I had some time over the past couple weekends to delve into the scoring averages as a ranking method. If one intends to prove that Tiger is far and away the GOAT and muddy the waters if Nicklaus is even second, this is the method they should use.
A quick look at Vardon Trophy (lowest scoring average) winners from 1947-2019 and understanding of a methodology change in calculations from 1988-current is in order. From 1947-1987, this was awarded based on raw scoring average. From 1988-current, a weighting/adjustment was added (I'm guessing as an attempt to factor in strength of field and course conditions) that adds additional strokes to a players total for each tournament and minimum rounds lowered from 80 to 60. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vardon_Trophy
Compared to the ZOJO, 45 under par, 5 at par, 26 over par: https://www.pgatour.com/tournaments/the-zozo-championship/past-results.2020.html The adjustment for this tournament was 1.975. I guess the adjustment could theoretically go negative, but haven't seen that happen and would require the majority of the field being over par.
The winning scoring average was remarkably steady from the 1951-1987 era (69.82-70.89) winning every year), the adjustment era of 1988-current is remarkably steady as well, but about a stroke lower (68.70-69.92) winning every year, so it appears the adjustment is a bit off so feel free to tack on an additional stroke for equipment advancements.
Oh wait, 1988-current has one notable exception, Eldrick Tont. Of the nine wins he's had of the Vardon Trophy, seven have beat the best anyone else has won with, with two being nearly a full stroke lower than any other winner at 67.79. He's in a class by himself.
How many times did Jack win the Vardon you may ask? A big fat zero. The 60s were owned by Palmer (4x) and Casper (5x) with Dave Hill sneaking one in in 1969. The 70s? Trevino (4x + 1980), Watson (3x), and Crampton (2x) with Don January sneaking one in in 1976. A couple of Jack's misses were pretty narrow, but for the GOAT to never eke out even one?
Thanks @Skin2 for making me look into scoring and not just wins/majors. Palmer, Casper, and Trevino deserve some upward adjustment in the all-time list too.
I wish there was something similar to the Baseball-Reference.com site for golf or even better a database to query, but PGA.com seems to only focus on current year and pulling together data from many individual courses is tedious and incomplete at best for direct course comparisons.
ETA: I know it's really early in the season, but so far Tiger @ #1 has a nearly 1.8 stroke average advantage over #2/last year's winner.
Oh, and just for Augusta, the top 5 stroke average leaders, 25 rounds minimum, and prior to Tiger's win last year all happen to be active players, so I don't put a lot of stock in scoring as an equalizer between generations:
Tiger Woods -- 70.93
Phil Mickelson -- 71.30
Jason Day -- 71.55
Rory McIlroy -- 71.61
Justin Rose -- 71.73
well done creating distance right off the bat. when you really break it down, the gap between Tiger and Jack is pretty profound. and it ties into the other thread -- having a greater # of majors is just a notional idea of who is/was goatier.
@galaxy27 said:
well done creating distance right off the bat. when you really break it down, the gap between Tiger and Jack is pretty profound. and it ties into the other thread -- having a greater # of majors is just a notional idea of who is/was goatier.
Tiger had GOAT wrapped up a decade ago. Maybe his US Open win on a broken leg was the definitive event in golf.
He blew it though. A decade of car wrecks, divorce, concubines, surgeries, a DUI, and by his standards, mediocre to putrid golf.
He got a bunch of the goodwill back in the last year with the Fedex pseudo win, matching the career wins record and of course the Masters.
Four more majors and he is slam dunk GOAT. Two more, maybe.
Most important is he is more likeable now. Enjoys the game and I can sort of cheer for him. That will never be a researchable stat, but a tiny part of being the greatest is having folks like you.
@galaxy27 said:
well done creating distance right off the bat. when you really break it down, the gap between Tiger and Jack is pretty profound. and it ties into the other thread -- having a greater # of majors is just a notional idea of who is/was goatier.
Tiger had GOAT wrapped up a decade ago. Maybe his US Open win on a broken leg was the definitive event in golf.
He blew it though. A decade of car wrecks, divorce, concubines, surgeries, a DUI, and by his standards, mediocre to putrid golf.
He got a bunch of the goodwill back in the last year with the Fedex pseudo win, matching the career wins record and of course the Masters.
Four more majors and he is slam dunk GOAT. Two more, maybe.
Most important is he is more likeable now. Enjoys the game and I can sort of cheer for him. That will never be a researchable stat, but a tiny part of being the greatest is having folks like you.
arnie..........arnie.........arnie ;-)
2013,14 and 15 Certificate Award Winner Harmon Killebrew Master Set and Master Topps Set
@ScoobyDoo2 said:
I always enjoyed Greg Norman.... not the greatest but honorable mention.
Agreed, The Shark was great to watch and probably slides into my top 16-20 bracket all time. If he could have converted some of those 2nd place major finishes (8) into wins instead of only winning two, I'd bump him up from that. Still some impressive stats w/88 worldwide wins (only 20 on the PGA tour) and 331 weeks @ world #1.
this is another one of those "Era Comparisons" which end up saying the guy who won the most Championships is the greatest, an excercise in futility.
