The Western Open: A major?

[Tommy Williamsen]

Whenever I read about tournaments in the twenties or thirties I read something like the following, "he won the Western Open, which was considered a major at the time."  In fact Walter Hagen won The Western five times.  Even when the Masters began the Western Open carried more prestige.  Hagen's total would be 16 majors if we counted the Western.  Maybe it is time to rethink how majors are counted for the pros eighty years ago.

[Bruceski]

Then are you willing to consider the Memorial and the Players Championship "unsung" majors of today? Maybe Bay Hill or the World Golf Championships should be thrown in? In that case, Tiger Woods is up at around 20 total "majors" -- better than Nicklaus! What you're suggesting is too open to interpretation and confusion. An event either is or isn't a major -- this shouldn't be left for debate.

[Paul Richards]

The Western was considered a major during the era up to Hagen.


Wish it were still so.

[Tommy Williamsen]

Bruce you are making this more complicated than it is.  In Hagen's day there were only three professional "Majors."  The Western Open WAS a Major for them.  The Western Golf Association was as important as the USGA.  The stuff about the Players and. Bay Hill, and the Memorial, are nonsequitors.  The question is about the Western.

[Bruceski]

Tommy, I'm not trying to be contrarian. Was The Western really considered a "major" at the time, or simply one of the more prestigious events? Currently, the term "major" has real meaning and is not a moniker left to interpretation.

[mikes1160]

Then again, the Western was in a rota then......of course, it was still in a rota right up until '74, when it moved to Butler National for 17 years. Which leads me to ask the question: was it controversial for the Masters to first be considered a major (whenever that was), since it was the only major that was never going to be in a rotation?

[Phil_the_Author]

In 1912, the first Shawnee open was contested at the Shawnee CC. Several years later it was renamde the Eastern Open and was considered one of the handful of most important tournaments to win.

The MGA holds the Met Open. For many years it was considered one rung below the U.S. Open and the greatest of all "other " tournaments.

This rush to title events and measure greatness across time based upon the outcomes of these is arbitrary, and foolish. So often the decision is based more upon "being there" or "having seen them play" than any other means of measurment.

Raphael Palmeiro has just accomplished a feat that less than a handful of others have ever done, 3,000+ hits and 500+ home runs in a career. Among those who question his credentials as being worthy of greatness are members of the sports media who as individuals would define greatness not that long ago, by a player having achieved either of those numbers no less both.

I believe that much of our reasons for wanting to declare someone as the greatest is to recognize ourselves and the time we spend opur lives within. We always outshine our dads while our sons can't get out of our shadows.

Does Tiger have 10 majors or 13? Did he tie Jones record today or not? Why should it matter?

In 2000 Golf Magazine gave a ranking of the ten greatest golfers of all time. Tiger was not in it. Were they wrong or did he somehow just break into this group? If he never wins another major, will those who think he is the greatest change their minds? If he goes on to surpass, Nicklaus and Jone and Hagen combined will those who worship at the altar of Jack finally admit that they are equals.

Regardless of the who and how of ranking great and grand people and courses, anyone who has ever had the privilege of watching young Eldrick will be able to tell THEIR grandkids, "I was there. I saw him do it..."

[ForkaB]

No.

[Paul Richards]

>Does Tiger have 10 majors or 13?
13

>Did he tie Jones record today or not?

Yes.


And 7 to go to catch Jack....

[Tommy Williamsen]

I think part of the reason I ask the question is that the status of a tournament seems to change.  Nancey Lopez won the Dinah Shore but it wasn't declared a major until later.  It doesn't count in her record.  On the other hand the first masters champion has a major.  Getting a handle on what constitutes a major seems to be a slippery thing.  I think that is why comparing "major" wins may not be the best way to compare players of different eras.

[Jim Nugent]

>Does Tiger have 10 majors or 13?
13

>Did he tie Jones record today or not?

Yes.


And 7 to go to catch Jack....

I canīt see the U.S. Amateur as a major any more.  Probably doesnīt get one of the top 100 players in the world.   While the definition of a major is nebulous at best, how can you put a win at the Amateur in the same class as a win at the Open?  

