Trevino or Ballesteros ?

[Tim Pitner]

If you see Seve ahead of Trevino than you place absolutely ZERO STOCK in what they both did at the US Open -- the equal premier major along with the British Open in my book. Lee was the first player to shoot all four rounds in the 60's when he won at Oak Hill in '68. Seve simply had no real record of success with the event -- end of story.

Jim Nugent said it best -- throw Seve into the mix when Jack and Palmer and Player were at their best and I don't se him winning the amount he did when that trio was operating at full steam. Lee encountered them all and held his own and then some.

Matt,

I really don't want to debate this point too much--their respective primes didn't overlap so it really can't be determined, conclusively, who was the better player.  

Re: the US Open, you're right, I don't place a lot of importance in what Trevino and Seve did at the US Open.  When Seve played in the US Open, before Shinnecock and Pinehurst, the courses on the rotation were all about hitting it straight and staying out of the extreme rough--it was boring golf and it produced winners like Andy North, not Seve.  

Re: what if Seve had played in the primes of Nicklaus, Player and Palmer, I don't believe for a second that Seve in his prime couldn't have achieved similar results against them as he did playing against Watson, Norman and Faldo.  

[Bob_Huntley]

Ballesteros simply felt the need to destroy the American golf professional. Some of it can be traced to things such as Hale Irwin dismissing him as the "Car Park" champion and his long running fued with Deane Beaman.

Does anyone remember Hale Irwin losing the Memorial Tournament to Roger Maltbie? Irwin was probably the sourest loser out there. I think Golf Digest has an article on the topic in last months edition.

Bob

[Matt_Ward]

Mark P:

You need to re-examine the nature of what the PGA Tour was about with the likes of the following when Trevino played. It isn't about being in America -- it's simply about where the best competition was being played -- both then and still to this day.

Maybe the name of Palmer, Nicklaus, Casper, Player, Watson, et al -- are vaguely familiar. You can have the names of the European stars you mentioned. I am quite comfortable with the ones I mentioned and for Lee to be as competitive as this lot speaks volumes more to me than what Seve did in winning the German Open or the Portugal Classic, et al.

And, I will reiterate for the hard of hearing - I was utterly captivated by Seve but far too often the aspect of charisma and bravado are highlighted when the sheer aspect of playing the game takes a second billing.

Tim Pitner:

The winners of the US Open -- prior to Shinnecock's emergence in '86 included the likes of Nicklaus in '80 at Baltusrol - Watson in '82 at Pebble and David Graham's stunning final round play at Merion in '81, to name just three quick incredible wins.

The idea that driving the ball straight should be thrown out the window is a silly proposition on your part. Seve defenders have to downplay the US Open because his record in the event doesn't really shine. Ergo -- blame the USGA and the set-ups rather than then lack of total golf game control on the player.

If we also want to talk about no names winning major events I can name plenty of others in the other majors as well.

Tim -- one last thing -- the combined weight of Nicklaus, Palmer and Player is a good bit beyond the likes of Watson, Norman and Faldo. If you think otherwise I have high quality swamp land for you in Jersey.

[Robert_Walker]

Bob Huntley,
Forget the topflite, but I'll take that ham sandwich on rye toast with swiss cheese, lettuce, tomato, mustard, mayo, and a slice of raw onion. Plus, may I have some potato chips with that as well?
Thanks,
RW

[Phil Benedict]

The idea that driving the ball straight should be thrown out the window is a silly proposition on your part. Seve defenders have to downplay the US Open because his record in the event doesn't really shine. Ergo -- blame the USGA and the set-ups rather than then lack of total golf game control on the player.

I agree with Matt about the tendency of some to dismiss the US Open because of its emphasis on straight driving.  The fact that Seve hardly made a dent in the US Open weighs against him more than Trevino's failures at Augusta - which is only one course.

[John Kavanaugh]

I have always found that when faced with a difficult choice such as this is that it is best to imagine yourself as a beautiful woman and go with the guy with who you would most want to share a bed.  In my humble opinion I would choose Seve.  This theory will apply in all aspects of life even beyond sports.  I challenge anyone to dispute its accuracy.

[Jeff_Brauer]

I won't debate who is better.

I will relate that in conversations with Lee, he is interested in some kind of system that would rate players of different eras comparably, so there could be a definitive list, and he could die knowing he was No. XXX or whatever.

That said, I got the feeling he felt he was somewhere between 7 and 14 on at least modern list.

That also said, I doubt there will ever be such a list, because it would depend on who values what, as illustrated in this discussion, as well as any discussions on golf course rankings!

[David_Tepper]

Lee Jansen, Andy North, Curtis Strange & Hale Irwin have collectively won 9 US Opens. Palmer, Watson, Faldo, Norman & Seve have collectivley won 2. The former MUST be a better group of golfers than the latter!  

