel stick out, but going back a few years there have been a number of unexpected winners, with guys like Steve Jones in the 1996 US Open, or Ian Baker-Finch in the 1991 British Open.

 

-Thomas

[Damo75]

I'll take a different tack and say the biggest fluke to win a major has to be Larry Mize.

 

Ben Curtis is probably the worst player to win one, recently at least, but you can't really fluke 4 good rounds in a row. I'd say it's more just luck that he happened to play well that particular week.

 

Back to my first sentence though - anyone can fluke 1 shot, so I'm sticking with Mize.

[Golfchicago]

I gotta go with Todd Hamilton

[alexandre]

I would go with Tiger Woods!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[creecool]

LARRY MIZE AND HIS NORMAN CAREER MAJOR AUGUSTA KILLER CHIP IN!!!!!

[villa]

It's got to be Larry Mize! Greg must still be having nightmares about that.

 

Don't agree with Ben Curtis or Todd Hamilton. At the end of the day they played 4 rounds and won.

Paul Lawrie was lucky to get in a play off but even he had to get it done in the end.

[albiefresh]

It's got to be Larry Mize! Greg must still be having nightmares about that.

 

Don't agree with Ben Curtis or Todd Hamilton. At the end of the day they played 4 rounds and won.

Paul Lawrie was lucky to get in a play off but even he had to get it done in the end.

 

I don't understand - was the Master only 2 rounds in 1987 or something? As I recall, Mize played 4 rounds to get in the playoff and then won the playoff. By the way, Todd Hamilton's win was also in a playoff, so your logic fails me.

 

I'd have to go with Curtis. He didn't do anything before his major and has done nothing since. Hamilton has 1 other PGA Tour win and several in Japan. Mize won 3 or 4 other times on Tour. Lawrie was a semi-consistent winner on the European Tour at the time. Beem has won a couple of times on Tour as well.

[golfhawaii]

I'll go with Todd Hamilton

 

Todd Hamilton dominated on the Japan Tour. He also won the Honda Classic the same year he won the british, how is he a fluke?

[nikemike]

Ben Curtis for sure. He was a lucky sob with the bounces going the right way for him.

 

As mentioned, Todd Hamilton was established on the Japan Tour. Americans just didn't know much about him.

[HipCheck]

Take your pick:

 

Todd Hamilton

Ben Curtis

Shawn Micheel

Paul Lawrie

Mark Brooks

Larry Mize

 

All just proof you can play real well for a weekend and have some things fall into your lap.

[villa]

It's got to be Larry Mize! Greg must still be having nightmares about that.

 

Don't agree with Ben Curtis or Todd Hamilton. At the end of the day they played 4 rounds and won.

Paul Lawrie was lucky to get in a play off but even he had to get it done in the end.

 

I don't understand - was the Master only 2 rounds in 1987 or something? As I recall, Mize played 4 rounds to get in the playoff and then won the playoff. By the way, Todd Hamilton's win was also in a playoff, so your logic fails me.

 

I'd have to go with Curtis. He didn't do anything before his major and has done nothing since. Hamilton has 1 other PGA Tour win and several in Japan. Mize won 3 or 4 other times on Tour. Lawrie was a semi-consistent winner on the European Tour at the time. Beem has won a couple of times on Tour as well.

 

The subject is major flukes, not the worst player to win a major.

 

My opinion was based on the fact that Larry Mize's bunker shot was the luckiest i've seen to win a major.

If it hadn't have gone in it surely would've given Greg Norman victory.

 

I agree that Todd Hamilton went through a play off as well but I don't see how he fluked his win?

[sprtsfrek21]

As the writer of this topic, i wouldn't call Francis Ouimet a fluke. He had to of played some great golf to outplay guys like Harry Vardon or Ted Ray.

[albiefresh]

It's got to be Larry Mize! Greg must still be having nightmares about that.

 

Don't agree with Ben Curtis or Todd Hamilton. At the end of the day they played 4 rounds and won.

Paul Lawrie was lucky to get in a play off but even he had to get it done in the end.

 

I don't understand - was the Master only 2 rounds in 1987 or something? As I recall, Mize played 4 rounds to get in the playoff and then won the playoff. By the way, Todd Hamilton's win was also in a playoff, so your logic fails me.

 

I'd have to go with Curtis. He didn't do anything before his major and has done nothing since. Hamilton has 1 other PGA Tour win and several in Japan. Mize won 3 or 4 other times on Tour. Lawrie was a semi-consistent winner on the European Tour at the time. Beem has won a couple of times on Tour as well.

 

The subject is major flukes, not the worst player to win a major.

 

My opinion was based on the fact that Larry Mize's bunker shot was the luckiest i've seen to win a major.

