Although point guard doesn't have the star power of the other positions, there have been a handful of great ones and it turned out to be the most competitive for the top spot. Here are the top 10 point guards in NBA/ABA/ABL history and then some explainer on how it turned out.
1. Oscar Robertson, 1960-1974, 18749.4
2. Magic Johnson, 1979-1996, 18628.3
3. Bob Cousy, 1950-1970, 18546.4
4. John Stockton, 1984-2003, 17021.6
5. Gary Payton, 1990-2005, 16848.3
6. Isiah Thomas, 1981-1993, 15838.4
7. Jason Kidd, 1994-2005, 15816.8
8. Allen Iverson, 1996-2005, 15246.7
9. Walt Frazier, 1967-1980, 15201.6
10. Tim Hardaway, 1989-2003, 13990.9
Again, scoring is worth the most points so that explains why shoot first point guards Tim Hardaway and Allen Iverson make the top 10 ahead of the No. 11 point guard, Mo Cheeks.
But pass first floor leaders such as Jason Kidd, John Stockton and Bob Cousy scored well. Gary Payton seems to be too high at No. 5 but he scored really well on defensive points and ranks with Frazier as the top two defenders among point guards.
The Big O was better at his peak than either Magic or Cousy. Cousy's multiple titles almost pushed him into the top two. Cousy was a lousy shooter but an amazing rebounder for such a small player.
Friday, November 25, 2005
Sunday, October 30, 2005
All-time pro basketball player rankings -- first the power forwards
Just in time for the NBA season, I'm wrapping my all-time pro basketball player rankings. I'll post my all-time Top 59 (one player for each season, so next year it'll be a Top 60 list) early next week. For the next few days, I'll list the top 10s at each position, starting today with the Top 10 power forwards.
First, the rankings. A team sport is much tougher than an individual sport. Great stats don't always equal great players. Or a great player may sacrifice stats at some point in his career for the good of the team. Isaiah Thomas, point guard of the Pistons in the 80's, comes to mind. Statistically, he was a greater player earlier in his career. But as the Pistons picked up talent, he didn't shoot as much and turned over some of the ball-handling to Joe Dumars.
To balance the team versus the individual, I gave bonus points on team performance as well as on a variety of post-season awards.
Each season, I took a players total points, field goal and free throw percentages, rebounds, assists, steals and blocked shots and divided it by the average of the top three totals in each category in that season. I then multiplied the total points by 1,500, the shooting percentages by 250 each, the rebounds and assists by 1,000 each and the blocks and steals by 500 each.
So scoring was worth 2,000 (points and shooting percentages), rebounds and assists worth 2,000 and blocks and steals worth 1,000.
For the bonus points, I took a player's team's winning percentage in the regular season and mutliplied it by 625 (Jordan's 1995-1996 Bulls earned the highest score of 548.8). I took the playoff winning percentage and multiplied it by 375 (The 1982-1983 76ers got 346.2 points). Then, every player on a team that won a BAA, ABA or NBA title received 100 bonus points. So players could earn up to 1,100 for his team's performance.
The other bonus points were given to the top 10 players in the MVP voting (max. 500), MVP of the NBA Finals or ABA playoffs (100 points), Defensive Player of the Year (100 points), All-NBA or ABA (200 for first team, 100 for second, 50 for third), and All-Defensive Team (100 for first, 50 for second). In total, a player could earn another 1,000 points in bonus points.
The playoffs also presented a dilemma. Unlike baseball and football, where the regular seasons are clearly the measuring stick, basketball players are often defined by their postseason play. It's why many downgrade Wilt Chamberlain and elevate Michael Jordan. Kevin Garnett is maligned for not taking his Timberwolves farther and Tim Duncan is considered by many to be the top player in the game.
For the playoffs, I decided not to rank players statistically on how they performed against everyone else. Instead, they are judged on how they performed in comparison with their regular-season play.
An example, in 1961-1962, Wilt Chamberlain averaged 35 points a game in 12 playoff games on .467 shooting. Those are monster numbers. But those numbers earned Chamberlain just 18 points in my ranking system (74 total points divided by 4 since the playoffs, at most, are about 1/4 as long as the regular season). How could that be. Well, in 1961-1962, Wilt averaged 50.4 points a game in the regular season on .506 shooting. Only strong playoff rebounding numbers saved "The Stilt" from actually earning a negative for his postseason performance.
My thought was teams head into the playoffs expecting the stars to perform at or above their regular-season production. By holding Wilt to just 35 points, the Warriors needed other players to produce 15 more points just so they could meet their normal production.
Once I had the year-by-year numbers, I took a player's top three years and came up with an average score. Then I averaged their top five years and top 10 years for two more scores. Then I totaled their career numbers and added the four (3, 5, 10 and career) numbers together for a final ranking.
This system produced some interesting results, which I'll get into later. For now, here's my all-time top 10 power forwards.
1. Karl Malone, 1985-2004, 19339.0
2. Bob Pettit, 1954-1965, 18231.9
3. Tim Duncan, 1997-2005, 18217.9
4. Kevin Garnett, 1996-2005, 18108.3
5. Dolph Schayes, 1949-1964, 17694.8
6. Elvin Hayes, 1968-1984, 17280.1
7. Charles Barkley, 1984-2000, 17100.3
8. George McGinnis, 1971-1982, 15607.3
9. Dan Issel, 1970-1985, 14264.9
10. Chris Webber, 1993-2005, 13908.0
Clearly, scorers do well in the system. Of these 10, only Schayes and Garnett weren't pure scorers. Dirty-work power forwards such as Dave DeBusschere, Buck Williams and Dennis Rodman finished well down in 15th, 17th and 19th place. It's important to remember these three were never really considered among the top players in the league when they were playing. DeBusschere and Williams were picked all-NBA second team just once each and Rodman was picked just third-team All-NBA twice.
Both Duncan and Garnett will pass Pettit this season and each should zoom past Malone. Dirk Nowitzki is 12th on the list and may move past Chris Webber and Kevin McHale to No. 9 this year. The 00's are the era of the great power forward.
To get a better look at how the system works, let's look at Karl Malone versus Charles Barkley, two contemporaries who battled for years for the distinction of the games best No. 4.
Karl Malone
3 years (1996-1997, 1997-1998, 1994-1995) - 5151.6
5 years (add 1998-1999 and 1990-1991) - 5041.6
10 years - 4813.4
career - 4332.5
Total - 19339.0
Charles Barkley
3 years (1992-1993, 1985-1986, 1989-1990) - 4775.9
5 years (add 1988-1989, 1987-1988) - 4592.4
10 years - 4271.7
career - 3460.2
Total - 17100.3
Malone made the top 10 in MVP voting 14 times in 19 years, Barkley eight in 16 seasons.
Barkley was first team All-NBA five teams, second team five teams and third team once. Malone was first team 11 times, second team twice and third team once.
Barkley was never named to the all-defensive first or second teams. Malone was a first-team all-defensive player three times and a second-teamer once.
Malone's teams made the playoffs in every season and three times advanced to the finals, although never winning. Barkley's teams made one NBA final and twice missed the playoffs. Barkley, though, was the better playoff performer. He earned 2,330.1 bonus points over his 16 seasons and only had negative playoff scores three times. Malone received 1,698.4 bonus points in 19 seasons although he had just two negative playoff totals.
A lot of people love Barkley because he was so spectacular and produced his numbers in a small-forward (6-foot-4) body. Malone was steadier, better longer and a better defensive player.
First, the rankings. A team sport is much tougher than an individual sport. Great stats don't always equal great players. Or a great player may sacrifice stats at some point in his career for the good of the team. Isaiah Thomas, point guard of the Pistons in the 80's, comes to mind. Statistically, he was a greater player earlier in his career. But as the Pistons picked up talent, he didn't shoot as much and turned over some of the ball-handling to Joe Dumars.
To balance the team versus the individual, I gave bonus points on team performance as well as on a variety of post-season awards.
Each season, I took a players total points, field goal and free throw percentages, rebounds, assists, steals and blocked shots and divided it by the average of the top three totals in each category in that season. I then multiplied the total points by 1,500, the shooting percentages by 250 each, the rebounds and assists by 1,000 each and the blocks and steals by 500 each.
So scoring was worth 2,000 (points and shooting percentages), rebounds and assists worth 2,000 and blocks and steals worth 1,000.
For the bonus points, I took a player's team's winning percentage in the regular season and mutliplied it by 625 (Jordan's 1995-1996 Bulls earned the highest score of 548.8). I took the playoff winning percentage and multiplied it by 375 (The 1982-1983 76ers got 346.2 points). Then, every player on a team that won a BAA, ABA or NBA title received 100 bonus points. So players could earn up to 1,100 for his team's performance.
The other bonus points were given to the top 10 players in the MVP voting (max. 500), MVP of the NBA Finals or ABA playoffs (100 points), Defensive Player of the Year (100 points), All-NBA or ABA (200 for first team, 100 for second, 50 for third), and All-Defensive Team (100 for first, 50 for second). In total, a player could earn another 1,000 points in bonus points.
The playoffs also presented a dilemma. Unlike baseball and football, where the regular seasons are clearly the measuring stick, basketball players are often defined by their postseason play. It's why many downgrade Wilt Chamberlain and elevate Michael Jordan. Kevin Garnett is maligned for not taking his Timberwolves farther and Tim Duncan is considered by many to be the top player in the game.
For the playoffs, I decided not to rank players statistically on how they performed against everyone else. Instead, they are judged on how they performed in comparison with their regular-season play.
An example, in 1961-1962, Wilt Chamberlain averaged 35 points a game in 12 playoff games on .467 shooting. Those are monster numbers. But those numbers earned Chamberlain just 18 points in my ranking system (74 total points divided by 4 since the playoffs, at most, are about 1/4 as long as the regular season). How could that be. Well, in 1961-1962, Wilt averaged 50.4 points a game in the regular season on .506 shooting. Only strong playoff rebounding numbers saved "The Stilt" from actually earning a negative for his postseason performance.
