Trending around the Internet - is the PGA "easiest" to win?

[Natural Patrick]

12 minutes ago, iacas said:

The PGA is the toughest to win. Strongest field by far. That simple (to me).

X2

[boogielicious]

14 hours ago, Golfingdad said:

This probably goes hand-in-hand with the idea that it's less important than the others.  Unlike the other three, the PGA doesn't have a signature.  The Masters has Augusta, The British has links golf and everything that accompanies it, the US Open has difficult set-ups and a winner near par nearly every year.  The PGA winner seemingly scores as well as a winner of your average tournament at a myriad of lush green courses around the country, so it really doesn't seem that special.

Add to that your Beems, Micheels, Yangs, and it just doesn't have the luster.  Somebody said it in one of the other threads that if somebody has one major win and that one win is a PGA, they don't quite feel like a real major winner.  Even though I acknowledge that as patently unfair, I completely agree with it.

Difficulty in winning is something else entirely, but my guess is that the above reasons have something to do with some people thinking it's easier.

I think this is really the issue, perception. Oh, Jimmy Walker won so it must have been easy. I think that is mostly wishful thinking for folks who wanted a top 10 golfer to win. 

It's a major with a very deep field, perhaps the deepest. Although they are trying to beat the course presented to them, they still have to contend with each other. Maybe there are more first time winners because the top players tend to focus more on the other three majors and have a bit of a letdown in the PGA, peaking too early for this one so to speak.

[Hardspoon]

 

6 minutes ago, boogielicious said:

I think this is really the issue, perception. Oh, Jimmy Walker won so it must have been easy. I think that is mostly wishful thinking for folks who wanted a top 10 golfer to win. 

In some ways, it is the opposite. First-time winners, and winners outside the top-whatever in OWGR, prove that the fields are actually deeper. That makes them harder to win.

I would expect the major with the most "outlier" champions to be the most difficult to win. Good case for the PGA, and it fits with the strength of field.

[boogielicious]

1 minute ago, Hardspoon said:

 

In some ways, it is the opposite. First-time winners, and winners outside the top-whatever in OWGR, prove that the fields are actually deeper. That makes them harder to win.

I would expect the major with the most "outlier" champions to be the most difficult to win. Good case for the PGA, and it fits with the strength of field.

Agree. Plus, who wants all the majors to be the same anyway? 

[Hardspoon]

Just now, boogielicious said:

Agree. Plus, who wants all the majors to be the same anyway? 

Probably the guy who wins the Masters each year. 

[CarlSpackler]

I'm not sure about "easiest", but I rarely watch the PGA. To me, the Players has more of a major feel.

[colin007]

12 hours ago, billchao said:

 

And don't diminish Y.E. Yang's major championship win. Just ask @colin007 how hard it was. 

Oh man, that still stings worse than a urine test for a gonorrhea patient.....

[Broke100Once]

The PGA's "a regular golf tournament, except moreso" vibe really appeals to me.  I have to roll my eyes a bit at Augusta's self-importance and the USGA's apparent desire to make golf as unpleasant as possible for both players and viewers, so I would actually rank the PGA second only to the British on my list of favourite major. 

Someone wiser than me can go through the numbers to see if the PGA actually does produce on average the 'weakest' winners, though it wouldn't be surprising given that it's the most democratic of the four.  Some golfers just don't mesh with Augusta National, some golfers don't play well under the USGA's draconian course setups and some golfers can't handle links golf.  The PGA's lack of a signature style gives everyone a chance.

The PGA also suffered a bit for various other reasons...
* matchplay until 1958, so you tended to get somewhat random winners some years akin to how the World Match Play produces some good but less-than-elite champions today
* poor scheduling, as it was pretty much up against the Open Championship for several years.  While most top players chose the PGA for convenience's sake, losing even a few to the Open didn't help.
* even today, the scheduling as the year's last major takes away some of the luster. Flipping the PGA and US Open on the schedule would make a world of difference, I feel.
* A minor lack of starpower.  Bobby Jones never played in a PGA, obviously.  Hogan stopped playing the PGA after his car accident since the six-day matchplay format was too grueling on his body (he played the tournament a couple of times after it switched to strokeplay).  Watson never won it.
* Palmer never won it, which is probably an underrated huge factor and the biggest 'lack of star power' there is.  The Masters only truly gained its top-dog status thanks to the game's most popular figure winning it multiple times.

 

On 2016-08-02 at 7:02 PM, JetFan1983 said:

And just a general question/observation: I feel like there haven't been a whole lot of PGA collapses over the years, but I can recall several Masters/US Open/British open ones off the top of my head. Not sure why that is exactly, but it could be in part due the PGA's lack of mystique. Guys tend to close out when ahead at the PGA for whatever reason.

