'To be No1 in the world you should have won a major' ??

[Mr_T]

In my opinion Luke is the best player in the world, consistent golf over 2 years, top of both money lists, yes he hasn't won a major but they are 4 tournmanents out of god knows how many, look at monty, in his prime he was a great player and he hasn't won a major, i think any tour pro can win a major, all it takes is a good week and Luke just hasn't had one yet, he will get one, I have no doubts about that, but I wish the media would praise him for his achievements rather than try and pick out flaws

 

[Mr_T]

And to be perfectly honest I don't count the USPGA as much of a major, seems like a bit of a money making afterthought to me really

 

[TRS30]

Skys treat of Donald is disgraceful. They bang on about Westwood like the sun shines out of his @ss when Donald has amuch better record over the last two years.

 

[richart]

And to be perfectly honest I don't count the USPGA as much of a major, seems like a bit of a money making afterthought to me really

The USPGA has been played since 1916, and is open to all the top golfers in the world. The Masters has been played since 1934 and is open to a limited field including past winners. If the USPGA is a money making after thought, what does that make the Masters ?

 

[viscount17]

World rankings should be based on results over a single season, not rolled over.
There also needs to be a rationalisation of points awarded for different events, as it is there is a heavy bias on US events, some of them pretty weak imo.

 

[Imurg]

What a waste of a thread.

To even think that a Major HAS to in your back pocket to be No.1 is, quite frankly, ludicrous.

 

[bluetoon]

What a waste of a thread.

To even think that a Major HAS to in your back pocket to be No.1 is, quite frankly, ludicrous.

Oh Oh!!, looks like i'm in the minority here then.

When i think of someone being No1, i think of 'Greatness'

Sure you can be F1 champion having never won a race in the season, Sure you can be League champion having not beat all the 'big' teams, blah , blah.

If Number 1 means a consistant year then thats not for me, and dare i say it not the rest of the general Public.

For No1 to mean 'greatness' then there has to be a Major in their somewhere.

Unfortunately, Unless Westwood, or Donald bag a Major then their career will be missing something, just ask Monty who would trade in an OOM title for a major.

If these guys dont bag a major then history wont remember them very kindly. Regardless of how many times they got to Number one,

I'm sure Luke would give up his No1 title like a shot for a Major.

 

[paddyc]

The whole world ranking points system needs overhauling as some mediocre events carry far more ranking points than other high profile events, for example Lee Westwood entered and won the Indonesian Masters,only because of the points on offer, but what other big names played in that, however he couldn't be arsed with the so called 5th major the Players Championship because there was not the ranking points on offer.

I think Donal is right to be no 1 for his consistency and he has won a WGC event which Westwood has never won and for Luuuuuuuke to be No1 in Europe and America (which I am sure he will be) is an unbelievable achievement

 

[Imurg]

How History remembers them is irrelvent.

Q. Is Luke Donald currently the best player in the World..?

A. Yes. The way the Best PLayer is determined is by a process called the World Ranking system. It provides points based on performances. The best points average heads the rankings and is deemed to be the Best Player in the World.


To be Number 1 in anything you have to play the best, score the most(not golf!), run the fastest, throw the furthest, sell the most etc etc etc

Greatness in Golf is something achieved over many many years of Competition. Greats include Jack, Arnie, Gary, Tom, Tiger, Greg, Seve, Sir Nick.....
Greats do not include GMac, Lee, Rory, Luke, Adam, Jason, Zach, Dustin etc etc

Some day, some of the 2nd group may become Greats if they win enough Majors.
It won't , however, stop them possibly becoming the current Best Player in the World.

Who is currently the Best Footballer in the World - arguably it's Messi. Has he won a World Cup? NO? Then he can't possibly be the best in the World........

Get real...........

 

[bluetoon]

How History remembers them is irrelvent.

Q. Is Luke Donald currently the best player in the World..?

A. Yes. The way the Best PLayer is determined is by a process called the World Ranking system. It provides points based on performances. The best points average heads the rankings and is deemed to be the Best Player in the World.


To be Number 1 in anything you have to play the best, score the most(not golf!), run the fastest, throw the furthest, sell the most etc etc etc

Greatness in Golf is something achieved over many many years of Competition. Greats include Jack, Arnie, Gary, Tom, Tiger, Greg, Seve, Sir Nick.....
Greats do not include GMac, Lee, Rory, Luke, Adam, Jason, Zach, Dustin etc etc

Some day, some of the 2nd group may become Greats if they win enough Majors.
It won't , however, stop them possibly becoming the current Best Player in the World.

Who is currently the Best Footballer in the World - arguably it's Messi. Has he won a World Cup? NO? Then he can't possibly be the best in the World........

Get real...........

I am,

You ask anybody in the highsteet who is the best golfer in the world right now.
The answers will be 'Tiger' 'Rory' etc

Why, because they make the headlines with moments of 'greatness' along side consistancy.

Donald, Westwood ? Who are they again!! What did they win.
Like I said Ask Monty.

 

[Cheifi0]

The number one spot in golf is an indication of who is currently playing the most competitive golf and scoring well over the recent past, which I believe Luke thoroughly deserves at the moment. What you refer to as greatness bluetoon, I believe is a comparison of said player to all players to have played the game and conversations on this topic could rage on relentlessly discussing strength of the field during that era, equipment used, challegene of the courses played etc (Just like any sport). Luke has some way to be seen as one of golfs greats (but so does McIlroy) but that doesn't detract from the fact that he is the best golfer at this current moment.

