Padraig Harrington.....2015 Honda Classic Champion

abff

big_drive wrote: »

I can see him getting a big win this year.

Any idea what improvement this finish will have for his world ranking?

I've had a look at the rankings and I think today's finish will move him up to number 48.

Projected rankings are as follows:

46 David Lynn 2.339
47 Jamie Donaldson 2.339
48 Padraig Harrington 2.237
49 K.J. Choi 2.201
50 Thorbjorn Olesen 2.168
51 George Coetzee 2.167
52 Shane Lowry 2.156
53 Henrik Stenson 2.141
54 Richie Ramsay 2.137
55 Rafa Cabrera-Bello 2.131

Speak Now

abff wrote: »

I've had a look at the rankings and I think today's finish will move him up to number 48.

Projected rankings are as follows:

46 David Lynn 2.339
47 Jamie Donaldson 2.339
48 Padraig Harrington 2.237
49 K.J. Choi 2.201
50 Thorbjorn Olesen 2.168
51 George Coetzee 2.167
52 Shane Lowry 2.156
53 Henrik Stenson 2.141
54 Richie Ramsay 2.137
55 Rafa Cabrera-Bello 2.131

Subject to tonights Sony open results of course.

abff

Jerry Seinfeld wrote: »

Subject to tonights Sony open results of course.

That's true.

I've had a look at the scorecard and Tim Clark (currently 3rd, 3 shots behind the joint leaders) can jump to 46th in the rankings if he wins. 2nd place would leave him outside the top 55.

The only other player who could jump into the top 50 is John Huh (currently tied 24th, 9 shots behind the leaders) who will jump to 48th if he finishes 3rd on his own, 49th if he finishes tied 3rd/4th and 50th if he finishes 4th on his own.

PRAF

abff wrote: »

That's true.

I've had a look at the scorecard and Tim Clark (currently 3rd, 3 shots behind the joint leaders) can jump to 46th in the rankings if he wins. 2nd place would leave him outside the top 55.

The only other player who could jump into the top 50 is John Huh (currently tied 24th, 9 shots behind the leaders) who will jump to 48th if he finishes 3rd on his own, 49th if he finishes tied 3rd/4th and 50th if he finishes 4th on his own.

I'm impressed, someone who understands the WGR!

abff

I had another look at the rankings and I think the average ranking for Jamie Donaldson will differ marginally from that shown in my previous posting.

Doesn't change the order, but revised figures are as follows:

46 David Lynn 2.339
47 Jamie Donaldson 2.337
48 Padraig Harrington 2.237
49 K.J. Choi 2.201
50 Thorbjorn Olesen 2.168
51 George Coetzee 2.167
52 Shane Lowry 2.156
53 Henrik Stenson 2.141
54 Richie Ramsay 2.137
55 Rafa Cabrera-Bello 2.131

I'm viewing this as a test of whether I really understand how the rankings work or just think I do.

FixdePitchmark

abff wrote: »

I had another look at the rankings and I think the average ranking for Jamie Donaldson will differ marginally from that shown in my previous posting.

Doesn't change the order, but revised figures are as follows:

46 David Lynn 2.339
47 Jamie Donaldson 2.337
48 Padraig Harrington 2.237
49 K.J. Choi 2.201
50 Thorbjorn Olesen 2.168
51 George Coetzee 2.167
52 Shane Lowry 2.156
53 Henrik Stenson 2.141
54 Richie Ramsay 2.137
55 Rafa Cabrera-Bello 2.131

I'm viewing this as a test of whether I really understand how the rankings work or just think I do.

abff - fair play - you've done all the brain work, can we just get an easy answer - (no I guess)

What would it take Shane to get to top 50 - 0.012 looks like a small number - but I guess relative position etc comes into it.

Another top ten ?

abff

It's a tiny margin for Shane. One shot less today (or any other day) would have put him in a 3 way tie for 7th and his average points would have increased to 2.188.which would have put him up to 50th.

As you say, there are too many variables to say for definite what he need to do next week in order to get into the top 50. It depends on how many points the tournament is worth and what everyone else does. There is strong field in next week's tournament (with three of the top five ranked players in the OWGR) and it looks as if it will be worth 52 or 54 points to the winner.

Top 10 would probably be enough to get Shane into the top 50, unless everyone around him also picks up a lot of ranking points.

PRAF

abff wrote: »

It's a tiny margin for Shane. One shot less today (or any other day) would have put him in a 3 way tie for 7th and his average points would have increased to 2.188.which would have put him up to 50th.

As you say, there are too many variables to say for definite what he need to do next week in order to get into the top 50. It depends on how many points the tournament is worth and what everyone else does. There is strong field in next week's tournament (with three of the top five ranked players in the OWGR) and it looks as if it will be worth 52 or 54 points to the winner.

Top 10 would probably be enough to get Shane into the top 50, unless everyone around him also picks up a lot of ranking points.

Is the immediate issue for Paddy and Shane just to stay in the top 64? Would be great to see them, GMAC, and Rory in the next WGC.

abff

PRAF wrote: »

Is the immediate issue for Paddy and Shane just to stay in the top 64? Would be great to see them, GMAC, and Rory in the next WGC.

I guess so, although top 50 would also get Shane invites into US tournaments. At this stage, they should both make it unless they have a series of missed cuts and everyone just behind them in the rankings picks up loads of points.

Speak Now

abff wrote: »

I guess so, although top 50 would also get Shane invites into US tournaments. At this stage, they should both make it unless they have a series of missed cuts and everyone just behind them in the rankings picks up loads of points.

I'd say they are certs for the matchplay now, next aim will be top 50 for Doral at start of March.

abff

abff wrote: »

I had another look at the rankings and I think the average ranking for Jamie Donaldson will differ marginally from that shown in my previous posting.

Doesn't change the order, but revised figures are as follows:

46 David Lynn 2.339
47 Jamie Donaldson 2.337
48 Padraig Harrington 2.237
49 K.J. Choi 2.201
50 Thorbjorn Olesen 2.168
51 George Coetzee 2.167
52 Shane Lowry 2.156
53 Henrik Stenson 2.141
54 Richie Ramsay 2.137
55 Rafa Cabrera-Bello 2.131

I'm viewing this as a test of whether I really understand how the rankings work or just think I do.

I've just realised that I didn't adjust properly for those players who have played over 52 tournaments in the past two years. My revised ranking calculations are as follows:

46 David Lynn 2.339
47 Jamie Donaldson 2.337
48 Padraig Harrington 2.220
49 K.J. Choi 2.202
50 Thorbjorn Olesen 2.168
51 George Coetzee 2.150
52 Shane Lowry 2.149
53 Richie Ramsay 2.143
54 Henrik Stenson 2.140
55 Rafa Cabrera-Bello 2.129

Only change in positions is at 53 and 54. At this stage, I'm going to stop looking at it in case I go blind/demented. :eek: Hopefully the figures shown above will appear in tomorrow's official rankings (US result permitting).

If not, it's back to drawing board and time for me to take up a new hobby.

abff

abff wrote: »

I've just realised that I didn't adjust properly for those players who have played over 52 tournaments in the past two years. My revised ranking calculations are as follows:

46 David Lynn 2.339
47 Jamie Donaldson 2.337
48 Padraig Harrington 2.220
49 K.J. Choi 2.202
50 Thorbjorn Olesen 2.168
51 George Coetzee 2.150
52 Shane Lowry 2.149
53 Richie Ramsay 2.143
54 Henrik Stenson 2.140
55 Rafa Cabrera-Bello 2.129

Only change in positions is at 53 and 54. At this stage, I'm going to stop looking at it in case I go blind/demented. :eek: Hopefully the figures shown above will appear in tomorrow's official rankings (US result permitting).

If not, it's back to drawing board and time for me to take up a new hobby.

OK. I expect nobody really cares, but I'm going to comment briefly on my predictions and why some of them were a bit off.

• Some of the figures in this week's rankings don't tie in precisely with last week's rankings. I've no idea why - the differences are generally quite small.
• I made an error in calculating the points that would be lost this week by Choi and Coetzee by transposing their figures in my spreadsheet.
• I underestimated the points available for the winner of the US tournament. I thought it would be 36, not 38. I also didn't allow for the impact that winning would have on Russell Henley's world ranking (although if it had been 36 points instead of 38, he would not have made the top 50).

In general, I'm happy that I understand how the rankings work, apart from the small rounding discrepancies between one week's figures and the following week's. But it's just too difficult to predict how these rounding discrepancies will operate from one week to the next so I won't be wasting any more Sunday nights making predictions.

If anyone wants to waste their time looking at how the rankings work, the details are here http://www.owgr.com/about_us/default.sps?iType=425

shaneon77

back in the top 50. lets hope his form can keep him there or lower still!

PRAF

abff wrote: »

OK. I expect nobody really cares, but I'm going to comment briefly on my predictions and why some of them were a bit off.

• Some of the figures in this week's rankings don't tie in precisely with last week's rankings. I've no idea why - the differences are generally quite small.
• I made an error in calculating the points that would be lost this week by Choi and Coetzee by transposing their figures in my spreadsheet.
• I underestimated the points available for the winner of the US tournament. I thought it would be 36, not 38. I also didn't allow for the impact that winning would have on Russell Henley's world ranking (although if it had been 36 points instead of 38, he would not have made the top 50).

