Another Remarkable Tiger Stat

[JESII]

The European Tour might play two events on links courses...how much links golf do the Germans or Swede's play in their youth?

[Tim Pitner]

What bothers me is when some people look at foreign players on the U.S. tour, whether they're Europeans, Australians, South Africans, etc., and conclude that, because they're not exceling in the U.S., they must be overrated and their past success was due solely to playing against lesser competition.  I'm suggesting that it's not that easy to live and work in a foreign country (even if you're wealthy) and, judging from some of the whining done by U.S. golfers (who don't tend to be the most cosmopolitan bunch) at the Open Championship, I question whether many U.S. golfers would do that well if they played the European Tour full-time (Tiger would be fine).   

My immediate question then is why have U.S. golfers dominated the British Open so much?  Even without Tiger, they have won the majority of Open Championships since 1994. 

European golfers have won almost no British Opens the past 13 years, and only 4 majors in all.  U.S. golfers have won the vast majority of Open Championships during that time, and 36 majors in all.  9 times as many as the European players.

Even if you don't count Tiger's wins, U.S. players are light years ahead of the Euro's, both in total majors and Open Championships.

That makes me think they might do ok if they played there full time.     

Jim,

I'm not sure what U.S. players' success in the non-European majors has to do with whether they'd do well on the European Tour.  My thesis is that, because of non-golf issues, it'd be difficult, generally, for U.S. players to do well on the European Tour.  The best players would still rise to the top, I would guess. 

As for the British Open, the American winners other than Tiger I recall are O'Meara, Daly, Duval, Curtis and Hamilton.  I don't have a great answer as to why Curtis and Hamilton won the Open--Curtis is a pretty solid player; Hamilton played a lot in Japan and was a seasoned world golfer.  Interestingly, Ben Curtis played quite a bit in Europe after winning the Open and had some success, but I don't think he won another event there. 

[Dean Stokes]

I did hear a commentator on the Nationwide Tour last year say that he believed the Natiowide Tour was the 2nd stongest tour in the world. Honest! And I wasn't even drinking that day.

[Mike_Clayton]

Tim,

You make a great point.
American tour pros for the most part never play away from home except for the Open Championship. They play a home game every week and that is a big and unacknowledged advantage over ' foreigners' who are away from home every week,playing on courses that are different from the ones they mastered and formed their games around at home.

Bring the US Tour to the sandbelt and watch guys like Allenby,Lonard,Appleby,Ogilvy and Baddeley grow another leg because they play those courses and all the shots they demand so well. The 1998 Presidents Cup was a classic example of that.


The same does not apply so much in Europe these days because they are playing mostly courses that are set-up exactly the way they are in America - rough,green speed,consistency of sand.
There is almost no links golf on the European tour.

The reality is the numbers still say the Americans have the biggest number of top 100 players but it will be much different in 20 years as the world catches up.

The most interesting year in America will be the one where more than half of the top 125 are foreigners.

Dean,

I have heard that too.
Are they really suggesting the top 12 players on the Naionwide Tour would beat the top 12 Europeans? The top 12 on the main tour cannot do that.

[Dean Stokes]

Mike, some great points. This commentators remarks don't bode well for the Sunshine Tour (South Africa) which is very strong and the Asian Tour which could also string 12 good players together.
How many foreign players are full time on the US tour right now?

[JESII]

Mike,

Your input on this certainly carries alot more weight than the rest of us on here...you've been there...but do you really think the styles of golf course play a significant role in success at the highest level?

By "styles" I mean links or sandbelt or parkland etc...

I just think the winners will find a way regardless...with one or two exceptions...

[Mike_Clayton]

JES II

I think playing at home is probably more important than the course - its just easier being around friends,in places you really like on courses you know.


Good players are very adaptable - but on the sandbelt there are shots players understand how to play better than others because they became second nature as kids.
Just as American juniors learn to play that chip from rough around the green Australians learn to play the low running chip that lands halfway up a steep back.props,just gets to the edge of the green and trickles to the hole.
A good example of that skill was Baddeley over the back of the 2nd green at Oakmost in last years Open. Tiger had exactly the same shot and made a mess of it.

