What was the issue with Hale Irwin? (Tour history)

[lowheel]

> @Hankshank said:

> Don’t know why, but I found myself googling Hale Irwin, found his Wiki page and was surprised seeing how much he won on Seniors, and comparingly how few titles he had on the PGA. Was there something wrong when he was in his prime?

>

> For Langer, the other player that has dominated the Seniors tour but didnt have 30+ victories on the PGA tour the answer is easy. Putting yips. Those costed him at least 10 big titles. Otherwise, his game was razor sharp. And then he found the broomstick and the rest is history.

>

> Irwin is a little before my time. Ok, I played most of the 80’s but there wasnt any televised golf, more than an occasional major, in my home country. Articles, but mostly about the big names. I remember seeing his last victory at 49, after a long break, assuring that there is such a thing as muscle memory. But apart from a sloppy putt miss that costed him a BO in 84, i have no memory of him in his prime.

>

> Looking at his winning record he absolutely ruled the Seniors tour, even more profoundly than Langer. But, albeit 3 US Opens, he had surprisingly few wins on the PGA tour. I remember him from the 80`s as something like a Furyk, OWGR top 10 guy maybe, but never one of the Big Three or the Big Five.

> Why did he win so much more on the seniors? Did he have any issues with his game that he sorted out late in his career?

 

Length of courses was a huge deal for him. He was a scrapper. A premier fairway wood player. Not very long so had to do it differently. He rededicated himself before turning 50 and it just clicked for him. Langer was a different animal.Had 320 starts on the big tour and only won 3 times. twice the masters. he had 25 top 5 finishes and 63 top 10s. His putting was an issue but i just dont think he liked the TPC style courses over here. Guy is a resilient warrior. As for Irwin i believe youre not putting into perspective how rare 20 wins is in this lifetime. thats good enough for 33rd all time not to mention where 3majors puts him.When a motivated hall of famer hits 50 and startsplaying shorter courses that put scoring clubsin his hands 75% of the time he will dominate that tour.Langer is doing exactly what Irwin did. Deeply dedicated and disciplined. Length still isnt an issue at 61. Champions tour is great for that reason alone. Dont forget irwin won at 49 i believe and Langer almost won in 07 or 08 when he lost a playoff at colonialwhen he was 48 or 49. they were playing well before moving to that tour

[lowheel]

> @Obee said:

> **Hale was one of the shorter players on tour. Was a 247 to 258 guy, if I remember correctly**. Was usually near the bottom in driving distance. In fact, three of the best players from the 70's and early 80's were short/shortish hitters: Strange, Pavin, and Irwin. In 1980 (first year the stat was available), Irwin averaged 250.2, good for 138th on the tour in driving distance. He was 35(?) at the time. Strange was 98th that year.

 

exactly. he was prolific with fairway woods because of his upright swing.

[tiderider]

> @Hankshank said:

> Having, as the European I am, only a rudimentary knowledge of American football, it surprises me that he was short from tee, hearing that he played college football. When I see an occasional match, I see guys that look like being able to hit the ball cross-atlantic.

 

his college career was 40 years ago ... and at a school/team that at the time was not "big time" college football ... players today are much bigger and much more athletic than players 40 years ago, and the style of play back then did not involve his position to the extent it does today, so athleticism was not at a premium for his position (for the most part) ... he played defensive back, and those guys are arguably the most athletic players on the field today, and would certainly be able to crush a golf ball if they took up the game and practiced it ... back then, at his particular school, he would not have been anything similar to what is seen today at his position, though his longevity on the champions tour is indicative of someone that was able to maintain a decent physical ability ...

[DavePelz4]

On my "Hale Irwin Fun Fact of the Day Calendar" was the point that he won on 6 continents.

[lowheel]

> @"Darth Putter" said:

> > @cardoustie said:

> > Man his shot out of the rocks on 18 at Pebble broke a poor Canadian's heart

>

> Perhaps the best bounce I've ever seen in a pro tournament.

