Do The World Rankings Need to be Re-Tooled?

[cdnglf]

Tiger effectively has the most wins on PGA Tour if you don't count small field events like Hero, team events like Inverness etc.

 

He's probably the leader in the category of "most non-team wins with fields > 25". Not sure he'd lead the "fields > 90" category though.

[mjtoal]

The OWGR is tricky to get right. Even the best players lose more events than they win, and other players can win one in a season in which they otherwise do little. Different people have different views about whether a player with lots of top 10s but no wins has played better or worse than a player with a win but little else. This makes it hard to have a system which is reflective of both long term and short term form. In tennis, the same players win many tournaments or have high finishes. That makes for a more stable ranking system. At the bottom end of the OWGR, the rankings are quite flat, that is little separates players a hundred or two hundred points apart. So as long as the rules allow a tournament (or in this case, Tiger himself) to invite a player in the 800s, that player will rocket up regardless of their finish.

 

The OWGR seems to be pretty reasonable given the noisy and variable elements included.

[Sean2]

I think points should only be awarded for full-field events, with the exception of the FedEx Cup.

[NaBUru38]

If you finish 11th in a 18-player tournament, you should get no workd ranking points.

 

Bubba Watson was 18th in the PGA Tour money ranking, Rickie Fowler was 32nd, and Justin Rose was 44th.

However, they are 10th, 11th and 15th in the world ranking as of December 2016.

 

Jimmy Walker was 10th in the PGA Tour money ranking, Snedeker was 13th and William McGirth was 17th.

However, they are 21st, 27th and 51st in the world ranking as of December 2016..

 

That's because of their results in 2015 also count, which makes no sense.

[Browns71213]

This has been an enlightening discussion because I knew nothing about the workings of the OWGR, so thanks for the insight! My reason for posting this was not to Tiger bash, while I am not a fan, I don't dislike the guy either. Rather it was the point values awarded to a golfer who finished at the bottom of what was essentially a clambake, with a limited field. I get that it was a strong field, but still many in the top 20 were not there and they lose out on those points, whether they care or not, I agree with many of you they probably don't care. Also, some of those in the top 20 would never play in this event due to their relationship, or lack there of, with Tiger. Insert Sergio Garcia here. However it still seems to me that a limited event field should not carry that many points, when the other 150 golfers on the bubble could use those points for their livelihood, but do not have the chance to compete for them. To me, and this is just one terrible golfer's opinion, these silly events can have a few points available, but devalue them greatly compared to full-field events, regardless of that caliber of players in the event.

[bladehunter]

The weightings given to the top ranked players are too high, which overrates limited field events, like the WGCs. This isn't too big a problem, except when the formula is applied to tiny events like the Charity Points for Tiger Challenge.

 

That event is a joke. It's official status is absurd and the special exemption Tiger got is embarrassing.

 

 

how now brown cow...... really ? you first say the tournament is a joke and then say that tiger getting an exemption into it is embarrasing as if the event is a great event ( it is) .... which is it? how would yoi have him get back in ? monday qualify? maybe Q school? wtf?? hes a multiple time past champion.. he gets in FO LIFE! as hulk hogan of the NWO would say.... hate tiger all you want.. but please make sense when you do it ... The field is stacked and he has an exemption to get in... which makes his finish worth something ....

 

 

as for the world golf rankings.. i personally think it should be off a year timeline so that we dont have the Rory riding at #1 syndrome we had last year after a dismal 6-8 months ( compared to his previous play not compared to all others) .... and potentially we could have it again ... with his win for teh fedex plus a couple more he might make #1 again next year then fall off and retain it for another year if someone else doesnt explode.... i would just like to see the hottest player carrying the #1 spot while being hot... not well after the streak ends....

[BrianMcG]

By some peoples reasoning then, The Masters shouldn't receive points either. It's an invitational with a small field loaded with amateurs and seniors.

[cdnglf]

The weightings given to the top ranked players are too high, which overrates limited field events, like the WGCs. This isn't too big a problem, except when the formula is applied to tiny events like the Charity Points for Tiger Challenge.

 

That event is a joke. It's official status is absurd and the special exemption Tiger got is embarrassing.

