Official 2013 British Open at Muirfield Discussion Thread

[geauxforbroke]

Originally Posted by kw purp

Quote:

Originally Posted by phan52

He hardly plays on the PGA Tour.  If Westwood played regularly on the PGA Tour he would have a lot more wins there. The vast majority of the events that he plays in that qualify for the PGA Tour are Majors and World Golf events, with stellar fields. And the reason he gets to play in all those events is based on his results in them.

His results point to him being a top ten player in the world. You could look it up...

http://www.officialworldgolfranking.com/players/bio.sps?ID=4052

No one takes the world golf rankings seriously. At no point in time was Lee Westwood or Luke Donald the number one player in the world, but they were ranked that way.

Originally Posted by kw purp

Quote:

Originally Posted by phan52

You said he had "somewhat of a point". His point has been that Lee Westwood is a loser. He has stated that Woody Austin, because of his 4 win on th PGA Tour, is a better player. The guy has no point. Except maybe at the top of his head.

Said he was a better winner not player. Austin has 4 pga tour wins, Lee has 2. Lee is a better player. Read my previous post

Dude, multi quote. Seriously.

Back on the off-topic topic, Westwood is one of the best players in the world. It's a shame he hasn't won any majors, but he's proven he's got the game for it. His time will come.

[Lash]

Originally Posted by phan52

I find it amazing that a guy who constantly finishes in the top ten im Majors (and just finished tied for third in a very exciting event) is considred a loser. People who think that are tiring and obviously uninformed.

.Top ten player in the world. Look it up.

Obviously the "loser" comments were partially hyperbole and also just misunderstood. I believe his point was that in the strictest definition of the word he loses in the big time tournaments, so he is, by definition, a "loser." That doesn't mean he is a bad golfer, but again it all goes back to this idea that it is somewhat shocking that he has never won a major, when really it isn't.

[geauxforbroke]

Originally Posted by Lash

Quote:

Originally Posted by phan52

I find it amazing that a guy who constantly finishes in the top ten im Majors (and just finished tied for third in a very exciting event) is considred a loser. People who think that are tiring and obviously uninformed.

.Top ten player in the world. Look it up.

Obviously the "loser" comments were partially hyperbole and also just misunderstood. I believe his point was that in the strictest definition of the word he loses in the big time tournaments, so he is, by definition, a "loser." That doesn't mean he is a bad golfer, but again it all goes back to this idea that it is somewhat shocking that he has never won a major, when really it isn't.

I think the issue is using the term "loser". In golf, there are winners, and those who didn't win. It's hard to call someone a loser unless it's a match play event.

[Lash]

Originally Posted by geauxforbroke

I think the issue is using the term "loser". In golf, there are winners, and those who didn't win. It's hard to call someone a loser unless it's a match play event.

I don't disagree, but I think for so many to focus on that and ignore the point kw was and is trying to make, is a bit obtuse.

[kw purp]

Originally Posted by phan52

I find it amazing that a guy who constantly finishes in the top ten im Majors (and just finished tied for third in a very exciting event) is considred a loser. People who think that are tiring and obviously uninformed.

.Top ten player in the world. Look it up.

Tiger, Phil, Rory, Rose, Bradley, Bubba, Webb Simpson, Adam Scott, Kuchar, Dustin Johnson.

All better resumes than Lee. Yes many of them have their fair share of gags as well, but they been more successful on tour in recent history than Lee.

That took 30 seconds to rattle off

[geauxforbroke]

Originally Posted by Lash

Quote:

Originally Posted by geauxforbroke

I think the issue is using the term "loser". In golf, there are winners, and those who didn't win. It's hard to call someone a loser unless it's a match play event.

I don't disagree, but I think for so many to focus on that and ignore the point kw was and is trying to make, is a bit obtuse.

If his point was "Westwood is overhyped and not an elite player", then I disagree. The guy is one of the top players in the entire game. I don't care what his record in majors is. The eye-ball test will show you that he's one of the best.

He'll have more chances and will end up winning at least one major. I feel pretty safe saying that.

[phan52]

Quote:

Originally Posted by geauxforbroke

I think the issue is using the term "loser". In golf, there are winners, and those who didn't win. It's hard to call someone a loser unless it's a match play event.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lash

I don't disagree, but I think for so many to focus on that and ignore the point kw was and is trying to make, is a bit obtuse.

Originally Posted by geauxforbroke

If his point was "Westwood is overhyped and not an elite player", then I disagree. The guy is one of the top players in the entire game. I don't care what his record in majors is. The eye-ball test will show you that he's one of the best.

He'll have more chances and will end up winning at least one major. I feel pretty safe saying that.

This. And not just the eyeball test. Results count. Westwood always shows up on the leader board in big events. It's how he gets his ranking.

[Lash]

Originally Posted by geauxforbroke

If his point was "Westwood is overhyped and not an elite player", then I disagree. The guy is one of the top players in the entire game. I don't care what his record in majors is. The eye-ball test will show you that he's one of the best.

He'll have more chances and will end up winning at least one major. I feel pretty safe saying that.