In general, I'm happy that I understand how the rankings work, apart from the small rounding discrepancies between one week's figures and the following week's. But it's just too difficult to predict how these rounding discrepancies will operate from one week to the next so I won't be wasting any more Sunday nights making predictions.

If anyone wants to waste their time looking at how the rankings work, the details are here http://www.owgr.com/about_us/default.sps?iType=425

Don't worry, I don't think anyone would pull you up on making a few errors here and there! Great to have some input from someone who knows how the rankings work and how, roughly, performances in a particular event will impact their rankings.

RikkFlair

Great to see him back in top 50, first time since summer '11. He's still exempt for the US majors for another couple of years isn't he? Though the top 50 ranking would probably take care of that anyway.

Speak Now

RikkFlair wrote: »

Great to see him back in top 50, first time since summer '11. He's still exempt for the US majors for another couple of years isn't he? Though the top 50 ranking would probably take care of that anyway.

This is his last year exempt for the Masters and US open.

Seves Three Iron

An interesting little aside to the rankings is the battle between Harri and Lowry to be the highest ranked player from the Republic of Ireland (not that either of them probably give a toss!) After losing it for the first time in 13 or so years recently, Harri is back in pole position again. I think this could be quite an even contest over the next couple of years though.

FixdePitchmark

Seves Three Iron wrote: »

An interesting little aside to the rankings is the battle between Harri and Lowry to be the highest ranked player from the Republic of Ireland (not that either of them probably give a toss!) After losing it for the first time in 13 or so years recently, Harri is back in pole position again. I think this could be quite an even contest over the next couple of years though.

I'd like to see Shane and Paddy play together in a big international - Have they ?

abff

FixdePitchmark wrote: »

I'd like to see Shane and Paddy play together in a big international - Have they ?

Don't think so.

Maybe the 2014 Ryder Cup would be a good time to start?

PRAF

FixdePitchmark wrote: »

I'd like to see Shane and Paddy play together in a big international - Have they ?

I think Paddy might be trying to match Shane regarding his physique. Hints of a beer belly on Paddy this year!

getoffthepot

PRAF wrote: »

I think Paddy might be trying to match Shane regarding his physique. Hints of a beer belly on Paddy this year!

didn't go unnoticed here ! too late for the belly butter !

madds

PRAF wrote: »

I think Paddy might be trying to match Shane regarding his physique. Hints of a beer belly on Paddy this year!

Noticed that also. Big change from Jan 2006 when spent the winter in the gym and was in super shape starting the new season. This was back when he was sporting the highlights in his air too.

Seves Three Iron

He has put on 20 pounds. Says he's done it partially to help him hit the ball further. Reckons extra upper body weight suits his swing and will add distance to his shots.

Mind you, considering he said he hit the ball perfectly last year, better than ever before in fact, and was only let down by his putting, you'd wonder why he'd go to such extreme measures to improve this area.

PRAF

Seves Three Iron wrote: »

He has put on 20 pounds. Says he's done it partially to help him hit the ball further. Reckons extra upper body weight suits his swing and will add distance to his shots.

Mind you, considering he said he hit the ball perfectly last year, better than ever before in fact, and was only let down by his putting, you'd wonder why he'd go to such extreme measures to improve this area.

Putting on extra upper body weight could be achieved by adding muscle rather than by adding a beer belly!

Ed Winchester

PRAF wrote: »

Putting on extra upper body weight could be achieved by adding muscle rather than by adding a beer belly!

Putting on a beer belly is much more fun though!

ssbob

PRAF wrote: »

Putting on extra upper body weight could be achieved by adding muscle rather than by adding a beer belly!

I don't think Paddy drinks does he? Not 100% on that but can't imagine him in his local when he's on a week off.

PRAF

ssbob wrote: »

I don't think Paddy drinks does he? Not 100% on that but can't imagine him in his local when he's on a week off.

I think you are right. He's not much of a drinker anyway. Maybe he's been eating too many cheese burgers or something. I think he was a bit chubbier in his early days on tour anyway. Maybe its just a return to the Paddy of 1996?

Anyway, I hope he is right about a bit of "extra upper body weight" improving your golf game. If so, 2013 could be a good year for me on the course!!

abff

Whatever it is, it seems to be working. Maybe a more relaxed attitude to his diet will feed into a more relaxed attitude on course and less soul searching/analysis.

RikkFlair

Well he'll almost certainly be at the next Ryder Cup anyway, vice captain if not playing

ssbob

RikkFlair wrote: »

Well he'll almost certainly be at the next Ryder Cup anyway, vice captain if not playing

Any idea when Ryder Cup qualification begins? Harry was "unlucky" with his 2011 form because 2 years like 2012 would have got him into last years team!