 

 

how now brown cow...... really ? you first say the tournament is a joke and then say that tiger getting an exemption into it is embarrasing as if the event is a great event ( it is) .... which is it? how would yoi have him get back in ? monday qualify? maybe Q school? wtf?? hes a multiple time past champion.. he gets in FO LIFE! as hulk hogan of the NWO would say.... hate tiger all you want.. but please make sense when you do it... The field is stacked and he has an exemption to get in... which makes his finish worth something ....

 

Try and rewrite your post, keeping the bolded part in mind.

[bigeasy]

yes world ranking points need to be changed without a doubt, Hideki wins and doesnt move, something isnt right.

[bladehunter]

The weightings given to the top ranked players are too high, which overrates limited field events, like the WGCs. This isn't too big a problem, except when the formula is applied to tiny events like the Charity Points for Tiger Challenge.

 

That event is a joke. It's official status is absurd and the special exemption Tiger got is embarrassing.

 

 

how now brown cow...... really ? you first say the tournament is a joke and then say that tiger getting an exemption into it is embarrasing as if the event is a great event ( it is) .... which is it? how would yoi have him get back in ? monday qualify? maybe Q school? wtf?? hes a multiple time past champion.. he gets in FO LIFE! as hulk hogan of the NWO would say.... hate tiger all you want.. but please make sense when you do it... The field is stacked and he has an exemption to get in... which makes his finish worth something ....

 

Try and rewrite your post, keeping the bolded part in mind.

 

 

lol... the old grammar police fall back... i personally do not consider internet forums as legal documents... i type as i think.. quick and in random form.. if you would like to address my points that it is a small but stacked field and that he has a past champions exemption ( as any past champ does for any event he wins) then im all ears...

[cdnglf]

The weightings given to the top ranked players are too high, which overrates limited field events, like the WGCs. This isn't too big a problem, except when the formula is applied to tiny events like the Charity Points for Tiger Challenge.

 

That event is a joke. It's official status is absurd and the special exemption Tiger got is embarrassing.

 

 

how now brown cow...... really ? you first say the tournament is a joke and then say that tiger getting an exemption into it is embarrasing as if the event is a great event ( it is) .... which is it? how would yoi have him get back in ? monday qualify? maybe Q school? wtf?? hes a multiple time past champion.. he gets in FO LIFE! as hulk hogan of the NWO would say.... hate tiger all you want.. but please make sense when you do it... The field is stacked and he has an exemption to get in... which makes his finish worth something ....

 

Try and rewrite your post, keeping the bolded part in mind.

 

 

lol... the old grammar police fall back... i personally do not consider internet forums as legal documents... i type as i think.. quick and in random form.. if you would like to address my points that it is a small but stacked field and that he has a past champions exemption ( as any past champ does for any event he wins) then im all ears...

 

Not true for the Charity for Tiger Challenge.

Also not true for Fedex events, WGCs, the US Open after 10 years, the Players after 5 and probably some other events I'm forgetting.

[bladehunter]

lol ok.... well it was only 15 months yes? so not close to 5 years or 10... check each and every field every week... nearly 100% have some exemptions or another... i count a past champ as much more legit exemption than say one from a sponsor... that just means you have some rich connections.... Tiger won it several times.. surely that is deserving... afterall as much as many wanted him too he did NOT finish last.. and if not for a bad round sunday would have finished top 10... yes in a small field.. but a small field that was all meat and no fillers....

[cdnglf]

lol ok.... well it was only 15 months yes? so not close to 5 years or 10... check each and every field every week... nearly 100% have some exemptions or another... i count a past champ as much more legit exemption than say one from a sponsor... that just means you have some rich connections.... Tiger won it several times.. surely that is deserving... afterall as much as many wanted him too he did NOT finish last.. and if not for a bad round sunday would have finished top 10... yes in a small field.. but a small field that was all meat and no fillers....

 

I cannot think of any no-cut/guaranteed OWGR point events that have unrestricted sponsor exemptions. If there are some, let me know.

Bonus points if you can find some where the sponsor and the recipient are the same person.