I don't know that he ever said "elite," but either way I can't guess on what he meant. All I can go by is what he said, which was that Westwood is talked about as if it is shocking that he has never won a major, when really it will be shocking when he does, based on his history.

That's doesn't diminish what kind of player Westwood is, it's just the facts. The announcers this weekend talked like they were shocked Westwood hadn't won a major, even though he's come up short enough times now that it shouldn't be too shocked.

I don't think he is overhyped in general, but I do think the announcers were overstating it a bit this weekend. Then again, they are announcers and will probably always be more positive about a player than he deserves, which is better than saying "ole Westwood never wins these tournaments."

[geauxforbroke]

Originally Posted by Lash

I don't know that he ever said "elite," but either way I can't guess on what he meant. All I can go by is what he said, which was that Westwood is talked about as if it is shocking that he has never won a major, when really it will be shocking when he does, based on his history."

He's one of the best players that has played for the Europeans in the Ryder Cup in the last 15 years.

He's won 39 professional tournaments.

He has 16 top-10 finishes in majors. 8 of those were top-3 finishes.

He has been runner up in 2 majors.

No one should be surprised when he wins a major. If you hang around long enough in major tournaments, you'll get it done.

[Fourputt]

Originally Posted by kw purp

Quote:

Originally Posted by phan52

That is an absurd statement. Yeah, Lee Westwood has issues when he is at or near the lead in Majors and he probably missed his best shot yesterday. But he is probably playing the best golf of his career in the last 4-5 years and is definitely a Top Ten player. He plays the vast majority of his golf on the Euro Tour yet last season, with a limited schedule on the PGA Tour, he made it all the way to the Tour Championship. He has 16 top ten finishes in Majors, 10 of them in the last 4 years. How many current players can say that? More often than not, Lee Westwood is on the leaderboard in Majors.

This is exactly what I am talking about. How could he possibly be a top 10 player? A top 10 player wins golf tournaments. Lee Westwood does not win golf tournaments. He won the St. Jude classic THREE YEARS AGO. And the Freeport McDermott Classic (wtf is that) FIFTEEN YEARS AGO. Those are his only PGA tour wins. Thats it. And your telling me he is top 10? The guy who won the Sanderson Farms tournament the past weekend is more a winner than lee in the last 3 years.

So as far as you are concerned, PGA Tour performance is all that counts?  Awfully provincial of you.

[Lash]

Originally Posted by geauxforbroke

He's one of the best players that has played for the Europeans in the Ryder Cup in the last 15 years.

He's won 39 professional tournaments.

He has 16 top-10 finishes in majors. 8 of those were top-3 finishes.

He has been runner up in 2 majors.

No one should be surprised when he wins a major. If you hang around long enough in major tournaments, you'll get it done.

I don't disagree with any of this.

[Shorty]

Originally Posted by kw purp

He is a better winner than Lee Westwood. Not even arguable. Tell me, what is Lee Westwood's record in Majors? The exact same as Woody Austin. 4 wins and no majors beats 2 wins and no majors.

Lucky European Tour wins don't count, isn't it.

22 of those are worth nothing, eh?

Unbelievable.

Not even arguable? I dare you to try to argue your ridiculous point.

[Jakester23]

Doea anyone think its more of a shock that Westwood hasn't one a major or sergio? Sergio has more pga wins and in better fields. I'm not saying I think Sergio is better but looking at his resume that argument could be made.

[mmoan2]

My prediction - Westwood just blew his last chance at winning a major. And he's an elite player. He's had 60 chances and he's past 40 now.

[Spyder]

Originally Posted by mmoan2

My prediction - Westwood just blew his last chance at winning a major. And he's an elite player. He's had 60 chances and he's past 40 now.

I think the "last chance" portion of your statement is out of line, especially considering he's been in contention so many times. Being in a major is technically a chance . You're saying he'll never be in another major, if you take that sentiment literally, or at the least... you're saying he will never be in the conversation on the final day again. Statistics are against you if you go off of his past performance.

I think he will be in contention again and he will have another opportunity to clinch a major victory. I am not saying that he will definitely win a major, but I can't rule him out simply based on how many times he's been there. Time is against him and all of us in life, but he still has what it takes to pull it off before he is ruled out as a possibility and stranded on Ben Crane island.

[Shorty]

Originally Posted by mmoan2

My prediction - Westwood just blew his last chance at winning a major. And he's an elite player. He's had 60 chances and he's past 40 now.

Phil Mickelson is an elite player.

He's 43.

He just won The Open.

[Shorty]

Originally Posted by Jakester23

Doea anyone think its more of a shock that Westwood hasn't one a major or sergio? Sergio has more pga wins and in better fields. I'm not saying I think Sergio is better but looking at his resume that argument could be made.

Really?

Westwood has double the international wins Garcia has.

The PGATour isn't the only tour, you know.

Westwood plays the Majors, WGCs and a half dozen select events on the PGA Tour only.

Get some international perspective.

[Spyder]

Originally Posted by Shorty

Really?

Westwood has double the international wins Garcia has.

The PGATour isn't the only tour, you know.

Shorty, it's already been decided that the PGA Tour is the only professional tour that matters. Keep up!

Measly European Tour victories are a dime a dozen.