>

> The two iron out of the bunker at #16 in the playoff was incredible.

 

yup Nelford was gutted from that.His facial expression was sheer agony

 

[JAMH03]

> @Hankshank said:

> Ok! Was he regarded as a Rory or a DJ in his hey days? Guess that was in the late 70`s.

 

No.

[JohnnyCashForever]

> @"Big Cat 3" said:

> > @JohnnyCashForever said:

> > > @"Darth Putter" said:

> > If it was a tough course, you'd see him near the top of the leaderboard.

> >

> > >

> > Agreed. Winged Foot in '74.

> >

> > Hale Irwin was a great player. Even with the glasses, he came across as someone who you didn't want to mess with. Same level as Raymond Floyd, in terms of grit and toughness, IMO.

> >

> >

> >

> Irwin wasn’t know for his warmth ... Mark O’Meara tells that great story when he was a rookie and paired with Irwin. O’Meara wasn’t playing well and walked up to Irwin on the final hole and said “Mr. Irwin, sorry I played so poorly” Irwin gave him a glare and said “ The sooner you figure out I dont give a f*** about how you played, the better off you will be”

> There you have Hale Irwin lol

>

>

 

I love that story. Today, Hale would be disciplined for creating a hostile work environment.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[iBanesto]

The issue is that Irwin had a swing that could last forever.

 


 

[Lodestone]

> @"Big Cat 3" said:

> > @JohnnyCashForever said:

> > > @"Darth Putter" said:

> > If it was a tough course, you'd see him near the top of the leaderboard.

> >

> > >

> > Agreed. Winged Foot in '74.

> >

> > Hale Irwin was a great player. Even with the glasses, he came across as someone who you didn't want to mess with. Same level as Raymond Floyd, in terms of grit and toughness, IMO.

> >

> >

> >

> Irwin wasn’t know for his warmth ... Mark O’Meara tells that great story when he was a rookie and paired with Irwin. O’Meara wasn’t playing well and walked up to Irwin on the final hole and said “Mr. Irwin, sorry I played so poorly” Irwin gave him a glare and said “ The sooner you figure out I dont give a f*** about how you played, the better off you will be”

> There you have Hale Irwin lol

>

>

 

perhaps not warm and cuddly, but if you think about what Irwin was saying to him, probably the best advice he could have given him at the time.

[Ferguson]

> @Hawkeye77 said:

> One of the best ever. He came along when Nicklaus and Trevino were still good, Miller and Weiskopf. Watson getting going, etc. Then Seve and Norman winning majors. Faldo.

>

> Great career.

>

> Built like a defensive back!!

 

Irwin was a great technician of the middle irons and often left out of conversations.

[puttingmatt]

Great player, and a great career in golf, a lot to be said for his

Competitive longevity.

[chigolfer1]

> @tiderider said:

> yeah, i don't know how 20 wins = "few wins" ... 23rd highest total, by number ... 3 majors ... one of the oldest people to win a tour event at 49 ...

> i'd say he did very well for himself ...

>

> as for the sr tour, didn't play against his top competition from the regular tour, as mentioned ... but he was a very competitive player who maintained his body/health, so maybe that helped him a bit more than others ...

 

Yeah, very strange premise to this argument the OP is trying to make.

[Ferguson]

I am going to put Hale Irwin ahead of Vijay, Hal Sutton and Frank Lickliter, II.

[Big Cat 3]

> @DavePelz4 said:

> On my "Hale Irwin Fun Fact of the Day Calendar" was the point that he won on 6 continents.

 

Another ... Hale Irwin won the 1967 NCAA Individual golf championship while at Colorado

Which is basically a major like the US Am

 

 

[DavePelz4]

> @Ferguson said:

> I am going to put Hale Irwin ahead of Vijay, Hal Sutton and Frank Lickliter, II.

 

But not Frank Lickliter the first?

