# PGA Tour 2015 **URL:** \ **Category:** The Game Room\ **Created:** [February 1, 2015, 10:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pga-tour-2015/711549 "2015-02-01T22:26:15Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 6
**Author:** ![parkona\_driveway](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/d26b3c/32.png) [@parkona\_driveway](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/parkona_driveway)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2015, 2:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pga-tour-2015/711549/101 "2015-04-13T14:59:29Z")
> [@Lochdale](#): > > If Spieth wins, at let’s say 18 under. Is it the greatest major performance ever or is that a bit much to say? > > > [@TonySinclair](#): > > > > IMO, the winning score is not as indicative as the margin of victory. A large victory margin is a good indicator that the winner established total control over the outcome. Alternately, we can compare the winning score to the average. This indicator is known as the “z-score.” Here are the best Masters z-scores, as of last year: > **[Bubba Watson’s Masters Performance Was Better Than You Think](https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/bubba-watsons-masters-performance-was-better-than-you-think/)** > > Bubba Watson captured his second green jacket Sunday, winning the Masters Tournament by three strokes over Jonas Blixt and Jordan Spieth. The 20-year-old Spieth… By this measure, the 1965 Nicklaus win tops the list, despite a lesser victory margin than Tiger achieved in 1997. This year’s result by Spieth is scored at minus-2.8: [http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fancy-stats/wp/2015/04/13/jordan-spieth-was-more-dominating-in-first-masters-win-than-tiger-woods/](http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fancy-stats/wp/2015/04/13/jordan-spieth-was-more-dominating-in-first-masters-win-than-tiger-woods/) Spieth’s z-score now ranks 5th all-time (between 1964 Arnold Palmer and 1996 Nick Faldo). Here’s a (2011) list of z-score rankings for all majors (since 1960): > **[» Relative Dominance](https://grantland.com/features/relative-dominance/)** Tiger’s 2000 US Open is easily the best. ---
**Author:** ![Zakalwe](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/zakalwe/32/270_2.png) [@Zakalwe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zakalwe)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2015, 3:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pga-tour-2015/711549/102 "2015-04-13T15:40:54Z")
> [@parkona\_driveway](#): > > Do you plan to offer prize money? I would not, no. Given the selection format I’ve said I prefer, too many of the results would effectively be out of a player’s hands. I could maybe see a “participation payment” to help the lower ranked players defray expenses and pay their caddies. ---
**Author:** ![parkona\_driveway](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/d26b3c/32.png) [@parkona\_driveway](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/parkona_driveway)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2015, 6:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pga-tour-2015/711549/103 "2015-04-13T18:18:19Z")
I respectfully vote no to the Ryder Cup expansion idea. I think Rory McIlroy summarized the event perfectly in 2009: > **[Rory McIlroy's 'exhibition' remark riles Ryder Cup captain Colin Montgomerie](https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2009/may/14/colin-montgomerie-rory-mcilroy)** > > Rory McIlory will have an interesting round in tandem with Colin Montgomerie, a man he managed to annoy after final practice > [@](#): > > The Ryder Cup is a great spectacle but an exhibition at the end of the day and it should be there to be enjoyed. In the big scheme of things it’s not that important to me. I suspect several other players would agree if they were allowed to be honest. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2015, 7:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pga-tour-2015/711549/104 "2015-04-13T19:12:06Z")
> [@parkona\_driveway](#): > > I respectfully vote no to the Ryder Cup expansion idea. I think Rory McIlroy summarized the event perfectly in 2009: > > [Rory McIlroy's 'exhibition' remark riles Ryder Cup captain Colin Montgomerie | Colin Montgomerie | The Guardian](http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2009/may/14/colin-montgomerie-rory-mcilroy) > > I suspect several other players would agree if they were allowed to be honest. Especially the Americans. Golf is not a team sport. To me, the Ryder Cup is a sort of goofy sideshow. It can be fun to watch, but ultimately means nothing. Having said that, I will say that the FedEx Cup has turned out to be something worthwhile. When they first announced it, it seemed not only impossible to understand, but completely unececessary. ---