My thought was teams head into the playoffs expecting the stars to perform at or above their regular-season production. By holding Wilt to just 35 points, the Warriors needed other players to produce 15 more points just so they could meet their normal production.
Once I had the year-by-year numbers, I took a player's top three years and came up with an average score. Then I averaged their top five years and top 10 years for two more scores. Then I totaled their career numbers and added the four (3, 5, 10 and career) numbers together for a final ranking.
This system produced some interesting results, which I'll get into later. For now, here's my all-time top 10 power forwards.
1. Karl Malone, 1985-2004, 19339.0
2. Bob Pettit, 1954-1965, 18231.9
3. Tim Duncan, 1997-2005, 18217.9
4. Kevin Garnett, 1996-2005, 18108.3
5. Dolph Schayes, 1949-1964, 17694.8
6. Elvin Hayes, 1968-1984, 17280.1
7. Charles Barkley, 1984-2000, 17100.3
8. George McGinnis, 1971-1982, 15607.3
9. Dan Issel, 1970-1985, 14264.9
10. Chris Webber, 1993-2005, 13908.0
Clearly, scorers do well in the system. Of these 10, only Schayes and Garnett weren't pure scorers. Dirty-work power forwards such as Dave DeBusschere, Buck Williams and Dennis Rodman finished well down in 15th, 17th and 19th place. It's important to remember these three were never really considered among the top players in the league when they were playing. DeBusschere and Williams were picked all-NBA second team just once each and Rodman was picked just third-team All-NBA twice.
Both Duncan and Garnett will pass Pettit this season and each should zoom past Malone. Dirk Nowitzki is 12th on the list and may move past Chris Webber and Kevin McHale to No. 9 this year. The 00's are the era of the great power forward.
To get a better look at how the system works, let's look at Karl Malone versus Charles Barkley, two contemporaries who battled for years for the distinction of the games best No. 4.
Karl Malone
3 years (1996-1997, 1997-1998, 1994-1995) - 5151.6
5 years (add 1998-1999 and 1990-1991) - 5041.6
10 years - 4813.4
career - 4332.5
Total - 19339.0
Charles Barkley
3 years (1992-1993, 1985-1986, 1989-1990) - 4775.9
5 years (add 1988-1989, 1987-1988) - 4592.4
10 years - 4271.7
career - 3460.2
Total - 17100.3
Malone made the top 10 in MVP voting 14 times in 19 years, Barkley eight in 16 seasons.
Barkley was first team All-NBA five teams, second team five teams and third team once. Malone was first team 11 times, second team twice and third team once.
Barkley was never named to the all-defensive first or second teams. Malone was a first-team all-defensive player three times and a second-teamer once.
Malone's teams made the playoffs in every season and three times advanced to the finals, although never winning. Barkley's teams made one NBA final and twice missed the playoffs. Barkley, though, was the better playoff performer. He earned 2,330.1 bonus points over his 16 seasons and only had negative playoff scores three times. Malone received 1,698.4 bonus points in 19 seasons although he had just two negative playoff totals.
A lot of people love Barkley because he was so spectacular and produced his numbers in a small-forward (6-foot-4) body. Malone was steadier, better longer and a better defensive player.
Sunday, September 11, 2005
Federer moves into top 10 of all-time greatest tennis players
Switzerland's Roger Federer continued to climb quickly on the short list of greatest men's tennis players of the open era.
Federer earned 16 points in my system with his four-set win over Andre Agassi in the U.S. Open -- 10 for the victory, two points for winning three sets to one and four bonus points by beating an 8-time major champion in Agassi.
Federer finished the year with 29.5 points when you combine the points with his Wimbledon victory. Federer has now won six of the last 10 major tournaments and when you run his record through my system, he's already run up 372.5 points to knock Rod Laver out of the 10th spot.
Laver, of course, would rank near the top if most of his career wasn't in the amateur era.
Agassi's run to the final edged him oh so close to sixth all-time. The U.S. Open final was the 15th time he made it to a major final. He is now 8-7 in those finals with four losses to Pete Sampras (No. 1 all-time). Still, he'll need one more final to pass Mats Wilander for sixth.
Here's how the men's top 32 now appear:
1. Pete Sampras, United States, 1990-2002, 656.50
2. Bjorn Borg, Sweden, 1974-1981, 648.50
3. Ivan Lendl, Czechoslovakia, 1981-1991, 619.50
4. Jimmy Connors, United States, 1974-1984, 594.50
5. John McEnroe, United States, 1979-1985, 542.50
6. Mats Wilander, Sweden, 1982-1988, 471.50
7. Andre Agassi, United States, 1990-2005, 470.00
8. Boris Becker, Germany, 1985-1996, 423.50
9. Stephan Edberg, Sweden, 1985-1993, 406.00
10. Roger Federer, Switzerland, 2003-2005, 372.50
11. Rod Laver, Australia, 1968-1969, 351.00
12. Jim Courier, United States, 1991-1993, 334.50
13. Guillermo Vilas, Argentina, 1975-1982, 323.00
14. John Newcombe, Australia, 1969-1976, 304.50
15. Ken Rosewall, Australia, 1968-1974, 290.50
16. Jan Kodes, Czechoslovakia, 1970-1973, 228.00
17. Arthur Ashe, United States, 1968-1975, 212.00
18. Lleyton Hewitt, Australia, 2001-2005, 191.00
19. Marat Safin, Russia, 2000-2005, 191.00
20. Illie Nastase, Romania, 1971-1976, 188.50
21. Gustavo Kuerten, Brazil, 1997-2001, 166.00
22. Pat Rafter, Australia, 1997-2001, 154.00
23. Stan Smith, United States, 1971-1972, 150.50
24. Pat Cash, Australia, 1987-1988, 141.00
25. Yevgeny Kafelinikov, Russia, 1996-2000, 139.50
26. Michael Chang, United States, 1989-1996, 134.00
27. Sergei Bruguera, Spain, 1993-1997, 133.00
28. Goran Ivanisevic, Croatia, 1992-2001, 131.00
29. Michael Stich, Germany, 1991-1996, 120.00
30. Johan Kriek, South Africa, 1981-1982, 113.00
31. Andy Roddick, United States, 2003-2005, 111.50
32. Manuel Orantes, Argentina, 1974-1975, 109.00
On the women's side, Mary Pierce made a slight move up the list and Kim Clijsters joined the ranks of established champions after finally claiming a title after losing three times to Justine Henin-Hardenne and once to Jennifer Capriati.
The all-time women's ranking looks this way heading into 2006:
1. Steffi Graf, Germany, 1987-1999, 1212.00
2. Martina Navratilova, Czechoslovakia, 1975-1994, 1190.00
3. Chris Evert-Lloyd, United States, 1973-1988, 948.50
4. Monica Seles, Yugoslavia, 1990-1998, 684.00
5. Margaret Smith-Court, Australia, 1968-1973, 646.00
6. Billie Jean King, United States, 1968-1975, 609.50
7. Evonne Goolagong-Cawley, Australia, 1971-1980, 567.00
8. Aranxta Sanchez-Vicario, Spain, 1989-1998, 455.50
9. Serena Williams, United States, 1999-2005, 446.00
10. Martina Hingis, Switzerland, 1997-2002, 425.00
11. Venus Williams, United States, 1997-2005, 394.00
12. Hana Mandlikova, Czechoslovakia, 1980-1987, 333.00
13. Lindsay Davenport, United States, 1998-2005, 308.50
14. Justine Henin-Hardenne, Belgium, 2001-2005, 245.00
15. Virginia Wade, England, 1968-1977, 191.00
16. Mary Pierce, France, 1994-2005, 190.00
17. Tracy Austin, United States, 1979-1981, 185.00
18. Jennifer Capriati, United States, 2001-2002, 184.00
19. Gabriela Sabatini, Argentina, 1988-1991, 163.00
20. Kim Clijsters, Belgium, 2001-2005, 147.00
21. Conchita Martinez, Spain, 1994-2000, 140.00
22. Ann Haydon-Jones, England, 1968-1969, 139.00
23. Jana Novotna, Czechoslovakia, 1991-1998, 126.00
24. Virginia Ruzici, Romania, 1978-1980, 107.50
25. Kerry Melville-Reid, Australia, 1970-1977, 100.00
26. Mimi Jausovec, Yugoslavia, 1977-1983, 95.00
27. Christine O'Neill, Australia, 1978, 85.00
28. Maria Sharapova, Russia, 2004, 77.50
29. Nancy Richey, United States, 1968-1969, 71.00
30. Mary Joe Fernandez, United States, 1990-1993, 69.00
31. Helena Sukova, Czechoslovakia, 1984-1993, 67.00
32. Wendy Turnbill, United States, 1977-1980, 65.00
Federer earned 16 points in my system with his four-set win over Andre Agassi in the U.S. Open -- 10 for the victory, two points for winning three sets to one and four bonus points by beating an 8-time major champion in Agassi.
Federer finished the year with 29.5 points when you combine the points with his Wimbledon victory. Federer has now won six of the last 10 major tournaments and when you run his record through my system, he's already run up 372.5 points to knock Rod Laver out of the 10th spot.
Laver, of course, would rank near the top if most of his career wasn't in the amateur era.
Agassi's run to the final edged him oh so close to sixth all-time. The U.S. Open final was the 15th time he made it to a major final. He is now 8-7 in those finals with four losses to Pete Sampras (No. 1 all-time). Still, he'll need one more final to pass Mats Wilander for sixth.