[Ferguson]

> @DavePelz4 said:

> > @Ferguson said:

> > I am going to put Hale Irwin ahead of Vijay, Hal Sutton and Frank Lickliter, II.

>

> But not Frank Lickliter the first?

 

Correct. The first version was not good at all.

 

[JohnnyCashForever]

 

> @JAMH03 said:

> > @Hankshank said:

> > Ok! Was he regarded as a Rory or a DJ in his hey days? Guess that was in the late 70`s.

>

> No.

 

I prefer to ask, "Are there any players today regarded as a Hale?" The answer is still no. But, maybe...maybe...Kisner, if he ever wins 3 US Opens...maybe. I had hopes for Patrick Reed fitting into that mold, until he started caring what others thought of him.

[driveandputtmachine]

Pretty good Ryder Cupper as well......13-5-2

That's a better winning percentage than Nicklaus, only bested by Watson from his contemporaries.

[Lodestone]

> @Ferguson said:

> > @DavePelz4 said:

> > > @Ferguson said:

> > > I am going to put Hale Irwin ahead of Vijay, Hal Sutton and Frank Lickliter, II.

> >

> > But not Frank Lickliter the first?

>

> Correct. The first version was not good at all.

>

 

you are a master golf historian, sir. I learn something meaningful with your every post.

[QuigleyDU]

> @gvogel said:

> > @Obee said:

> > Hale was one of the shorter players on tour. Was a 247 to 258 guy, if I remember correctly. Was usually near the bottom in driving distance. **In fact, three of the best players from the 70's and early 80's were short/shortish hitters:** Strange, Pavin, and Irwin. In 1980 (first year the stat was available), Irwin averaged 250.2, good for 138th on the tour in driving distance. He was 35(?) at the time. Strange was 98th that year.

>

> IF that isn't a great argument for rolling back the ball and the driver, I don't know what it.

 

I saw it a different way. If you are good enough, you will find a way to get it done with what is currently available. But that is a different discussion that has like 100 pages. hal was steady eddie (or Hal) good at everything.

[JAMH03]

> @Shilgy said:

> > @tiderider said:

> > yeah, i don't know how 20 wins = "few wins" ... 23rd highest total, by number ... 3 majors ... one of the oldest people to win a tour event at 49 ...

> > i'd say he did very well for himself ...

> >

> > as for the sr tour, didn't play against his top competition from the regular tour, as mentioned ... but he was a very competitive player who maintained his body/health, so maybe that helped him a bit more than others ...

>

> He's 34th on the win list. Hmm, "by number" do you mean five guys tied counts as just one ahead of him??

 

> @chigolfer1 said:

> > @tiderider said:

> > yeah, i don't know how 20 wins = "few wins" ... 23rd highest total, by number ... 3 majors ... one of the oldest people to win a tour event at 49 ...

> > i'd say he did very well for himself ...

> >

> > as for the sr tour, didn't play against his top competition from the regular tour, as mentioned ... but he was a very competitive player who maintained his body/health, so maybe that helped him a bit more than others ...

>

> Yeah, very strange premise to this argument the OP is trying to make.

 

I think its a legit question on the nature of senior tour dominance vs reg tour excellence?

[smashdn]

> @tiderider said:

> yeah, i don't know how 20 wins = "few wins" ... 23rd highest total, by number ... 3 majors ... one of the oldest people to win a tour event at 49 ...

> i'd say he did very well for himself ...

>

> as for the sr tour, didn't play against his top competition from the regular tour, as mentioned ... but he was a very competitive player who maintained his body/health, so maybe that helped him a bit more than others ...

 

He had a very smooth, repeatable, non-taxing swing. Might also explain his longevity. I recall watching a "Top Ten Golf Swings of All Time" or something to that affect on the youtubes and he was like #6. Sort of the Ernie Els before Els. Looked like he got a heck of a lot out of an 80% swing.

