Masters '09 - Euro weanies

conno16

looking back on it now you would have to say it was very disappointing from both an irish and european perspective
no real challenge worth highlighting
poulter and casey were rubbish
paddy and gmac yet again huffed and puffed just past the cut
too much pressure / attention on rory in the run-up, give the lad a chance to settle into pro golf

any comments on 'our' lack of contention?

Mister Sifter

What did you actually expect? Harrington was the only one of the Irish lads who could be considered a genuine favourite to win it beforehand. But, he's won the last two majors and isn't in great form, so it was little surprise he finished where he did. Bar a few disaster holes he would have been in the top ten.

Gmac - i think he actuall did very well to finish where he did. It was only his second time playing the Masters so i think his performance was very good.

McIlroy - superb performance from him in my opinion. The lad is 19 and has did in the past 6 months what it takes guys 10 years to do normally. To make the cut was a great achievement. Like Gmac, definite pass marks.

Maybe the talent just isn't there in Europe as people optimistically claim at times. Casey was never gonna win it after winning in Houston, and is showing real signs of progression, but the likes of Rose, Stenson, Poulter, have really failed to kick on. Westwood and Garcia were the biggest disappointments for me though.

The European performance of the week though was Sandy Lyle - great showing from the 'ol man!

conno16

Graeme1982 wrote: »

Casey was never gonna win it after winning in Houston,

wheres the logic there??

Mister Sifter

conno16 wrote: »

wheres the logic there??

The irony of you questioning the logic of someone else's post is incredible, but anyway...

It's common sense. Houston was his first US tour win. A huge moment for him that would have taken out so much. To then expect him to go and win his frst major in Augusta was a massive, massive ask. That kind of thing doesn't happen too often. It was the same with Gmac after Scottish Open last year going into the Open.

whatawaster

McIlroy did brilliantly. In fact he did exactly what i thought he'd do: play solidly all week but make 2/3 costly errors, due to his inexperience and over-aggression.
He once again showed that he's superb at coming back from setbacks. He seems to immediately forget his bad scores and he kept level headed even after his run-in with the rules officials.
I can't wait to see him at the Open, he could have a great chance.

conno16

fair enough, altho there is a strong counter arguement to that in terms of building up momentum etc
if ur logic was correct, paddy shoulda pulled out of the tour last year upon winning his first major of the year

back to the point tho - poulter is a waste of space, played well in ryder cup last year but will never win a major on american soil
garcia is beginning to look like a clown, last two years have damaged him bigtime
rose is small-time - the kinda bloke that will always play a good opening round in the open before fading off

Mister Sifter

conno16 wrote: »

fair enough, altho there is a strong counter arguement to that in terms of building up momentum etc
if ur logic was correct, paddy shoulda pulled out of the tour last year upon winning his first major of the year

Well, that's not what i'm arguing. I'm talking about someone going from winning their first US tour title to winning their first major in the space of a week. It doesn't happen like that. The addrenalin provided by the Houston win for Casey would've eventually left him mentally and phsyically drained. I'd say it really hit him on Friday or Saturday of the Masters.

Your Paddy point is miles off what i'm getting at. The circumstances were totally different and that is a very poor example of a counter argument.

L.O.F.T

conno16 wrote: »

fair enough, altho there is a strong counter
rose is small-time - the kinda bloke that will always play a good opening round in the open before fading off

I could have picked anyone of your points made but one point you made was to say a European order of Merit winner is small time just shows your inability to muster a decent argument and validate a decent point. You’re a bluffer and should listen more often instead of making seditious remarks.

conno16

L.O.F.T wrote: »

I could have picked anyone of your points made but one point you made was to say a European order of Merit winner is small time just shows your inability to muster a decent argument and validate a decent point. You’re a bluffer and should listen more often instead of making seditious remarks.

didn't monty win the order of merit as well for around 20 years on the trot
gmac will prob be in contention this year
its about as significant now as me scoring a new course record in elm green next weekend

whatawaster

conno16 wrote: »

back to the point tho - poulter is a waste of space, played well in ryder cup last year but will never win a major on american soil

Poulter almost won the Open last year and has been a consistent performer in Europe for several years.
Monty never won a major and is still in the top 10 players i've ever seen (though i'm only 23).

There are more ways of judging a player than how many majors they win ON AMERICAN SOIL.

