Rory McIlroy - 4 Time Major Winner

Remind me

OEP wrote: »

It will be interesting to see how Koepka gets on this year. No one, since Tiger, has managed to dominate in the majors for more than about 2 years. McIlroy had his stint, then Spieth, then Koepka. It also shows that unless you're a freak like Tiger, it's near impossible to dominate for long periods.

Add Harrington to that list

slave1

Rory's playing super stuff but in reality it's largely a math result, Brooks has -57.17 points in calendar year 2020 alone versus Rory's -12.51 and there's your difference, along with Brooks has played 5 tournaments since the Tour Championship versus Rory's 9 and of course Brook's results reflect his injury recovery phase

bren2001

slave1 wrote: »

Rory's playing super stuff but in reality it's largely a math result, Brooks has -57.17 points in calendar year 2020 alone versus Rory's -12.51 and there's your difference, along with Brooks has played 5 tournaments since the Tour Championship versus Rory's 9 and of course Brook's results reflect his injury recovery phase

You're very wide of the mark there slave1 on how the rankings work.

1. The number of tournaments played is somewhat irrelevant if you've played more than 40 in the last 24 months (from the top of my head, not 100% sure on the time frame). The are not cumulative they are averaged. Rory has played 5 more tournaments than Brookes but his points total is divided by 48 as opposed to 43. On average, over the last 2 years, Rory has, on average, out performed Koepka. I think we would all agree this is the case. Brookes is poor in regular events.

2. Points lost in 2020 is again, kind of an irrelevant number. They are the tournaments that have dropped off Koepkas points total. However, the divisor drops by 1 each time a tournament is dropped from his calculation. If a win drops off, your average score will go down. If a missed cut or poor performance drops off, your points go up.

What the ranking show, is that Rory has been the most consistent player on average over the last 2 years.

prawnsambo

bren2001 wrote: »

You're very wide of the mark there slave1 on how the rankings work.

1. The number of tournaments played is somewhat irrelevant if you've played more than 40 in the last 24 months (from the top of my head, not 100% sure on the time frame). The are not cumulative they are averaged. Rory has played 5 more tournaments than Brookes but his points total is divided by 48 as opposed to 43. On average, over the last 2 years, Rory has, on average, out performed Koepka. I think we would all agree this is the case. Brookes is poor in regular events.

2. Points lost in 2020 is again, kind of an irrelevant number. They are the tournaments that have dropped off Koepkas points total. However, the divisor drops by 1 each time a tournament is dropped from his calculation. If a win drops off, your average score will go down. If a missed cut or poor performance drops off, your points go up.

What the ranking show, is that Rory has been the most consistent player on average over the last 2 years.

You have the time frame correct. there's also a maximum number (52) of tournaments that can be divided into the points total. Then there's also a reduction in the points tally for each tournament on a sliding scale before they drop off the calculation entirely. Basically it's weighted towards the more recent tournaments.

Edit: Just looked it up there. Points for the most recent 13 weeks remain the same. After that, they are reduced equally over the next 91 weeks. So as an example, a 100 point win will hold at 100 for 13 weeks and then reduce by 100/91 each week for the remaining 91 weeks.

abff

prawnsambo wrote: »

You have the time frame correct. there's also a maximum number (52) of tournaments that can be divided into the points total. Then there's also a reduction in the points tally for each tournament on a sliding scale before they drop off the calculation entirely. Basically it's weighted towards the more recent tournaments.

Edit: Just looked it up there. Points for the most recent 13 weeks remain the same. After that, they are reduced equally over the next 91 weeks. So as an example, a 100 point win will hold at 100 for 13 weeks and then reduce by 100/91 each week for the remaining 91 weeks.

That sums it up pretty well. But the reduction factor is 1/92 each week, not 1/91. So you get 91/92 in week 14 and 1/92 in week 104. Of course, if you’ve played more than 52 tournaments in the past two years, it’s only the most recent 52 that count, so the overall average reduction factor is likely to be slightly less. And if you’ve played fewer than 40 tournaments, your overall adjusted points total is divided by 40, rather than the number of tournaments played.

Officially confirmed for the Irish Open

FixdePitchmark

Exactly wrote: »

Officially confirmed for the Irish Open

So was just an issue with Mcginley so.

Mushy

FixdePitchmark wrote: »

So was just an issue with Mcginley so.

Or if he played irish open itd be 7 weeks in a row

BigChap1759

FixdePitchmark wrote: »

So was just an issue with Mcginley so.

Defo was

Dav010

Great to see him back at the Irish Open. There could be a lot of factors why he has decided to play, not least of which is his own personal reasons for doing so. There is also the possibility that the negative press he received last year made him consider it this year, and the fact that Mount Juliet can cater for players to stay on site. No mater the reasons, it’s a huge boost for the tournament and especially the fans.

slave1

He has a good chance on a parkland course, he’s an also ran on the links these days

Bubbaclaus

slave1 wrote: »

He has a good chance on a parkland course, he’s an also ran on the links these days

Top 5 in 4 of his last 5 Open Championships is an also ran?

rooney30

slave1 wrote: »

He has a good chance on a parkland course, he’s an also ran on the links these days

As mentioned top 5 in 4 of the last 5 opens . Followed him a fair bit around Birkdale in 2017. Had a slump I form around that time and wasn’t
playing his best stuff, still managed T4 though . He can play links

Joe_ Public

You'll always hear it said that his preferred high ball flight mitigates against him when it comes to links golf. Dont know what's in that. I heard no less an authority than Padraig Harrington take a contrary view anyway.

slave1

slave1 wrote: »

He has a good chance on a parkland course, he’s an also ran on the links these days

Bubbaclaus wrote: »

Top 5 in 4 of his last 5 Open Championships is an also ran?