[bladehunter]

I'm not going to argue any further Tigers back deal with it

[Shilgy]

So some want a minimum of 90 players. Assume they mean "real" players so no Masters, no FedEx Cup final, no WGC match play. Heck are any of the WGC events full field? Others want full field 140+ only so that leaves out the invitationals. Are we down to about 10 events that count? Another complains that Matsuyama won but did not move. Well yeah...if he is already number six he needs to move over number five. Also depends on what points come off as it is a sliding scale. Another mentioned Zach Johnson's "special exemption". We know the Hero was open to the top 50 and Zach was 38 going in. Seems legit to me.

 

Bottom line is it is better than nothing and a valid way to decide which players get into certain big time events. For years fans clamored for events that became the WGC tourneys but now posters have an issue with them getting points awarded? Should they just get in based on who signs up the fastest like a weekend at the local muni? At the Hero if Tiger had finished 20 strokes back of the next player in last position it would be more of an issue and the points would be less deserving. But the history of the PGA tour is riddles with much less deserving events that the Hero getting recognition as official wins which is much more of a travesty imo than points being awarded.

[bscinstnct]

By some peoples reasoning then, The Masters shouldn't receive points either. It's an invitational with a small field loaded with amateurs and seniors.

 

[Dave230]

Sure let's have 300 in every tournament, shotgun start from sunrise to sunset. The winner would be so much more deserving than a regular event because the world number 298 played in the tournament! Right?

 

I think it's fine and would actually prefer a few more small invitationals to be honest, especially matchplay competitions. The World Matchplay at Wentworth used to be great and it's a more intimate way to get to know the best players in the world.

 

Tennis has the World ATP Tour Championship with only 8 players that is one of the most prestigious tournaments. The golf equivalent, the Tour Championship, only has 30 players but people would claim that doesn't deserve world ranking points because it doesn't have the standard field.

 

If you want to avoid the 'rich getting richer' situation in the World Ranking points, then how about an imaginary cut after 4 days in WGCs, Tour and Hero?

 

70 players in WGC, 35 get points, 18 in Hero, 9 get points etc.

 

--

 

As for the OWGR, I'm yet to see a better and fairer way to do the rankings for all the complaints. You can't overload points on the PGA Tour, which already has a points advantage. There's more golf in the world outside of America.

 

And the players do care about it. Being the best player in the world is a rarer feat than winning a major actually. There have only been 19 players as the Best Player in the World since 1986. There have been 19 different major champions since 2011. The average quality of number 1s far exceeds the average quality of major winners. Players like being considered the best.

 

You could argue that Luke Donald would swap no 1 for a major every day. But among players with that monkey off their backs, then it does matter to be considered better than all your peers based on your consistency.

[cdnglf]

If you want to avoid the 'rich getting richer' situation in the World Ranking points, then how about an imaginary cut after 4 days in WGCs, Tour and Hero?

 

70 players in WGC, 35 get points, 18 in Hero, 9 get points etc.

 

Something like this could work. As it stands though, the smaller "elite" field events award way more ranking points than they should.

 

Tiger got nearly the same number of points for finishing 15th out of 18 at the Charity Challenge as he did for finishing T-10 out of ~140 at the Wyndham.

Now, I know the Wyndham isn't the strongest tournament on the schedule, but that's just stupid.

[knock it close]

Check out who number 34 is in the OWGR and you'll see what needs to be adjusted. Also the Hero doesn't deserve OWGR points but lets not act like its that big of a deal..

 

h/t NLUPodcast

[Hawkeye77]

Tiger effectively has the most wins on PGA Tour if you don't count small field events like Hero, team events like Inverness etc.

 

He's probably the leader in the category of "most non-team wins with fields > 25". Not sure he'd lead the "fields > 90" category though.

 

Of course he does, who do you think has more?

[Hawkeye77]

So every event has to have the same minimum and large number of players to count? No variety? No different kind of events for the fans?

 

No Hero, and you'd have the weird threads bashing the Tour for not having four days of golf coverage on last weekend because we are "entitled" to an event every week.

 

It was a strong field and a good event and fun to watch and if actual players have a gripe then play better so you get invited or play better and get famous so your foundation has a little leverage.

 

Hardly a big deal.

[cdnglf]

Tiger effectively has the most wins on PGA Tour if you don't count small field events like Hero, team events like Inverness etc.

 

He's probably the leader in the category of "most non-team wins with fields > 25". Not sure he'd lead the "fields > 90" category though.

 

Of course he does, who do you think has more?

