How many more majors do you think Harrington will win during the rest of his career?

Pisco Sour

I had a look at the list of major winners today and Padraig Harrington is in quite an exclusive club of players who (post war) have won 3 majors. It got me thinking, how many more can he win? How far up the list of all time major winners do people think he will go by the time his competitive years are over?

Burgerman55

2 more majors
1 within the next 3 years, 2 within the next 10 years

The_Kew_Tour

Good question

always hard know but the form he has produced since start August has been very encouraging and if he seems realise that what has got him there works best for him. Its only matter time before he wins a tour event

As for majors I think there is another 3-4 majors in him, but my head thinks it will be 1-2. If I had say I go 2 majors.

Hope The Masters is one of them too. Love see him win that

fullstop

16

Johnny_Fontane

none...

he hit a purple patch but its very very difficult to win majors. he will contend and come close but wont win any more....

i'd love if he did but I cant see it.

Osgoodisgood

Probably none. He's 38 and has, at the most, a few years at his peak remaining. That combined with his desire to constantly mess around with his swing suggests it's unlikely he'll win another.

Hope I'm wrong though.

chemicalfred

Osgoodisgood wrote: »

Probably none. He's 38 and has, at the most, a few years at his peak remaining. That combined with his desire to constantly mess around with his swing suggests it's unlikely he'll win another.

Hope I'm wrong though.

Don't agree with age being an issue. Look at what Tom Watson nearly did this year. Vijay Singh peaked in his 40's. Kenny Perry still contends. If Harrington keeps himself in good condition physically he should still be capable of contending in Majors in his 40's. Other players like Faldo and Woods made major swing changes in their career with positive outcomes.

Whether he wins another major again is another matter but I would imagine he will. If I was asked for a number I would say 3

In_tuition

McIlroy expressed in an interview last week that he would like to win 1 major a year, seeing as though he has about 30 years to go, that's some ambition, thankfully he realised what he had said and he gave a smile.

As for Harrington I'd say 5.

L.O.F.T

Harrington is no doubt a world class golfer and has the ability to win any week, however he has to contend with equally world class golfers playing well on those give major weeks. This year Cink, Cabrera, YE Yang and Glover all succeed where no one thought they would before they teed it up and most pundits and commentators all expected Harrington to win one of the majors this year, He didn’t. Yes Sing, Nicklaus and Perry have played well into their 40's but they have been the exception rather than the rule. Harrington also has to content with the resurgence of Woods after rebuilding his knee and leg ( and managed to win 6 times along with the FedEx cup) and the massive influx of young, super talented, groomed and fearless golfers such as McIlroy, Ishikawa, O’Hair, Watney, ....the list is endless. I think Woods will continue to dominate the majors and the emerging talent who use Tiger Woods as a template such as his attitude towards fitness, practice and being totally immersed in golf 24/7 are those who will be challenging for majors in the next few years
Has he the ability to win more, I think yes if he plays to his full potential but can and will are two different things. 1 more major ( I ‘hope’ Im wrong)

stockdam

It's not easy to answer.

Harrington is not in the same class as Woods and there are lots of equally good players. WInning majors isn't easy and it can come down to luck (hitting form at the right time).

Monty never won any and he is as good if not better.

f22

stockdam wrote: »

Monty never won any and he is as good if not better.

Perhaps "was" may be a little more appropriate, his amateur playing partner Tim Henham outscored him last weekend in Scotland.

Aidric

I think he has another major in him but that's it.

G1032

2

Osgoodisgood

chemicalfred wrote: »

Don't agree with age being an issue. Look at what Tom Watson nearly did this year. Vijay Singh peaked in his 40's. Kenny Perry still contends. If Harrington keeps himself in good condition physically he should still be capable of contending in Majors in his 40's. Other players like Faldo and Woods made major swing changes in their career with positive outcomes.

I hear you, I just don't agree! Vijay won 3 majors, aged 35, 37 and 41. Watson won his last aged 34. Perry has come 2nd in majors twice.

As for Faldo and Woods making swing changes, they did but they made them when they were still in their 20s with arguably their best years still ahead of them.

Whether he wins another major again is another matter but I would imagine he will. If I was asked for a number I would say 3

That would make him the equal 12th biggest major winner in history. I'd be delighted if he did it but is he really in that league?

Pisco Sour

Osgoodisgood wrote: »

I hear you, I just don't agree! Vijay won 3 majors, aged 35, 37 and 41. Watson won his last aged 34. Perry has come 2nd in majors twice.

As for Faldo and Woods making swing changes, they did but they made them when they were still in their 20s with arguably their best years still ahead of them.

That would make him the equal 12th biggest major winner in history. I'd be delighted if he did it but is he really in that league?

Should we not just look at Post WW2 major winners for comparison purposes. The sport was nowhere near as competitive in the 1800's as it is now. Theres no way Harry Vardon etc should be classified as a better golfer than Harrington simply because they won more majors in an era when golf was played in only a few countries.

G1032

04072511 wrote: »

Should we not just look at Post WW2 major winners for comparison purposes. The sport was nowhere near as competitive in the 1800's as it is now. Theres no way Harry Vardon etc should be classified as a better golfer than Harrington simply because they won more majors in an era when golf was played in only a few countries.

You can't just ignore all golf played before WW2. You might not accept that Vardon was a better golfer than Harrington (although thats open to debate) but Bobby Jones was without question a better player than Harrington and maybe every pro today with the possible exception of Woods. So if you dimisss pre WW2 major winners you dismiss Jones' 13 major wins and his Grand Slam.

