Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

The Greats

Options
245

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    GreeBo
    Registered Users Posts: 27,088 ✭✭✭✭GreeBo


    Mantis Toboggan wrote: »
    If McIlroy stayed around the Mickey Mouse leagues he'd also dominate. Monty never got to world number 1, no majors and he didn't even win 1 pga tour event. Not sure how you can have him ahead of McIlroy.

    I think you deserve recognition if you dominate a tour for a decade.

    You say that McIlroy would dominate if he was on the European tour...I think thats *very* easy to say/assume. He hasnt though, so you cant give him credit for it.


  • Options
    #33
    Mantis Toboggan
    Registered Users Posts: 17,685 ✭✭✭✭Mantis Toboggan


    GreeBo wrote: »
    I think you deserve recognition if you dominate a tour for a decade.

    You say that McIlroy would dominate if he was on the European tour...I think thats *very* easy to say/assume. He hasnt though, so you cant give him credit for it.

    Monty does deserve recognition, he was an excellent player in Europe and did dominate but when he went up against the best in the world he fell short.

    Free Palestine 🇵🇸



  • Options
    #34
    bmay529
    Registered Users Posts: 400 ✭✭bmay529


    McElroy is a great golfer. No doubt about it. He has all the ability in the world. If only he could get his head together and have the determination and single mindedness of a Tiger, Koepka or one or two others I believe he could dominate as Tiger did. But that's not him. He prefers to be friendly with everyone and that is his appeal also... but so frustrating to watch at times when it effects his golf. However, I believe he will be viewed as one of the greats of the game when his career ends.


  • Options
    #35
    GreeBo
    Registered Users Posts: 27,088 ✭✭✭✭GreeBo


    Mantis Toboggan wrote: »
    Monty does deserve recognition, he was an excellent player in Europe and did dominate but when he went up against the best in the world he fell short.

    Well he dominated other european players who did win in the US and majors.

    I don't think you can exclude him, tbh I think it's based on not liking the guy.


  • Options
    #36
    Mantis Toboggan
    Registered Users Posts: 17,685 ✭✭✭✭Mantis Toboggan


    GreeBo wrote: »
    Well he dominated other european players who did win in the US and majors.

    I don't think you can exclude him, tbh I think it's based on not liking the guy.

    I didn't say I'd exclude him just that I can't have him ahead of McIlroy.

    I actually think his induction into the hall of fame was warranted despite lots arguing against it.

    Free Palestine 🇵🇸



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    GreeBo
    Registered Users Posts: 27,088 ✭✭✭✭GreeBo


    Mantis Toboggan wrote: »
    I didn't say I'd exclude him just that I can't have him ahead of McIlroy.

    I actually think his induction into the hall of fame was warranted despite lots arguing against it.

    Monty is in because of a decade of dominance, despite not getting it done in the majors (5 2nd spots though), he also made it to #2 in the world.

    Rory isnt in because he hasnt dominated or excelled in the majors yet IMO.
    If he was to kick on and get more majors then, like Brooks I would have him in, he is certainly knocking on the door, but if you include him now then there are a whole host of others you have to add which diminishes from the idea of "Great"


  • Options
    #38
    Dublin Spur
    Registered Users Posts: 3,317 ✭✭✭Dublin Spur


    Couples
    Stewart
    Norman


  • Options
    #39
    Russman
    Registered Users Posts: 5,854 ✭✭✭Russman


    Like anything like this, its very subjective about Monty.
    He's a great of European golf, but for me, not of world golf. Add in even one major and I'd probably change my mind. I guess it depends on what "great" is. 3 of the Majors are in America so there's a disadvantage there already for Europeans, probably more so back in the 90s. Gary Player always mentions about the travelling he did and what he might have won had he based himself in the States. I mean Monty's 3 consecutive BMW PGAs is mighty impressive for what is essentially our version of the USPGA which for some reason is a Major.
    I'm almost talking myself into including him now ! But no, not quite. Maybe.:D


  • Options
    #40
    Bubbaclaus
    Registered Users Posts: 4,461 ✭✭✭Bubbaclaus


    Monty (0 majors, just 10 top 10s in them and never world number 1) is ahead of McIlroy (4 majors, 22 top 10s and 2 years as world number 1) because he apparently dominated?