[Bob_Huntley]

David,

That sure punctured someone's thesis.

Bob

[Bob_Huntley]

Reg Murphy made the first ruling granting relief and Michael Bonalick over-ruled Reg.  MB actually thought that RM had not given SB relief.

Robert,

Sandwich on its way by Fed Ex.

Tell me more about the over-ruling. I do remember Ken Green being quite positive that Seve was not going to get relief and I thought that MB concurred with Green.

Bob

[Phil Benedict]

Lee Jansen, Andy North, Curtis Strange & Hale Irwin have collectively won 9 US Opens. Palmer, Watson, Faldo, Norman & Seve have collectivley won 2. The former MUST be a better group of golfers than the latter!  

Palmer, Watson, Faldo, Norman & Seve won no PGA's, the major which is most US Open-like in set-up.  Weird, isn't it?

[Robert_Walker]

I just remember MB rolling up and very quickly saying "no relief!"
I have it on my Beta Max tape. The BetaMax machine is put away.

[Matt_Ward]

David Tepper:

You forgot to mention that AP lost three US Opens in playoffs ('62, '63 and '66). Norman also lost one in a playoff ('84 at WF / West) and was on the door step in a few others -- most especially the '86 and '95 events at Shinnecock.

Watson also could have defended his crown in '83 except for the 60-foot bomb of a putt Larry Nelson sank on the 16th hole during the Monday morning finish at Oakmont.

Faldo also lost in a '88 playoff and was one ball turn away from joining the Donald / Irwin playoff the next year at Medinah.

My point is a simple one -- the names you mentioned were key players in competing for the US Open during their prime. The name of Seve Ballesteros is not among such a listing.

You see I have this archaic point -- great players can adopt their games to whatever the site requires. Seve, while great in so many ways, simply did not have the wherewithal to compete in any meaningful way in one of the game's two most important events.

I can also name winners of the Masters and BO who aren't exactly householfd names. Let's start with Paul Lawrie for starters with his thrilling victory at Carnoustie in '99. How bout Ben Curtis, Tod Hamilton? I guess they must be better golfers than Phil Mickelson, Vijay Singh and Jim Furyk who have never won the BO.

[George Pazin]

The fact that Seve hardly made a dent in the US Open weighs against him more than Trevino's failures at Augusta - which is only one course.

My point is a simple one -- the names you mentioned were key players in competing for the US Open during their prime. The name of Seve Ballesteros is not among such a listing.

I wouldn't bet my life on it - maybe Matt's - but I think Seve did have some top 10s in the US Open during the 80s. In fact, were I a wagering man, I'd wager Seve had more US Open top 10s than Lee had Masters top 10s.

Regardless, this is all hypothetical hair-splitting. They had very different styles, each won more than a couple majors, each contended in a bunch more.

[CHrisB]

I wouldn't bet my life on it - maybe Matt's - but I think Seve did have some top 10s in the US Open during the 80s. In fact, were I a wagering man, I'd wager Seve had more US Open top 10s than Lee had Masters top 10s.

Seve had three top-5 finishes in the U.S. Open ('83,'85,'87), while Trevino had 2 top-10 finishes in the Masters (tied for 10th in '75 and '85).

[David_Tepper]

Matt W. -

I specifically excluded the names of one-time U.S. Open (and one-time major) winners from my prior list (think Orville Moody, Lou Graham, Scott Simpson, etc.).  There are "fluke" winners of every major from time to time.

It is also interesting to note that Palmer, Watson, Faldo, Norman and Seve did not win any PGA's either. Does that also diminish their greatness?

I agree that the greatest players should be able to excel under all playing conditions. The black mark against Pete Sampras & John McEnroe is that they never won a French Open. Roger Federer has to win one before I would put him on the short list of all-time tennis greats.

By this standard, doesn't Trevino failure to contend at the Masters hurt him just a much as Seve's relatively poor US Open showings?

DT

   

[Phil Benedict]

I have a technical question.  I made the statement on this thread that Seve "hardly made a dent" in the US Open which has been proven wrong by Chris Brauner, who notes that Seve had three top 5 finishes.  Obviously I can go back and fix my statement (ie Seve never won the US Open, which I know is true), but how can I fix it in the posts that quoted my original statement?

I think I'm screwed!

[PThomas]

fact:  Lee won three different majors, Seve only two

[Matt_Ward]

Gents:

Seve had top ten finishes but he was never truly coming down the home stretch in any of them to match what I posted previously with the other names I mentioned.

David T:

Please help me out when you mention the names of Palmer, Watson, Faldo and Norman. The only person that Seve proponents can certainly say he has the edge over is Norman and I dare say the edge is not as much as many might believe.