**Author:** ![Dinsdale](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/97f17d/32.png) [@Dinsdale](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dinsdale)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2015, 8:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pga-tour-2015/711549/105 "2015-04-13T20:04:42Z")
My only question: which is more BS - inability to “activate his glutes”, or “a bone popped out and I just popped it back in. No big deal.”?! 😃 Dunno about the cottage cheese - seemed like every shot of the guys teeing off on 1 had (IMO) an extremely hot woman in the background. Was a little sad when the last pair went off… Watched most of the final round on FF. Not much passing for drama. Spieth is a heck of a player. Just one more young gun who doesn’t know enough to participate in the traditional “Tiger fade” of a decade ago. Tiger is still a phenomenal talent. He’s capable of a top 10 in any tourney he enters. And lightning will strike such that he gets hot (and healthy) enough to win several more tourneys. But the margin is getting finer and finer in terms of majors. His evermore limited schedule makes it even harder for me to care about him. He comes out of the blue for a big event, then disappears for a month. If years pass and he doesn’t grab a couple more Ws, will we see him playing the John Deere to try to pass Sammy? Wonder how that wrist is feeling today… Hell of a competitor, to follow that up with an eagle. Wish he wasn’t such an asshole, and that SOMEONE had stepped forward to challenge him when he was at his peak. ---
**Author:** ![TonySinclair](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/49beb7/32.png) [@TonySinclair](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TonySinclair)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2015, 10:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pga-tour-2015/711549/106 "2015-04-13T22:07:57Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > I care about the nature shots. 🙂 > > Really, I do. Augusta is absolutely gorgeous and in HD it’s almost like being there. But this isn’t an MTV video where we’re switching scenes avery 3 seconds. If they cut out all the “non golf” stuff by they leaders, it would be confusing as hell because scenes would switching constantly and there aren’t enough roving commentators to make sense of it all. I agree, Augusta is gorgeous (I attended a couple of Masters back in the 80’s, and it was breathtaking in person), but it’s not like the golfers are in a studio. You see Augusta all around them. Cutting away to show a heron for a few seconds is fine, but there’s no need for a five-minute travelogue. That’s what the pre-show is for. As for MTV direction, that’s not what I want. Of course they should take 20 seconds or so to provide context for the shots. But there is no need whatever to show a player taking two minutes to choose his club. Putting the broadcast on a 20-second delay would allow them to know when he finally hits his shot, so they could cut to him then and set up the shot for the viewer. It might even allow them to do what every mom and pop radio station has done for 50 years, and bleep out the cursing, which is destroying the moral fiber of our nation’s youth. ---
**Author:** ![TonySinclair](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/49beb7/32.png) [@TonySinclair](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TonySinclair)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2015, 11:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pga-tour-2015/711549/107 "2015-04-13T23:38:38Z")
> [@parkona\_driveway](#): > > A large victory margin is a good indicator that the winner established total control over the outcome. > > Alternately, we can compare the winning score to the average. This indicator is known as the “z-score.” Here are the best Masters z-scores, as of last year: > > [Bubba Watson’s Masters Performance Was Better Than You Think | FiveThirtyEight](http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/bubba-watsons-masters-performance-was-better-than-you-think/) > > By this measure, the 1965 Nicklaus win tops the list, despite a lesser victory margin than Tiger achieved in 1997. > > This year’s result by Spieth is scored at minus-2.8: > > [http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fancy-stats/wp/2015/04/13/jordan-spieth-was-more-dominating-in-first-masters-win-than-tiger-woods/](http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fancy-stats/wp/2015/04/13/jordan-spieth-was-more-dominating-in-first-masters-win-than-tiger-woods/) > > Spieth’s z-score now ranks 5th all-time (between 1964 Arnold Palmer and 1996 Nick Faldo). > > Here’s a (2011) list of z-score rankings for all majors (since 1960): > > [» Relative Dominance](http://grantland.com/features/relative-dominance/) > > Tiger’s 2000 US Open is easily the best. Thanks for the very interesting links, but I have to believe that something is wrong with the methodology when it put’s Faldo’s 1996 win in the top five of dominating performances. The 1996 Masters is remembered as arguably the most spectacular collapse of a final round leader in major championship history. Even Van de Velde only blew one hole, not the whole round. The problem may be that the Masters has a much smaller and weaker field than the other majors, since it only invites 70-100 players, and includes many amateurs, old-timers, and Asian players who really don’t belong in a world class event. So comparing the winner’s score against the field average may be misleading. I enthusiastically agree that Jack’s 1965 Masters belongs at or near the top, though. I watched every minute of that on TV, and was blown away. That was the event that made Jack my favorite golfer, a position he held for 32 years. ---