Golf renders that type of discussion as "unable to be done" due to the equipment changes. the Golf Ball used today bears little resemblance to those used 50 years ago. the Courses in play today bear little resemblance to those of long ago with special grass and machinery to keep them in a condition that Ben Hogan probably never saw.
and don't even get me started on the Golf Clubs themselves. only consider the "Driver" used today, it probably has a "sweet spot" that is larger in size than the entire club face that those old timers were using. the comparison between now-and-then is so warped by technology that it isn't possible to have it.
Comments
I had some time over the past couple weekends to delve into the scoring averages as a ranking method. If one intends to prove that Tiger is far and away the GOAT and muddy the waters if Nicklaus is even second, this is the method they should use.
A quick look at Vardon Trophy (lowest scoring average) winners from 1947-2019 and understanding of a methodology change in calculations from 1988-current is in order. From 1947-1987, this was awarded based on raw scoring average. From 1988-current, a weighting/adjustment was added (I'm guessing as an attempt to factor in strength of field and course conditions) that adds additional strokes to a players total for each tournament and minimum rounds lowered from 80 to 60. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vardon_Trophy
A quick example from recent tournaments, the Shriner's is a weak field event w/ 75 of 76 who made the cut finishing under par: https://www.pgatour.com/tournaments/shriners-hospitals-for-children-open/past-results.2020.html The adjustment for this tournament was +8.905 (divide by 4 to get the per round adjusment).
Compared to the ZOJO, 45 under par, 5 at par, 26 over par: https://www.pgatour.com/tournaments/the-zozo-championship/past-results.2020.html The adjustment for this tournament was 1.975. I guess the adjustment could theoretically go negative, but haven't seen that happen and would require the majority of the field being over par.
The winning scoring average was remarkably steady from the 1951-1987 era (69.82-70.89) winning every year), the adjustment era of 1988-current is remarkably steady as well, but about a stroke lower (68.70-69.92) winning every year, so it appears the adjustment is a bit off so feel free to tack on an additional stroke for equipment advancements.
Oh wait, 1988-current has one notable exception, Eldrick Tont. Of the nine wins he's had of the Vardon Trophy, seven have beat the best anyone else has won with, with two being nearly a full stroke lower than any other winner at 67.79. He's in a class by himself.
How many times did Jack win the Vardon you may ask? A big fat zero. The 60s were owned by Palmer (4x) and Casper (5x) with Dave Hill sneaking one in in 1969. The 70s? Trevino (4x + 1980), Watson (3x), and Crampton (2x) with Don January sneaking one in in 1976. A couple of Jack's misses were pretty narrow, but for the GOAT to never eke out even one?
Thanks @Skin2 for making me look into scoring and not just wins/majors. Palmer, Casper, and Trevino deserve some upward adjustment in the all-time list too.
I wish there was something similar to the Baseball-Reference.com site for golf or even better a database to query, but PGA.com seems to only focus on current year and pulling together data from many individual courses is tedious and incomplete at best for direct course comparisons.
ETA: I know it's really early in the season, but so far Tiger @ #1 has a nearly 1.8 stroke average advantage over #2/last year's winner.
Oh, and just for Augusta, the top 5 stroke average leaders, 25 rounds minimum, and prior to Tiger's win last year all happen to be active players, so I don't put a lot of stock in scoring as an equalizer between generations:
Tiger Woods -- 70.93
Phil Mickelson -- 71.30
Jason Day -- 71.55
Rory McIlroy -- 71.61
Justin Rose -- 71.73
well done creating distance right off the bat. when you really break it down, the gap between Tiger and Jack is pretty profound. and it ties into the other thread -- having a greater # of majors is just a notional idea of who is/was goatier.
you'll never be able to outrun a bad diet
>
BOTH my dad's and my favorite players getting some love here.
YES!
ARNIE........ARNIE.............ARNIE! ;-)
Tiger had GOAT wrapped up a decade ago. Maybe his US Open win on a broken leg was the definitive event in golf.
He blew it though. A decade of car wrecks, divorce, concubines, surgeries, a DUI, and by his standards, mediocre to putrid golf.
He got a bunch of the goodwill back in the last year with the Fedex pseudo win, matching the career wins record and of course the Masters.
Four more majors and he is slam dunk GOAT. Two more, maybe.
Most important is he is more likeable now. Enjoys the game and I can sort of cheer for him. That will never be a researchable stat, but a tiny part of being the greatest is having folks like you.
arnie..........arnie.........arnie ;-)
I always enjoyed Greg Norman.... not the greatest but honorable mention.
Agreed, The Shark was great to watch and probably slides into my top 16-20 bracket all time. If he could have converted some of those 2nd place major finishes (8) into wins instead of only winning two, I'd bump him up from that. Still some impressive stats w/88 worldwide wins (only 20 on the PGA tour) and 331 weeks @ world #1.
this is another one of those "Era Comparisons" which end up saying the guy who won the most Championships is the greatest, an excercise in futility.
Golf renders that type of discussion as "unable to be done" due to the equipment changes. the Golf Ball used today bears little resemblance to those used 50 years ago. the Courses in play today bear little resemblance to those of long ago with special grass and machinery to keep them in a condition that Ben Hogan probably never saw.
and don't even get me started on the Golf Clubs themselves. only consider the "Driver" used today, it probably has a "sweet spot" that is larger in size than the entire club face that those old timers were using. the comparison between now-and-then is so warped by technology that it isn't possible to have it.
The new drivers are actually vintage Volkswagon Beetles laying on their side, attached to a shaft.