Arthur Wedge
Well-known member
They aren’t bad records - Monty was in two playoffs -and also had multiple top 10’s
It was the same with Donald
But they all earned their right to get into the majors
LIV Golf
- Thread starter MarkT
- Start date
They aren’t bad records - Monty was in two playoffs -and also had multiple top 10’s
It was the same with Donald
But they all earned their right to get into the majors
They were two I picked at Random. Plenty of others from both sides of the pond you could add
wjemather
Well-known member
As an example, Mark McNulty spent a long time in the top-10 (and a very long time in the top-50) of the owgr and finished his career with just 2 top-10s in majors (one top 5), both in 1990.
However, I wouldn't describe a record with more than a dozen top-30 major finishes as poor, but then I'm not shifting goalposts to justify an opinion formed without sufficient knowledge of the subject.
Edit to add: I was going to say spare us the "McNulty wasn't world-class" speech but too late now!
Last edited:
Arthur Wedge
Well-known member
Mark McNulty - guess that depends on what someone thinks is world class
Another solid pro who at least got a runner up in the Open and another top 10 place
Don’t think he even won in the US ?
Prob have him along the likes of Sam Torrance , Howard Clark etc - decent tour golfers on the European tour
Edit - just seen your edit - are you moving it to top 30’s in majors now ? Next time you will say it’s making cuts
Think it’s very simple
LIV fans weren’t demanding for the likes of Burmester to be in majors based on winning events on the Dp tour - when they moved to LIV it all changed and it seems moving Tour increased someone’s ability to challenge in the majors
What we have seen is the real top players who before LIV was around challenged and won majors are still the players that are good enough to be winning them
The players that struggled to qualify for majors or challenge in them before LIV still didn’t challenge when they got into a major
Last edited:
Swango1980
Well-known member
It's a pointless argument if it is based on the subjective nature of how one defines "world-class".
I'm not sure many would put Mark McNulty in the world-class category
D
Deleted member 21784
Guest
Ive never seen people so uninterested in a subject spend so much time discussing it
Ricky Gervais guitar lessons springs to mind
Ricky Gervais guitar lessons springs to mind
Arthur Wedge
Well-known member
What a strange irrelevant post
D
Deleted member 21784
Guest
Arthur Wedge
Well-known member
World class gets thrown around easily in most sports
Very hard to quantify tbh
I also look more at a tier levels
The guys right at the top Tier 1
Those that have won multiple majors , world number 1 for weeks upon weeks - consistent winner on the PGAT etc
The likes of
Rory , Scheffler , Koepka , BDC , Rahm etc
In the past
Woods , Mickelson , Seve , Faldo etc
SteveW86
Head Pro
Wonder if you guys could pick a topic out of a hat at random and still argue the pros/cons of it. 
Swango1980
Well-known member
I've just gone onto a random topic generator. The topic that was given was:Wonder if you guys could pick a topic out of a hat at random and still argue the pros/cons of it.
Cotton
Get your debates ready
SteveW86
Head Pro
I've just gone onto a random topic generator. The topic that was given was:
Cotton
Get your debates ready
That’s quite a risky one to start with given the history of cotton farming
I’m talking specifically about the argument that play on Liv should lead directly to qualification in majors. Some arguing as high as Top 12 or all event winners
Current evidence shows that performance on Liv does not translate to equivalent major performance.
The same scrutiny should also apply to some of the lower ‘ranked’ PGAT events where winners get auto invites to Masters. I’m not sure they’re rooting up trees after a good few days in an opposite event field/autumn swing
Sample size remains small, and variance in golf is high, so it just shows the majors are doing the right thing by taking time and easing into it.
Cotton - first recorded in Southern India
Mel Smooth
Hacker
I'd definitely have pressed the button again on that one
. Spin again.........Swango1980
Well-known member
I suppose the purpose of qualification isn't to get the Top x number of players in the world (x being the field size), as slots will be open to amateurs, PGA club pros, past champions, etc (criteria depending on the Major we are discussing of course)
So, I wouldn't be against the Top y players from LIV qualifying for Majors (would it be the same for each Major?). That qualification process can be reviewed over time depending on how much value they bring to the Majors
I know complexity is difficult for you, so let’s try and keep this as simple as possible
Both of the below can be true at the same time
The topic of Liv, the divide it has caused, the drama and politics it has created, the pathway forward for professional golf now can be a highly interesting topic for debate
The golf on Liv, the format, teams, courses, depth, history, legacy etc can be incredibly dull and uninteresting (to some)
Swango1980
Well-known member
Of course LIV are trending. The whole golfing audience have had their first glimpse of LIV players in many many months, so they will be part of the conversation.We are Trending even when the next LIV event is well over a week away….
I'm not sure how much of the content is positive and negative, and I imagine very little of the chat is about LIV itself, but rather the players specifically.
SteveW86
Head Pro
We are Trending even when the next LIV event is well over a week away….
Won’t be long before the number of posts in this thread outweigh the number of people who watch a LiV event on TV