[Jim Nugent]

Then are you willing to consider the Memorial and the Players Championship "unsung" majors of today? Maybe Bay Hill or the World Golf Championships should be thrown in? In that case, Tiger Woods is up at around 20 total "majors" -- better than Nicklaus! What you're suggesting is too open to interpretation and confusion. An event either is or isn't a major -- this shouldn't be left for debate.

Bruce, this raises the question to me: why is a major a major?  

[PThomas]

Redanman:  but doesn't the PGA get the best field of the year (or one of)?  they seem to pick good/great courses now too...

[Paul Richards]

Tommy said:

> In Hagen's day there were only three professional "Majors."  The Western Open WAS a Major for them.  The Western Golf Association was as important as the USGA.


In response to Bruce, the Western was a major to these gentlemen on tour.  It was probably the next most prestigious  tournament for them after the US Open.

[Tommy Williamsen]

Shivas you make a good point.  Should we,however, speak about the most important tourneys including the amateurs or the most important professional titles.  Counting, at best is difficult and at worst, impossible to be difinitive.  I think that is why comparing records is so difficult and controversial.  I would put Hagens' record at 16 majors, Nicklaus' at 20 and Tiger's at 10: Maybe.

[Michael Moore]

Any tournment sponsored by boner pills, i.e. the Cialis Western Open, cannot be a major.

[PThomas]

Michael- a few years ago when it was the Advil Western Open it was great cause me and my kids got about $80 worth of free Advil for kids as samples, which goes fast when you have three young girls..

now I haven't taken them since Cialis took over and I assume they aren't giving out samples of that because I can't imagine explaining to them what THOSE samples are for...

[Tim_Cronin]

The Western Open was considered a major championship by players and reporters through at least the late 1940s.
Ben Hogan's win at Sunset CC in St. Louis in 1946 was reported as his first major championship. It came a few weeks before the PGA. And when he won at Brookfield CC near Buffalo in 1948, it was the third of three majors he captured that year, following the PGA in May and the U.S. Open in June. He posed with the Wanamaker, U.S. Open and Wadley trophies to commemorate the feat.
The rise of The Masters, and the penchant of the WGA to take its championship to such outposts as Davenport, Salt Lake City and Buffalo, more than a bit out of the way in that era, the reluctance to raise the purse above $15,000 until 1956, plus the failure to gain a national TV contract until 1963, all contributed to the Western slipping a peg.
Oh, and Mark McCormack, a native Chicagoan, decided it wasn't a major when he sent Arnie to the British Open in 1960.
There's more, but you get the idea.

[Paul Richards]

Tim


> plus the failure to gain a national TV contract until 1963,

That Western was 'broadcast' from Beverly CC.  We have Chris Schenkel's (sic?) copy now on DVD.  It's a pretty rudimentary 'broadcast' - mostly guys putting out on 17 or 18.  


>There's more, but you get the idea.

Would love for you to share.

>all contributed to the Western slipping a peg

Perhaps with the USGA dropping the ball so badly on the technology issue, it may be time for the WGA to reassert itself as the 'other' ruling body.  Thoughts?

[Kyle Harris]

Slightly off the thread, but apparently there is discussion into moving The Players' Championship to May.

Would that move make it seem like any more of a major than it is now?

Is The Players' Championship an analog to the Western Open of yore?

[Tim_Cronin]

The PGA used to be played in May, usually close to Memorial Day. Don't know why it ended up in August (TV, perhaps?), but it was also played in July at one time.
For the Players, the move would be TV-related. It would get the tournament away from March Madness and smack into the NBA/NHL playoffs, to say nothing of baseball.

Paul: That SNI Network Western Open telecast Beverly CC has a copy of (assuming it came from the WGA) is a condensed version, incorporating highlights of Sunday's final round and Monday's playoff. I believe SNI covered from the 15th green forward, which was standard in that era.

[Paul Richards]

Tim said:

>Monday's playoff

That was really a "Major" Championship moment at Beverly.

Palmer defeats Nicklaus and Boros in an 18-hole Monday playoff.

These 3 champions were all at the top of their games at that time, standing 1-2-3 on the money list, and having been defending champs in the previous Masters, US Open, British and PGA, i believe.