Here's how the men's top 32 now appear:
1. Pete Sampras, United States, 1990-2002, 656.50
2. Bjorn Borg, Sweden, 1974-1981, 648.50
3. Ivan Lendl, Czechoslovakia, 1981-1991, 619.50
4. Jimmy Connors, United States, 1974-1984, 594.50
5. John McEnroe, United States, 1979-1985, 542.50
6. Mats Wilander, Sweden, 1982-1988, 471.50
7. Andre Agassi, United States, 1990-2005, 470.00
8. Boris Becker, Germany, 1985-1996, 423.50
9. Stephan Edberg, Sweden, 1985-1993, 406.00
10. Roger Federer, Switzerland, 2003-2005, 372.50
11. Rod Laver, Australia, 1968-1969, 351.00
12. Jim Courier, United States, 1991-1993, 334.50
13. Guillermo Vilas, Argentina, 1975-1982, 323.00
14. John Newcombe, Australia, 1969-1976, 304.50
15. Ken Rosewall, Australia, 1968-1974, 290.50
16. Jan Kodes, Czechoslovakia, 1970-1973, 228.00
17. Arthur Ashe, United States, 1968-1975, 212.00
18. Lleyton Hewitt, Australia, 2001-2005, 191.00
19. Marat Safin, Russia, 2000-2005, 191.00
20. Illie Nastase, Romania, 1971-1976, 188.50
21. Gustavo Kuerten, Brazil, 1997-2001, 166.00
22. Pat Rafter, Australia, 1997-2001, 154.00
23. Stan Smith, United States, 1971-1972, 150.50
24. Pat Cash, Australia, 1987-1988, 141.00
25. Yevgeny Kafelinikov, Russia, 1996-2000, 139.50
26. Michael Chang, United States, 1989-1996, 134.00
27. Sergei Bruguera, Spain, 1993-1997, 133.00
28. Goran Ivanisevic, Croatia, 1992-2001, 131.00
29. Michael Stich, Germany, 1991-1996, 120.00
30. Johan Kriek, South Africa, 1981-1982, 113.00
31. Andy Roddick, United States, 2003-2005, 111.50
32. Manuel Orantes, Argentina, 1974-1975, 109.00
On the women's side, Mary Pierce made a slight move up the list and Kim Clijsters joined the ranks of established champions after finally claiming a title after losing three times to Justine Henin-Hardenne and once to Jennifer Capriati.
The all-time women's ranking looks this way heading into 2006:
1. Steffi Graf, Germany, 1987-1999, 1212.00
2. Martina Navratilova, Czechoslovakia, 1975-1994, 1190.00
3. Chris Evert-Lloyd, United States, 1973-1988, 948.50
4. Monica Seles, Yugoslavia, 1990-1998, 684.00
5. Margaret Smith-Court, Australia, 1968-1973, 646.00
6. Billie Jean King, United States, 1968-1975, 609.50
7. Evonne Goolagong-Cawley, Australia, 1971-1980, 567.00
8. Aranxta Sanchez-Vicario, Spain, 1989-1998, 455.50
9. Serena Williams, United States, 1999-2005, 446.00
10. Martina Hingis, Switzerland, 1997-2002, 425.00
11. Venus Williams, United States, 1997-2005, 394.00
12. Hana Mandlikova, Czechoslovakia, 1980-1987, 333.00
13. Lindsay Davenport, United States, 1998-2005, 308.50
14. Justine Henin-Hardenne, Belgium, 2001-2005, 245.00
15. Virginia Wade, England, 1968-1977, 191.00
16. Mary Pierce, France, 1994-2005, 190.00
17. Tracy Austin, United States, 1979-1981, 185.00
18. Jennifer Capriati, United States, 2001-2002, 184.00
19. Gabriela Sabatini, Argentina, 1988-1991, 163.00
20. Kim Clijsters, Belgium, 2001-2005, 147.00
21. Conchita Martinez, Spain, 1994-2000, 140.00
22. Ann Haydon-Jones, England, 1968-1969, 139.00
23. Jana Novotna, Czechoslovakia, 1991-1998, 126.00
24. Virginia Ruzici, Romania, 1978-1980, 107.50
25. Kerry Melville-Reid, Australia, 1970-1977, 100.00
26. Mimi Jausovec, Yugoslavia, 1977-1983, 95.00
27. Christine O'Neill, Australia, 1978, 85.00
28. Maria Sharapova, Russia, 2004, 77.50
29. Nancy Richey, United States, 1968-1969, 71.00
30. Mary Joe Fernandez, United States, 1990-1993, 69.00
31. Helena Sukova, Czechoslovakia, 1984-1993, 67.00
32. Wendy Turnbill, United States, 1977-1980, 65.00
Tuesday, August 16, 2005
Mickelson nears top 20 in all-time golf playday
Phil Mickelson's dramatic flop shot earned him a second major title and pushed him past eight golfers in my Golf's Ultimate Playday standings.
In terms of his peers, only Tiger and Ernie Els rank ahead of Lefty.
Mickelson earned 21 points -- 20 points for winning and one bonus point for margin of victory -- for the PGA and ended up with 22 points overall for 2005. That makes for his second best season in the majors in his career. His total points, factoring in his 1, 3, 5, 10 and career rankings, rose from 249.56 to 277.3, leapfrogging him past Billy Casper, Craig Wood, Cary Middlecoff, Julius Boros, Bobby Locke, Jimmy Demaret, Nick Price and Peter Thomson.
Els is immediately ahead of Mickelson with 279.9 points. Jim Barnes is ahead of those two with 301.11 points.
Here are the top 14 golfers from the PGA (there was a five-way tie for 10th) and where they now rank in the Ultimate Playday standings. The players in bold are in the Ultimate Playday or top 72 golfers ever.
PGA rank, player, points, all-time rank
1. Phil Mickelson, 277.3, 22nd
2. Steve Elkington, 140.5, 88th
2. Thomas Bjorn, 78.3, 187th
4. Tiger Woods, 622.08, 2nd
4. Davis Love III, 177.89, 60th
6. Geoff Ogilvy, 15.0, 662nd
6. Michael Campbell, 59.0, 251st
6. Retief Goosen, 145.6, 83rd
6. Pat Perez, 8.75, 874th
10. Vijay Singh, 220.41, 41st
10. Ted Purdy, 0.50, 1,116th
10. David Toms, 81.45, 179th
10. Steve Flesch, 12.9, 697th
10. Dudley Hart, 5.09, 923rd
In terms of his peers, only Tiger and Ernie Els rank ahead of Lefty.
Mickelson earned 21 points -- 20 points for winning and one bonus point for margin of victory -- for the PGA and ended up with 22 points overall for 2005. That makes for his second best season in the majors in his career. His total points, factoring in his 1, 3, 5, 10 and career rankings, rose from 249.56 to 277.3, leapfrogging him past Billy Casper, Craig Wood, Cary Middlecoff, Julius Boros, Bobby Locke, Jimmy Demaret, Nick Price and Peter Thomson.
Els is immediately ahead of Mickelson with 279.9 points. Jim Barnes is ahead of those two with 301.11 points.
Here are the top 14 golfers from the PGA (there was a five-way tie for 10th) and where they now rank in the Ultimate Playday standings. The players in bold are in the Ultimate Playday or top 72 golfers ever.
PGA rank, player, points, all-time rank
1. Phil Mickelson, 277.3, 22nd
2. Steve Elkington, 140.5, 88th
2. Thomas Bjorn, 78.3, 187th
4. Tiger Woods, 622.08, 2nd
4. Davis Love III, 177.89, 60th
6. Geoff Ogilvy, 15.0, 662nd
6. Michael Campbell, 59.0, 251st
6. Retief Goosen, 145.6, 83rd
6. Pat Perez, 8.75, 874th
10. Vijay Singh, 220.41, 41st
10. Ted Purdy, 0.50, 1,116th
10. David Toms, 81.45, 179th
10. Steve Flesch, 12.9, 697th
10. Dudley Hart, 5.09, 923rd
Saturday, July 30, 2005
Who would be invited to the all-time singles tennis tournaments
Roger Federer already is the greatest Swiss tennis player in history. After his third straight win at Wimbledon, where he again appeared to be playing two to three levels above everyone else, experts are discussing his ranking among the best ever.
The 2005 Wimbledon also was notable because of the return of Venus Williams. Her career has been on the decline for a couple of seasons and a number of younger players -- including the whole Russian revolution -- had come along seemingly relegating her to second-tier status. But Venus showed she may have a second act in store for us.
With the U.S. Open (which means the end of summer) approaching, where do these players rank among the best of the professional era? Here's who would be the top 32 seeds in a women's and men's all-time tournament based on a ranking system I created giving points for finishing first or second in a major tournament, along with bonus points for margin of victory or sets won in a loss and an evolving bonus system for quality wins.
The ranking is only for players in the open era. Bill Tilden, Helen Wills Moody, et. al. played in times where the best players weren't necessarily playing in the majors. This also hurt players who spanned both eras -- sorry Billie Jean King and Rod Laver.
To give an example of how it works, I'll break down the career of Czechoslovakian great Hana Mandlikova.
Mandlikova first earned points in 1980 with a straight set win in the Australian Open over Wendy Turnbill of the U.S. For the win, Mandlikova earned 10 points (to Turnbill's 5) plus the maximum of 2 bonus points for the straight set win. Mandlikova did not receive any bonus points for quality wins because Turnbill never won a major tournament. Also in 1980, Mandlikova lost the U.S. Open to Chris Evert-Lloyd in three sets, earning Hana 5 points for second and 1 point for winning a set. So Mandlikova's total score in 1980 was 18.
In 1981, Mandlikova beat Sylvia Hanika in straight sets to win the French, earning 10 points plus 2 for margin of victory and no points for quality wins because Hanika also never won a major. At Wimbledon, she lost the final to Evert-Lloyd in straight sets, earning 5 points. Her 1981 total was 17.
In 1982, Mandlikova lost the U.S. Open again to Evert-Lloyd in straight sets for 5 points.
Hana didn't make a major final again until 1985 when she defeated Martina Navratilova in three sets to win the U.S. Open. The win was worth 10, the margin was worth 1 point and the win over Navratilova was worth 9 points because a player earns a half-point for every major won by the player she defeated. Navratilova went on to win 18 majors in her career, meaning every player who defeated her in a final received the 9 bonus points. So Hana's total for this one win was 20 points.
The theory behind the bonus system is a win over a Navratilova, Evert or Steffi Graf is much more significant than a win over Sylvia Hanika.
In 1986, she lost in straight sets to Navratilova at Wimbledon but avenged it at the Australian with a straight-set win over for Martina for her fourth and final major title. The win over Navratilova was worth 21 points (10 for win, 2 for margin, 9 for quality win).