Seve gets plenty of points on the charisma and bravado side of the equation -- no doubt he deserves them but people need to look beyond the surface level and see the playing records for what they are.

In regards to Trevino / Masters -- the issue boils down to how important people view what takes place at Augusta? Frankly, I see the Masters considerably below what the US and British Opens are about -- on par with the PGA which I believe is quickly gaining more and more traction. The club runs an invitational event played on the same course. Being the first major of the year and having seduced much of the media for the bulk of its existence I can see how The Masters is seen by a great many people as THE major of the four. I don't.

No doubt Lee allowed the goblins of denial to play with his head and no less an authority on the Masters and on Lee -- Jack Nicklaus himself said -- that Lee could certainly win there with the proper mindset.

You see David -- you and likely others see some sort of equivalence with failure at The Masters as being on par with failure at the US Open. I don't for the reasons I just explained.

The two Opens are "open" to all -- they are national championships from the two primary golf associations on the globe. Lee was the first person to fire four consecutive rounds in the 60's in winning at Oak Hill in 1968. He won one of the finest British Open titles of all time with his win in '72 at Muirfield -- outlasting the Nicklaus surge and the hometown crowd for Jacklin. His win st Shoal Creek in '84 at the PGA was also stunning for his ability to still be a threat.

I agree w Rich Goodale -- Lee is the superior player.

[Kalen Braley]

I have always found that when faced with a difficult choice such as this is that it is best to imagine yourself as a beautiful woman and go with the guy with who you would most want to share a bed.  In my humble opinion I would choose Seve.  This theory will apply in all aspects of life even beyond sports.  I challenge anyone to dispute its accuracy.

lol John,

Does this mean you would pick Camileo Villegas over Phil Mickleson?  And if you pick Phil is it because he man boobs??

[Bill Shamleffer]

Lee Jansen, Andy North, Curtis Strange & Hale Irwin have collectively won 9 US Opens. Palmer, Watson, Faldo, Norman & Seve have collectivley won 2. The former MUST be a better group of golfers than the latter!  

I do not really have a dog in this fight, but I had to respond to David's great post with the following:

Janzen, North, Strange & Irwin - ZERO Open championships & Masters wins.

Palmer, Watson, Faldo, Norman & Ballesteros - 15 Open Championships & 11 Masters wins.

[Brock Peyer]

Jeff, you mistunderstood my comment.  

My point was that every shot was different to Seve, in his prime and probably now, no two were alike.  No two were alike because he had that kind of feel.  I respect anyone that can hit high, soft greenside bunker shots with a 5 iron.  Yes, I am familar with his game, I was lucky enough to have him autograph his instructional book during a Masters practice round in '87 or '88 when he was at his best.  I loved him and can kinda quote what he said as he chunked hooked it into the pound on 15 at Augusta in '86.  Back then he tried to hook and cut his putts depending on the putt.  The dude was PURE talent, unbelievable talent.....but I guess that I wasn't too familar with him.






Seve on the other hand, probably never hit two drives shaped exactly the same let alone trying for the same distance.

Brock,
You clearly never had the chance to watch Seve in his prime.
He didi not hit it all over the lot that frequently the way his play of the last 15 years leads many to believe.
He had wondeful trajectory amd curvature control.
When he won the two Masters he drove the ball very well with 2-3 exceptions.

[Phil Benedict]

I couldn't agree more with Matt Ward's assessment of the relative significance of the US Open and the Masters. One is our national championship and the other is a product of shrewd marketing and position on the calendar.  There is no comparison no matter how much Jim Nance gushes about Augusta in early April.

[Kalen Braley]

John Daley is a pure talent and is charasmatic and generally has no game plan.  He also has a great short game, is awesome with the putter, and can also certainly "spray" it around more often than not.

Is he just a less dedicated version of Seve??

[David_Tepper]

Phil Benedict -

You make a very telling comment when you say the US Open "is our national (US of A) championship." I imagine the vast majority of golfers in growing up in the US dream of winning the US Open. But do you think Player or Seve or Faldo or Norman necessarily grew up dreaming of winning the US Open? Somehow, I rather doubt it.

Maybe the foreign players just don't feel the US Open is as important as we think it is (and we expect them to think it is). My guess is the British Open is the event they cherish the most and the Masters could very well be #2 on their list. Judging people (who have different standards) by our standards might be a mistake.

Matt W. -

Go back to my original post - I gave the nod to Trevino!

Personally, I think all this talk about Seve's persona and charisma is beside the point. He was a supremely talented golfer who posessed both great power and phenomenal touch. He may have been the most complete golfer of his time. Only Tiger has been better since.

I really do hope you get a chance to talk to his peers some time, to ask them what they thought of Seve's ability. I think you will be surprised at what you hear.

P.S. Seve won 5 World Match Play titles back when that event actually had a strong field.      

DT