Dufner totally blew the 2011 PGA, DJ's sand trap fiasco in 2010, Kenny Perry playing commentator rather than warming up for a playoff in 1996, Tiger finally losing a 54-hole lead in 2009, Mike Reid allowing Payne Stewart to come back in 1989.....there have been lots of memorable collapses in recent PGA history alone.  Justin Leonard blowing the 2004 PGA is one that flies under the radar.

[JetFan1983]

2 hours ago, Broke100Once said:

 

Dufner totally blew the 2011 PGA, DJ's sand trap fiasco in 2010, Kenny Perry playing commentator rather than warming up for a playoff in 1996, Tiger finally losing a 54-hole lead in 2009, Mike Reid allowing Payne Stewart to come back in 1989.....there have been lots of memorable collapses in recent PGA history alone.  Justin Leonard blowing the 2004 PGA is one that flies under the radar.

Haha, thanks, yea that definitively closed the book my speculations lol. Nice post. 

[natureboy]

7 hours ago, Broke100Once said:

Someone wiser than me can go through the numbers to see if the PGA actually does produce on average the 'weakest' winners, though it wouldn't be surprising given that it's the most democratic of the four.  Some golfers just don't mesh with Augusta National, some golfers don't play well under the USGA's draconian course setups and some golfers can't handle links golf.  The PGA's lack of a signature style gives everyone a chance.

IMO. the US Open is still more 'democratic' in that the qualifier system does allow unknowns from all walks of life who are 'in form' to advance to the big show even if lower ranked or not a professional.

Maybe you could say the PGA setup is the 'most fair' of the Majors in that it doesn't favor a particular playing style, doesn't favor prior course knowledge / experience in certain playing conditions, and the less penal setups don't favor the longest w/ accuracy players (generally the top 100) who are coming into the greens with higher trajectories?

Edited August 4, 2016 by natureboy

[allenc]

An important question that was left out is "easiest for who?"  I'll attempt to rank the majors for ease of winning for allenc.

1.  U.S. Open - has several handfuls of qualifying spots that I could conceivably earn.  Odds - 700,000,000 to 1

2. Open championship - also lots of qualifying spots (even more than the u.s. Open?) but I'm slightly less likely to travel for them.  Although if I somehow became good enough I probably would.  800,000,000 to 1.

3. Masters - gotta win the mid-am or U.S. Am.  That's around 10% the qualifiers as above.  7 billion to 1

4. PGA - The only conceivable way I consider turning pro is if one of the above happen first.  So it's their combined probability times my chances of winning this one.  But in that case I'm obviously pretty damn good and the genetic enhancement procedure was a success.  8 billion to 1.

[Shindig]

On 8/2/2016 at 4:02 PM, JetFan1983 said:

And just a general question/observation: I feel like there haven't been a whole lot of PGA collapses over the years, but I can recall several Masters/US Open/British open ones off the top of my head. Not sure why that is exactly, but it could be in part due the PGA's lack of mystique. Guys tend to close out when ahead at the PGA for whatever reason. 

 

First thought: 2009 PGA, Tiger.

Second thought?  I can't think of another collapse offhand at the PGA.  2011 maybe?

[Rainmaker]

Not to say winning any major is easy but there is an element of the course choices, set-ups and scoring conditions that might make the pga the easiest of the 4 to win for some pros.  . .edit . .which is to say . .maybe they have a 20% chance of winning any major ever . .but getting hot at the pga would be their most likely chance.

Edited August 5, 2016 by Rainmaker

[JetFan1983]

15 minutes ago, Shindig said:

First thought: 2009 PGA, Tiger.

Second thought?  I can't think of another collapse offhand at the PGA.  2011 maybe?

True. Also Nick Watney shot like 81 at the 2010 PGA as well... people tend to only remember the DJ bunker incident on that one. 

@Broke100Once wrote a nice post above cataloging a few memorable collapses. 

[Aguirre]

On 8/3/2016 at 7:35 AM, CarlSpackler said:

I'm not sure about "easiest", but I rarely watch the PGA. To me, the Players has more of a major feel.

The PGA has more of a major feel to me because it's an actual major.

[NJpatbee]

The PGA does not have quite the luster of the other 3 majors but does indeed have the strongest field making it difficult to win.  IMO the Masters relies heavily on the mystique of Augusta, the British Open on the tradition of the links course and golf's heritage, and the US Open on incredibly difficult conditions that you would never find elsewhere.  The PGA Championship relies on the strength of the field (97 of the top 100 in 2016) on a difficult but not tricked up course which makes it a very challenging tournament to win.  It is underrated but having been at two the last two held at Baltusrol the excitement and intensity does have a major feel.  I have also been to the Masters and quite frankly I was most excited to see Augusta National in person.  At the PGA I am most excited to watch the deepest and strongest field of any tournament.