[V. Kmetz]

I've gotten Choi in... will get knudson


investigating barnes and pinero



Faulkner noted

[V. Kmetz]

OK, before we get back to the Non-Winners, let's look at the list of nearly 80 1-x winners for careers starting AFTER 1935 and AS OF/Before 2010 (BDC and Willet excluded <2010).


They are broken into three subjective (by my dint, modified with your own) columns/groups... Best 32, Next Best 21, Next 23... 


As you see, the lists are numbered (for my accounting) but not ranked; each of the columns is in reverse chronological order to allow cross-reading to players of each general "era."


The Small Questions:

• Active players are in bold; is there anyone on the list who ought/ought not to be in bold, because they are still/no longer active more than 5 reg. Tour events?
• Not minding what column they should be in, did I forget someone in the main? Or duplicated a name in two columns?

The Bigger Question:
Does this list have it right? Is each player where they ought to be? Is there any honest case that any of these players are in the wrong company, up or down?  I'm open to a fact case, but I've grown familiar with these records at this point (I never knew how accomplished Ferrier and Lema were), so if you really think there's an injustice, or gift - have a fact or two to demonstrate.


Have at it; I have grace of all day to discuss this and watch the Players - LoL...once this is put to bed, we can return to the Non-winners.

[Thomas Dai]

Need to ponder the above a little more.
Well done VK. You've put a lot of time and effort into this.
atb

[James Reader]

Is Bill Rogers in the right place?  I’m a year or two too old to remember him winning the Open, but there’s got to be a strong argument that he was the best player in the World for a year or so - between March ‘81 and the ‘82 US Open, he had 7 worldwide wins, including the Open, and two other top 3s in majors.


Others on the list had sustained success over a much longer period, but how many had better peaks?

[V. Kmetz]

Is Bill Rogers in the right place?  I’m a year or two too old to remember him winning the Open, but there’s got to be a strong argument that he was the best player in the World for a year or so - between March ‘81 and the ‘82 US Open, he had 7 worldwide wins, including the Open, and two other top 3s in majors.

Others on the list had sustained success over a much longer period, but how many had better peaks?

Yeah that is a sound consideration... he WAS 1981 Player of the Year (4 wins including the Open)... when I shortly publish the update from messages and this input, he'll move to the next column.

[V. Kmetz]

Need to ponder the above a little more.
Well done VK. You've put a lot of time and effort into this.
atb

I'm posting an update soon; and then after that...get back to the Non Winners list for more consolidation...  I caught/been alerted to a number of omissions (Day, Darren Clarke, Mark Brooks) and re-isted one or two... which will be reflected in the update.

[V. Kmetz]

Ok, with input here's another update of 1x Major Winners...


1. Are we missing or duplicated someone? (Day, Wb. Simpson, Clarke, Glover and Brooks are now added and positioned)
2. Are each in their (generally) "correct" column? Is anyone genuinely deserving to be moved up or down a column?
3. Thank you for the input so far, and the next stage, after any additional input, will start to tie together the original post (Non-Winners, which is now at 40, not 10).

[Thomas Dai]

As mentioned above, welcome for the work involved in putting this together. As to the players, I’d be inclined to move Duval, Woosnam, Weiskopf, DeVicenzo, Nagel and Ogilvy up.
Atb

[V. Kmetz]

As mentioned above, welcome for the work involved in putting this together. As to the players, I’d be inclined to move Duval, Woosnam, Weiskopf, DeVicenzo, Nagel and Ogilvy up.
Atb

Duval, Woosnam, Weiskopf and DeVicenzo have no where to go...they are already in the "Best 35 of 1x".... so you mean Nagle up...to make Best (now) 36...and then, Oglivy up to Next 23...?


If so, I'll agree heartily on Nagle, his Austral-Asian record is quality, put together with his international competitiveness in an era when that was not easy is sound, alongside his burst some years after his prime (like Sutton or Kenny Perry), establishes a good case.


On Oglivy, unless someone wants to expand the case that he deserves to be in the second column with those players' records, I'm going to keep his spot as is... Not that it should hurt impugn a major-win, but I do have a bias of being at WF in 06, and seeing first hand that Phil, Monty, and/or Poulter all should/might have at least gotten that US Open to a Monday playoff.  Ogilvy made a miraculous chip in on 17 and that fabulous up and down on 18...but if I took away those two chips and one putt, I think Oglivy would be hard pressed to make a 40 Best Non-Major Winner (which is part of the point, when we get back to those)...


Any others?

[V. Kmetz]

a miss of my own... Bolt... 15 wins + 1 major makes that list... 37 deep (with Nagle added)

[Phil Burr]

I have to ask if Gene Littler is high enough.  Won his major in ‘61; was great long enough to lose a playoff to Watkins in ‘77 PGA; also lost a Masters playoff to Casper in ‘70; and won a US Amateur.  Don’t forget he also overcame cancer at a time when the diagnosis was seen as a virtual death sentence.

[Phil Burr]

Let me add, VK, that anything I might contribute here is not to challenge your work, which is a formidable amount of research, labor and thought.  All respect to you taking on this challenge.  Still, Littler is two strokes away from having four majors on the Nicklaus scale, which would have vaulted him much higher in the all-time discussion.

[Ira Fishman]

I have to ask if Gene Littler is high enough.  Won his major in ‘61; was great long enough to lose a playoff to Watkins in ‘77 PGA; also lost a Masters playoff to Casper in ‘70; and won a US Amateur.  Don’t forget he also overcame cancer at a time when the diagnosis was seen as a virtual death sentence.

He also won 29 PGA tournaments which I believe is substantially more than everyone on the list above him. I also think De Vicenzo is far too low.


Ira

[V. Kmetz]

Remember, Phil, Ira... these are not ranked...if they are in the Best 35(37 soon) 1x winners...there is no where for them to go at this point...


These are ranked chronologically, in reverse order (for now)

[Thomas Dai]

On Oglivy, unless someone wants to expand the case that he deserves to be in the second column with those players' records, I'm going to keep his spot as is.

GO also has 3 World Golf Championship wins. Only TW and DJ have more. It’s your thread though.
Atb

[V. Kmetz]

GO also has 3 World Golf Championship wins. Only TW and DJ have more. It’s your thread though.
Atb

If I were to re-counter on Geoff Ogilvy; it would be:

• Only 1 of those WGC wins was a full field event... the others match play.
• Only 1 more of his 8 total PGA wins was a full field event...his major.
• Without those 3 wins and his major, he has no Euro Tour wins, never won on European soil.
• The 2nd of those match plays was on his home course, which I recall was a factor as to why it was his home course.

In essence, my take on Ogilvy it that he was a good Jan-Mar player for 5 years, only twice besting a full great field in medal play.


But rather than quibble, is there someone on the list above, that ought to come down for him?  Cink? Lowry? Marr?  As I'm typing this right now, I see that Marr had very little beyond his PGA victory in 1965... I may be reacting to him because he worked in my home district and was the comfortable color voice of ABC golf for a bazillion years...perhaps Oglivy should take that spot? ...Or just have Marr come down...

[Pete_Pittock]

Jesper Parnevik?

[V. Kmetz]

We haven't gotten (back) to the Top 40 non-winners yet, but I can mention in advance that Parnevik did not make the cut... 3 of his 5 Am PGA wins came in a 13 month period, but its thin beyond that moment of time. His record in majors was also thinner than I remember, and his European record isn't that stellar by comparison to others who have made that Top 40 group... which is coming next...

[V. Kmetz]

OK... now that the one-timers have been sorted out as well as they can, we now get to a juicier, pulp part:


How do the Top 40 Non-Major Winners stack up against the LEAST 25 of the one timers? 


My primary question: Is there anyone on the LEAST 1x 25 list, who is better, or deserves slightly greater recognition, or historical reputation than someone on the Top 40 list of those who failed to win a major? (but had significant careers and/or historic engagements with the professional game).


In effect, just how far does Lucas Glover and his 2009 US Open win go in the face of someone like Mark McNulty who was acoomplished in world wide golf?  Or a closer case might be...How about Michael Campbell, who contended in a few majors, besides besting Woods to win at Pinehurst?...Does he deserve a slightly higher seat than Scott Hoch?




In this (JUST an) example, I've shown you what I mean... I first took Webb Simpson and matched him against everybody, starting with Matsuyama and I didn't think he was as good as any of those non winners until I got to Wayne Levi...so I put Simpson next to Levi and continued and didn't find cause to put Simpson anywhere else....

Another example is later down the list when I was now on Wayne Grady... I didn't think he was as good as anybody on the chronological list until I got to David Frost... I put his name next to Frost... if I had kept on, I may have also put him next to Levi, along with Simpson...

...and then you would go on comparing each of the 24 least winners to the entire 40 list, only pausing to out that subject player next to the one of the Non-Major winners you thought he was better than.

Last points:

1. There's already a mistake, as Larry Mize got lost
2. You see here where I sort of bailed and put some names on the Top 40 list "near".... feel free to include them in your scan of the 24 LEAST 1xers...
3. The American PGA winners pre 58 are mostly inconsequential to the examination and would tend to place lower any rank of honor. There's only one name, 1950 PGA winner, Chandler Harper, that might battle to have gotten up a list...but I'll sort that out.
4.  Thank all for the assists, nominations to date.

[Ira Fishman]

Goalby was better than any of the actives on the non major list except Westwood. Also,
I suggest you check out Jim Ferrier’s record.


Fun exercise. Thanks for doing all of the work.


Ira

[V. Kmetz]

Goalby was better than any of the actives on the non major list except Westwood. Also,
I suggest you check out Jim Ferrier’s record.

Fun exercise. Thanks for doing all of the work.

Ira

Hi Ira,
Ferrer is already on the Top 32 of 1x winners... (from yesterday, below) (yes, he was one of the ones I was impressed with, examing his record) I suppose you're saying Goalby 11w & major (diminished some though it is) ought to have been on that Next 23 list (also from yesterday) and thus exempt from this stage of the comparison (Westwood notwithstanding).... Is that correct?

[Ira Fishman]

Goalby was better than any of the actives on the non major list except Westwood. Also,
I suggest you check out Jim Ferrier’s record.

Fun exercise. Thanks for doing all of the work.

Ira

Hi Ira,
Ferrer is already on the Top 32 of 1x winners... (from yesterday, below) (yes, he was one of the ones I was impressed with, examing his record) I suppose you're saying Goalby 11w & major (diminished some though it is) ought to have been on that Next 23 list (also from yesterday) and thus exempt from this stage of the comparison (Westwood notwithstanding).... Is that correct?

VK,


Sorry, I was working off the list in Post 93. I did not see Ferrier there or how you assessed Goalby.


Ira

[Jim Sherma]

You can make a case that Hal Sutton should be high on the 1x list. Two Players titles 17 years apart (1993 & 2000) and 14 PGA wins across 19 years. He was good for a long time. Weir's career is very soft if you remove the Masters. Elkington could easily swap out with him (10 wins including 2-Players and the PGA).

[V. Kmetz]

You can make a case that Hal Sutton should be high on the 1x list. Two Players titles 17 years apart (1993 & 2000) and 14 PGA wins across 19 years. He was good for a long time. Weir's career is very soft if you remove the Masters. Elkington could easily swap out with him (10 wins including 2-Players and the PGA).

Sutton can't go any higher at this stage, he's already among the best of 1xers (remember they are still listed in chronological order at this point)... the Elkington Weir debate is a close one, and I might consider Elkington up to the Best, as opposed to Weir moving down.


On close scrutiny,

• Weirs best season (2003) is slightly more accomplished than Elkington's (1995).
• Weir's made the cut in all four majors 3x...Elkington only twice...
• The runner-up opponents Weir bested in his wins, are of a higher caliber than those who Elkington bested
• Elkington's "two more" PGA tour wins are reflected by his January ToC victories.

Still, I will consider it as it is indeed a very close margin

[V. Kmetz]

Does anyone following the thread have any input about the most recent parallel lists....


Who of these 25 LEAST 1xersdeserves a better place at the table than the 0x Major Non-Winners?

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()