So her yearly point totals added up this way.
1980, 18
1981, 17
1982, 5
1985, 20
1986, 5
1987, 21
How does this add up? I used a five-step system weighted more toward one or three great seasons to give her a score.
Mandlikova's best year was 1987 when she got a 21 so her 1-year score is 21.
Her three best years ('87, '85, '80) added up to 59 points.
Her best five years ('87, '85, '80, '81 and '82 or '86) added up to 81.
And her 10-year score of 86 was also her career total.
So you add the five together.
21 + 59 + 81 + 86 + 86 = 333.
Again, one great season pushes you fairly high because it's 100 percent of the 1-year score, one-third of the 3-year, one-fifth of the 5-year and 10 percent of the 10-year score.
So after giving an example of how a score is compiled, here are the top 32 seeds (in reverse order) for an all-time women's tournament. Players in bold are still active.
No. 32, Wendy Turnbill, United States, 1977-1980, 65.0
No. 31, Helena Sukova, Czechoslovakia, 1984-1993, 67.0
No. 30, Mary Joe Fernandez, United States, 1990-1993, 69.0
No. 29, Nancy Richey, United States, 1968-1969, 71.0
No. 28, Maria Sharapova, Russia, 2004, 77.5
No. 27, Christine O'Neill, Australia, 1978, 85.0
No. 26, Mimi Jausovec, Yugoslavia, 1977-1983, 95.0
No. 25, Kim Clijsters, Belgium, 2001-2004, 98.0
No. 24, Kerry Melville-Reid, Australia, 1970-1977, 100.0
No. 23, Virginia Ruzici, Romania, 1978-1980, 107.5
No. 22, Jana Novotna, Czechoslovakia, 1991-1998, 126.0
No. 21, Ann Haydon-Jones, Great Britain, 1968-1969, 139.0
No. 20, Conchita Martinez, Spain, 1994-2000, 140.0
No. 19, Gabriela Sabatini, Argentina, 1988-1991, 163.0
No. 18, Mary Pierce, France, 1994-2005, 170.0
No. 17, Jennifer Capriati, United States, 2001-2002, 181.5
No. 16, Tracy Austin, United States, 1979-1981, 185.0
No. 15, Virginia Wade, Great Britain, 1968-1977, 191.0
No. 14, Justin Henin-Hardenne, Belgium, 2001-2005, 234.0
No. 13, Lindsay Davenport, United States, 1998-2005, 308.5
No. 12, Hana Mandlikova, Czechoslovakia, 1980-1987, 333.0
No. 11, Venus Williams, United States, 1997-2005, 394.0
No. 10, Martina Hingis, Switzerland, 1997-2002, 425.0
No. 9, Serena Williams, United States, 1999-2005, 446.0
No. 8, Aranxta Sanchez-Vicario, Spain, 1989-1998, 455.5
No. 7, Evonne Goolagong-Cawley, Australia, 1971-1980, 567.0
No. 6, Billie Jean King, United States, 1968-1975, 609.5
No. 5, Margaret Smith-Court, Australia, 1968-1973, 646.0
No. 4, Monica Seles, Yugoslavia, 1990-1998, 684.0
No. 3, Chris Evert, United States, 1973-1988, 948.5
No. 2, Martina Navratilova, Czechoslovakia, 1975-1994, 1,190.0
No. 1, Steffi Graf, Germany, 1987-1999, 1,212.0
In the men's tournament, the seeds stack up this way:
No. 32, Manuel Orantes, Argentina, 1974-1975, 109.0
No. 31, Andy Roddick, United States, 2003-2005, 111.5
No. 30, Johan Kriek, South Africa, 1981-1982, 113.0
No. 29, Michael Stich, Germany, 1991-1996, 120.0
No. 28, Goran Ivanisevic, Croatia, 1992-2001, 131.0
No. 27, Sergei Bruguera, Spain, 1993-1997, 133.0
No. 26, Michael Chang, United States, 1988-1996, 134.0
No. 25, Yevgeny Kafelnikov, Russia, 1996-2000, 139.5
No. 24, Pat Cash, Australia, 1987-1988, 141.0
No. 23, Stan Smith, United States, 1971-1972, 150.5
No. 22, Pat Rafter, Australia, 1997-2001, 154.0
No. 21, Gustavo Kuerten, 1997-2001, 166.0
No. 20, Illie Nastase, Romania, 1971-1976, 188.5
No. 18 (tie), Marat Safin, Russia, 2000-2005, 191.0
No. 18, (tie), Lleyton Hewitt, Australia, 2001-2005, 191.0
No. 17, Arthur Ashe, United States, 1968-1975, 212.0
No. 16, Jan Kodes, Czechoslovakia, 1970-1973, 228.0
No. 15, Roger Federer, United States, 2003-2005, 241.0
No. 14, Ken Rosewall, Australia, 1968-1974, 290.5
No. 13, John Newcombe, Australia, 1969-1976, 304.5
No. 12, Guillermo Vilas, Argentina, 1975-1982, 323.0
No. 11, Jim Courier, United States, 1991-1993, 334.5
No. 10, Rod Laver, Australia, 1968-1969, 351.0
No. 9, Stephan Edberg, Sweden, 1985-1993, 406.0
No. 8, Boris Becker, Germany, 1985-1996, 423.5
No. 7, Andre Agassi, United States, 1990-2003, 462.5
No. 6, Mats Wilander, Sweden, 1982-1988, 471.5
No. 5, John McEnroe, United States, 1979-1985, 542.5
No. 4, Jimmy Connors, United States, 1974-1984, 594.5
No. 3, Ivan Lendl, Czechoslovakia, 1981-1991, 619.5
No. 2, Bjorn Borg, Sweden, 1974-1981, 648.5
No. 1, Pete Sampras, United States, 1990-2002, 656.5
The 2005 Wimbledon also was notable because of the return of Venus Williams. Her career has been on the decline for a couple of seasons and a number of younger players -- including the whole Russian revolution -- had come along seemingly relegating her to second-tier status. But Venus showed she may have a second act in store for us.
With the U.S. Open (which means the end of summer) approaching, where do these players rank among the best of the professional era? Here's who would be the top 32 seeds in a women's and men's all-time tournament based on a ranking system I created giving points for finishing first or second in a major tournament, along with bonus points for margin of victory or sets won in a loss and an evolving bonus system for quality wins.
The ranking is only for players in the open era. Bill Tilden, Helen Wills Moody, et. al. played in times where the best players weren't necessarily playing in the majors. This also hurt players who spanned both eras -- sorry Billie Jean King and Rod Laver.
To give an example of how it works, I'll break down the career of Czechoslovakian great Hana Mandlikova.
Mandlikova first earned points in 1980 with a straight set win in the Australian Open over Wendy Turnbill of the U.S. For the win, Mandlikova earned 10 points (to Turnbill's 5) plus the maximum of 2 bonus points for the straight set win. Mandlikova did not receive any bonus points for quality wins because Turnbill never won a major tournament. Also in 1980, Mandlikova lost the U.S. Open to Chris Evert-Lloyd in three sets, earning Hana 5 points for second and 1 point for winning a set. So Mandlikova's total score in 1980 was 18.
In 1981, Mandlikova beat Sylvia Hanika in straight sets to win the French, earning 10 points plus 2 for margin of victory and no points for quality wins because Hanika also never won a major. At Wimbledon, she lost the final to Evert-Lloyd in straight sets, earning 5 points. Her 1981 total was 17.
In 1982, Mandlikova lost the U.S. Open again to Evert-Lloyd in straight sets for 5 points.
Hana didn't make a major final again until 1985 when she defeated Martina Navratilova in three sets to win the U.S. Open. The win was worth 10, the margin was worth 1 point and the win over Navratilova was worth 9 points because a player earns a half-point for every major won by the player she defeated. Navratilova went on to win 18 majors in her career, meaning every player who defeated her in a final received the 9 bonus points. So Hana's total for this one win was 20 points.
The theory behind the bonus system is a win over a Navratilova, Evert or Steffi Graf is much more significant than a win over Sylvia Hanika.
In 1986, she lost in straight sets to Navratilova at Wimbledon but avenged it at the Australian with a straight-set win over for Martina for her fourth and final major title. The win over Navratilova was worth 21 points (10 for win, 2 for margin, 9 for quality win).
So her yearly point totals added up this way.
1980, 18
1981, 17
1982, 5
1985, 20
1986, 5
1987, 21
How does this add up? I used a five-step system weighted more toward one or three great seasons to give her a score.
Mandlikova's best year was 1987 when she got a 21 so her 1-year score is 21.
Her three best years ('87, '85, '80) added up to 59 points.
Her best five years ('87, '85, '80, '81 and '82 or '86) added up to 81.
And her 10-year score of 86 was also her career total.
So you add the five together.
21 + 59 + 81 + 86 + 86 = 333.
Again, one great season pushes you fairly high because it's 100 percent of the 1-year score, one-third of the 3-year, one-fifth of the 5-year and 10 percent of the 10-year score.
So after giving an example of how a score is compiled, here are the top 32 seeds (in reverse order) for an all-time women's tournament. Players in bold are still active.
No. 32, Wendy Turnbill, United States, 1977-1980, 65.0
No. 31, Helena Sukova, Czechoslovakia, 1984-1993, 67.0
No. 30, Mary Joe Fernandez, United States, 1990-1993, 69.0
No. 29, Nancy Richey, United States, 1968-1969, 71.0
No. 28, Maria Sharapova, Russia, 2004, 77.5
No. 27, Christine O'Neill, Australia, 1978, 85.0
No. 26, Mimi Jausovec, Yugoslavia, 1977-1983, 95.0
No. 25, Kim Clijsters, Belgium, 2001-2004, 98.0
No. 24, Kerry Melville-Reid, Australia, 1970-1977, 100.0
No. 23, Virginia Ruzici, Romania, 1978-1980, 107.5
No. 22, Jana Novotna, Czechoslovakia, 1991-1998, 126.0
No. 21, Ann Haydon-Jones, Great Britain, 1968-1969, 139.0
No. 20, Conchita Martinez, Spain, 1994-2000, 140.0
No. 19, Gabriela Sabatini, Argentina, 1988-1991, 163.0
No. 18, Mary Pierce, France, 1994-2005, 170.0
No. 17, Jennifer Capriati, United States, 2001-2002, 181.5
No. 16, Tracy Austin, United States, 1979-1981, 185.0
No. 15, Virginia Wade, Great Britain, 1968-1977, 191.0
No. 14, Justin Henin-Hardenne, Belgium, 2001-2005, 234.0
No. 13, Lindsay Davenport, United States, 1998-2005, 308.5
No. 12, Hana Mandlikova, Czechoslovakia, 1980-1987, 333.0
No. 11, Venus Williams, United States, 1997-2005, 394.0
No. 10, Martina Hingis, Switzerland, 1997-2002, 425.0
No. 9, Serena Williams, United States, 1999-2005, 446.0
No. 8, Aranxta Sanchez-Vicario, Spain, 1989-1998, 455.5
No. 7, Evonne Goolagong-Cawley, Australia, 1971-1980, 567.0
No. 6, Billie Jean King, United States, 1968-1975, 609.5
No. 5, Margaret Smith-Court, Australia, 1968-1973, 646.0
No. 4, Monica Seles, Yugoslavia, 1990-1998, 684.0
No. 3, Chris Evert, United States, 1973-1988, 948.5
No. 2, Martina Navratilova, Czechoslovakia, 1975-1994, 1,190.0
No. 1, Steffi Graf, Germany, 1987-1999, 1,212.0
In the men's tournament, the seeds stack up this way:
No. 32, Manuel Orantes, Argentina, 1974-1975, 109.0
No. 31, Andy Roddick, United States, 2003-2005, 111.5
No. 30, Johan Kriek, South Africa, 1981-1982, 113.0
No. 29, Michael Stich, Germany, 1991-1996, 120.0
No. 28, Goran Ivanisevic, Croatia, 1992-2001, 131.0
No. 27, Sergei Bruguera, Spain, 1993-1997, 133.0
No. 26, Michael Chang, United States, 1988-1996, 134.0
No. 25, Yevgeny Kafelnikov, Russia, 1996-2000, 139.5
No. 24, Pat Cash, Australia, 1987-1988, 141.0
No. 23, Stan Smith, United States, 1971-1972, 150.5
No. 22, Pat Rafter, Australia, 1997-2001, 154.0
No. 21, Gustavo Kuerten, 1997-2001, 166.0
No. 20, Illie Nastase, Romania, 1971-1976, 188.5
No. 18 (tie), Marat Safin, Russia, 2000-2005, 191.0
No. 18, (tie), Lleyton Hewitt, Australia, 2001-2005, 191.0
No. 17, Arthur Ashe, United States, 1968-1975, 212.0
No. 16, Jan Kodes, Czechoslovakia, 1970-1973, 228.0
No. 15, Roger Federer, United States, 2003-2005, 241.0
No. 14, Ken Rosewall, Australia, 1968-1974, 290.5
No. 13, John Newcombe, Australia, 1969-1976, 304.5
No. 12, Guillermo Vilas, Argentina, 1975-1982, 323.0
No. 11, Jim Courier, United States, 1991-1993, 334.5
No. 10, Rod Laver, Australia, 1968-1969, 351.0
No. 9, Stephan Edberg, Sweden, 1985-1993, 406.0
No. 8, Boris Becker, Germany, 1985-1996, 423.5
No. 7, Andre Agassi, United States, 1990-2003, 462.5
No. 6, Mats Wilander, Sweden, 1982-1988, 471.5
No. 5, John McEnroe, United States, 1979-1985, 542.5
No. 4, Jimmy Connors, United States, 1974-1984, 594.5
No. 3, Ivan Lendl, Czechoslovakia, 1981-1991, 619.5
No. 2, Bjorn Borg, Sweden, 1974-1981, 648.5
No. 1, Pete Sampras, United States, 1990-2002, 656.5
Tuesday, July 19, 2005
The chase: How does Tiger compare with the Bear, year-by-year?
Jack Nicklaus' records seem monumental. But when you stack up Tiger Woods' accomplishments year-by-year, Tiger is way ahead. Here is a look at the five greatest "young" golfers of all time -- Nicklaus, Woods, Gene Sarazen, Bobby Jones and Seve Ballesteros -- and how they rank at ages 19 through 29, using the ranking system I discussed in my first post.
Age 19
Tiger Woods, 45
Bobby Jones, 29.5
Jack Nicklaus, 25
Seve Ballesteros, 21.25
Gene Sarazen, 18.75
At age 19, Woods had two U.S. Amateurs, Ballesteros had finished tied for second in the British Open, Nicklaus had one U.S. Amateur, Sarazen had a top-10 finish in the PGA and Jones had a second-place showing in the U.S. Amateur and two top-10 finishes in the U.S. Open.
Age 20
Gene Sarazen, 120
Tiger Woods, 67.5
Bobby Jones, 46.50
Jack Nicklaus, 43
Seve Ballesteros, 21.25
At age 20, Sarazen wins the U.S. Open and PGA. Woods claims his third straight U.S. Amateur.
Age 21
Gene Sarazen, 160.00
Tiger Woods, 139.50
Bobby Jones, 92.25
Jack Nicklaus, 85.50
Seve Ballesteros, 21.25
Sarazen wins his second straight PGA. Woods runs away with the Masters in his first professional major. Jones wins his first U.S. Open and Nicklaus claims his second U.S. Amateur.
Age 22
Gene Sarazen, 160.56
Tiger Woods, 149.33
Jack Nicklaus, 140.25
Bobby Jones, 126.00
Seve Ballesteros, 63.00
Jones finishes second in the U.S. Open and wins his first U.S. Amateur. Nicklaus wins his first U.S. Open. Ballesteros wins his first British Open.
Age 23
Jack Nicklaus, 249.00
Tiger Woods, 207.33
Gene Sarazen, 168.81
Bobby Jones, 158.25
Seve Ballesteros, 123.00
Jones finishes second in the U.S. Open -- losing in a playoff -- and wins his second U.S. Amateur. Nicklaus wins his first Masters and first PGA. Woods wins his first PGA. Ballesteros wins his first Masters.
Age 24
Tiger Woods, 407.83
Jack Nicklaus, 287.00
Bobby Jones, 260.75
Gene Sarazen, 178.94
Seve Ballesteros, 123.00
Jones wins the U.S. Open and British Open and takes second in the U.S. Amateur. Nicklaus finishes second in the Masters, British Open and PGA. Woods wins the U.S. Open and British Open in runaways and the PGA in a playoff to cap off greatest season ever.
Age 25
Tiger Woods, 435.83
Jack Nicklaus, 346.00
Bobby Jones, 322.75
Gene Sarazen, 197.44
Seve Ballesteros, 134.75
Jones wins his second British Open and third U.S. Amateur. Nicklaus wins his second Masters and ties for second in PGA. Woods wins the Masters to make it four straight professional major victories.
Age 26
Tiger Woods, 524.58
Jack Nicklaus, 420.75
Bobby Jones, 342.50
Gene Sarazen, 224.50
Seve Ballesteros, 205.50
Sarazen takes second in British Open. Jones wins fourth U.S. Amateur and loses U.S. Open in a playoff. Nicklaus wins his third Masters and first British Open. Woods wins his third Masters, second U.S. Open and finishes second in the PGA. Ballesteros wins his second Masters.
Age 27
Tiger Woods, 531.08
Jack Nicklaus, 470.50
Bobby Jones, 362.50
Seve Ballesteros, 246.25
Gene Sarazen, 242.50
Jones wins his third U.S. Open. Nicklaus wins his second U.S. Open and takes second in the British. Ballesteros wins his second British Open.
Age 28
Tiger Woods, 531.83
Jack Nicklaus, 493.50
Bobby Jones, 477.25
Seve Ballesteros, 261.50
Gene Sarazen, 251.50
Sarazen finishes second in the PGA. Jones scores his grand slam and retires, winning his fourth U.S. Open, third British Open, fifth U.S. Amateur and only British Amateur. Nicklaus finishes second in the U.S. Open and British Open. Woods has his worst year in the majors with just one top-10 finish in the British Open.
Age 29
Tiger Woods, 609.08 (with one event to go)
Jack Nicklaus, 495.75
Bobby Jones, 477.25
Gene Sarazen, 277.88
Seve Ballesteros, 273.00
Nicklaus has his worst year as a pro in the majors, with just one top-10 finish in the British Open. Woods rebounds to win his fourth Masters, take second in the U.S. Open and claims his second British Open.
Age 19
Tiger Woods, 45
Bobby Jones, 29.5
Jack Nicklaus, 25
Seve Ballesteros, 21.25
Gene Sarazen, 18.75
At age 19, Woods had two U.S. Amateurs, Ballesteros had finished tied for second in the British Open, Nicklaus had one U.S. Amateur, Sarazen had a top-10 finish in the PGA and Jones had a second-place showing in the U.S. Amateur and two top-10 finishes in the U.S. Open.
Age 20
Gene Sarazen, 120
Tiger Woods, 67.5
Bobby Jones, 46.50
Jack Nicklaus, 43
Seve Ballesteros, 21.25
At age 20, Sarazen wins the U.S. Open and PGA. Woods claims his third straight U.S. Amateur.
Age 21
Gene Sarazen, 160.00
Tiger Woods, 139.50
Bobby Jones, 92.25
Jack Nicklaus, 85.50
Seve Ballesteros, 21.25
Sarazen wins his second straight PGA. Woods runs away with the Masters in his first professional major. Jones wins his first U.S. Open and Nicklaus claims his second U.S. Amateur.
Age 22
Gene Sarazen, 160.56
Tiger Woods, 149.33
Jack Nicklaus, 140.25
Bobby Jones, 126.00
Seve Ballesteros, 63.00
Jones finishes second in the U.S. Open and wins his first U.S. Amateur. Nicklaus wins his first U.S. Open. Ballesteros wins his first British Open.
Age 23
Jack Nicklaus, 249.00
Tiger Woods, 207.33
Gene Sarazen, 168.81
Bobby Jones, 158.25
Seve Ballesteros, 123.00
Jones finishes second in the U.S. Open -- losing in a playoff -- and wins his second U.S. Amateur. Nicklaus wins his first Masters and first PGA. Woods wins his first PGA. Ballesteros wins his first Masters.
Age 24
Tiger Woods, 407.83
Jack Nicklaus, 287.00
Bobby Jones, 260.75
Gene Sarazen, 178.94
Seve Ballesteros, 123.00
Jones wins the U.S. Open and British Open and takes second in the U.S. Amateur. Nicklaus finishes second in the Masters, British Open and PGA. Woods wins the U.S. Open and British Open in runaways and the PGA in a playoff to cap off greatest season ever.
Age 25
Tiger Woods, 435.83
Jack Nicklaus, 346.00
Bobby Jones, 322.75
Gene Sarazen, 197.44
Seve Ballesteros, 134.75
Jones wins his second British Open and third U.S. Amateur. Nicklaus wins his second Masters and ties for second in PGA. Woods wins the Masters to make it four straight professional major victories.
Age 26
Tiger Woods, 524.58
Jack Nicklaus, 420.75
Bobby Jones, 342.50
Gene Sarazen, 224.50
Seve Ballesteros, 205.50
Sarazen takes second in British Open. Jones wins fourth U.S. Amateur and loses U.S. Open in a playoff. Nicklaus wins his third Masters and first British Open. Woods wins his third Masters, second U.S. Open and finishes second in the PGA. Ballesteros wins his second Masters.
Age 27
Tiger Woods, 531.08
Jack Nicklaus, 470.50
Bobby Jones, 362.50
Seve Ballesteros, 246.25
Gene Sarazen, 242.50
Jones wins his third U.S. Open. Nicklaus wins his second U.S. Open and takes second in the British. Ballesteros wins his second British Open.
Age 28
Tiger Woods, 531.83
Jack Nicklaus, 493.50
Bobby Jones, 477.25
Seve Ballesteros, 261.50
Gene Sarazen, 251.50
Sarazen finishes second in the PGA. Jones scores his grand slam and retires, winning his fourth U.S. Open, third British Open, fifth U.S. Amateur and only British Amateur. Nicklaus finishes second in the U.S. Open and British Open. Woods has his worst year in the majors with just one top-10 finish in the British Open.
Age 29
Tiger Woods, 609.08 (with one event to go)
Jack Nicklaus, 495.75
Bobby Jones, 477.25
Gene Sarazen, 277.88
Seve Ballesteros, 273.00
Nicklaus has his worst year as a pro in the majors, with just one top-10 finish in the British Open. Woods rebounds to win his fourth Masters, take second in the U.S. Open and claims his second British Open.
Sunday, July 17, 2005
Tiger moves into No. 2 on all-time golfer list
At the end of 1996 I was riding with a friend to attend our annual golf fantasy league draft. Yes, there are such things. My friend was a sports nut from college, and I was an assistant sports editor of a small Wisconsin newspaper. Obviously, most of the discussion was sports-related.
After a while, the talk turned to Sports Illustrated’s choice of Tiger Woods as its Sportsman of the Year. I thought it was a terrible pick. That summer Michael Johnson had turned in one of the greatest Olympic performances in decades, perhaps on a par with Jesse Owens’ performance back in 1936. Track and Field may not be much of a fan favorite in the United States, but the Olympics is a world-wide stage.
My friend, who ran the golf league and still does, thought Woods was the right choice and agreed with SI’s reasoning. The magazine hadn’t picked Woods for what he accomplished in 1996 but for what he might accomplish. My buddy said Woods would be to golf what Michael Jordan was to the NBA.
Well, it’s 2005 and I’ll admit he was right on that account. But the talk that night also turned to Woods’ long-stated goal to match and surpass all of the records of Jack Nicklaus. That was not a small goal. Nicklaus was a colossus in his sport, perhaps more so at that time than any other. Old-timers in baseball can argue the virtues of Babe Ruth versus Willie Mays and Hank Aaron with Barry Bonds making a sudden entrance into the picture. Fans of forgotten Negro League stars can even, thanks to tireless research by groups such as the Society for American Baseball Research, throw names such as Josh Gibson, Satchel Paige and Oscar Charleston into the discussion.
Football fans not only argue eras but positions as well. Was Jim Brown a greater player than Johnny Unitas? Was Brown as good as an all-around player as Walter Payton? Did any player dominate his position more than receiver Jerry Rice or outside linebacker Lawrence Taylor? ESPN once chose Bears middle linebacker Dick Butkus as the best ever. A Sports Illustrated writer even made an argument for old Cleveland Browns star Marion Motley.
Basketball fans have their Michael Jordan versus Wilt Chamberlain versus Bill Russell arguments. A book published in 2004 by a long-time respected stat man made a different choice – placing Shaquille O’Neal at the top of the list.
Hockey has Wayne Gretzky or Gordie Howe; tennis has Pete Sampras, Bjorn Borg or Rod Laver, Martina Navritilova or Steffi Graf; even horse racing has Secretariat versus Man ‘O War.
But golf in 1996 was a simple argument, who was the second greatest player after Nicklaus? Sure, every once in a while I’d read an argument about why perhaps Bobby Jones or Ben Hogan should be considered Nicklaus’ equal, but no one seriously argued any player was better.
Nicklaus’ accomplishments simply towered over all others.
* Eighteen professional majors and two U.S. amateurs. The next closest number, if you count the U.S. and British amateurs, was Jones with 13 then Walter Hagen with 11.
* Nineteen times he was a runner up in the four most coveted tournaments. Seventy-four times he finished in the top 10, including one in 1998 at the Masters at the age of 58.
He won his first professional in 1962 and last in 1986. He swallowed whole the careers of Lee Trevino, Raymond Floyd, Hubert Green, Tom Weiskopf and dozens of others.
I wondered after that night, and especially after Woods made a mockery of the competition in the 1997 Masters, just what it would take for Tiger to surpass the Golden Bear. Was it simply a matter of winning more majors?
Of course, I’m not the first to take on a ranking. Robert McCord published a book ranking the top 100 men and top 40 women. Sporting News chimed in with its 50 Greatest Golfers by Reid Spencer, a golf writer who has covered the sport for more than 25 years.
Spencer did not use any kind of statistical analysis. He just used his judgment in creating the list. Spencer’s work was notable because he handed the title of greatest golfer to Woods, dropping Nicklaus to second even though Tiger still trailed the Bear by 12 professional majors at the time and 11 majors overall if you count his U.S. Amateurs, which Woods always does. Spencer’s No. 3 was Ben Hogan, Bobby Jones is No. 4 and Arnold Palmer sits at No. 5. Spencer seems to be a bit rough on non-U.S. golfers. Gary Player comes in at No. 8, ahead of English star Harry Vardon. Turn of the century golfer U.S. golfer Willie Anderson is an interestingly high No. 12, while Seve Ballesteros only manages a spot at No. 16. Francis Ouimet, a winner of two U.S. Amateurs and the historic 1913 U.S. Open is No. 17 while Nick Faldo is No. 19.
For my list, I decided to create the equivalent of the all-time golf fantasy league. I went back and gave points to every player who finished in the top 10 of a four-round major (thus eliminating all of the British Opens before 1892 and the U.S. Opens before 1898). I based the point system on our fantasy league totals. A player who finished second received nine, third eight and on down. But a player who won the major received 20 points plus bonus points for margin of victory, meaning Nicklaus’ greatest romp – the 1980 PGA where he won by seven shots – was worth 27 points.
One can argue the gap between first and second should not be so wide. But I argue the difference between winning and coming in second in majors is enormous. Colin Montgomerie, as of this writing, has won zero professional majors. He’d come tantalizingly close, losing playoffs in the 1994 U.S. Open and 1995 PGA, finishing a shot behind Ernie Els in the 1997 U.S. Open and just recently finishing second to Woods in the 2005 British Open. But close doesn’t count when it comes to golf greatness. The gap in Monty’s resume overshadows his dominance of both the European tour and the Ryder Cup.
I thought about awarding points for victories in other events, especially national championships like the Australian, Canadian and French opens, and the near majors such as the Players Championship. But to me, that muddied the waters. David Duval won several big tournaments but it was his win at the British Open that was regarded as his breakthrough. In the end, to me, they are the only ones that count when discussing the all-time greatest players.
My next decision was what to do with the two major amateur events – the U.S. and the British. Today, no one seriously argues either of these events are on the same level as the professional majors or a number of the next-tier events. But these two championships were recognized majors until the 1960s and in the early 20th century the top amateurs were thought to be better than the top professionals. Simply excluding them would seriously devalue two top players – Bobby Jones and Harold Hilton. After much thought, I decided to award the winners of the two amateurs 10 points, much less than a professional major even in the days of Jones and Hilton. My thought was that even though the amateurs carried equal prestige back in the day, it still was easier for Jones to win a U.S. Amateur knowing Gene Sarazen and Walter Hagen couldn’t play than it was to win the U.S. Open where everyone was eligible. The second place finisher in an amateur received five points and the medalists received one.
With the numbering systems in place, I gave the ranking one final tweak. Studying baseball over the years, I’ve always struggled with comparing a player who was good for a number of years versus a player who dominated for a few and then faded away. I’ve always called it the Carlton Fisk versus Gary Carter argument.
Fisk was an often injured catcher early in his career who defied history and continued to catch until he was 45 years old. By playing so long he set a number of marks for catchers and went into the Hall of Fame in 2000 on his first try. Carter was out of baseball when he was 38 and really was through as a top flight player when he was 34. He finally got into the Hall of Fame in 2003 after coming up short in the voting for a couple of years.
Here’s how the two stack up in career numbers:
Stat Carter Fisk
Games 2,296 2,499
Batting average .262 .269
Slugging percentage .439 .457
Hits 2,092 2,356
Home runs 324 376
Runs 1,025 1,276
Runs batted in 1,225 1,330
But let’s take a look at of the best five seasons for each player.
