timd77
Assistant Pro
Who decides what’s a major and what’s not?
D
Deleted member 23270
Guest
It is a phrase coined by a player years ago (Palmer?) and it just stuck I believe. I'm sure foxholer will be along soon to put us all right.
r0wly86
Head Pro
Gert rid of the PGA and have the fourth major on rotation around the world, different country and venue every year
D
Deleted member 23344
Guest
Canary_Yellow
Journeyman Pro
Who was the last person to win a major that would not have been in the Masters field?
D
Deleted member 23270
Guest
Don't know, why don't you google it?
Off the top of my head.....Paul Lawrie, Darren Clarke, John Daly, Todd Hamilton, Ben Curtis, Phil Mickelson all won majors when outside the top 50.
Last edited by a moderator:
Canary_Yellow
Journeyman Pro
Funnily enough, I tried googling it but the answer wasn't easy to find, or at least I couldn't find it.
I guess it might be Clarke? Increasingly unusual for winners of majors to come from outside the top 50, certainly in the last 15 years
D
Deleted member 23270
Guest
Yep unlikely but it does happen which is why I would like to see the Masters invite OWGR top 100.
Canary_Yellow
Journeyman Pro
Yes, I'm all in favour of there being more golf for me to watch. Which is the biggest thing I'd change - broadcast every shot please!
As you say at the outset, it's a beautiful course, great to look at, seems to produce good drama, but the fuss and rules etc I can live without.
phillarrow
Well-known member
It's not just the winners either though, there's been some cracking battles down the stretch involving players of a wide range of world rankings in big tournaments.
In some cases, even in losing these battles, they can be the springboard to greater success.
In almost every case, Cinderella stories make for great sporting drama.
By having such a limited field, I do think it's a shame that the masters reduces the chances for stories like this.
In some cases, even in losing these battles, they can be the springboard to greater success.
In almost every case, Cinderella stories make for great sporting drama.
By having such a limited field, I do think it's a shame that the masters reduces the chances for stories like this.
Canary_Yellow
Journeyman Pro
Yes, I have a dreadful memory so can't think of what those are, but I don't doubt you're right.
What are the arguments against expanding the field? Exclusivity? But not sure really whose interests that serves.
Ethan
Money List Winner
The Masters is in some ways an anachronism and it has had a colourful (ahem) past, but is clearly in the same category as The Open, The US Open with The PGA Championship lagging a bit behind. It has a little too much independence for my taste, and can introduce its own ball or rule on club length if it wants, and it seems ridiculous that the 51st best player in the OWGR doesn't get in while the winner of the US Mid-Amateur does. Too much reliance on the PGA Tour - the winner of the John Deere Classic gets in, but the winner of the The BMW PGA and other high end European Tour events don't get in, although from this year The Scottish Open does (as a co-sanctioned event). In some ways it is a glorified PGA Tour event with some special invitees.
In the 70s and 80s, it was much worse, sometimes with only the winner of the European Order of Merit getting in automatically.
In the 70s and 80s, it was much worse, sometimes with only the winner of the European Order of Merit getting in automatically.
Similar threads