[LeftArmBender]

> @Ferguson said:

> I am going to put Hale Irwin ahead of Vijay, Hal Sutton and Frank Lickliter, II.

 

Lol. You're good, man. You're good.

[chigolfer1]

> @JAMH03 said:

> > @Shilgy said:

> > > @tiderider said:

> > > yeah, i don't know how 20 wins = "few wins" ... 23rd highest total, by number ... 3 majors ... one of the oldest people to win a tour event at 49 ...

> > > i'd say he did very well for himself ...

> > >

> > > as for the sr tour, didn't play against his top competition from the regular tour, as mentioned ... but he was a very competitive player who maintained his body/health, so maybe that helped him a bit more than others ...

> >

> > He's 34th on the win list. Hmm, "by number" do you mean five guys tied counts as just one ahead of him??

>

> > @chigolfer1 said:

> > > @tiderider said:

> > > yeah, i don't know how 20 wins = "few wins" ... 23rd highest total, by number ... 3 majors ... one of the oldest people to win a tour event at 49 ...

> > > i'd say he did very well for himself ...

> > >

> > > as for the sr tour, didn't play against his top competition from the regular tour, as mentioned ... but he was a very competitive player who maintained his body/health, so maybe that helped him a bit more than others ...

> >

> > Yeah, very strange premise to this argument the OP is trying to make.

>

> I think its a legit question on the nature of senior tour dominance vs reg tour excellence?

 

I don't but to each his own. Again, the guy won 20 times on the PGA tour (and three majors). That is A LOT of wins. If the question was just more, how the heck does a guy win 45x on a tour, whatever tour it is, I can see that. I just think it's strange to try to use the argument that he didn't win that much on the regular tour.

 

I would answer it by saying the champions tours has much shallower talent than the PGA. In other words, the drop off from Irwin to the 30th player on the Senior tour was much greater than on the PGA, especially back then.

[LyinEye]

Hale, player.

[BrianMcG]

> @JohnnyCashForever said:

> > @"Big Cat 3" said:

> > > @JohnnyCashForever said:

> > > > @"Darth Putter" said:

> > > If it was a tough course, you'd see him near the top of the leaderboard.

> > >

> > > >

> > > Agreed. Winged Foot in '74.

> > >

> > > Hale Irwin was a great player. Even with the glasses, he came across as someone who you didn't want to mess with. Same level as Raymond Floyd, in terms of grit and toughness, IMO.

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > Irwin wasn’t know for his warmth ... Mark O’Meara tells that great story when he was a rookie and paired with Irwin. O’Meara wasn’t playing well and walked up to Irwin on the final hole and said “Mr. Irwin, sorry I played so poorly” Irwin gave him a glare and said “ The sooner you figure out I dont give a f*** about how you played, the better off you will be”

> > There you have Hale Irwin lol

> >

> >

>

> I love that story. Today, Hale would be disciplined for creating a hostile work environment.

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

 

 

 

Yep. Great story.

 

https://www.golfchannel.com/video/mark-omeara-his-first-us-open-hale-irwin

[ghostrider]

> @Lodestone said:

> > @Hawkeye77 said:

> > One of the best ever. He came along when Nicklaus and Trevino were still good, Miller and Weiskopf. Watson getting going, etc. Then Seve and Norman winning majors. Faldo.

> >

> > Great career.

> >

> > Built like a defensive back!!

>

> Good one "Built like a defensive back!!"....for you kids out there, Hale did actually play DB in college. I think it was for Colorado? But he was really built like a shortstop. Or a golfer.

>

 

I met him a couple of times in Austin when I worked as a volunteer on driving range. He was not a "shortstop". He was much taller and bigger than expected. Probably 6-2 or so. Anyhow a great book is Massacre at Winged Foot which talks about his first open. It was the year after Miller's 63 and the USGA just punished everyone. Think he won at 7 over or so. He also won with a high school kid as his caddy for what it is worth.

