World Number 1

[Wheyayeman]

Since Lee Westwood dethroned Tiger at the top world rankings, the past 18 months or so for me have been how I would like to see the rankings contested over the coming years. I'm loving the fact the McIlroy and Donald are pretty much fighting it out weekly for the crown whilst Westwood is probably only a big win away from catching them up.

I was just wondering what everyone else's take on this is, Do you prefer having someone dominate (ie Tiger or moving forward McIlroy) so it gives the game a figure head and someone to beat or would you prefer the "Womens Tennis" scenario where it seems that 1 of a dozen woman can win that weekends tournament and become world no 1 (Exaggerated comment but you get my drift)

I like the idea of 3 or 4 players contesting the world number 1 slot, and so having to go out and earn it by beating your closet rivals on any given weekend to keep your rank, but without the game being so diluted that a couple of good comps in a row can catapult no12 to the top.

What say you?

 

[Mattyboy]

Its got to be better if its more competitive - but what winds me up is that the entire top ten have 3 majors between them!

Surely the number 1 has got to have more credentials than one (or no) majors to their name. 'But they did win the tin pot shoot out' the other week'...............

 

[In_The_Rough]

Doing it that way though means that those that have won more than 1 Major will always be a the top of the rankings even if they have not won anything for years. Surely it should go on current performances not those for yonks ago eg Tiger, Mickelson etc

 

[pokerjoke]

Definately like the thought of them fighting it out,week in week out.
As for majors they will come.
Imo Rory has the greatest potential,and i can see him winning multiple majors.
As for Lee and Luke maybe 1 or 2 each.

 

[HickoryShaft]

Its got to be better if its more competitive - but what winds me up is that the entire top ten have 3 majors between them!

Surely the number 1 has got to have more credentials than one (or no) majors to their name. 'But they did win the tin pot shoot out' the other week'...............

You sound like you should commentate on US golf shows Matty.

My view is the opposite to this - Luke hasn't bagged a major yet but he was by far the most consistent finisher in the game last year and top earner on both PGA and European tours. Surely that deserves the No.1 in the world title more than a one off win in a Major?

I am really enjoying the additional drama that the win could take someone to No. 1 rather than having it too far out of reach based on past form only

Having said that I would enjoy seeing either Donald or Westwood grabbing one to get that monkey off their backs once and for all.

 

[Alex1975]

How ever it shakes out for me is good, competitive or dominated, both have there good points.

 

[StrangelyBrown]

There is a balance to be struck. Certainly Luke Donald deserved to be number one, winning both money lists. This suggests that he was consistantly the best player of last year.

However, for Phil Mickleson to have never been no.1 and having four majors to his name just seems wrong...

Then again (and I mean no disrespect to the players), was Louis Oosthuisen or Darran Clark the best players in the world when they won their major? Same with Zach Johnson, Mike Weir and a raft of other 1 time winners...

I'm rambling a bit now because I don't know if there is a solution better to the one we have currently...

 

[HawkeyeMS]

Its got to be better if its more competitive - but what winds me up is that the entire top ten have 3 majors between them!

Surely the number 1 has got to have more credentials than one (or no) majors to their name. 'But they did win the tin pot shoot out' the other week'...............

I say we have to stop linking the World number 1 spot to the world rankings. Since 2002 thiere have been 26 major winners. Of those 26 only four have won more than 1 (Woods -8, Mickleson-4, Harrington-3 & Cabrera-2) So if you want to pick your world number based on majors, there's your shortlist.

You could extend it to the guys who have won 1 major in the last two years: Schwartzel, McIlroy, Clarke, Bradley, McDowell, Oosthuizen & Kaymer. For me there's only one obvious pick from that lot and he's the current world number one already.

Going back 5 years you could pick Lucas Glover or Zach Johnson for top spot and going back further still Todd Hamilton is a contender.

The point I'm making is, world number 1 is the reward for being the most consistent golfer over a rolling 2 year period. And lets not forget Donald was the only person ever to win the money list on both major tours last year, a feat that may never be achieved again.

To win a majot, you have to have four good rounds of golf, just 4.

 

[thecraw]

Westwood will only fall down the ranking now, he's a spent force. The young Americans will start to rise, Watney, Hass etc.

Westwood has had his spell on top of the world and he won't be back ever. Guarenteed.

 

[lobthewedge]

I personally prefer it when there is one undisputed number1 and he stays there for a good few months or even a year or two. Having too many number1's over a short period of time will only serve to dilute the title and take the sheen off it a bit.

However, I take the point that it can also be unhealthy to have one player dominate the way Tiger did in the last decade, and the number1 battle this year is going to be a hell of a watch. I just hope someone gets out in front and stays there for at least a while.

 

[Mattyboy]

I say we have to stop linking the World number 1 spot to the world rankings. Since 2002 thiere have been 26 major winners. Of those 26 only four have won more than 1 (Woods -8, Mickleson-4, Harrington-3 & Cabrera-2) So if you want to pick your world number based on majors, there's your shortlist.

You could extend it to the guys who have won 1 major in the last two years: Schwartzel, McIlroy, Clarke, Bradley, McDowell, Oosthuizen & Kaymer. For me there's only one obvious pick from that lot and he's the current world number one already.

Going back 5 years you could pick Lucas Glover or Zach Johnson for top spot and going back further still Todd Hamilton is a contender.

The point I'm making is, world number 1 is the reward for being the most consistent golfer over a rolling 2 year period. And lets not forget Donald was the only person ever to win the money list on both major tours last year, a feat that may never be achieved again.

To win a majot, you have to have four good rounds of golf, just 4.

To win a major you have to beat every other player in the field - who are the best players in the world (ok - Masters excluded) - thereby coping the best with the most pressure in the game of golf.

My choice for the current world no 1 would be (surprise surprise) Mcilroy. I agree that Donald was the best player last year. I think, even though he is not the player he was, Woods still has alot to answer for in that he won so many majors the others dont have many between them. Time should (or might) redress this).

But I do think that majors should be given more weighting in the calcualtions.

Hickory, thanks for the thought that I should be commentating on the US golf - but I fear that I would be even worse than Kelly Tighlman (or however you spell it)!

 

[G1BB0]

Westwood will only fall down the ranking now, he's a spent force. The young Americans will start to rise, Watney, Hass etc.

Westwood has had his spell on top of the world and he won't be back ever. Guarenteed.

want to have a wager on that?

Westy is one of the best long game players out there, if his putting/short game is on song he can beat anyone, past, present and future!

 

[kid2]

For me i think that there is a bit of a grey area as regards World No.1....
Is it the best player in the world bar none?
Is it the most consistent performer and money winner?
Is it the one that has the most majors?

What i cant stand is everyone getting a bite of the cherry...I dont mean to sound thick.....but....1 minute its Woods then its Westy....the next its Kaymer....then its Donald, Macilroy....Everytime you open the media pages its someone else....


I think that the World No.1 should have the ability to win every other week..He should be the one that sets the bar and everyone else should try to reach, and the important word "Maintain" that achievement ...I know that ill probably get slated for that but this money earnings business is crap.Look at how long Tiger held the No.1 spot......No one has even touched that bar yet as far as i can see.You only have to look at the prize money that split over the 2 tours to realize that 1 tournament in the U.S can nearly equate to 3 or 4 winnings on the European Tour....

 

[HawkeyeMS]

For me i think that there is a bit of a grey area as regards World No.1....
Is it the best player in the world bar none?
Is it the most consistent performer and money winner?
Is it the one that has the most majors?

What i cant stand is everyone getting a bite of the cherry...I dont mean to sound thick.....but....1 minute its Woods then its Westy....the next its Kaymer....then its Donald, Macilroy....Everytime you open the media pages its someone else....


I think that the World No.1 should have the ability to win every other week..He should be the one that sets the bar and everyone else should try to reach, and the important word "Maintain" that achievement ...I know that ill probably get slated for that but this money earnings business is crap.Look at how long Tiger held the No.1 spot......No one has even touched that bar yet as far as i can see.You only have to look at the prize money that split over the 2 tours to realize that 1 tournament in the U.S can nearly equate to 3 or 4 winnings on the European Tour....

I think we've been spoiled by Woods TBH. Very rarely in the 24 year history of the world rankings has someone dominated like he has. He has been No.1 for nearly half of the time the world rankings have been calculated. Greg Norman spent nearly 6 years at no.1 and in the remaining 6 years only 13 other players have held the top spot.

You might think the money earnings is crap but it's never been done before and will, I suspect will never be done again. It was a massive, massive achievement by Donald.

 

[Andr3w]

Unless the spot is dominated for a long period then it doesn't feel like that person is genuinely the best in the world, merely that they hit some good form for a period of time.

 

[thecraw]

want to have a wager on that?

Westy is one of the best long game players out there, if his putting/short game is on song he can beat anyone, past, present and future!

Happily!

Westwood is not good enough!

 

[kid2]

I think we've been spoiled by Woods TBH. Very rarely in the 24 year history of the world rankings has someone dominated like he has. He has been No.1 for nearly half of the time the world rankings have been calculated. Greg Norman spent nearly 6 years at no.1 and in the remaining 6 years only 13 other players have held the top spot.

You might think the money earnings is crap but it's never been done before and will, I suspect will never be done again. It was a massive, massive achievement by Donald.

Im not taking a thing from Donald Hawkeye....The man in my eyes is a class act....I would even go as far as to say he is better than Macilroy.....My own opinion of course but Im not a massive Macilroy fan to be honest...

To me Luke is a more rounded player than Macilroy....

 

[Evesdad]

I think Westwood has the next couple years then he'll be passed by the younger generation, just my opinion. As the number 1 I think majors need more of a weighting but think it works quite well. The most consistent player etc abit like Rory's girlfriend, I'm not going to try and spell it!, was top in tennis while failing in all the majors but did well everywhere else!

 

[HomerJSimpson]

To be honest the world rankings have become a bit of a side show. No one cared for them for years when it was all Woods, and most of the top 10 weren't Brits. Now we've got all the top slots everyone is all over it like a rash. It's great that Westwood, Donald, McIlroy can all say that for a while at least they were officially the best player in the world, but I'd rather watch the best in the world slug it out on the course and win majors and big events. I guess its a bit like our handicaps. Play well and cuts take care of themselves. Paly well in their world and the rankings points do the same. Westwood and Donald got their on the back of playing consistently well over a two year period.

 

[USER1999]

Surely given that the majors are heavily weighted, to be number one without winning a major must be so much harder than being number one with majors? If you can do this, you must be the real number one!