**Author:** ![notfrommensa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/f14d63/32.png) [@notfrommensa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/notfrommensa)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2015, 11:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pga-tour-2015/711549/108 "2015-04-13T23:59:46Z")
> [@TonySinclair](#): > > Thanks for the very interesting links, but I have to believe that something is wrong with the methodology when it put’s Faldo’s 1996 win in the top five of dominating performances. The 1996 Masters is remembered as arguably the most spectacular collapse of a final round leader in major championship history. Even Van de Velde only blew one hole, not the whole round. > > The problem may be that the Masters has a much smaller and weaker field than the other majors, since it only invites 70-100 players, and includes many amateurs, old-timers, and Asian players who really don’t belong in a world class event. So comparing the winner’s score against the field average may be misleading. > > I enthusiastically agree that Jack’s 1965 Masters belongs at or near the top, though. I watched every minute of that on TV, and was blown away. That was the event that made Jack my favorite golfer, a position he held for 32 years. Their analysis only counts the players that made the cut. And only 44 players made the cut in 1996. > [@](#): > > For the purposes of this study, we analyzed the scores produced by players in every major since 1960,2 including only those players who completed four rounds. Performances in any sort of playoff were ignored. The fact that Norman choked has no bearing on the analysis. ```auto 276 … Nick Faldo 281 … Greg Norman 282 … Phil Mickelson 283 … Frank Nobilo 284 … Scott Hoch 284 … Duffy Waldorf 285 … Davis Love 285 … Jeff Maggert 285 … Corey Pavin 286 … David Frost 286 … Scott McCarron 287 … Ernie Els 287 … Lee Janzen 287 … Bob Tway 288 … Mark Calcavecchia 288 … Fred Couples 289 … John Huston 290 … Paul Azinger 290 … David Duval 290 … Tom Lehman 290 … Mark O'Meara 290 … Nick Price 291 … Larry Mize 291 … Loren Roberts 292 … Brad Faxon 292 … Ray Floyd 292 … Justin Leonard 293 … Bob Estes 294 … John Daly 294 … Jim Furyk 294 … Jim Gallagher Jr. 294 … Hale Irwin 294 … Scott Simpson 294 … Craig Stadler 294 … Ian Woosnam 295 … Fred Funk 295 … Jay Haas 295 … Bernhard Langer 296 … Colin Montgomerie 296 … Vijay Singh 297 … Steve Lowery 297 … Jack Nicklaus 299 … Seve Ballesteros 302 … Alexander Cejka ===== 290.3 … Mean 5.3 … Std Deviation 290.32 = Mean of 72 Hole scores 5.29 = Standard Deviation of 72 Holes scores ``` (290.32 - 276)/5.29 = 2.70 ---
**Author:** ![notfrommensa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/f14d63/32.png) [@notfrommensa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/notfrommensa)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2015, 12:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pga-tour-2015/711549/109 "2015-04-14T00:07:21Z")
Whenever Tiger does make an appearance on the PGATour, I hope he says something like “I need Reps” ---
**Author:** ![TonySinclair](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/49beb7/32.png) [@TonySinclair](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TonySinclair)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2015, 12:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pga-tour-2015/711549/110 "2015-04-14T00:12:27Z")
> [@notfrommensa](#): > > Whenever Tiger does make an appearance on the PGATour, I hope he says something like “I need Reps” Hard to see how he can ever top “my glutes are shutting off.” It’s right up there with Mike Tyson saying, after a bad loss, that he planned to retire and just “fade into Bolivia.” I’ve long maintained that Tiger is the best golfer ever, but I’ve never claimed he’s the smartest. That would be Jack. ---
**Author:** ![TonySinclair](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/49beb7/32.png) [@TonySinclair](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TonySinclair)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2015, 12:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pga-tour-2015/711549/111 "2015-04-14T00:17:44Z")
> [@notfrommensa](#): > > The fact that Norman choked has no bearing on the analysis. Maybe I’m misunderstanding you. How can you say a guy had a dominating performance, if he was six shots back after three rounds? ---
**Author:** ![notfrommensa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/f14d63/32.png) [@notfrommensa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/notfrommensa)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2015, 12:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pga-tour-2015/711549/112 "2015-04-14T00:26:26Z")
> [@TonySinclair](#): > > Maybe I’m misunderstanding you. How can you say a guy had a dominating performance, if he was six shots back after three rounds? Numbers don’t say that, people do. Faldo beat the mean score by 2.7 Standard Deviations. ---
