I swore “Good Morning America” claimed Tiger Woods is still ranked #1 despite not winning a tournament in a year (give or take). If I heard correctly, what does this say about the #2 ranked pro golfer???
It’s Phil Mickleson, and he was very far behind Tiger. He only won once this year. That said, Mickleson has had the opportunity to take the World #1 title in about his last five events, but is coughing up hairballs the size of grapefruits whenever he gets close.
Tiger had a huge lead going into 2010 because of his outstanding year in 2009.
2009 results still count a significant portion of the calculations. I have done some calculations and if the results were only from the last 12 months, TW would not be number 1.
Depending on the assumptions for attrition, TW would be about 15th (he still has some good results from late last year). Players like Mickelson, Els, Westwood, Kaymer, Oosthuizen, Rose, McIlroy, Furyk, Mahan would be ahead of him.
He is losing ground quickly and if doesn’t start having good results soon, he will lose the #1 spot by default. He is trending to be about 6th at the end of the year, depending how he finishes the year and how others player finish.
Since the beginning of the year, Mickelson has increased his average by about 11% while Tiger’s average has decreased by 35%.
Current
TW 9.42
PM 8.99
1/3/10
TW 14.40
PM 8.10
IMO, the ranking period is 12 months too long. US Open results from 15 months ago should have no bearing on who is currently the best golfer. The system is designed to not be volatile.
Tennis rankings are a rolling 12 month period, but the points are not depreciated like they are in golf. Points earned in golf are spoilage free for 3 months and then depreciate ~1.1% per week after the 3 free months. After 104 weeks, (2 yrs) the points disappear. The points are then divided by the number of events a player plays with a minimum divisor of 40 events.
FTR, Tiger won the BMW tournament in mid September last year, and another tournament in Australia in November.