The best players though are capable of playing anything but what happened in India last week was interesting.

That was a pretty decent field there and a local kid won because the course in Delhi is one only a local would feel truly comfortable on - and India is a difficult place to play for foreigners.


Dean,

Without looking I would guess there are 40 overseas players on the US Tour. Probably 30 made the top 125.

[Mike_Clayton]

Dean,

42 - give or take one or two for bad counting!! - made the top 125 last year.

[Dean Stokes]

It soon could be the called the Buick Gillette Gatorade Tag Heuer Amex World PGA Tour - hosted by America.

[Doug Ralston]

It soon could be the called the Buick Gillette Gatorade Tag Heur Amex World Tour - hosted by America.

So you remember in 'Rollerball' when everyone stood and sang the Corporate Anthem before the game? No so funny now ...........

Doug

[Dean Stokes]

No.

[Dan Boerger]

Mike - That's an interesting perspective. Thanks for sharing. Let's not forget that the majority of professional golfers on any tour are playing with their "backs against the wall" so to speak. Any advantage, however minor, can mean a big difference each week and certainly at the end of the year.

[Dean Stokes]

Mike - That's an interesting perspective. Thanks for sharing. Let's not forget that the majority of professional golfers on any tour are playing with their "backs against the wall" so to speak. Any advantage, however minor, can mean a big difference each week and certainly at the end of the year.

Dan - could you explain "backs against the wall" for me please? I've no idea what you mean by that. Thankyou.

[Dan Boerger]

My bad ... I should not use so many cliches! By that I mean that most professional golfers are trying to make a decent living (many do!) and also keep their playing privileges year after year. Tiger, Phil, Ernie, Jim, Padraig are not the norm.

So, if you are an American journeyman, it makes sense to take advantage of all you can. That obviously includes size of purse and, as Mike points out, home filed advantage.

[Dean Stokes]

Thankyou.

[Brian_Ewen]

It has already been discussed by the European Tour that they are likely to go to 14-15 tournaments for membership of the tour , from next season .

So it would be more than two tournaments if Tiger ever wanted to join .

It still amazes me , that some of you Guys list events as Tiger used to play "regularly" , when the reality is he played it once to pick up a big fat cheque , or he had a video game to sell .

Just like YOUR Mr Trump , its nought to do with Golf and all to do with MONEY .

IMHO !

[Mark Pearce]

What bothers me is when some people look at foreign players on the U.S. tour, whether they're Europeans, Australians, South Africans, etc., and conclude that, because they're not exceling in the U.S., they must be overrated and their past success was due solely to playing against lesser competition.  I'm suggesting that it's not that easy to live and work in a foreign country (even if you're wealthy) and, judging from some of the whining done by U.S. golfers (who don't tend to be the most cosmopolitan bunch) at the Open Championship, I question whether many U.S. golfers would do that well if they played the European Tour full-time (Tiger would be fine).   

My immediate question then is why have U.S. golfers dominated the British Open so much?  Even without Tiger, they have won the majority of Open Championships since 1994. 

European golfers have won almost no British Opens the past 13 years, and only 4 majors in all.  U.S. golfers have won the vast majority of Open Championships during that time, and 36 majors in all.  9 times as many as the European players.

Even if you don't count Tiger's wins, U.S. players are light years ahead of the Euro's, both in total majors and Open Championships.

That makes me think they might do ok if they played there full time.     

That would explain the US team's continued dominance in the Ryder Cup, then.....

[Rich Goodale]

Face it, Mark.  The Euros are Zeros when playing in Majors against a full field of the best players in the world.  Sure, they punch well above their weight in match play, but is that really golf?

[Mark Pearce]

You're right, Rich.

I propose BUDA VI be settled by the medal matchplay format which was such a hit in the old Dunhill Cup.

[Tags:]

Tags: