1. The Open - I love watching links golf, it is so much more interesting (although the BBC does not do nearly as well as the US braodcasting companies showing the event)

2. Tie - the other three. It used to be The Masters, but I hate the changes. I loved the back nine charges not the present day see if you can stay where you are. The US Open is great, but sometimes the USGA just over does the rough. Let these guys hit from there and show some recovery skill. The PGA has vastly improved as it used to be a distant 4th. Better venues and better course setups have really helped.

1. The Open - I love watching links golf, it is so much more interesting (although the BBC does not do nearly as well as the US braodcasting companies showing the event)

2. Tie - the other three. It used to be The Masters, but I hate the changes. I loved the back nine charges not the present day see if you can stay where you are. The US Open is great, but sometimes the USGA just over does the rough. Let these guys hit from there and show some recovery skill. The PGA has vastly improved as it used to be a distant 4th. Better venues and better course setups have really helped.

I agree here, and have always thought that the PGA could be an interesting major by combining the best setup attributes of both the US Open and Masters (pre-"Tiger-proofing).  That allows players who hit the best shots - from anywhere on the course including off the fairway - to rise to the top... not just the ones who can hack it out of 5-inch rough back to the fairway.  

I was in Ireland recently and asked two caddies which major they thought provided the best champion and they both answered US Open. Not quite a scientific survey.

They must be relatives of Andy North or Lee Janzen.

1 - National Open
2 - Open Championship
3 - Masters
4 - PGA

Really, the exercise is futile. Each major, including The Players if you wish, are all different in style and make-up.  Other than being golf courses, there is no apple to apple comparison.

1 - National Open
2 - Open Championship
3 - Masters
4 - PGA

National Open of which nation?  The Canadian Open?  The Australian Open?  

Matt, I've always preferred the Open Championship because of the history and the course set ups ( usually ).  I believe we see a wider variety of shots produced and as a result more interest.  The U.S Open is next because it is the National Champioship of the biggest golfing nation in the world.  The Masters is third just but could be surpassed by the PGA.

Why would the Australian Open need American players? With the exception of Woods, and possibly Mickelson, the majority of the best players in the world are not American.

They are Australian.

And European. And South African.

Filling the Australian Open field with US players would be the shortest and quickest route to mediocrity.

The Australian Open has many of the criteria for greatness, certainly more so than the soporific US PGA; Multiple wins by two of the best players in history, and two of the five to have won the Grand Slam;if it was played at Royal Melbourne on the Old Composite Course, it would be played at perhaps the best course in the world that gives every type of player, except unthinking, mechanical Americans, a chance;we don't scream out "in the hole" when Tiger Woods drives on a par five, so the telecast would be a pleasure to watch;Melbourne is the sporting capital of the world;

The Aussie Open is going to need to attract more than just the top American golfers, who btw are rated 1, 2 and 3 in the world, and about 40 of the top 100.  It needs all those others you mentioned as well.  Right now it gets almost none of them.  From my quick look through the field, maybe 7 to 10 of the top 50 played the past few years.  

It mostly gets the top Australian golfers.  That may be why Robert Allenby won it a few years ago, despite limping home the final day with a 77.  Last time someone won the U.S. Open with a 77 or worse was 1929.  Fields were thin then, too.  

I would love to see the best golfers play the AO, at RM comp and other great courses.  But you can't anoint something a major.  And while you may not like the current majors lineup, it is what it is.  

I keep wondering, Mark, how those mechanical unthinking Americans keep winning the Open Championship -- the only real major IYO -- about 95% of the time?

The Open - the original and still the best

Strategy needs width.

Brian,

How much "width" did Tiger need last year to execute his strategy of dismantling the field with irons off the tee at Hoylake?

His strategy at the Open last year was about precision.  Is that much different fundamentally than his strategy at the US Open this year?   The condition of Hoylake and his talent enabled him to hit iron shots off the tee that ran out forever, so he didn't have to rely on the driver at all, and his overall level of execution was far superior to the rest of the field.  It wasn't as close as the 2-stroke margin indicates as I recall.

Not so this year.  I can't help coming back to the way he butchered #3 on Sunday at the US Open this year, making double from the first cut with a horrible pitch shot, two horrendous chip shots, on in 4 and 2 putts, just like one of us.  He just didn't execute up to Tiger potential this year.

At Hoylake on the 56 driving holes, he hit driver once and 3-wood off the tee 14 times, the rest irons.  In your view is that  Open "strategic" golf at its finest or "tedium" or ??

The statement "Strategy needs width" it seems to me is just as prescriptive and potentially damaging to creativity in golf course design as "every course should have six-inch rough on both sides of the fairway" or "let's plant some more trees here."

Like George Pazin, I could care less about ranking the Majors.  I enjoy watching all of them and watching the best players in the world strive to reach the top of their profession.  I think they're all fascinating dramas.  

Mark,

I agree 100% on your last little point.

Tiger after having won in 2000, 2005, and 2006 surely has descended into a massive pit, from which there is no escape.  

And I'm also very much pleased to know that Paul Lawrie is on the top of the heap as well.

Keep the laughs coming mate...

Jim Nugent:

American players may well be ranked 1,2 and 3 in the world, but they are surely the only three of the 40/100 anyone would pay to see.  And 40/100 isn't too flash considering the bias skewed towards US PGA tour events, which are only strong because of foreign players.

If the Europeans, Australians and South Africans abandoned the US PGA Tour for a European World Tour, the US PGA tour would need to be sponsored by a palliative care organisation.

As to your query about why those mechanical, unthinking Americans keep winning The Open... buggered if I know.

But it is interesting to note that those who do - Lehmann, Duval, Curtis, Hamilton - quickly descend back into the pit of mediocrity from which they had briefly risen, whereas the foreigners who keep filching the US Open are still amongst the best players in the world...

First you told us Tiger and maybe Phil are the only Americans anyone will pay to see.  Now you say it's Tiger, Phil and Furyk, but no one else.  

Michael Campbell, among the world's best players, hunh?  Lehman and Duval were in the pit of mediocrity?  This is a joke.   Though if you want to take your argument to a logical conclusion, the Open Championship may not be not such a great event after all, and the U.S. Open is far better.  According to you, mediocre nobodies keep winning the British Open, while the world's best win the U.S. Open.  

Mark, most of your arguments are not consistent.  They only make sense when I realize your fundamental bias:  you hate American golfers.  Seve did, too.  He wanted to pound them into the ground.  No surprise you think he is so great, far better than Trevino, e.g.  

So long as Tiger is on tour, it doesn't much matter what the Australians, South Africans and Europeans do.  The PGA will be a huge success.  It attracts all the best golfers in the world -- full time or part -- for that very reason.  Worth noting that those great European golfers you are enamored with win next to nothing on the U.S. Tour, even though many play full time.  Aussies and South Africans have picked off a few events in recent years, but they sure don't dominate.  Yet the one international event U.S. golfers play in any numbers -- the British Open -- they nearly always win.  Still another reason there are now 44 Americans golfers in the top 100.  Next-closest nation has around 10.  

Golf at the highest level has definitely become much more a world game.  American dominance is the least it's been in probably 90 years or so.  This trend will probably continue, especially if golf keeps growing in places like China and India.  You're probably seeing the future, Mark, or at least part of it, but I sure think you have a blind spot for the present, and past.  

This is a straw poll amongst a bunch of highly opinionated and well educated (in golfing terms) guys.  Matt asked if the relative ratings of the various majors were changing?

One of the recurrent sub themes is our perception of the majors being almost entirely based upon how the TV shows it to us.  Did Oakmont make for great TV?

Hence in Britain I believe the average golfer rates them as follows.

The Open .   It's ours; it has history and the BBC show almost every ball struck over the four days. (I'd be interested in how someone above thinks it's covered better in the states). Free to air no adverts.

The Masters.  Time of year is perfect reminder to find the clubs again, and it gets very good coverage on the free BBC.  



The US Open.  only available on the expensive BSKYB TV and finishes sometime after midnight Sunday - too late to stay drinking at the club if you've got to drive home.








The PGA.  I’ve tried to find a pub/club showing this a couple of times but I’m usually on holiday and it's too much trouble.

The Players gets the same reaction from me.  But judging from comments I’ve overheard from others there’s more interest in it overhere than in the PGA.


I just won't pay out to have sports channels in my house and most that do have them for the soccer.