 

[markyjee]

I think the way the wgr work is pretty good, Lots of comments about Luke being number 1 because he consistently gets top 10s, he has won 4 times this year which i think is more than anyone else, deserves his position as No1

 

[need_my_wedge]

Oh Oh!!, looks like i'm in the minority here then.

When i think of someone being No1, i think of 'Greatness'

Sure you can be F1 champion having never won a race in the season, Sure you can be League champion having not beat all the 'big' teams, blah , blah.

If Number 1 means a consistant year then thats not for me, and dare i say it not the rest of the general Public.

For No1 to mean 'greatness' then there has to be a Major in their somewhere.

Unfortunately, Unless Westwood, or Donald bag a Major then their career will be missing something, just ask Monty who would trade in an OOM title for a major.

If these guys dont bag a major then history wont remember them very kindly. Regardless of how many times they got to Number one,

I'm sure Luke would give up his No1 title like a shot for a Major.

So how do you count it based on Majors. If you take 2009/ 2010 there were 8 different major winners

Mickelson, GMac, Oosthuizen, Kaymer, Cabrera, Glover, Cink and YE Yang

Assuming none of them won any other tournaments during that period (or by your reckoning it doesn't matter about other tournaments anyways), how do you choose which of that eight is No1? By rule of winning a major, means that there are 8 world number 1's. If you base it on total majors won, then surely Nicklaus is the world No 1 even though he's not playing competitive any more, which means that Tiger never was No1.

I'm sure all golfers would like to win a major, and would give up a lot to achieve that, but winning a major does not make you world No1, just ask Cink, Glover, GMac etc..........

There is a distinct difference between greatness and world number 1. greatness is based on how many tournaments/ Majors you win over your career, and you can achieve this while you are halfway through your career ala Tiger, Seve, Sir Nick etc. World number 1 is based on how well you play over a two year period. Right now that's Luke, and it's a title well deserved, regardless of whether he has a major in his pocket yet or not.

 

[Wildrover]

The whole world ranking points system needs overhauling as some mediocre events carry far more ranking points than other high profile events, for example Lee Westwood entered and won the Indonesian Masters,only because of the points on offer, but what other big names played in that, however he couldn't be arsed with the so called 5th major the Players Championship because there was not the ranking points on offer.

Actually Lee didn't enter the players because he wasn't a member of the PGA Tour so he couldn't get into it as he didn't have enough starts with his other commitments in other US events so if anybody was at fault it was the protectionist attitude of the PGA Tour.

 

[Wildrover]

You're allowed to get lucky twice now are we. You just dont get lucky playing the best in the world.

OK Tommo, I give you...................Scott Simpson!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Imurg]

You're allowed to get lucky twice now are we. You just dont get lucky playing the best in the world.

OK Tommo, I give you...................Scott Simpson!!!!!!!!!!!

Closely followed by.......

Andy North.........

 

[Lawrence22]

The whole world ranking points system needs overhauling as some mediocre events carry far more ranking points than other high profile events, for example Lee Westwood entered and won the Indonesian Masters,only because of the points on offer, but what other big names played in that, however he couldn't be arsed with the so called 5th major the Players Championship because there was not the ranking points on offer.

I think Donal is right to be no 1 for his consistency and he has won a WGC event which Westwood has never won and for Luuuuuuuke to be No1 in Europe and America (which I am sure he will be) is an unbelievable achievement

Sorry but this is total rubbish. KJ Choi got 80 ranking points for winning the players while Lee bagged 20 points for winning in Indonesia. You can check it OWGR website if you don't believe me.

 

[Scottjd1]

Its never going to be an exact science but overall i'm pretty happy witht he way they work out the World ranking, its not that often I look at the table and theink...They don't deserve to be there!

Majors are big events, difficult to win and as such they obtain the maximum points and if you are the most consistant AND win majors you will be a long way ahead (like Tiger was for years). So the ranking already takes into account by points weighting, I would argue its harder to be that good and consistently winning/getting top tens to be number one WITHOUT the heavy points from the majors. More props to Luke for doing that.

If you look at other sports they all have different ways of working these things out, I think another good example is Tennis where they generally get it right. (And FIFA get it SO WRONG).

I say leave alone and when Luke/Lee win majors they will open up a huge gap with Rory!

 

[richart]

Closely followed by.......

Andy North.........

He won two US Opens and one other USPGA tournament.

 

[Lawrence22]

My opinion for what it's worth is that you shouldn't have to win a major to necessarily be number 1. Greg Norman was number 1 for over 5 years and was undoubtedly the best player in the world at that time and he only ever won 2 majors. That means for at least 3 of the years he was No1 he didn't win a major but I doubt there were too many thinking he didn't deserve the position.
I think the World ranking system is close to perfect, the things I would change is that I would increase the points for the 2 Opens above the other 2 majors, and maybe reduce the points gained for getting places. 60 pts for 2nd in a major is more than for winning most other events. The other thing I would change is how far down the points go in limited field events. If only 12 are playing only 3 should get points. Luke has just got 6.84 points for finishing 7th in a 12 man field.