 

Jack, although I'm not certain. WGC fields are < 90, and as you may have heard Tiger has a lot of those.

[Golfnutgalen]

Check out who number 34 is in the OWGR and you'll see what needs to be adjusted. Also the Hero doesn't deserve OWGR points but lets not act like its that big of a deal..

 

h/t NLUPodcast

 

To his credit Ikeda has finished in the top 2 in 8/15 starts on the Japan Tour since the PGA Championship when he was ranked 92nd in the world. That does not mean I believe his ranking is well deserved though because his placings when he has competed against the top players in the world are not stellar to say the least.

[cdnglf]

Check out who number 34 is in the OWGR and you'll see what needs to be adjusted. Also the Hero doesn't deserve OWGR points but lets not act like its that big of a deal..

 

h/t NLUPodcast

 

To his credit Ikeda has finished in the top 2 in 8/15 starts on the Japan Tour since the PGA Championship when he was ranked 92nd in the world. That does not mean I believe his ranking is well deserved though because his placings when he has competed against the top players in the world are not stellar to say the least.

 

He's played 12 straight weeks, and nearly every week since the end of April. Jeez...

[Shilgy]

Tiger effectively has the most wins on PGA Tour if you don't count small field events like Hero, team events like Inverness etc.

 

He's probably the leader in the category of "most non-team wins with fields > 25". Not sure he'd lead the "fields > 90" category though.

 

Of course he does, who do you think has more?

 

Jack, although I'm not certain. WGC fields are < 90, and as you may have heard Tiger has a lot of those.

Pretty close I am guessing between Tiger and Jack. Tiger has 18 WGC(?). But he starts 8 ahead of Jack and a quick glance at Jack's "official" wins he has two 4balls with Arnie, 5 Tournament of Champions -guessing fields of 20-30 as it was just winners from the previous year, A Match play with 16 particiapnts(8 were exempt and 8 others choses), and a World Series of Golf with just 20 players. So that is nine wins with WAY less than the 90 number. Add the Masters for both and I believe we are at a draw. :)

[augustgolf]

If you finish 11th in a 18-player tournament, you should get no workd ranking points.

 

Bubba Watson was 18th in the PGA Tour money ranking, Rickie Fowler was 32nd, and Justin Rose was 44th.

However, they are 10th, 11th and 15th in the world ranking as of December 2016.

 

Jimmy Walker was 10th in the PGA Tour money ranking, Snedeker was 13th and William McGirth was 17th.

However, they are 21st, 27th and 51st in the world ranking as of December 2016..

 

That's because of their results in 2015 also count, which makes no sense.

 

 

 

Well, actually....it does make sense....to someone....somewhere.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

If the PGA Tour in the US is considered the most elite, difficult golf venue from the whole world, then you're absolutely right.

 

But, the reality is that no one will ever have a ranking system that satisfies everyone from every place on the planet.

 

How did we get along before we had a worldwide ranking, and is it really all that important?

 

I thought what was important was to do your absolute best every time you teed it up competitively, no matter where that was.

 

When did that change?

[cdnglf]

Tiger effectively has the most wins on PGA Tour if you don't count small field events like Hero, team events like Inverness etc.

 

He's probably the leader in the category of "most non-team wins with fields > 25". Not sure he'd lead the "fields > 90" category though.

 

Of course he does, who do you think has more?

 

Jack, although I'm not certain. WGC fields are < 90, and as you may have heard Tiger has a lot of those.

Pretty close I am guessing between Tiger and Jack. Tiger has 18 WGC(?). But he starts 8 ahead of Jack and a quick glance at Jack's "official" wins he has two 4balls with Arnie, 5 Tournament of Champions -guessing fields of 20-30 as it was just winners from the previous year, A Match play with 16 particiapnts(8 were exempt and 8 others choses), and a World Series of Golf with just 20 players. So that is nine wins with WAY less than the 90 number. Add the Masters for both and I believe we are at a draw. :)

 

I figured they'd be pretty close. Tiger also has a couple Mercedes, a couple tour championships and I think he won the third Fedex event once.

[knock it close]

Check out who number 34 is in the OWGR and you'll see what needs to be adjusted. Also the Hero doesn't deserve OWGR points but lets not act like its that big of a deal..