GreeBo

f22 wrote: »

Perhaps "was" may be a little more appropriate, his amateur playing partner Tim Henham outscored him last weekend in Scotland.

I'd be fairly confident we are comparing people in their prime, otherwise you are limited to the people still playing today?

BombSquad

Osgoodisgood wrote: »

That would make him the equal 12th biggest major winner in history. I'd be delighted if he did it but is he really in that league?

Why not? Why the inferiority complex about Irish golfers?

ronaldochokes wrote: »

but Bobby Jones was without question a better player than Harrington and maybe every pro today with the possible exception of Woods.

Why? He played in an era with little or no depth of competition... I wouldn't dismiss all of today's golfers so easily...

Adiaga 2

A little off-topic but I would rate Vardon way ahead of Harrington in terms of 'greatness' or however you want to put it. You can only judge someone against their peers and Vardon was peerless in terms of golfing ability for most of his career. He did more for professional golf than anyone before him and very few have had more of an impact since. He also gave the us the grip most of us use and his swing was like the modern golf swing than anyone else of his time. I'm a fan of Pad's but to put him ahead of Vardon is way off the mark imo.

Osgoodisgood

BombSquad wrote: »

Why not? Why the inferiority complex about Irish golfers?

No such complex here! I'd be delighted to see him win lots more. The OP asked how many more we thought he would win. Based on his age, history of meddling with his swing, the fact that people rarely win majors after their late 30s and the fact that there are a lot of players equally or more talented around that are around his age or younger I believe he is unlikely to win any more. The fact that he's Irish has nothing to do with it.

Why? He played in an era with little or no depth of competition... I wouldn't dismiss all of today's golfers so easily...

I didn't. I think the top group of today's golfers is very strong. But to suggest that players from the pre colour TV era were inferior and that their achievements are somehow less worthy is simply unfair and unmeasurable.

Mr check raise

i think theres another 2 or 3 majors left in him. hes after gettin over those swing changes that were ruining him and hes probably good for another 6 or 7 years. it not like hes overally long so losing a few yards off drives over the next few years will affect him, he'll always have that magic feel around greens

i'd also like him to go head to head with tiger again. it was really good to watch for a couple of weeks up till those disasterous 8s. hes probably the only one that could match tiger in a head to head(no offence to Yang, but everything went for him in PGA)

Pisco Sour

I still think that a major win in modern times should be weighted more than a major win in the late 1800's, early 1900's. Scotland has won 55 majors, but just 3 of these have been post war. Its hardly a case of their pre war players being so much better than their modern players. Its simply a case of it being a lot tougher to win in modern times.

Osgoodisgood

04072511 wrote: »

I still think that a major win in modern times should be weighted more than a major win in the late 1800's, early 1900's. Scotland has won 55 majors, but just 3 of these have been post war. Its hardly a case of their pre war players being so much better than their modern players. Its simply a case of it being a lot tougher to win in modern times.

While we're at it will we de-weight any majors won while Woods wasn't playing?

Pisco Sour

Osgoodisgood wrote: »

While we're at it will we de-weight any majors won while Woods wasn't playing?

Of course not, that would be silly. Injuries are a part of sport.

But there is no way that you can claim that a victory in the 1908 open would be anywhere near as difficult to achieve as a victory in the 2008 open. Golf is now a worldwide game with higher participation levels. Back in the old days it was played in the UK and US mainly.

G1032

BombSquad wrote: »

Why not? Why the inferiority complex about Irish golfers?



Why? He played in an era with little or no depth of competition... I wouldn't dismiss all of today's golfers so easily...

Jones is regarded as one of the greatest players ever to play the game. According to books written about him he was as good a ball striker and as tough a competitor as has ever lived. He is the only player to ever win the Grand Slam. You cannot just dismiss him becasue he played in the pre war era. He had plenty of competition like Walter Hagen, Ted Ray, Gene Sarazen.
And i'm not dismissing todays players at all. Far from it. I'm just asking people not to dismiss the likes of Hagen and Jones and then post war the likes of Nelson and Hogan

chemicalfred

Osgoodisgood wrote: »

I hear you, I just don't agree! Vijay won 3 majors, aged 35, 37 and 41. Watson won his last aged 34. Perry has come 2nd in majors twice.

As for Faldo and Woods making swing changes, they did but they made them when they were still in their 20s with arguably their best years still ahead of them.

That would make him the equal 12th biggest major winner in history. I'd be delighted if he did it but is he really in that league?

I just think that with the way players take care of themselves today with regard to diet an fitness that the current crop of pro's will have a longer time to be competitive at the top then the previous generation. With that in mind I think Harrington has a good 10yrs left at his peak. 3 majors in that time is not beyond the bounds of possibilities. Remember when Harrington started out people doubted his ability to make it as a pro at all, look at him now!!! With his work ethic and will to win I think we will see more majors out of him. Personally I would have more faith in someone with his work ethic than any precocious talent. There are many players with more natural talent than Harrington who have won f'all.

sweetswing

i think he could win another 3 . he is verry fit takes care of himself well, he has 3 all ready so he knows how to win majors , he is mentally tuff , a great putter , sneaky long as they say , a screw it with a bit of luck it could even be 4 come on harrington

Daithio9

33 and a half.

soundsham

if he could eliminate the brainfarts 3 or 4,
but as he has proved many times at the masters when double bogeying par 5's,
or this years pga with the 8 :eek: when in contention it seems a big number is never too far away for ph

so I'd say probably another open as this is obviously the one he is most suited to and maybe 1 more in the us I'd love it to be the green jacket

Imagine the yanks and the headlines if a paddy got to wear a green jacket!!!......:rolleyes: