Phil has rightly moved up and Tiger is still untouchable. At least you have to win something to be in the mens top three.
Of the top 20 , only six are Americans, with 4 South Africans, VJ ,two Aussies and 7 Europeans. Long time since the Euros have had more in the top 20 than USA. just think what would happen if we started winning Majors!
Phil has rightly moved up and Tiger is still untouchable. At least you have to win something to be in the mens top three.
Sorry, but that is incorrect. If you were to place in the top 3 in most events that you entered in the mens, you would be easily in the top 3 on the mens rankings.
If you were to place 2nd in every event, you would be world number 1, easily ahead of Tiger.
If someone were to average the same positions in tournaments, on the mens side, that Michelle Wie averages on the womens side, that person would also be in the top 3 in the mens rankings, without winning a tournament.
Can we keep Wie out of this discussion about the Men's Rankings? You've got plenty of other threads to speculate about your girl.
Firstly, the initial comment was OBVIOUSLY about Wie.
Saying top 3 without winning a tournament, who else could that be?
So I certainly didn't bring up Wie in this discussion. Lefty decided to use Phil's ranking as an excuse to take a dig at Wie.
Secondly, nobody likes to discuss Wie more than you sir.
Show me someone in the men's top 100 that has never won a professional tournament
I can show you LOTS AND LOTS of mens players in the top 100 who haven't won in the last 2 years, and the mens ranking is based entirely on the last 2 years. Therefore, any previous wins by men, before the last 2 years mean absolutely nothing, as far as the rankings are concerned.
No they wouldn't. Wie has played in a very limited number of events and that limited number of top 3 finishes would have a nominal effect in the men's rankings.
You obviously misread my original post. I said that if someone averaged Wie's results, they would be in the top 3, and that is true. If Fred Couples averaged Wie's results, he would be in the top 3 without winning an event.
Certainly, your last statement did not include the person in your mirror.
Your misperceived "dig at Wie" has been explained as something else entirely so again, I ask you to keep your Wie comments to the appropriate threads. The numerous Wie threads give us more than ample places to discuss her.
Clarify this please.
Is this a discussion about mens only world rankings, or is it about the womens system as well?
In any case both systems are computerised and calculated on results. They are based on hard facts, and are correct, at defining the best, so there probably isn't any need for any more discussion about them.
Wow....he really jumped up and has solid control of 2nd now. The race seems to be for 3rd now as Vijay and Goosen are neck and neck. Ernie keeps slipping more and more. Hopefully he can get back up.
Of the top 20 , only six are Americans, with 4 South Africans, VJ ,two Aussies and 7 Europeans. Long time since the Euros have had more in the top 20 than USA. just think what would happen if we started winning Majors!
Harrington is going to be back in the top 20 soon again also. It would be nice if the Europeans could have more top 10s. WHEN Europe starts winning majors again, that should cure that problem.
And by the way, it should be "1 Fijian" in the rankings, unless VJ is a country!
Europe also had the leading Amateur at the Masters. He was Irish and shot about 50 over par, but he was still the leading amateur. Horray.
I need no excuse. The ladies rankings are garbage and need to be reformatted on the same basis as the mens.
I was not digging at Wie , just the fools who put together the rankings. SHe has no control over marketing madness.
No, they are not garbage but we've been through that before. One major difference and only one if that the World's using 40 tournament as a divisor regardless if a player has one or two or 39 or 40 tournaments. Very unfair, and I for one hope the Rolex Rankings never gets that stupid.