 

h/t NLUPodcast

 

To his credit Ikeda has finished in the top 2 in 8/15 starts on the Japan Tour since the PGA Championship when he was ranked 92nd in the world. That does not mean I believe his ranking is well deserved though because his placings when he has competed against the top players in the world are not stellar to say the least.

Yea don't want to begrudge the guy, he's ran through Japan, but like you said he has not shown much if anything against top competition.

[hdr_ric]

This has been an enlightening discussion because I knew nothing about the workings of the OWGR, so thanks for the insight! My reason for posting this was not to Tiger bash, while I am not a fan, I don't dislike the guy either. Rather it was the point values awarded to a golfer who finished at the bottom of what was essentially a clambake, with a limited field. I get that it was a strong field, but still many in the top 20 were not there and they lose out on those points, whether they care or not, I agree with many of you they probably don't care. Also, some of those in the top 20 would never play in this event due to their relationship, or lack there of, with Tiger. Insert Sergio Garcia here. However it still seems to me that a limited event field should not carry that many points, when the other 150 golfers on the bubble could use those points for their livelihood, but do not have the chance to compete for them. To me, and this is just one terrible golfer's opinion, these silly events can have a few points available, but devalue them greatly compared to full-field events, regardless of that caliber of players in the event.

 

Pretty sure Sergio has played in Tiger's event before ... efforting now...

 

 

EDIT. Sergio played in Tiger's event in 2000 and finished 3rd.

 

 

EDIT2: It appears that Sergio never played in the old Nedbank limited field cash grab which used to run opposite of Tiger's event, so I surmise that his absence from Tiger's event since 2000 has a heck of a lot more to do with his schedule (no December golf period) than anything else.

 

Without looking it up, I strongly suspect that Tiger's event "invites" players based on the world rankings, and just goes down the list until the field is complete .... rather than Tiger personally inviting his "buddies" as some haves stated.

 

Some guys just don't play in December. It is their offseason/vacation.

 

 

EDIT3: To those who seem butthurt about Tiger moving from 899 to 650 or whatever ... who cares. It doesn't matter jack squat. The rankings after 200 are meaningless anyway. It does not matter. Tiger will either be healthy for a full season, in which case he very likely wins somewhere ... or his back will get hurt again and he will retire. I don't see many other likely outcomes.

[justwellsy]

World rankings will never be a true indicator of who is on top, as they will always bias in favor of top players. With the ability today to obtain meaningful "results" from raw data re: just about anything, you'd think a better "system" of ranking top players would be a result.

 

But it's all about marketing. How far down the rankings did Jason Day drop as a result of the Hero Challenge?

 

Point made

 

Re-read what I have bolded above. It's an oxymoron at best and complete nonsense at worst.

 

To the OP: the 248 people that Tiger jumped THAT HIGH in the world rankings are likely not players that are playing on the PGA Tour. Strength of competition is always a factor, as well as what Tour you play on (which go hand in hand).

Dan McCarthy won 4 events on PGA Tour Canada (Mackenzie Tour) this year and received a total of 24 world ranking points for those victories. Patrick Reed finished in 2nd at the Valero Texas open and also earned 24 points for that lone solo 2nd finish. Dan McCarthy is ranked 270th in the OWGR, which is very good when compared with the 2nd place finisher on the Mackenzie Tour money list... Brock Mackenzie, World Number 569.

 

Hideki Matsuyama earned 54 points for his Phoenix Open win this year, while only earning 46 points for his win in the World Challenge. Excluding Tiger, the Hero World Challenge Field included 17 of the top 28 ranked players in the world. That's actually a pretty strong field in terms of talent. The only thing that really helps Tiger is that there's no cut. Although, he would have made the cut this time and actually finished higher than 17th if the traditional cut percentages were followed. As long as you make a cut you are guaranteed World Ranking points and he would have made the cut if there was one.

 

The only thing I think is wrong with the OWGR is that it does not recognize Champions tour events. You're telling me the Champions tour doesn't deserve at least some world ranking points? Bernhard Langer had a dominant year, yet he is barely inside the top 1000 by virtue of his T24 finish at the Masters. That's the only event he received rankings points from. Does anyone really believe that Kenny Perry is the 1453rd best player in the world as his ranking suggests? Of course not