Why does the most dominant pro golfer only win 25% of the time?

[Doug Siebert]

Jim,

I don't think that "almost all the best players" were pros in Jones' day.

And the argument that because there are more golfers that being the best is harder is kind of weak.  Tiger may have to (theoretically) compete with 30 million golfers instead of 1 million, but how many of those golfers are full time golfers?  Pros and idle rich, that is.  Jones was neither, and he still kicked everyone's asses regularly.  Could Tiger approach what he has done if he had to finish college, attend law school and work as a lawyer most of the year, rather than working on his game 12 hours a day?

Tiger may have more people to compete with, but do you have equipment guys designing equipment to your exact specifications, letting you try out everything while measured in 100 ways by computer and camera, have a trainer, nutritionist, swing coach, full time caddie and probably a hypnotist and astrologer thrown in for good measure?  No one has all the advantages Tiger has to the extent he does, and beyond the handful of guys at the top most of those advantages start rapidly dimishing in scope.  Its not a fully level playing field between Tiger and the #125 guy on the money list, anymore than it was in Jones' day.

As far as Annika, I don't get why people denigrate her accomplishments because she is only competing against the women?  Well, she's a woman, so how is that any different than not letting pros compete in amateur events or adults compete in junior events?  People make a big deal about how dominant Tiger was when he was a junior and an amateur, but ignore the fact that he missed the cut whenever he got to compete with the big boys in the Masters and US Open, so he clearly wasn't all that back then by the "Annika" standard.

If aliens visit earth and get interested in golf and start beating humans, I'll bet a lot of humans will still attach a lot of importance for being the 'low human' finisher in the Open, even if he loses by 22 strokes to Vrrrraskkxx from Sirius B.  Those Sirius B guys kick some serious long driving ass on our comparatively low gravity world, after all!

[Jim Nugent]

Doug -- the main tournaments where top pro's and amateurs played against each other were the British and U.S. Opens.  I think that from 1920 through 1930, Bobby was the only amateur to win either of those tournaments.  Definitely the vast majority of winners were pro's.  IMO that pretty well proves they were the best players of the day -- plus Bobby, of course.

I understated the growth of the competition Tiger faces.  Golf is now a worldwide game.  Of the top ten players on the World Golf ratings, five are from countries other than the U.S. and Britain.  Eight of the top twenty.  Around 60 million people play worldwide now, with 12 or 13 million serious golfers in the U.S. alone.  I think today's players face vastly greater competition.

I admit I don't know much about Bobby.  My impression is he WAS idle rich.  Supported at first by his wealthy father.  Not much of an attorney.  Am I wrong?  Though I'm not sure why this matters anyway.  

Records set in baseball's minor leagues mean little to me.  Same with the Continental League in hoops (does it still exist?).  Women's golf for me has the same importance.  Though I enjoyed your alien analogy.  According to Shivas, one of them is already here!

   

[MikeJones]

Golf has more variables than any other sport I can think of. A 1.68 inch ball which has to travel 1000s of yards over wild and varied terrain at the mercy of the elements.

If you wanted to make the best player win more often, all you would have to do is make courses longer, wider and enlarge the hole. Quite the opposite of what a lot of people might think.

[JESII]

What do you think Tiger's head-to-head winning percentage is across the board. Each week he plays against an average of about 100-120 players and over the course of 10 years he probably wins about 85% - 90% of the time, maybe more.

A little different way of valuating it, but to make the argument to other sports apples-to-apples, this is probably the best way.

I don't know how, but there is a way to look this up, even if only for one season.