Meant in the context of the Irish Open where his links record in recent years is poop IIRC

slave1

slave1 wrote: »

Meant in the context of the Irish Open where his links record in recent years is poop IIRC

He was also tournament host most of those years which brings its own difficulties.

SeeMoreBut

Rory McIlroy calls for 'streamlining' of golf tournament schedule

https://www.skysports.com/golf/news/12176/11949582/rory-mcilroy-calls-for-streamlining-of-golf-tournament-schedule

All well in good when you are not a journey man

Banner2theend

SeeMoreBut wrote: »

Rory McIlroy calls for 'streamlining' of golf tournament schedule

https://www.skysports.com/golf/news/12176/11949582/rory-mcilroy-calls-for-streamlining-of-golf-tournament-schedule

All well in good when you are not a journey man

Extremely elitest and foolish comments from Rory. Disappointed that he would come out with such drivel.:mad:

prawnsambo

Banner2theend wrote: »

Extremely elitest and foolish comments from Rory. Disappointed that he would come out with such drivel.:mad:

It's a response to the proposed Premier League of Golf which is even more elitist. Taking the top players away from the tours would reduce the available purses on those tours and create a two-tier system.

GreeBo

prawnsambo wrote: »

It's a response to the proposed Premier League of Golf which is even more elitist. Taking the top players away from the tours would reduce the available purses on those tours and create a two-tier system.

There are already multiple tiers?!

Banner2theend

prawnsambo wrote: »

It's a response to the proposed Premier League of Golf which is even more elitist. Taking the top players away from the tours would reduce the available purses on those tours and create a two-tier system.

He called for a streamlining of the world tours. He even said himself that those "streamlining" comments could be called elitest. Have to agree with you that this premier league golf concept can be called a golden wheelbarrow for these rich over-pampered golfers. Would be a disaster for the PGA tour but would be much worse for the European tour if players jumped ship for this new pro golf tour.

In a time where golf is trying to become more socially inclusive, this PLG jamboree will only lead to the narrative by many that the game is elitist and that perception in itself cannot be good for golf.

BoardsMember

I wouldn't be too harsh on him for the streamlining, he just wants to play less and earn more. So would I if I was him.

What I found curious was his take on Covid-9, contrasting/comparing with his approach to the Zika virus....

"If the organisers and the Olympic committee believe it’s safe enough that athletes can go and compete, then you have to take their word for it. They’re obviously liaising with the people that are the best at doing this. If they’re speaking to those people and those people are the best in their field, then you have to trust that their judgment is the right one."

prawnsambo

GreeBo wrote: »

There are already multiple tiers?!

Well clearly within the top tier. I am aware that there are multiple tiers below the PGA and European Tours.

Russman

Banner2theend wrote: »

Extremely elitest and foolish comments from Rory. Disappointed that he would come out with such drivel.:mad:

I wouldn't call it drivel just because I disagree with it tbh.
I think he has a point, in a way, although I totally disagree with limited field events with no cut. You're not too far off Tiger's gathering in the winter where they get ranking points, when small fields and no cut comes into play. I think he also selectively misses the point that the real reason for small fields with no cut in the likes of the Far East is purely because the Americans simply wouldn't bother travelling otherwise. Your run of the mill journeyman on the PGA Tour couldn't be ar$ed flying abroad to miss a cut and make no coin.

I mean, look at the Florida swing, you've got Honda, Bay Hill, The Players, & Valspar, each of which is a very good tournament in its own right and would deserve a top class field, yet, I'd guess very few of the top guys will play all 4 or even 3 out of 4. Was Honda in any way memorable ? I don't think so tbh, and Valspar will probably be the same. I honestly think the new condensed season doesn't work and every event almost has to be a "top" event to survive, yet the guys simply can't play every week and presumably have to miss events they might ordinarily like to play.

AdamD

I like Rory but that's a stupid comment. The top players streamline it as is, they only play 12-14 tournaments anyway. Doesn't effect Rory that the tour continues on when he has weeks off..

Rikand

BoardsMember wrote: »

I wouldn't be too harsh on him for the streamlining, he just wants to play less and earn more. So would I if I was him.

What I found curious was his take on Covid-9, contrasting/comparing with his approach to the Zika virus....

"If the organisers and the Olympic committee believe it’s safe enough that athletes can go and compete, then you have to take their word for it. They’re obviously liaising with the people that are the best at doing this. If they’re speaking to those people and those people are the best in their field, then you have to trust that their judgment is the right one."

Basically, hes raging that he missed the last one

prawnsambo

AdamD wrote: »

I like Rory but that's a stupid comment. The top players streamline it as is, they only play 12-14 tournaments anyway. Doesn't effect Rory that the tour continues on when he has weeks off..

They play a fair bit more than 12-14 events. Tiger Woods has said he only wants to play 12 a year, but he's 44 with a poor injury profile.

Most of the top guys are playing twenty and upwards a year. You only have to look at the OWGR website to confirm that. Rory has averaged 24 over the last two years, as has Rahm. Koepka 22, but he's been injured.

prawnsambo

Rikand wrote: »

Basically, hes raging that he missed the last one

Every time he stands on the first tee with Justin Rose and hears him introduced as 'Olympic Champion' he's internally going "fúckitfúckitfúckitfúckit..."

prawnsambo

prawnsambo wrote: »

Every time he stands on the first tee with Justin Rose and hears him introduced as 'Olympic Champion' he's internally going "fúckitfúckitfúckitfúckit..."

He's actually playing with him today and Molinari. Out just before 1pm our time.

Koepka has to win and Rory finish outside the Top 10 for him to be displaced as World Number 1.

Either cases are likely to happen. More likely Rory to win and Koepka be outside the Top 10.

+1 after 6 to -4 after 14