Carter’s five best seasons were 1977, 1980, 1982, 1984, 1985. Fisk’s were 1972, 1977, 1978, 1983, 1985. If you look at the averages for those seasons, Carter fairs much better.
Stat Carter Fisk
At bats 554 519
Batting average .284 .283
Slugging percentage .500 .506
Hits 157 147
Home runs 30 26
Runs 82 89
Runs batted in 98 89
Walks 65 59
Personally, I’ve always favored someone who dominated for a short time over someone who was just good for a long period of time. If I were starting a baseball team and I had my choice between Fisk or Carter (assuming of course Pudge Rodriguez and Johnny Bench weren’t available), I’d take Carter.
For my ranking, I could rank players both ways. I could just total the points over an entire career – which would favor players such as Gene Sarazen and Sam Snead, who were solid contenders for decades. Or I could use a system I use in baseball rankings, where I total up the points from a player’s top year, three best years, five best years, 10 best years and then career points. Under this system, one great season is equal to a player’s entire career. This system favors Bobby Jones, who quit competitive golf at age 27, and Woods, who strung together perhaps the best stretch of golf ever in 1999, 2000 and 2001.
I compromised and mixed the two to get the rankings that follow. Finally, I wondered how deep should my list run. Everyone does a top 50 or a top 100. Golf has its own numbering systems so I settled on Golf’s Greatest Playday. Basically, if I were holding a one-day event and had 18 foursomes ready for a shot-gun start, here’s who I would according to how they’ve performed in the events that over time have evolved into the most important titles in the world of golf.
On the 18th tee
Rank, Player, Country, Years, Points
72. Charles Evans Jr., United States, 1909-1927, 162.67
71. Sandy Herd, Scotland, 1892-1927, 163.31
70. David Graham, Australia, 1975-1990, 163.70
69. Tony Jacklin, England, 1967-1972, 164.50
On th 17th tee
68. Tommy Bolt, United States, 1952-1971, 166.63
67. Doug Ford, United States, 1955-1962, 168.50
66. Harry Cooper, Eng/U.S., 1923-1942, 169.50
65. Jack Burke Jr., United States, 1951-1965, 169.95
On the 16th tee
64. Davis Love III, United States, 1995-2005, 169.96
63. Curtis Strange, United States, 1980-1995, 170.17
62. Johnny Farrell, United States, 1922-1937, 170.46
61. Larry Nelson, United States, 1979-1991, 173.75
On the 15th tee
60. Jim Ferrier, Aus/U.S., 1936-1964, 176.50
59. Jose Maria Olazabul, Spain, 1984-2005, 181.70
58. Gene Littler, United States, 1953-1979, 184.00
57. Lanny Wadkins, United States, 1970-1993, 185.50
On the 14th tee
56. Fred Couples, United States, 1980-2005, 186.70
55. Lawson Little, United States, 1934-1951, 187.33
54. Tom Kite, United States, 1970-2001, 187.94
53. Mark O'Meara, United States, 1979-2003, 188.70
On the 13th tee
52. Hubert Green, United States, 1974-1989, 190.00
51. Henry Picard, United States, 1932-1950, 192.44
50. Alex Smith, Scot/US, 1898-1921, 193.69
49. Horton Smith, United States, 1928-1954, 198.31
On the 12th tee
48. Tommy Armour, Scot/US, 1925-1937, 202.63
47. Ted Ray, England, 1902-1925, 204.88
46. Bernhard Langer, Germany, 1981-2005, 209.58
45. Jock Hutchison, Scot/U.S., 1908-1928, 210.25
On the 11th tee
44. Henry Cotton, England, 1927-1958, 210.92
43. Payne Stewart, United States, 1985-1999, 216.50
42. Denny Shute, United States, 1928-1950, 219.25
41. Vijay Singh, Fiji, 1993-2005, 220.11
On the 10th tee
40. Paul Runyan, United States, 1931-1951, 221.13
39. Johnny Miller, United States, 1966-1985, 221.38
38. Harold Hilton, England, 1892-1913, 221.50
37. Lloyd Mangrum, United States, 1940-1956, 221.60
On the 9th tee
36. Tom Weiskopf, United States, 1969-1982, 222.43
35. Willie Anderson Jr., Scot/U.S., 1898-1908, 223.50
34. Leo Diegel, United States, 1920-1933, 235.56
33. Ralph Guldahl, United States, 1933-1941, 237.13
On the 8th tee
32. Hale Irwin, United States, 1973-1993, 243.38
31. Ben Crenshaw, United States, 1972-1995, 243.52
30. Phil Mickelson, United States, 1990-2005, 249.56
29. Billy Casper, United States, 1958-1976, 251.21
On the 7th tee
28. Craig Wood, United States, 1929-1944, 251.94
27. Cary Middlecoff, United States, 1948-1959, 252.50
26. Julius Boros, United States, 1950-1973, 252.92
25. Bobby Locke, South Africa, 1936-1957, 259.75
On the 6th tee
24. Jimmy Demaret, United States, 1938-1962, 263.44
23. Nick Price, Zimbabwe, 1982-2005, 267.98
22. Peter Thomson, Australia, 1951-1971, 277.10
21. Ernie Els, South Africa, 1992-2004, 279.90
On the 5th tee
20. Jim Barnes, Eng/U.S., 1913-1930, 301.11
19. James Braid, Scotland, 1894-1914, 301.63
18. Raymond Floyd, United States, 1965-1994, 309.32
17. Greg Norman, Australia, 1979-1999, 316.82
On the 4th tee
16. Seve Ballesteros, Spain, 1976-1991, 321.08
15. Lee Trevino, United States, 1967-1986, 334.54
14. J.H. Taylor, England, 1893-1925, 348.75
13. Harry Vardon, England, 1894-1922, 351.50
On the 3rd tee
12. Byron Nelson, United States, 1935-1955, 367.54
11. Nick Faldo, England, 1978-2003, 401.50
10. Gene Sarazen, United States, 1921-1956, 458.63
9. Sam Snead, United States, 1937-1974, 464.41
On the 2nd tee
8. Bobby Jones, United States, 1919-1930, 477.25
7. Gary Player, South Africa, 1956-1984, 477.43
6. Tom Watson, United States, 1974-2000, 493.36
5. Arnold Palmer, United States, 1954-1977, 515.33
On the 1st tee
4. Walter Hagen, United States, 1913-1940, 517.29
3. Ben Hogan, United States, 1939-1967, 583.95
2. Tiger Woods, United States, 1994-2005, 609.08
1. Jack Nicklaus, United States, 1959-1998, 858.59
After a while, the talk turned to Sports Illustrated’s choice of Tiger Woods as its Sportsman of the Year. I thought it was a terrible pick. That summer Michael Johnson had turned in one of the greatest Olympic performances in decades, perhaps on a par with Jesse Owens’ performance back in 1936. Track and Field may not be much of a fan favorite in the United States, but the Olympics is a world-wide stage.
My friend, who ran the golf league and still does, thought Woods was the right choice and agreed with SI’s reasoning. The magazine hadn’t picked Woods for what he accomplished in 1996 but for what he might accomplish. My buddy said Woods would be to golf what Michael Jordan was to the NBA.
Well, it’s 2005 and I’ll admit he was right on that account. But the talk that night also turned to Woods’ long-stated goal to match and surpass all of the records of Jack Nicklaus. That was not a small goal. Nicklaus was a colossus in his sport, perhaps more so at that time than any other. Old-timers in baseball can argue the virtues of Babe Ruth versus Willie Mays and Hank Aaron with Barry Bonds making a sudden entrance into the picture. Fans of forgotten Negro League stars can even, thanks to tireless research by groups such as the Society for American Baseball Research, throw names such as Josh Gibson, Satchel Paige and Oscar Charleston into the discussion.
Football fans not only argue eras but positions as well. Was Jim Brown a greater player than Johnny Unitas? Was Brown as good as an all-around player as Walter Payton? Did any player dominate his position more than receiver Jerry Rice or outside linebacker Lawrence Taylor? ESPN once chose Bears middle linebacker Dick Butkus as the best ever. A Sports Illustrated writer even made an argument for old Cleveland Browns star Marion Motley.
Basketball fans have their Michael Jordan versus Wilt Chamberlain versus Bill Russell arguments. A book published in 2004 by a long-time respected stat man made a different choice – placing Shaquille O’Neal at the top of the list.
Hockey has Wayne Gretzky or Gordie Howe; tennis has Pete Sampras, Bjorn Borg or Rod Laver, Martina Navritilova or Steffi Graf; even horse racing has Secretariat versus Man ‘O War.
But golf in 1996 was a simple argument, who was the second greatest player after Nicklaus? Sure, every once in a while I’d read an argument about why perhaps Bobby Jones or Ben Hogan should be considered Nicklaus’ equal, but no one seriously argued any player was better.
Nicklaus’ accomplishments simply towered over all others.
* Eighteen professional majors and two U.S. amateurs. The next closest number, if you count the U.S. and British amateurs, was Jones with 13 then Walter Hagen with 11.
* Nineteen times he was a runner up in the four most coveted tournaments. Seventy-four times he finished in the top 10, including one in 1998 at the Masters at the age of 58.
He won his first professional in 1962 and last in 1986. He swallowed whole the careers of Lee Trevino, Raymond Floyd, Hubert Green, Tom Weiskopf and dozens of others.
I wondered after that night, and especially after Woods made a mockery of the competition in the 1997 Masters, just what it would take for Tiger to surpass the Golden Bear. Was it simply a matter of winning more majors?
Of course, I’m not the first to take on a ranking. Robert McCord published a book ranking the top 100 men and top 40 women. Sporting News chimed in with its 50 Greatest Golfers by Reid Spencer, a golf writer who has covered the sport for more than 25 years.