    Christ that's some argument.


  • Options
    #41
    GreeBo
    Registered Users Posts: 27,088 ✭✭✭✭GreeBo


    Bubbaclaus wrote: »
    Monty (0 majors, just 10 top 10s in them and never world number 1) is ahead of McIlroy (4 majors, 22 top 10s and 2 years as world number 1) because he apparently dominated?

    Christ that's some argument.

    Domination requires a time element.
    If I eagle the first hole you can't say that I dominated a course, for example.

    To put it in context, Monty basically won the Race to Dubai 7 times in a row.
    He is the 4th in the all time european tour victories with 31 events
    He won the Volvo PGA 3 times, in a row.
    He was runner up in 5 majors and held a world ranking of #2.
    He has also won 3 Senior majors, narrowly missing out on winning the PGA 3 times in a row.

    Note that its not like I'm saying Rory is nowhere near, as things stand he is next in line (but could get passed by DJ or Brooks) it all depends on what he does next.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    RoadRunner
    Registered Users Posts: 1,910 ✭✭✭RoadRunner


    As times moves on, Career longevity has reduced. Training, knowledge, travel, access to courses and winnings have improved. Someone playing a course 40 years ago would have never seen the course before their first tee. Today they can play it on a simulator and study it in great detail from google maps and know the slope of the greens. There is a far greater pool of people who can win each event.

    The definition of "great" need to also change too. We will NEVER see the days of anyone winning 18 majors or 100 european tour events and it's not because the old guys were "better". Comparing old greats with new greats on their historic achievements is as meaningless as using today's metrics to say that Charl Schwartzel's $18 million career winnings puts him head and shoulder above Jack with only a paltry $5.7 million career earnings.

    I think you need 4-5 years as the best in the world to be great. With 106weeks (OWGR) Rory is almost halfway there. He can do it without winning the masters in my opinion, but unless he can pick himself back up and kick on for the second half of his career against the new crop then he can't be seen as a great. OWGR tells who's good. Be good for a long time and you become great. There's been no one great since tiger.


  • Options
    #43
    blue note
    Registered Users Posts: 4,508 ✭✭✭blue note


    I think people are judging Monty's achievements based on how big the European tour is now. When he was winning on the European tour, they were big tournaments. Dominating the European tour for that long when he did was huge.

    That said... he played in too many majors for him to be given a pass on not winning one when it comes to being considered a great. It would be different for the likes of Christy O'Connor Sr. Back in his day the majors in America didn't get the same worldwide competition that they did in Montys day. Christy O'Connor Sr is reckoned to be one of the best in the world of his generation, but the only major he played in was the Open.


  • Options
    #44
    OEP
    Registered Users Posts: 1,157 ✭✭✭OEP


    What surprised me when I looked today was the number of missed cuts Monty had in the majors


  • Options
    #45
    GreeBo
    Registered Users Posts: 27,088 ✭✭✭✭GreeBo


    OEP wrote: »
    What surprised me when I looked today was the number of missed cuts Monty had in the majors

    Are they recent (ish) or back in his heyday?


  • Options
    #46
    Happy4all
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,089 ✭✭✭Happy4all


    GreeBo wrote: »
    McIlroy has never dominated like Monty did though, he has great patches, like DJ has at the moment, but nothing near Monty's stretch.

    Monty dominated in europe in an era that european golf wasn't that strong.

    He would beat the likes of Sam Torrance and Rocca to win european order of merit.

    Great is a big stretch.


  • Options
    #47
    OEP
    Registered Users Posts: 1,157 ✭✭✭OEP


    GreeBo wrote: »
    Are they recent (ish) or back in his heyday?

    Maybe I'm being a bit unfair. From 1992 to 2002 he missed 11 and a DQ. McIlroy has missed quite a few cuts himself.


  • Options
    #48
    willabur
    Registered Users Posts: 1,609 ✭✭✭willabur


    Monty is not a great for me.