[Lodestone]

> @ghostrider said:

> > @Lodestone said:

> > > @Hawkeye77 said:

> > > One of the best ever. He came along when Nicklaus and Trevino were still good, Miller and Weiskopf. Watson getting going, etc. Then Seve and Norman winning majors. Faldo.

> > >

> > > Great career.

> > >

> > > Built like a defensive back!!

> >

> > Good one "Built like a defensive back!!"....for you kids out there, Hale did actually play DB in college. I think it was for Colorado? But he was really built like a shortstop. Or a golfer.

> >

>

> I met him a couple of times in Austin when I worked as a volunteer on driving range. He was not a "shortstop". He was much taller and bigger than expected. Probably 6-2 or so. Anyhow a great book is Massacre at Winged Foot which talks about his first open. It was the year after Miller's 63 and the USGA just punished everyone. Think he won at 7 over or so. He also won with a high school kid as his caddy for what it is worth.

I read that book. It was written by Dick Schaap...great book.

and there are plenty of good 6-2 shortstops. that lad who plays for Houston ain't bad, Carlos Correa, and he's 6-3 or so. Derek Jeter was at least 6-2,,,ARod and Cal Ripken JR were at least 6-2, and played SS for a few years, quite well before being moved to 3rd. just to name a few who came right to the top of my head.

But, to your point, he was pretty big for a golfer especially of his era. I went to the '95 Ryder Cup at Oak Hill and was amazed at how slightly built Bernhard and Curtis Strange were, among a few others.

[Lodestone]

OMG...."Richard Schaap"....

[JAMH03]

> @chigolfer1 said:

> > @JAMH03 said:

> > > @Shilgy said:

> > > > @tiderider said:

> > > > yeah, i don't know how 20 wins = "few wins" ... 23rd highest total, by number ... 3 majors ... one of the oldest people to win a tour event at 49 ...

> > > > i'd say he did very well for himself ...

> > > >

> > > > as for the sr tour, didn't play against his top competition from the regular tour, as mentioned ... but he was a very competitive player who maintained his body/health, so maybe that helped him a bit more than others ...

> > >

> > > He's 34th on the win list. Hmm, "by number" do you mean five guys tied counts as just one ahead of him??

> >

> > > @chigolfer1 said:

> > > > @tiderider said:

> > > > yeah, i don't know how 20 wins = "few wins" ... 23rd highest total, by number ... 3 majors ... one of the oldest people to win a tour event at 49 ...

> > > > i'd say he did very well for himself ...

> > > >

> > > > as for the sr tour, didn't play against his top competition from the regular tour, as mentioned ... but he was a very competitive player who maintained his body/health, so maybe that helped him a bit more than others ...

> > >

> > > Yeah, very strange premise to this argument the OP is trying to make.

> >

> > I think its a legit question on the nature of senior tour dominance vs reg tour excellence?

>

> I don't but to each his own. Again, the guy won 20 times on the PGA tour (and three majors). That is A LOT of wins. If the question was just more, how the heck does a guy win 45x on a tour, whatever tour it is, I can see that. I just think it's strange to try to use the argument that he didn't win that much on the regular tour.

>

> I would answer it by saying the champions tours has much shallower talent than the PGA. In other words, the drop off from Irwin to the 30th player on the Senior tour was much greater than on the PGA, especially back then.

 

@chigolfer1 OK Fine but if you don't know the nature of PGA excellence 40 years ago or Sr. Tour excellence more recently and are only looking at it in terms of #'s it's legit to ask what, how and why?

 

The OP asked

 

> @Hankshank said:

> Ok! Was he regarded as a Rory or a DJ in his hey days? Guess that was in the late 70`s.

 

Safe to say he is TRYING to learn and put things in perspective for himself.

 

We've all had to do it in golf and many other aspects of our lives most of us have had help at times. It's in fact OK to be ignorant and to ask questions to increase your understanding.