Spencer did not use any kind of statistical analysis. He just used his judgment in creating the list. Spencer’s work was notable because he handed the title of greatest golfer to Woods, dropping Nicklaus to second even though Tiger still trailed the Bear by 12 professional majors at the time and 11 majors overall if you count his U.S. Amateurs, which Woods always does. Spencer’s No. 3 was Ben Hogan, Bobby Jones is No. 4 and Arnold Palmer sits at No. 5. Spencer seems to be a bit rough on non-U.S. golfers. Gary Player comes in at No. 8, ahead of English star Harry Vardon. Turn of the century golfer U.S. golfer Willie Anderson is an interestingly high No. 12, while Seve Ballesteros only manages a spot at No. 16. Francis Ouimet, a winner of two U.S. Amateurs and the historic 1913 U.S. Open is No. 17 while Nick Faldo is No. 19.
For my list, I decided to create the equivalent of the all-time golf fantasy league. I went back and gave points to every player who finished in the top 10 of a four-round major (thus eliminating all of the British Opens before 1892 and the U.S. Opens before 1898). I based the point system on our fantasy league totals. A player who finished second received nine, third eight and on down. But a player who won the major received 20 points plus bonus points for margin of victory, meaning Nicklaus’ greatest romp – the 1980 PGA where he won by seven shots – was worth 27 points.
One can argue the gap between first and second should not be so wide. But I argue the difference between winning and coming in second in majors is enormous. Colin Montgomerie, as of this writing, has won zero professional majors. He’d come tantalizingly close, losing playoffs in the 1994 U.S. Open and 1995 PGA, finishing a shot behind Ernie Els in the 1997 U.S. Open and just recently finishing second to Woods in the 2005 British Open. But close doesn’t count when it comes to golf greatness. The gap in Monty’s resume overshadows his dominance of both the European tour and the Ryder Cup.
I thought about awarding points for victories in other events, especially national championships like the Australian, Canadian and French opens, and the near majors such as the Players Championship. But to me, that muddied the waters. David Duval won several big tournaments but it was his win at the British Open that was regarded as his breakthrough. In the end, to me, they are the only ones that count when discussing the all-time greatest players.
My next decision was what to do with the two major amateur events – the U.S. and the British. Today, no one seriously argues either of these events are on the same level as the professional majors or a number of the next-tier events. But these two championships were recognized majors until the 1960s and in the early 20th century the top amateurs were thought to be better than the top professionals. Simply excluding them would seriously devalue two top players – Bobby Jones and Harold Hilton. After much thought, I decided to award the winners of the two amateurs 10 points, much less than a professional major even in the days of Jones and Hilton. My thought was that even though the amateurs carried equal prestige back in the day, it still was easier for Jones to win a U.S. Amateur knowing Gene Sarazen and Walter Hagen couldn’t play than it was to win the U.S. Open where everyone was eligible. The second place finisher in an amateur received five points and the medalists received one.
With the numbering systems in place, I gave the ranking one final tweak. Studying baseball over the years, I’ve always struggled with comparing a player who was good for a number of years versus a player who dominated for a few and then faded away. I’ve always called it the Carlton Fisk versus Gary Carter argument.
Fisk was an often injured catcher early in his career who defied history and continued to catch until he was 45 years old. By playing so long he set a number of marks for catchers and went into the Hall of Fame in 2000 on his first try. Carter was out of baseball when he was 38 and really was through as a top flight player when he was 34. He finally got into the Hall of Fame in 2003 after coming up short in the voting for a couple of years.
Here’s how the two stack up in career numbers:
Stat Carter Fisk
Games 2,296 2,499
Batting average .262 .269
Slugging percentage .439 .457
Hits 2,092 2,356
Home runs 324 376
Runs 1,025 1,276
Runs batted in 1,225 1,330
But let’s take a look at of the best five seasons for each player.
Carter’s five best seasons were 1977, 1980, 1982, 1984, 1985. Fisk’s were 1972, 1977, 1978, 1983, 1985. If you look at the averages for those seasons, Carter fairs much better.
Stat Carter Fisk
At bats 554 519
Batting average .284 .283
Slugging percentage .500 .506
Hits 157 147
Home runs 30 26
Runs 82 89
Runs batted in 98 89
Walks 65 59
Personally, I’ve always favored someone who dominated for a short time over someone who was just good for a long period of time. If I were starting a baseball team and I had my choice between Fisk or Carter (assuming of course Pudge Rodriguez and Johnny Bench weren’t available), I’d take Carter.
For my ranking, I could rank players both ways. I could just total the points over an entire career – which would favor players such as Gene Sarazen and Sam Snead, who were solid contenders for decades. Or I could use a system I use in baseball rankings, where I total up the points from a player’s top year, three best years, five best years, 10 best years and then career points. Under this system, one great season is equal to a player’s entire career. This system favors Bobby Jones, who quit competitive golf at age 27, and Woods, who strung together perhaps the best stretch of golf ever in 1999, 2000 and 2001.
I compromised and mixed the two to get the rankings that follow. Finally, I wondered how deep should my list run. Everyone does a top 50 or a top 100. Golf has its own numbering systems so I settled on Golf’s Greatest Playday. Basically, if I were holding a one-day event and had 18 foursomes ready for a shot-gun start, here’s who I would according to how they’ve performed in the events that over time have evolved into the most important titles in the world of golf.
On the 18th tee
Rank, Player, Country, Years, Points
72. Charles Evans Jr., United States, 1909-1927, 162.67
71. Sandy Herd, Scotland, 1892-1927, 163.31
70. David Graham, Australia, 1975-1990, 163.70
69. Tony Jacklin, England, 1967-1972, 164.50
On th 17th tee
68. Tommy Bolt, United States, 1952-1971, 166.63
67. Doug Ford, United States, 1955-1962, 168.50
66. Harry Cooper, Eng/U.S., 1923-1942, 169.50
65. Jack Burke Jr., United States, 1951-1965, 169.95
On the 16th tee
64. Davis Love III, United States, 1995-2005, 169.96
63. Curtis Strange, United States, 1980-1995, 170.17
62. Johnny Farrell, United States, 1922-1937, 170.46
61. Larry Nelson, United States, 1979-1991, 173.75
On the 15th tee
60. Jim Ferrier, Aus/U.S., 1936-1964, 176.50
59. Jose Maria Olazabul, Spain, 1984-2005, 181.70
58. Gene Littler, United States, 1953-1979, 184.00
57. Lanny Wadkins, United States, 1970-1993, 185.50
On the 14th tee
56. Fred Couples, United States, 1980-2005, 186.70
55. Lawson Little, United States, 1934-1951, 187.33
54. Tom Kite, United States, 1970-2001, 187.94
53. Mark O'Meara, United States, 1979-2003, 188.70
On the 13th tee
52. Hubert Green, United States, 1974-1989, 190.00
51. Henry Picard, United States, 1932-1950, 192.44
50. Alex Smith, Scot/US, 1898-1921, 193.69
49. Horton Smith, United States, 1928-1954, 198.31
On the 12th tee
48. Tommy Armour, Scot/US, 1925-1937, 202.63
47. Ted Ray, England, 1902-1925, 204.88
46. Bernhard Langer, Germany, 1981-2005, 209.58
45. Jock Hutchison, Scot/U.S., 1908-1928, 210.25
On the 11th tee
44. Henry Cotton, England, 1927-1958, 210.92
43. Payne Stewart, United States, 1985-1999, 216.50
42. Denny Shute, United States, 1928-1950, 219.25
41. Vijay Singh, Fiji, 1993-2005, 220.11
On the 10th tee
40. Paul Runyan, United States, 1931-1951, 221.13
39. Johnny Miller, United States, 1966-1985, 221.38
38. Harold Hilton, England, 1892-1913, 221.50
37. Lloyd Mangrum, United States, 1940-1956, 221.60
On the 9th tee
36. Tom Weiskopf, United States, 1969-1982, 222.43
35. Willie Anderson Jr., Scot/U.S., 1898-1908, 223.50
34. Leo Diegel, United States, 1920-1933, 235.56
33. Ralph Guldahl, United States, 1933-1941, 237.13
On the 8th tee
32. Hale Irwin, United States, 1973-1993, 243.38
31. Ben Crenshaw, United States, 1972-1995, 243.52
30. Phil Mickelson, United States, 1990-2005, 249.56
29. Billy Casper, United States, 1958-1976, 251.21
On the 7th tee
28. Craig Wood, United States, 1929-1944, 251.94
27. Cary Middlecoff, United States, 1948-1959, 252.50
26. Julius Boros, United States, 1950-1973, 252.92
25. Bobby Locke, South Africa, 1936-1957, 259.75
On the 6th tee
24. Jimmy Demaret, United States, 1938-1962, 263.44
23. Nick Price, Zimbabwe, 1982-2005, 267.98
22. Peter Thomson, Australia, 1951-1971, 277.10
21. Ernie Els, South Africa, 1992-2004, 279.90
On the 5th tee
20. Jim Barnes, Eng/U.S., 1913-1930, 301.11
19. James Braid, Scotland, 1894-1914, 301.63
18. Raymond Floyd, United States, 1965-1994, 309.32
17. Greg Norman, Australia, 1979-1999, 316.82
On the 4th tee
16. Seve Ballesteros, Spain, 1976-1991, 321.08
15. Lee Trevino, United States, 1967-1986, 334.54
14. J.H. Taylor, England, 1893-1925, 348.75
13. Harry Vardon, England, 1894-1922, 351.50
On the 3rd tee
12. Byron Nelson, United States, 1935-1955, 367.54
11. Nick Faldo, England, 1978-2003, 401.50
10. Gene Sarazen, United States, 1921-1956, 458.63
9. Sam Snead, United States, 1937-1974, 464.41
On the 2nd tee
8. Bobby Jones, United States, 1919-1930, 477.25
7. Gary Player, South Africa, 1956-1984, 477.43
6. Tom Watson, United States, 1974-2000, 493.36
5. Arnold Palmer, United States, 1954-1977, 515.33
On the 1st tee
4. Walter Hagen, United States, 1913-1940, 517.29
3. Ben Hogan, United States, 1939-1967, 583.95
2. Tiger Woods, United States, 1994-2005, 609.08
1. Jack Nicklaus, United States, 1959-1998, 858.59
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)