Top 10 all timers

Status
Not open for further replies.
Erik_K

Erik_K

New
Burner said:
Yup, it was so brilliant it was just 1 shot better than Ian Poulter.
Click to expand...

So the margin of victory is what defines a great round?

As I said before, it's one of the better rounds I've seen on TV. I haven't watched as many rounds of competitive golf as some of the other posters. I want to say there was one event (WGC maybe?) where David Toms had some insane number of birdies and was just playing beautifully. This is obviously very subjective. I just look at the circumstances and how Phil was five shots back at one point. That 3W from 300+ yards out is still in my head! What a shot!

Just about every golf championship is close. No matter how well anyone plays they end of winning by only a stroke or two.
 
R

rogerdodger

New
Virtuoso said:
I watched Miller hit when he was in his 50's and he striped it.

Played with Weiskopf not to long ago and he striped it.

Played with Miller Barber about 6 years ago and he didn't hit it long but he had zero side spin. RIP

Watched Trevino in his 60's and was super pure.

Also surprised I don't see Jones on more lists, and I wonder why Player is so underrated.
Click to expand...

Why is Player so underrated? technically, as he won the grand slam he should rank above Palmer, Snead and those players who failed to win all four majors. He never had a great looking swing, was not considered a great ball striker but his short game was fantastic. He definitely is underrated.
 
D

DCgolf

New
Nicklaus,
Woods,
Hogan,
Jones,
Vardon,
Hagen,
Player,
Snead,
Nelson,
Sarazen.

Phil is a bullet tho!

Not to threadjack... but for those of you old enough, I've got a question: Phil vs Seve from 50 yards?
 
B

Brian Manzella

Administrator
Player had a great swing.

I did my list in 10 minutes....maybe 9.

Jones is easily on any list....but I missed him.

Call my list the Top 10 Pro list done under 10....
 
D

DCgolf

New
I think if I picked a player who dominated one era more than anyone, it might be Jones 1923-1930. In his last 9 US Opens he was 1st or 2nd, 8 times! (he was actually 1 or T1 6 times!) And in his last 12 Opens (British or US) he was 1st or 2nd 11 times! Era comparisons are so difficult: If we talk of best ever in terms of dominating their time, it's tough to leave Vardon, Willie Anderson, Tom Morris types off the list...
 
L

Lifter

New
DCgolf said:
for those of you old enough, I've got a question: Phil vs Seve from 50 yards?
Click to expand...

DCgolf,

I'm young but it seems to me that the answer is Seve. Phil has had problems with short putts for long stretches of his career. Did Seve ever have the kind of problems Phil has had with short putts?
 
D

DCgolf

New
Good point. I think Phil also has the 60 and 64 degree wedge to his credit. I can only imagine what Seve might have done with those in his hands.
 
mgranato

mgranato

New
Erik_K said:
So the margin of victory is what defines a great round?

As I said before, it's one of the better rounds I've seen on TV. I haven't watched as many rounds of competitive golf as some of the other posters. I want to say there was one event (WGC maybe?) where David Toms had some insane number of birdies and was just playing beautifully. This is obviously very subjective. I just look at the circumstances and how Phil was five shots back at one point. That 3W from 300+ yards out is still in my head! What a shot!

Just about every golf championship is close. No matter how well anyone plays they end of winning by only a stroke or two.
Click to expand...

Don't pay 'em no mind, E. They're just mad that the Jug is leaving the homeland and will be pouring something that doesn't look like carbonated motor oil.

keep-calm-cause-haters-gonna-hate-5.png


:p:D
 
M

ms1170

New
I think that Palmer gets overrated and Player gets underrated. Not that it was Palmers fault, but he got a whole bunch of wins in a time period that was somewhat weak. The late 50's was after Hogan, Snead, Nelson, but before Nicklaus, and Player's prime. It's kind of like Larry Holmes in boxing.
 
mgranato

mgranato

New
Minimum of 5 majors, minimum of 3 of the 4, the number in () are years between first and last won...

1. Nicklaus (24)
2. Woods (11)
3. Hagan (15)
4. Player (19)
5. Hogan (7)
6. Watson (8)
7. Sarazen (13)
8. Sneed (12)
9. Trevino (16)
10. Mickelson (11)
 
Last edited:
Burner

Burner

New
Erik_K said:
So the margin of victory is what defines a great round?

As I said before, it's one of the better rounds I've seen on TV. I haven't watched as many rounds of competitive golf as some of the other posters. I want to say there was one event (WGC maybe?) where David Toms had some insane number of birdies and was just playing beautifully. This is obviously very subjective. I just look at the circumstances and how Phil was five shots back at one point. That 3W from 300+ yards out is still in my head! What a shot!

Just about every golf championship is close. No matter how well anyone plays they end of winning by only a stroke or two.
Click to expand...

Notwithstanding Phils brilliance and how spectacular his final round was, it was still only one shot better than Dufner, as ms1170 points out, and Poulter.
Just sayin' and in complete absence of hating, despite totally erroneous suggestions to the contrary..
 
duckjr78

duckjr78

New
Okay, since "one of the best rounds ever" seems to be a bit of a tough sell, how about "one of the best back 9's ever?"

This would at least seem to rival Charl's back 9 at Augusta for best in recent memory.
 
faux_maestro

faux_maestro

New
Burner said:
Notwithstanding Phils brilliance and how spectacular his final round was, it was still only one shot better than Dufner, as ms1170 points out, and Poulter.
Just sayin' and in complete absence of hating, despite totally erroneous suggestions to the contrary..
Click to expand...

Isn't there a difference between being 5 back shooting 66 to win and shooting 67 to finish T3 (4 back) or T26 (11 back)?

P.S. Phil isn't in my top 10 but if he wins the U.S. Open he is.
 
Last edited:
Burner

Burner

New
faux_maestro said:
Isn't there a difference between being 5 back shooting 66 to win and shooting 67 to finish T3 (4 back) or T26 (11 back)?

P.S. Phil isn't in my top 10 but if he wins the U.S. Open he is.
Click to expand...

At the start of the final day each of the three guys in question were faced with the same course and the same objective, to shoot as low as possible. Phil shot 5 under, Jason and Ian shot 4 under. That is all I am saying.

Just introducing some perspective - the capacity to view things in their true relations or relative importance.
 
faux_maestro

faux_maestro

New
Burner said:
the capacity to view things in their true relations or relative importance.
Click to expand...

Which is why Mickelson's round has to be viewed differently, right? Not trying to be a douche but one shot better than Poulter and Dufner is, IMO, much more than one shot considering their starting positions. Dufner especially, he was so far back that he could truly just freewheel it and go for broke with almost no pressure.
 
M

ms1170

New
Speaking of great rounds. It looks like the Web.com tour is attempting to devalue 59's with their easy courses. Through the 1st 70 years 1929-1999 we had three 59's. There could easily have been 3 in the past 2 weeks on the Web.com tour.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top