**Author:** ![parkona\_driveway](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/d26b3c/32.png) [@parkona\_driveway](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/parkona_driveway)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2015, 1:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pga-tour-2015/711549/113 "2015-04-14T01:26:09Z")
As you guys have noted, the wacky 1996 Masters exemplifies the limitations of analysis via strict mathematical formula. I notice on the top 20 list for all majors, the British Open Championship dominates with 10 appearances. I have no theory to explain the tendency, so I’ll write it off to small sample size 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![TonySinclair](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/49beb7/32.png) [@TonySinclair](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TonySinclair)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2015, 2:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pga-tour-2015/711549/114 "2015-04-14T02:27:34Z")
> [@parkona\_driveway](#): > > As you guys have noted, the wacky 1996 Masters exemplifies the limitations of analysis via strict mathematical formula. > > I notice on the top 20 list for all majors, the British Open Championship dominates with 10 appearances. I have no theory to explain the tendency, so I’ll write it off to small sample size 🙂 If they were all pre-1980 Opens, it would be easy to explain — very weak fields. For example, the 1962 Open is 11th on the list. It was won by Arnold Palmer, in a year when probably 80 of the top 100 golfers in the world were Americans, but only 4 Americans under 50 years old were in the field against Arnie. So it probably had a far weaker field than most regular PGA events of that time, let alone today. But they have several post-1980 Opens in the list, too, so I don’t know. I just don’t think it’s a very indicative stat. ---
**Author:** ![notfrommensa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/f14d63/32.png) [@notfrommensa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/notfrommensa)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2015, 2:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pga-tour-2015/711549/115 "2015-04-14T02:51:28Z")
> [@parkona\_driveway](#): > > As you guys have noted, the wacky 1996 Masters exemplifies the limitations of analysis via strict mathematical formula. > > I notice on the top 20 list for all majors, the British Open Championship dominates with 10 appearances. I have no theory to explain the tendency, so I’ll write it off to small sample size 🙂 Its also noteworthy that the 1977 British Open has both Watson and Nicklaus on the list. Because they distanced themselves from the pack. ---
**Author:** ![DKW](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dkw/32/3118_2.png) [@DKW](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DKW)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2015, 3:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pga-tour-2015/711549/116 "2015-04-14T03:04:08Z")
The problem when someone roars past the field in the early going is that there are only two possibilities, either he’s never seriously challenged (which is boring), or he collapses and we get a 75-post treatise on how Greg Norman and Jean Van De Velde match up (which is nauseating). Remember the days when Bill Elliott had a 20 car length lead by about lap 10 and the ESPN commentators had to talk about team owners and proposed rule changes and chassis manufacturers for two freaking hours? Same deal here. I do want to chime in a bit, though, so random stuffs on the big names: Spieth - Let’s just get this out of the way: this is a well-mannered, classy gentleman who respects the traditions of the game, who also happens to be hotter than molten lead and has his whole future ahead of him. Whatever place his win occupies on any dominance list, you have to concede that he is a SUPER MEGA AWESOME thing for American golf. I’m not sure if you’ve noticed it, but the big names we have are starting to get old, and the new blood is either inconsistent, flawed, or just not that great. I have no idea how far he’s going to go, but I do know for absolute certain that it’s going to be a thrilling ride, and that’s something I haven’t been able to say for any American for a while. Mickelson - Strong, made the clutch shots he had to, caught a few breaks, just not quite overwhelming enough to do better than 2nd. His postgame interview spoke volumes; he was…gasp…_humble_, and he didn’t begrudge the champion anything. Look, I know there’s been this or that rap on him, but he’s come so far from the spastic gravelbrain who ranted about how it was so impressive Tiger could win with such crappy equipment (remember that one?), I gotta give him props. He’s one of the good guys now…deal with it. McIlroy - Once again proving that he’s the real deal and making me very relieved that I will not have to hear any nonsense about a “PGA Tour Game Curse”. I think the relatively tame hype around him has mostly to do with the fact that we’re not used to a dominating Brit. Luke Donald was a flash in the pan, Lee Westwood never panned out, and the less said about Colin flippin’ Montgomerie, the better. That plus Tiger’s raised the bar so much, it’s taking a while for McIlroy’s dominance to really sink in. Barring some catastrophe, however, he’ll continue making an impact and won’t surrender the crown easily. Woods - This won’t be a popular opinion (“No, Darrell, really??” 