Do You Think Harry Vardon's 6 Time Open Record Be Matched or Broken in the Near Future?

[KrisF]

Feel free to discuss more or about other things!

[iacas]

No, because the strength/depth of field is many orders of magnitude better now than when Vardon was playing. He had to beat like, what, three people?

[Vinsk]

18 minutes ago, iacas said:

No, because the strength/depth of field is many orders of magnitude better now than when Vardon was playing. He had to beat like, what, three people?

I voted no. This.

21 minutes ago, KrisF said:

Feel free to discuss more or about other things!

It will take quite an exceptionally gifted player to come along and do anything like Tiger did. Despite what some mistaken, melancholic people believe, the SOF has and continues to deepen.

There may be a player as talented as Tiger right now but due to the exponential increase in strength and depth of field, he’s hidden. Even just in the past few months we’ve seen brand new fish come out and shoot excellent scores in their first few tournaments and even win. I can’t say what the next Tiger will be able to do, but I can say the one after that will play a game none of us are familiar with or ever see.

[jamo]

I'll vote no. It's also just tricky to be dominant in the British Open year to year. One day of bad weather during your round can wipe you out if half the field lucks into better conditions. 

And even the Brits and Irishmen who grew up playing links golf to an extent haven't exactly dominated in recent years. 

[ChrisP]

Nope. Watson came super close though. Could easily have 6+. Had chances in 84 and 09. But I don’t really see anyone out there right now capable of doing it and the fields are only going to get stronger and deeper with time.

[Shindig]

I doubt it.  A certain TW had a chance for a sixth British Open win a few years ago but lost in a playoff.  

To have a chance to do something like making a run of majors, someone would have to pretty much practice only for majors. 

Edited July 18, 2019 by Shindig
years ago, not days ago.

[gjunkie57]

I voted no.  Rory was born and bred to do so and he struggles today. Fierce competition now, and these guys do not appear to have the stamina to sustain dominance more than a few years. Koepka is on top now and it will be seen how long he can maintain his dominance.  

[Patch]

I voted "yes" just because at some point, it is more likely some phenoms will come along shatter all of the pro golf, tournament records.

It won't happen in my life time, and it might take another 50-100 years. However, it is quite plausible that it will happen.

Fact is no one can be certain what will, or won't happen in the future of pro golf. 

Obviously I am guessing here.

[leftybutnotPM]

Peter Thomson won 5. Is he mentioned as an all time great in any serious conversation? Hardly anyone of note played until Hogan turned up and that was a chore.

Harry Vardon winning 6 Opens would not even be discussed in serioius conversations about achievements in golf. All he could do was beat who he had to come up against - it's not his fault - but let's just say there wasn't the depth of field that there is now

[iacas]

3 hours ago, Patch said:

I voted "yes" just because at some point, it is more likely some phenoms will come along shatter all of the pro golf, tournament records.

It won't happen in my life time, and it might take another 50-100 years. However, it is quite plausible that it will happen.

No it’s not.

[skydog]

Heck, except for Brooks, no young-ish player on tour today will likely make it to 6 majors total yet alone 6 Brit opens. 

[ChrisP]

Somewhat off-topic, but I wonder if a calendar grand slam will ever happen. Tiger obviously got three in a year and has the "Tiger Slam". But Spieth came close in 2015, and if Koepka wins the Open, you could make the argument he came closer than anyone in history. And Greg Norman would have the calendar slam if a golf tournament was 54 holes. I feel like it may happen one year, maybe not while I'm alive, though.

Back on topic, I think if Seve didn't lose his game in the 90s, he could have easily done it. He had such a great game for the British Open and I thought after he won in '88, he'd top Watson. But sadly, Seve started to lose his game after that '88 win.

Edited July 19, 2019 by ChrisP

[iacas]

9 minutes ago, ChrisP said:

Somewhat off-topic, but I wonder if a calendar grand slam will ever happen. Tiger obviously got three in a year and has the "Tiger Slam". But Spieth came close in 2015, and if Koepka wins the Open, you could make the argument he came closer than anyone in history. And Greg Norman would have the calendar slam if a golf tournament was 54 holes. I feel like it may happen one year, maybe not while I'm alive, though.

Back on topic, I think if Seve didn't lose his game in the 90s, he could have easily done it. He had such a great game for the British Open and I thought after he won in '88, he'd top Watson. But sadly, Seve started to lose his game after that '88 win.

Tiger came closer than anyone. He won all the events within 365 days (a year) and held all four. Brooks hasn't won the Masters OR the British Open. That's not closer than Tiger. Not at all.

[DeadMan]

22 minutes ago, ChrisP said:

Somewhat off-topic, but I wonder if a calendar grand slam will ever happen. Tiger obviously got three in a year and has the "Tiger Slam". But Spieth came close in 2015, and if Koepka wins the Open, you could make the argument he came closer than anyone in history. And Greg Norman would have the calendar slam if a golf tournament was 54 holes. I feel like it may happen one year, maybe not while I'm alive, though.

4 months for the majors might make easier for someone to get hot and stay hot. But I think it's unlikely.

Don't think anyone will win 6 British Opens in the future. If you look at the people who have won 4+, they all basically were active before the 1960s, except for Tom Watson. And then the only people in the last 25 years to win multiple British Opens are Tiger, Ernie Els, and Padraig Harrington. Tiger is the only one who has more than 2. So yeah, it's unlikely.

[ChrisP]

41 minutes ago, iacas said:

Tiger came closer than anyone. He won all the events within 365 days (a year) and held all four. Brooks hasn't won the Masters OR the British Open. That's not closer than Tiger. Not at all.

I’m talking in a calendar year. Tiger didn’t really contend at that 2000 Masters. Spieth was close in that he won two and came just shy of winning two more in the same calendar year. Same with Brooks should he win this week.

[iacas]

28 minutes ago, ChrisP said:

I’m talking in a calendar year. Tiger didn’t really contend at that 2000 Masters. Spieth was close in that he won two and came just shy of winning two more in the same calendar year. Same with Brooks should he win this week.

A stupid distinction (IMO) that's actually easier than what Tiger did in holding all four at one time with the eight-month gap in between.

Two wins isn't "close" IMO. Even if you want to stick to the "calendar year" thing, winning three is better than winning two.

28 minutes ago, ChrisP said:

Tiger didn’t really contend at that 2000 Masters

He finished 5th.

[ChrisP]

16 minutes ago, iacas said:

A stupid distinction (IMO) that's actually easier than what Tiger did in holding all four at one time with the eight-month gap in between.

Two wins isn't "close" IMO. Even if you want to stick to the "calendar year" thing, winning three is better than winning two.

Hence, why I said calendar year. Not taking away what Tiger did holding all four at one time. Just talking same calendar year.

Yes, you could say Tiger was closest in terms of wins. Spieth was closest in that if three or four more putts go down, he has all four. Depends how you look at it.

Edited July 19, 2019 by ChrisP

[KrisF]

25 minutes ago, ChrisP said:

I’m talking in a calendar year. Tiger didn’t really contend at that 2000 Masters. Spieth was close in that he won two and came just shy of winning two more in the same calendar year. Same with Brooks should he win this week.

Well Bobby Jones is really the only one to achieve a Calendar Grand Slam in his era. And in my opinion I do think someone could pull off a "modern slam".