Jump to content
IGNORED

Most difficult major to win...?


joekelly
Note: This thread is 4292 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

0  

  1. 1. Most difficult major to win?

    • Masters
      2
    • U.S. Open
      12
    • British Open
      3
    • PGA Championship
      3


Recommended Posts

I read on  these pages someone's opinion that the PGA Tourney, the fourth of the lot, is the easiest of the major's to win. Man, i would have thought the PGA  the most difficult as the field is controlled (no amateurs), the variable track always long and winding, the lateness of the season,  fatigue of the players, the final big event of the year all make for tougher going. Who knows?

Link to comment
Share on other sites


I would have to agree with your "source" that, IMHO, the PGA would be the easiest to win.  The two most difficult would be the U.S. Open and The Open.  Why?

The U.S. Open is a course set up different than anything else these participants play.  We have seen the PGA become accustomed to tourneys that see the 72 hole scores anywhere from 10 under to 20 under.  If there is discerable rough, it is not tough enough to invoke dire consequences.  The U.S Open has higher rough, narrower fairways, and faster greens than any other venue.  Many, many years we see the U.S. Open winning 72 hole score at even par... or a shot or two over.

The Open can be a test due to weather.  If Mother Nature wants to make The Open a challenge, she can... and often does!

Link to comment
Share on other sites


I think the notion that one of the majors is the most difficult to win is kind of silly, IMO.  Doesn't each one have exactly one winner?

Now if we want to talk about the hardest one to win for a particular player that might make sense.  Clearly the US Open was the hardest one for Sam Snead to win.  The PGA was the hardest for Arnold Palmer and Tom Watson. The Masters was the hardest one for Lee Trevino.  The British Open was the hardest for Ray Floyd.

  • Upvote 1

But then again, what the hell do I know?

Rich - in name only

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

if someone did a rough stat to see which major had the least amount of one-time winners since 1934 (the first masters), then i guess it would provide a basic argument for which major is the easiest/toughest to win.  augusta has had 16 multiple champions who combine for 45 of the 76 total green jackets, or 59%.  that's a pretty elite/elusive championship imho.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


The larger the field the lower each individuals chances are so statistically the Masters would be easiest with a 1 in 100 chance to win while the other three are 1 in 156.

Joe Paradiso

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

The larger the field the lower each individuals chances are so statistically the Masters would be easiest with a 1 in 100 chance to win while the other three are 1 in 156.

That's once you get in. But the smaller the field, the harder it is to get in. So do you look at which is harder to win starting from scratch, or which is harder to win starting from the first tee? Maybe the reason the Masters has so many repeat champs is because they have lifetime exemptions. Nicklaus would not have qualified for the 1986 Masters if it gave, say, a ten-year exemption for Masters winners, and a five-year exemption to winners of other majors, which is the scheme the US Open uses (ten years for US Open winners, and five years for the other three). The PGA and British also give effective lifetime exemptions to their winners (the Open cuts it off at 60), but with their larger fields, they aren't as hard to get into, so the lifetime exemption doesn't matter as much.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


True, so minus exemptions the Masters is the hardest to qualify for, but easiest to win.  The others are easier to qualify for but harder to win.

Originally Posted by brocks

That's once you get in. But the smaller the field, the harder it is to get in. So do you look at which is harder to win starting from scratch, or which is harder to win starting from the first tee?

Maybe the reason the Masters has so many repeat champs is because they have lifetime exemptions. Nicklaus would not have qualified for the 1986 Masters if it gave, say, a ten-year exemption for Masters winners, and a five-year exemption to winners of other majors, which is the scheme the US Open uses (ten years for US Open winners, and five years for the other three).

The PGA and British also give effective lifetime exemptions to their winners (the Open cuts it off at 60), but with their larger fields, they aren't as hard to get into, so the lifetime exemption doesn't matter as much.

Joe Paradiso

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

The Open is the toughest, IMO because its played on some of the most difficult courses in the nastiest weather.  Links courses when its windy and/or rainy are as tough as it gets.

Whats in my :sunmountain: C-130 cart bag?

Woods: :mizuno: JPX 850 9.5*, :mizuno: JPX 850 15*, :mizuno: JPX-850 19*, :mizuno: JPX Fli-Hi #4, :mizuno: JPX 800 Pro 5-PW, :mizuno: MP T-4 50-06, 54-09 58-10, :cleveland: Smart Square Blade and :bridgestone: B330-S

Link to comment
Share on other sites


i'll have to choose the us open not only because it just happened, but because I think its more difficult then the british open only slightly and you have to be incredibly accurate to win at it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


The Open. It fights with the US Open, but I believe the challenging courses and wind conditions they can face there are tougher than the sometimes tough layout of the US Open. Playing on windswept links courses is very different from what players normally face. Especially if the rough is half a meter high.