    He has shown longevity and dominance in the tour that ranks firmly behind the PGA when it comes to status. He never made it to number 1 in the World Golf Rankings, he never won a major - worse he choked when it was there for him to win it. Its not just dominance that defines a great one but moments.

    Faldo for me is the counter point, 97 weeks at number 1 and absolutely clutch when it comes to closing out in those moments.


  • Options
    #49
    GreeBo
    Registered Users Posts: 27,088 ✭✭✭✭GreeBo


    Happy4all wrote: »
    Monty dominated in europe in an era that european golf wasn't that strong.

    He would beat the likes of Sam Torrance and Rocca to win european order of merit.

    Great is a big stretch.

    Well in 1997 he beat:
    Langer
    Westwood
    Woosnam
    Goosen
    Harrington
    Olazabal

    in 1918:
    Clarke
    Westwood
    Jimenez
    Bjorn
    Ollie
    Els
    Goosen

    in 2005:
    Campbell
    Goosen
    Cabrera
    garcia
    Stenson
    Bjorn
    Ollie

    I think perhaps you are being a tad unfair or else have forgotten what the talent used to be like on the European Tour back then.


  • Options
    #50
    GreeBo
    Registered Users Posts: 27,088 ✭✭✭✭GreeBo


    willabur wrote: »
    Monty is not a great for me.

    He has shown longevity and dominance in the tour that ranks firmly behind the PGA when it comes to status.

    It ranks firmly behind it now, back then not so much I would say.

    Seve, Langer, Ollie, Woosnam, Lyle, Faldo, Price, Els, Goosen, Cabrera, Garcia, Bjorn, these are all the guys where were playing back then.


  • Options
    #51
    Bubbaclaus
    Registered Users Posts: 4,461 ✭✭✭Bubbaclaus


    So Monty is ahead because he dominated in the 90s apparently, but then we have the following:

    Monty 1990s
    0 majors
    21 wins between both main tours
    0 weeks #1
    4 major top 5s
    8 major top 10s

    McIlroy 2010s
    4 majors
    24 wins between both main tours
    106 weeks #1
    11 major top 5s
    18 major top 10s

    I'm not seeing the domination to be honest, with all due respect to Monty.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    GreeBo
    Registered Users Posts: 27,088 ✭✭✭✭GreeBo


    Bubbaclaus wrote: »
    So Monty is ahead because he dominated in the 90s apparently, but then we have the following:

    Monty 1990s
    0 majors
    21 wins between both main tours
    0 weeks #1
    4 major top 5s
    8 major top 10s

    McIlroy 2010s
    4 majors
    24 wins between both main tours
    106 weeks #1
    11 major top 5s
    18 major top 10s

    I'm not seeing the domination to be honest, with all due respect to Monty.


    It's in the Race to Dubai, which he won 7 times in a row, 8 total.

    Rory has won it 4 times. I wouldn't include the FedEx up as the ranking system has changed multiple times and doesn't directly correlate.
    The weeks at #1 is closest, but since its over a 2 year stretch its again hard to compare.


  • Options
    #53
    Happy4all
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,089 ✭✭✭Happy4all


    GreeBo wrote: »
    Well in 1997 he beat:
    Langer
    Westwood
    Woosnam
    Goosen
    Harrington
    Olazabal

    in 1918:
    Clarke
    Westwood
    Jimenez
    Bjorn
    Ollie
    Els
    Goosen

    in 2005:
    Campbell
    Goosen
    Cabrera
    garcia
    Stenson
    Bjorn
    Ollie

    I think perhaps you are being a tad unfair or else have forgotten what the talent used to be like on the European Tour back then.

    Most of them rivals won majors in the same years

    Personal opinions.

    For me he was very good but he would never spring to mind as one of the greats of golf.


  • Options
    #54
    Mysterypunter
    Registered Users Posts: 2,807 ✭✭✭Mysterypunter


    Russman wrote: »
    Did he ever really have many chances though ? I can’t remember many bar the two playoff losses, which in fairness are a bit like penalty shootouts.