If it hadn't have gone in it surely would've given Greg Norman victory.

 

I agree that Todd Hamilton went through a play off as well but I don't see how he fluked his win?

 

Well - since you seem to think that Larry Mize holed a bunker shot to beat Norman, you clearly do not know much about the '87 Masters and it clearly can't be the luckiest shot you have seen, since you clearly haven't seen it. And how you can possibly say that Norman would have likely gone on to win if Mize's chip hadn't gone in, I really don't know. Put in your words, Mize played all four rounds (and 2 holes) and came out on top. How that is different from your thoughts on Curtis and Hamilton is beyond me - but to each his own.

[mat562]

Ben Curtis. He did play 4 rounds which were consistent and held it together down the closing stretch, but it was still a bit of a fluke...

 

Mark Brooks is a close call though. I've seen him hit balls, and the average good 2 handicapper hits it better tee to green.

 

Just goes to show that there's "something" that the pro's have over the rest of us when it comes to the total package. I'm a hover around a decent 1 and 2-handicap, and I haven't got a USPGA trophy on the mantle...

[Simp]

I agree with Ben Curtis, but how about the double major fluke with Andy North?

 

So I guess that Goosen is in Andy's category as well then huh? You don't win 2 majors by being a fluke.

[Damo75]

It's got to be Larry Mize! Greg must still be having nightmares about that.

 

Don't agree with Ben Curtis or Todd Hamilton. At the end of the day they played 4 rounds and won.

Paul Lawrie was lucky to get in a play off but even he had to get it done in the end.

 

I don't understand - was the Master only 2 rounds in 1987 or something? As I recall, Mize played 4 rounds to get in the playoff and then won the playoff. By the way, Todd Hamilton's win was also in a playoff, so your logic fails me.

 

I'd have to go with Curtis. He didn't do anything before his major and has done nothing since. Hamilton has 1 other PGA Tour win and several in Japan. Mize won 3 or 4 other times on Tour. Lawrie was a semi-consistent winner on the European Tour at the time. Beem has won a couple of times on Tour as well.

 

Yeah, Mize played 4 rounds to get in the playoff, but so did Norman, and from memory Seve. The fact is that Mize still won by hitting one fluke shot.

 

Ben Curtis won outright after 72 holes - beat everybody. Hamilton won a 4 hole playoff against Ernie. Surely you can't possibly say it's more of a fluke that Hamilton played 4 rock-solid holes, compared to Mize pulling a 40 yard pitch out of his Word not allowed across the green at Augusta, just by saying they're both playoffs?

 

I'm sticking with Mize. He got into the playoff by playing well, but he won by a fluke shot.

[villa]

It's got to be Larry Mize! Greg must still be having nightmares about that.

 

Don't agree with Ben Curtis or Todd Hamilton. At the end of the day they played 4 rounds and won.

Paul Lawrie was lucky to get in a play off but even he had to get it done in the end.

 

I don't understand - was the Master only 2 rounds in 1987 or something? As I recall, Mize played 4 rounds to get in the playoff and then won the playoff. By the way, Todd Hamilton's win was also in a playoff, so your logic fails me.

 

I'd have to go with Curtis. He didn't do anything before his major and has done nothing since. Hamilton has 1 other PGA Tour win and several in Japan. Mize won 3 or 4 other times on Tour. Lawrie was a semi-consistent winner on the European Tour at the time. Beem has won a couple of times on Tour as well.

 

The subject is major flukes, not the worst player to win a major.

 

My opinion was based on the fact that Larry Mize's bunker shot was the luckiest i've seen to win a major.

If it hadn't have gone in it surely would've given Greg Norman victory.

 

I agree that Todd Hamilton went through a play off as well but I don't see how he fluked his win?

 

Well - since you seem to think that Larry Mize holed a bunker shot to beat Norman, you clearly do not know much about the '87 Masters and it clearly can't be the luckiest shot you have seen, since you clearly haven't seen it. And how you can possibly say that Norman would have likely gone on to win if Mize's chip hadn't gone in, I really don't know. Put in your words, Mize played all four rounds (and 2 holes) and came out on top. How that is different from your thoughts on Curtis and Hamilton is beyond me - but to each his own.

 

My apologies, have to hold my hands up. I was typing this at work yesterday and I do know it wasn't a bunker shot. Must have had bunkers on my mind!

 

It's still the flukiest shot i've seen to win a major and without causing another uproar, I thought that was the point of the topic.

[albiefresh]

It's got to be Larry Mize! Greg must still be having nightmares about that.

 

Don't agree with Ben Curtis or Todd Hamilton. At the end of the day they played 4 rounds and won.

Paul Lawrie was lucky to get in a play off but even he had to get it done in the end.