🙂 ), but I watched him for four rounds, and he did…pretty much as I expected. Struggle a bit early due to rust, put up an okay but not impressive first round, gradually regain his form and confidence, make the cut comfortably, make a bit of a move but never catch fire, and finish somewhere in the middle of the pack. I’m not about to make any predictions about him (I’m no glutton for punishment), but I’d be very surprised if he ever returned to his 2013 form. All those crushing shots have taken a heavy toll (the full extent of which we probably won’t even know until well after he’s retired), and he’s not getting any younger. If you’re a big fan, just keep watching and hoping. If you’re a hater…best move on; this horse may not be dead just yet, but it’s pretty ill. Just like to throw a question out there, though: Does anyone here actually _want_ him to break Sam Snead’s record of 82 tournament wins? Let’s be honest; in any sport with a wide variety of levels and fields, just “winning a tournament” doesn’t mean a lot in the grand scheme of things. In tennis, journeymen regularly clobber superstars in low-level events because the journeyman needs the win and the superstar is only there to fill a quota. Especially given that Tiger isn’t, y’know, all that popular right now, I could very well see this going the the way of the single-quarter assists record in basketball, an answer to a trivia question. (“How did a short, skinny, balding guy who’s whiter than a radish dipped in cornstarch get to be in NBA Jam?”) ---
**Author:** ![Lamar\_Mundane](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/85f322/32.png) [@Lamar\_Mundane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lamar_Mundane)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2015, 3:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pga-tour-2015/711549/117 "2015-04-14T03:35:30Z")
> [@DKW](#): > > The problem when someone roars past the field in the early going is that there are only two possibilities, either he’s never seriously challenged (which is boring), or he collapses and we get a 75-post treatise on how Greg Norman and Jean Van De Velde match up (which is nauseating). Remember the days when Bill Elliott had a 20 car length lead by about lap 10 and the ESPN commentators had to talk about team owners and proposed rule changes and chassis manufacturers for two freaking hours? Same deal here. > > I do want to chime in a bit, though, so random stuffs on the big names: > > Spieth - Let’s just get this out of the way: this is a well-mannered, classy gentleman who respects the traditions of the game, who also happens to be hotter than molten lead and has his whole future ahead of him. Whatever place his win occupies on any dominance list, you have to concede that he is a SUPER MEGA AWESOME thing for American golf. I’m not sure if you’ve noticed it, but the big names we have are starting to get old, and the new blood is either inconsistent, flawed, or just not that great. I have no idea how far he’s going to go, but I do know for absolute certain that it’s going to be a thrilling ride, and that’s something I haven’t been able to say for any American for a while. > > Mickelson - Strong, made the clutch shots he had to, caught a few breaks, just not quite overwhelming enough to do better than 2nd. His postgame interview spoke volumes; he was…gasp…_humble_, and he didn’t begrudge the champion anything. Look, I know there’s been this or that rap on him, but he’s come so far from the spastic gravelbrain who ranted about how it was so impressive Tiger could win with such crappy equipment (remember that one?), I gotta give him props. He’s one of the good guys now…deal with it. > > McIlroy - Once again proving that he’s the real deal and making me very relieved that I will not have to hear any nonsense about a “PGA Tour Game Curse”. I think the relatively tame hype around him has mostly to do with the fact that we’re not used to a dominating Brit. Luke Donald was a flash in the pan, Lee Westwood never panned out, and the less said about Colin flippin’ Montgomerie, the better. That plus Tiger’s raised the bar so much, it’s taking a while for McIlroy’s dominance to really sink in. Barring some catastrophe, however, he’ll continue making an impact and won’t surrender the crown easily. > > Woods - This won’t be a popular opinion (“No, Darrell, really??” 🙂 ), but I watched him for four rounds, and he did…pretty much as I expected. Struggle a bit early due to rust, put up an okay but not impressive first round, gradually regain his form and confidence, make the cut comfortably, make a bit of a move but never catch fire, and finish somewhere in the middle of the pack. I’m not about to make any predictions about him (I’m no glutton for punishment), but I’d be very surprised if he ever returned to his 2013 form. All those crushing shots have taken a heavy toll (the full extent of which we probably won’t even know until well after he’s retired), and he’s not getting any younger. If you’re a big fan, just keep watching and hoping. If you’re a hater…best move on; this horse may not be dead just yet, but it’s pretty ill. > > Just like to throw a question out there, though: Does anyone here actually _want_ him to break Sam Snead’s record of 82 tournament