Ogio Grom | Callaway X Hot Pro | Callaway X-Utility 3i | Mizuno MX-700 23º | Titleist Vokey SM 52.08, 58.12 | Mizuno MX-700 15º | Titleist 910 D2 9,5º | Scotty Cameron Newport 2 | Titleist Pro V1x and Taylormade Penta | Leupold GX-1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

The Open is the toughest, IMO because its played on some of the most difficult courses in the nastiest weather.  Links courses when its windy and/or rainy are as tough as it gets.

That's true, but the tougher the course, the easier it should be for the best players to win. However, IMO the Open is the hardest major for the best players to win because it involves the most luck. A good player can get the bad weather draw. Or the course might have crowned fairways, or (like this year) a couple hundred pot bunkers, so you can get some very bad bounces with good shots.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


The good players should be managing their game so their shots can't run out in to the bunkers.

And for that reason (amoungst lots of others), despite one of his worst Open performances at the last Lytham Open, I think Tiger will stand a great chance this year.

They're all hard, in the old days, when fewer of the European players played in the US and were less use to US style conditions, returning to the same venue made the Masters easier for them, now that most of them play a split schedule on both tours it doesn't make as much difference. Also, it was historically very hard for European's to get into the PGA & US Open.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Originally Posted by brocks

That's once you get in. But the smaller the field, the harder it is to get in. So do you look at which is harder to win starting from scratch, or which is harder to win starting from the first tee?

Maybe the reason the Masters has so many repeat champs is because they have lifetime exemptions. Nicklaus would not have qualified for the 1986 Masters if it gave, say, a ten-year exemption for Masters winners, and a five-year exemption to winners of other majors, which is the scheme the US Open uses (ten years for US Open winners, and five years for the other three).

The PGA and British also give effective lifetime exemptions to their winners (the Open cuts it off at 60), but with their larger fields, they aren't as hard to get into, so the lifetime exemption doesn't matter as much.

jack was 33rd in the world according to the first issue of the sony ranking that debuted the week ending april 6th, 1986.  the masters began april 10th that year.  i'm not sure if augusta had the same qualifying standards, but as we all know, top 50 in the owgr gets you in nowadays.

http://dps.endavadigital.net/owgr/doc/content/archive/1986/owgr01f1986.pdf

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Administrator

The PGA, the deepest field of the four majors. The Opens have too many qualifiers (who rarely win), and the Masters has a tiny field.

Erik J. Barzeski —  I knock a ball. It goes in a gopher hole. 🏌🏼‍♂️
Director of Instruction Golf Evolution • Owner, The Sand Trap .com • AuthorLowest Score Wins
Golf Digest "Best Young Teachers in America" 2016-17 & "Best in State" 2017-20 • WNY Section PGA Teacher of the Year 2019 :edel: :true_linkswear:

Check Out: New Topics | TST Blog | Golf Terms | Instructional Content | Analyzr | LSW | Instructional Droplets

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

jack was 33rd in the world according to the first issue of the sony ranking that debuted the week ending april 6th, 1986.  the masters began april 10th that year.  i'm not sure if augusta had the same qualifying standards, but as we all know, top 50 in the owgr gets you in nowadays.   [URL=http://dps.endavadigital.net/owgr/doc/content/archive/1986/owgr01f1986.pdf]http://dps.endavadigital.net/owgr/doc/content/archive/1986/owgr01f1986.pdf[/URL]

Thanks for the link. I can't find the 1986 qualifying standards, either. It seems unlikely that they could have used the world ranking if it came out just four days before the tournament started, and Woosnam, who was one spot higher than Jack in the rankings, was not in the field, but it's probably a moot point with Jack, since it's hard to believe he wouldn't have gotten a special invitation if he didn't otherwise qualify. But I think it's reasonable to assume that they would have taken the top 50 from the previous year's money list, and Jack was 43rd in 1985, so I was probably wrong about him not qualifying. I was just going by the fact that he hadn't won anything in almost two years. When Tiger was in that situation, he failed to qualify for the WGC in China last year, as well as the FedEx Playoffs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Originally Posted by iacas

The PGA, the deepest field of the four majors. The Opens have too many qualifiers (who rarely win), and the Masters has a tiny field.

And, further, you first have to be a pro to even get into the PGA, so a Beau Hossler wouldn't even be in the field in the first place.