 

I don't understand - was the Master only 2 rounds in 1987 or something? As I recall, Mize played 4 rounds to get in the playoff and then won the playoff. By the way, Todd Hamilton's win was also in a playoff, so your logic fails me.

 

I'd have to go with Curtis. He didn't do anything before his major and has done nothing since. Hamilton has 1 other PGA Tour win and several in Japan. Mize won 3 or 4 other times on Tour. Lawrie was a semi-consistent winner on the European Tour at the time. Beem has won a couple of times on Tour as well.

 

Yeah, Mize played 4 rounds to get in the playoff, but so did Norman, and from memory Seve. The fact is that Mize still won by hitting one fluke shot.

 

Ben Curtis won outright after 72 holes - beat everybody. Hamilton won a 4 hole playoff against Ernie. Surely you can't possibly say it's more of a fluke that Hamilton played 4 rock-solid holes, compared to Mize pulling a 40 yard pitch out of his Word not allowed across the green at Augusta, just by saying they're both playoffs?

 

I'm sticking with Mize. He got into the playoff by playing well, but he won by a fluke shot.

 

Wow - you can win a 74 hole golf tournament with one shot? I didn't know that - sign me up. I think he hit several hundred shots before that and the one that finished it off was a chip shot. I'd bet that during the other 73 holes, Norman holed a long chip shot or long putt that counted the same amount of strokes as Mize's chip shot.

 

We can agree to disagree. I don't see Mize's chip as a fluke. If it had bounced off of a tree and gone in, that's a fluke.

 

Curtis's victory to me was a fluke. He had no success on the Tour before or since, he played a track that had lucky bounces factoring in all week, and his ball bounced the luckiest of all. That - to me - is the definition of a fluke.

[Damo75]

It's got to be Larry Mize! Greg must still be having nightmares about that.

 

Don't agree with Ben Curtis or Todd Hamilton. At the end of the day they played 4 rounds and won.

Paul Lawrie was lucky to get in a play off but even he had to get it done in the end.

 

I don't understand - was the Master only 2 rounds in 1987 or something? As I recall, Mize played 4 rounds to get in the playoff and then won the playoff. By the way, Todd Hamilton's win was also in a playoff, so your logic fails me.

 

I'd have to go with Curtis. He didn't do anything before his major and has done nothing since. Hamilton has 1 other PGA Tour win and several in Japan. Mize won 3 or 4 other times on Tour. Lawrie was a semi-consistent winner on the European Tour at the time. Beem has won a couple of times on Tour as well.

 

Yeah, Mize played 4 rounds to get in the playoff, but so did Norman, and from memory Seve. The fact is that Mize still won by hitting one fluke shot.

 

Ben Curtis won outright after 72 holes - beat everybody. Hamilton won a 4 hole playoff against Ernie. Surely you can't possibly say it's more of a fluke that Hamilton played 4 rock-solid holes, compared to Mize pulling a 40 yard pitch out of his Word not allowed across the green at Augusta, just by saying they're both playoffs?

 

I'm sticking with Mize. He got into the playoff by playing well, but he won by a fluke shot.

 

Wow - you can win a 74 hole golf tournament with one shot? I didn't know that - sign me up. I think he hit several hundred shots before that and the one that finished it off was a chip shot. I'd bet that during the other 73 holes, Norman holed a long chip shot or long putt that counted the same amount of strokes as Mize's chip shot.

 

We can agree to disagree. I don't see Mize's chip as a fluke. If it had bounced off of a tree and gone in, that's a fluke.

 

Curtis's victory to me was a fluke. He had no success on the Tour before or since, he played a track that had lucky bounces factoring in all week, and his ball bounced the luckiest of all. That - to me - is the definition of a fluke.

 

Exactly - I would say you can win a 74 hole( or 73 hole, or 75 etc.) with one shot when it comes to sudden death playoffs. Ask Scott Verplank if Craig Parry won with 1 shot at Doral. I bet he says yes.

 

I don't see how you can say "during the other 73 holes, Norman holed a long chip shot or long putt that counted the same amount of strokes as Mize's chip shot", but when Ben Curtis does it (and I don't recall him getting any more/less lucky/unlucky bounces than anyone else) in 72 holes by hitting good shots and holing putts and having less hits than everyone else, it's a fluke? I didn't see any of his shots bounce in off trees. :drinks:

 

Curtis hasn't had any success on tour since, but neither did Jeff Sluman for a long time after he won the PGA. Curtis still has several years to go before he gets in that category.

 

Mize played the 11th hole in the playoff poorly. He ceratinaly didn't end up 40 yards from the hole on purpose - he carved his 2nd shot way right. And if his pitch hadn't gone in, it would have been lucky to stay out of the water going down the hill on that green.

 

Anyways, like you said, we can agree to disagree.