wins? Let’s be honest; in any sport with a wide variety of levels and fields, just “winning a tournament” doesn’t mean a lot in the grand scheme of things. In tennis, journeymen regularly clobber superstars in low-level events because the journeyman needs the win and the superstar is only there to fill a quota. Especially given that Tiger isn’t, y’know, all that popular right now, I could very well see this going the the way of the single-quarter assists record in basketball, an answer to a trivia question. (“How did a short, skinny, balding guy who’s whiter than a radish dipped in cornstarch get to be in NBA Jam?”) Yeah, I want him to break Snead’s record. I think he is the best golfer of all time and deserves to be recognized as such. Maybe he isn’t popular among the crowd you run in, but he’s incredibly popular. Tournaments he plays in get double the ratings of those where he’s not. You may think he just did OK in the Masters, but for his first tournament in two and a half months after back surgery it was an incredible performance. People made a big deal about Rory McIlroy not playing for two weeks. ---
**Author:** ![TonySinclair](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/49beb7/32.png) [@TonySinclair](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TonySinclair)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2015, 8:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pga-tour-2015/711549/118 "2015-04-14T08:16:42Z")
> [@DKW](#): > > Just like to throw a question out there, though: Does anyone here actually _want_ him to break Sam Snead’s record of 82 tournament wins? Absolutely. Given his strength of schedule, I consider it much more impressive than getting 18, or even 20, majors. He did what he had to do to get his card when he was 20, and he played the low-rent Buick Open for several years because he was sponsored by Buick. Other than that, he has pretty much played only the toughest events every year — majors, WGCs, and the strongest regular PGA and Euro Tour events. To have so many wins against the best fields, especially when he plays so few events each year, is incredible. I don’t know why it hasn’t already been done, but some day, somebody is going to compile all the data from the various pro tours, and figure out what the world rankings would have been for years prior to 1986, and what the strength of field was for the majors before 1986 (I won’t say McCormack’s rankings are a complete joke, but they’re useless for this purpose). I’ll be amazed if Jack’s Memorial Tournament didn’t have a stronger field every year since 1990 than three out of four majors he played in before 1975, even if you assume that golf is the only sport where a good (not great, but good) pro today wouldn’t eat the lunch of a good pro from 50 years ago. ---
**Author:** ![John\_DiFool](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_difool/32/19543_2.png) [@John\_DiFool](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_DiFool)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2015, 11:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pga-tour-2015/711549/119 "2015-04-14T11:51:39Z")
> [@DKW](#): > > McIlroy - Once again proving that he’s the real deal and making me very relieved that I will not have to hear any nonsense about a “PGA Tour Game Curse”. I think the relatively tame hype around him has mostly to do with the fact that we’re not used to a dominating Brit. Luke Donald was a flash in the pan, Lee Westwood never panned out, and the less said about Colin flippin’ Montgomerie, the better. That plus Tiger’s raised the bar so much, it’s taking a while for McIlroy’s dominance to really sink in. Barring some catastrophe, however, he’ll continue making an impact and won’t surrender the crown easily. Well, there is the other 2nd place finisher, he’s won one major… ---
**Author:** ![notfrommensa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/f14d63/32.png) [@notfrommensa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/notfrommensa)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2015, 2:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pga-tour-2015/711549/120 "2015-04-14T14:03:56Z")
> [@DKW](#): > > Just like to throw a question out there, though: Does anyone here actually _want_ him to break Sam Snead’s record of 82 tournament wins? If you read golf forums, the most rabid of Tiger fans already think that he has beat Sam Snead’s record. You could almost call a grass roots movements to re-write the history books because Sam Snead has team wins in his win total. Its almost as if they are putting a tin foil hats and claiming the PGA Tour conspired to pad Sam Sneads win total from 50-80 years ago because they knew a minority golfer would be challenging his record in the 21st century. What they don’t realize is that Snead has many unofficial wins from that period that might be deemed to be official if the PGATour attempts to re-write and scrutinize the record book. IMO, if Woods goes winless for another couple years, this clamoring is going to get more and more traction. And they may no like the results if it ever happens. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pga-tour-2015/711549.md?page=5) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pga-tour-2015/711549.md?page=7)