    Ohh, forgot about the duffed 7 iron at Winged Foot.

    He played 75 majors, so he had 75 chances. Dominated European golf for sure, but as someone else said in this thread, Ray Floyd won 4 majors, McIlroy has 4, and Jordan Speith has 3, so Monty is not an all time great.


  • Options
    #55
    Russman
    Registered Users Posts: 5,854 ✭✭✭Russman


    Mysterypunter wrote: »
    He played 75 majors, so he had 75 chances. Dominated European golf for sure, but as someone else said in this thread, Ray Floyd won 4 majors, McIlroy has 4, and Jordan Speith has 3, so Monty is not an all time great.

    Ohh I agree with you. I meant did he even have many chances coming down the stretch, or even going into the Sunday. I can't remember too many times where he was really in the shake up. A lot was made of him finishing second to Tiger in St Andrews but he was never winning that one. A bit like Poulter's finish at Birkdale behind Harrington, he was never really in the mix. Ogilvy's US Open is the one that got away from him I think.


  • Options
    #56
    GreeBo
    Registered Users Posts: 27,088 ✭✭✭✭GreeBo


    Happy4all wrote: »
    Most of them rivals won majors in the same years

    Personal opinions.

    For me he was very good but he would never spring to mind as one of the greats of golf.

    But then that means he dominated a tour that contained multiple, multi major winners ! :)


  • Options
    #57
    Russman
    Registered Users Posts: 5,854 ✭✭✭Russman


    Is Davis Love III in the conversation ? Just thought of him there. 2 Players and a Major. 20+ wins. World Cup with Freddie multiple times.


  • Options
    #58
    GreeBo
    Registered Users Posts: 27,088 ✭✭✭✭GreeBo


    Mysterypunter wrote: »
    He played 75 majors, so he had 75 chances. Dominated European golf for sure, but as someone else said in this thread, Ray Floyd won 4 majors, McIlroy has 4, and Jordan Speith has 3, so Monty is not an all time great.

    So we are back to "Majors = Greatness" again?
    I think thats far too simplistic, as it means someone with 3 is automatically less great than someone with 4, which isnt the case.

    Russman wrote: »
    Ohh I agree with you. I meant did he even have many chances coming down the stretch, or even going into the Sunday. I can't remember too many times where he was really in the shake up. A lot was made of him finishing second to Tiger in St Andrews but he was never winning that one. A bit like Poulter's finish at Birkdale behind Harrington, he was never really in the mix. Ogilvy's US Open is the one that got away from him I think.

    Well he has 5 2nd places, and I wouldnt include all 75 appearances, would be more realistic to say he had 40-50 appearances throughout his prime.


  • Options
    #59
    GreeBo
    Registered Users Posts: 27,088 ✭✭✭✭GreeBo


    Russman wrote: »
    Is Davis Love III in the conversation ? Just thought of him there. 2 Players and a Major. 20+ wins. World Cup with Freddie multiple times.

    I dont include world cup, ryder cup, presidents cup (or olympics) since its not a field of the best in the world, its broken up by countries etc.


  • Options
    #60
    Russman
    Registered Users Posts: 5,854 ✭✭✭Russman


    GreeBo wrote: »
    But then that means he dominated a tour that contained multiple, multi major winners ! :)

    His achievements are fantastic, no doubt, and there was a brief time when he was arguably the second best player in the world. Even throw in his fearsome Ryder Cup record. But to be brutally harsh, consistent underachievement in the Majors keeps him off my list.

    I don't want to demean the Euro Tour but in hindsight sometimes his OoM wins were essentially rewards for good attendance, he rarely travelled to the States for the abuse he got and his peers were often over there for longer stretches. A giant of European golf for sure, World golf, I'm not fully convinced.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #61
    Russman
    Registered Users Posts: 5,854 ✭✭✭Russman


    GreeBo wrote: »
    I dont include world cup, ryder cup, presidents cup (or olympics) since its not a field of the best in the world, its broken up by countries etc.

    Nor is The Masters :D:D

    I do agree with you though:)


Advertisement