This is a good question though. Certainly they're all extremely difficult to win...they're majors after all. But I would have to agree with iacas - the PGA.

The Masters has a small field populated with past champions who have no real shot at winning, but having said that, Larry Mize, for example, could win a major. So the Masters is out. Field's too small & too many players that are graced in simply by winning the thing three decades ago. In reality, only about 20-30 players in a given year have a true sot at winning. That's why it's more unusual to see a darkhorse win the Masters.

The US & British Opens have qualifiers. They're 'Opens'. One could conceivably catch a hot streak at the Sectionals & carry that into the Open. Very unlikely, but could happen. Two weeks of hot play & you're the Open champ.

But the PGA - first you have to be a pro, then you have to beat all the other pros, the best pros in the world.

I voted US Open, but after giving it more thought I would change my answer to the PGA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


British Open or US Open.  Huge fields.  Super tough conditions.

The Masters is obviously the hardest tournament in the world to get into, but once you're there I think you have a better chance of winning the thing than either open championship.

Driver:  Callaway Diablo Octane 9.5*
3W:  Callaway GBB II 12.5*, 5W:  Callaway Diablo 18* Neutral
3H:  Callaway Razr X, 4H:  Callaway Razr X
5-PW:  Callaway X Tour
GW:  Callaway X Tour 54*, SW:  Callaway X Tour 58*
Putter:  Callaway ITrax, Scotty Cameron Studio Design 2, Ping Anser 4

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Note: This thread is 4292 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • TST Partners

    TourStriker PlaneMate
    Golfer's Journal
    ShotScope
    The Stack System
    FlightScope Mevo
    Direct: Mevo, Mevo+, and Pro Package.

    Coupon Codes (save 10-15%): "IACAS" for Mevo/Stack, "IACASPLUS" for Mevo+/Pro Package, and "THESANDTRAP" for ShotScope.
  • Popular Now

  • Posts

    • Wordle 1,013 2/6 🟨⬜⬜🟨🟨 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩 Thought I was gonna be a big shot today...  🙂    Nice Job!
    • Cool here's my tweak, "If a player’s ball lies in the general area and there is interference from exposed tree roots or exposed rocks that are in the fairway or 1 club length from the fairway the tree roots and exposed rocks are treated as ground under repair. The player may take free relief under Rule 16.1b.[But relief is not allowed if the tree roots only interfere with the player’s stance.]
    • I would never do the extended warranty on the $50 slow cooker.  I also routinely reject the extended service plans on those toys we buy for the grand-kids.  I do consider them on higher cost items and will be more likely to get one if the product has a lot of "Electronic Tech" that is often the problem longer-term.  I also consider my intended length of ownership & usage.  If my thought is it would get replaced in 2-3 years then why bother but if I hope to use it for 10 years then more likely to get the extension. I did buy out a lease about a year ago.  Just prior to the lease end date the tablet locked up and would not function.  I got it repaired under the initial warranty and would not have bought it out if they had not been able to fix it since IMO once electronic issues start in a car they can be hard to track down & fix.  They did fix it but when I bought out the lease I paid up for the extended warranty the would cover electronic failures because my intent is to keep that car for another 8-10 years and I just do not trust the electronics to last.  Last week the touch screen went black and was unresponsive.  It reset on the 2nd time I restarted the car but that is exactly how the last malfunction started.  I fully expect to have a claim on that on repair under the extended warranty.  I do not recall the exact cost to fix last time since I did not pay it but I think it was @ $700-$800 and I suspect that will be higher next time.
    • Have you looked at Model Local Rule F-9 Relief from Tree Roots in or Close to Fairway?  You could extend this to cover exposed rocks.  The rule is recommended to be used only for areas relatively near the fairway, a player who hits a shot 20 yards in the woods doesn't really deserve relief.   Players can always take Unplayable Ball relief, they're not required to play it from a rock or a root.  Of course, they hate to take the penalty stroke too.
    • I agree with @klineka, you're clearly doing something right.  Its always going to be a bit of a guessing game if you don't have any scoring history.  On the other hand, understanding that it takes only 54 holes to establish an actual handicap, and they have about 6 weeks in which to play and post enough scores, I don't think its at all unreasonable to require them to have an official handicap before they become eligible for prizes.  I don't know how you structure the fees for the series of competitions, but if its possible they'll play with the group without being eligible for prizes, you could consider a way to let them do that without contributing to the prize pool.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Welcome to TST! Signing up is free, and you'll see fewer ads and can talk with fellow golf enthusiasts! By using TST, you agree to our Terms of Use, our Privacy Policy, and our Guidelines.

The popup will be closed in 10 seconds...