What's so special about their soil, anyway?

whatawaster

conno16 wrote: »

didn't monty win the order of merit as well for around 20 years on the trot

yes he did, because he was for years one of the best players in the world, who came within a whisker of several majors

Mister Sifter

conno16 wrote: »

its about as significant now as me scoring a new course record in elm green next weekend

Since when have worst scores ever shot on a course been significant anyway?

conno16

and won a load of comps even he cant remember
the golf tour needs to take a good look at itself

it should be organised around maybe 12 (max 15) competitions per year
golfers could enter in others as they wish but could not clock up easy points in comps outside the golden 12
much like formula 1 for example
clearly the majors would still stand out but the others would be bigtime as well

Mister Sifter

conno16 wrote: »

it should be organised around maybe 12 (max 15) competitions per year
golfers could enter in others as they wish but could not clock up easy points in comps outside the golden 12
much like formula 1 for example
clearly the majors would still stand out but the others would be bigtime as well

Isn't that the way it's already done?

whatawaster

conno16 wrote: »

and won a load of comps even he cant remember
the golf tour needs to take a good look at itself

it should be organised around maybe 12 (max 15) competitions per year
golfers could enter in others as they wish but could not clock up easy points in comps outside the golden 12
much like formula 1 for example
clearly the majors would still stand out but the others would be bigtime as well

why does golf need to look at itself?

The vast majority of World Ranking points/fedex cup points/RTD points are gained in the massive events with world class fields – 4 majors/WGC/players championship/PGA C’Ship etc.

I really don’t see what’s dysfunctional about the game of golf at the moment?

fullstop

I've never seen someone who knows so little about something be so opinionated on that topic.

Patrick_K

Seriously lads, do you not know when someone is chucking your chain ?
This joker must be having a ball with the responses he's getting.

If he's ignored he might just go away - and yes I do see the irony in me saying that while posting on the thread :-)

conno16

i think its too easy to be deemed a successful golfer these days
the likes of gmac, poulter, rose etc are not in the same league as woods, phil, harro etc
they just build up their profile by picking off a few nonsense competitions every year and boosting their points total. one good run in a major and a player could jump maybe 500 places!

take the irish open for example - some loser will prob win it this year and fire up 50 places in the world rankings
thats a complete farce in my book

the whole ranking thing is just a nonsense at present - for example, do ye agree that kenny perry is now the 6th best golfer on the planet? or that sergio is 3rd best
give me a break like

Mister Sifter

conno16 wrote: »

i think its too easy to be deemed a successful golfer these days
the likes of gmac, poulter, rose etc are not in the same league as woods, phil, harro etc
they just build up their profile by picking off a few nonsense competitions every year and boosting their points total. one good run in a major and a player could jump maybe 500 places!

take the irish open for example - some loser will prob win it this year and fire up 50 places in the world rankings
thats a complete farce in my book

the whole ranking thing is just a nonsense at present - for example, do ye agree that kenny perry is now the 6th best golfer on the planet? or that sergio is 3rd best
give me a break like

Ok, give us your top ten.

conno16

Top 5

1. woods
2. phil
[large gap]
3. paddy
4. furyk
5. singh, v.

by rationalising the points accumulation process, we would have a real top 5
to do so now is a waste of energy

OilBeefHooked2

Patrick_K wrote: »

Seriously lads, do you not know when someone is chucking your chain ?
This joker must be having a ball with the responses he's getting.

If he's ignored he might just go away - and yes I do see the irony in me saying that while posting on the thread :-)

+1
conno6
Your a legend, I'm absolutely amazed that your still getting airtime after all these weeks, and especially from respected posters in particular.

BUACHAILL

top 10

I only see 5

conno16

my point is its a ridiculous exercise right now to name a top 10 when we've all been infected by the pga rankings approach
its a nonsense

agree 12 competitions
get the best of the best participating in them
your ranking then is determined solely by your performance in the golden 12
over and out

BUACHAILL

because you cant name 10 is why
your a fool

Patrick_K

Here's my top 10 in the world, I will update it after the next round of the "Golden 12"

1 Cabrera
2 Perry
2 Campbell
4 Katayama
5 Mickelson
6 Merrick, Flesch, Woods + Stricker - I just couldnt seperate these 4
10 Mahan, O'Hair Furyk - damn it thats 12 now isnt it, ahhhhhhh this system doesnt work !

whatawaster

conno16 wrote: »

my point is its a ridiculous exercise right now to name a top 10 when we've all been infected by the pga rankings approach
its a nonsense

agree 12 competitions
get the best of the best participating in them
your ranking then is determined solely by your performance in the golden 12
over and out

the world rankings are a fairly fair assessment of who's the best in the world at that time. It varies from time to time, but pick random times over the last few years and you'll see:

Woods, Mickleson, Singh, Els, Garcia, Harrington, Goosen, Furyk and the likes around the top 5, and others like Stenson, Casey, Stricker, Villegas, Kim, Rose etc hovering around the top 10 or so. It obviously varies depending on form.

There is no other more accurate way. Rankings in any tournament depend on how many top players are playing in it, so it is already heavily weighted towards the majors. Then the WGC's. Then . . . .

Don't even attempt to tell me that Woods, Mickleson, Singh, Els, Goosen, Harrington, Garcia, Furyk (i know i'm forgetting someone) have not been consistently the best players in the world over the last 5 years. And the rankings have reflected that. What more do you want?