The DP World Tour Thread

Seve OB

A journeyman would be someone who just gets by and makes a modest living on tour.
I think it’s fair to say that Poulter has far exceeded that in his career

A Shaved Duck?

Seve OB wrote: »

A journeyman would be someone who just gets by and makes a modest living on tour.
I think it’s fair to say that Poulter has far exceeded that in his career

Maybe 10 years ago, last 8 he has been doing barely enough to keep the top 50 ranking.

I honestly think he has been over-rated for years.

callaway92

Poulter had what I’d consider to be an excellent 2019 for someone of his age and length off the tee.

First Up

A Shaved Duck? wrote:

Maybe 10 years ago, last 8 he has been doing barely enough to keep the top 50 ranking.

Yes, barely enough to stay in the top 2% in the OWGR.

Mediocrity personified.

Potential Underachiever

A Shaved Duck? wrote: »

Maybe 10 years ago, last 8 he has been doing barely enough to keep the top 50 ranking.

I honestly think he has been over-rated for years.

Hovering around the top 50 is way better than journeyman status imo, look at the likes of Seamus power, struggles year in year out to scrape in the top 125 on Tour to try and earn full playing status, otherwise scraping around trying to get starts in tournaments, that's what I'd class a journeyman as tbh.

Mysterypunter

Poulter has 4 wins in 10 years including an epic 1 shot victory over Hudson Swafford in the Houston Open. Has not won a major despite playing well in lots of them, but his career is overhyped by his mates in sky, maybe not a journeyman, but hugely overrated.

First Up

Mysterypunter wrote: »

Poulter has 4 wins in 10 years including an epic 1 shot victory over Hudson Swafford in the Houston Open. Has not won a major despite playing well in lots of them, but his career is overhyped by his mates in sky, maybe not a journeyman, but hugely overrated.

Career winnings of £24 million and ranked 12th on golf's all-time rich list. He may be over-hyped by the likes of Sky (he isn't alone in that) but somebody in the world Top 50 for 13 years, or with a 14-6-2 record in the Ryder Cup (unbeaten in singles) isn't over-rated.

Mysterypunter

First Up wrote: »

Career winnings of £24 million and ranked 12th on golf's all-time rich list. He may be over-hyped by the likes of Sky (he isn't alone in that) but somebody in the world Top 50 for 13 years, or with a 14-6-2 record in the Ryder Cup (unbeaten in singles) isn't over-rated.

He has more Ferraris than wins. Prize money has increased so much in the past 10-15 years that it cannot be used as a measure of all time standing, it's not a constant across the board, I'm sure that old Tom Morris, who is approaching 200 years of age didn't win as much money, but they are different eras. He still gets mentioned by Peter Alliss though. Matt Kuchar earned 40 million dollars in his first 400 starts, that is a mad average of $100,000 per tournament, but he is nowhere near an all time great. Handy money for sure, but loads of players are not worried about the Ryder Cup, I think it's the most overrated competition in all of sports, along with the ashes, it's only a head to head, and was nothing more than an exhibition match up to the late 70s, Europe got competitive after that, and it is a good spectacle, but nothing more.

Seve OB

So it seems that unless you spend your whole career in the top 10 of the OWGR then you are just a journeyman

First Up

Mysterypunter wrote: »

He has more Ferraris than wins. Prize money has increased so much in the past 10-15 years that it cannot be used as a measure of all time standing, it's not a constant across the board, I'm sure that old Tom Morris, who is approaching 200 years of age didn't win as much money, but they are different eras. He still gets mentioned by Peter Alliss though. Matt Kuchar earned 40 million dollars in his first 400 starts, that is a mad average of $100,000 per tournament, but he is nowhere near an all time great. Handy money for sure, but loads of players are not worried about the Ryder Cup, I think it's the most overrated competition in all of sports, along with the ashes, it's only a head to head, and was nothing more than an exhibition match up to the late 70s, Europe got competitive after that, and it is a good spectacle, but nothing more.

In the top 50 in the world for 13 of the last 20 years. That's no good either I suppose?

Mysterypunter

First Up wrote: »

In the top 50 in the world for 13 of the last 20 years. That's no good either I suppose?

Didn't say he's no good, I said he has 4 wins in 10 years. Westwood and himself played together in Scotland a couple of weeks ago, very exciting day for the sky boys, but they gave absolutely no credit to Aaron Rai who won, and were furious when Tommy Fleetwood missed a short one in the playoff. It's not always his fault that he doesn't live up to the hype, but he doesn't. Rory McIlroy is considered an underachiever by many, but he has 4 majors, Speith is slated every week now, and he has 3. Poulter and Westwood between them have 0. Depending on what basis you are judging careers, statics and numbers can be used in different ways, but Ryder Cup record should be way down that list. And I don't mind Poulter myself, there are a lot worse players and characters in the game.

Mysterypunter

Seve OB wrote: »

So it seems that unless you spend your whole career in the top 10 of the OWGR then you are just a journeyman

Steve Palmer, who is a tipster of sorts, was doing a betting preview on the open won by Shane Lowry, and described Jim Furyk as a veteran plodder. I thought that was a ridiculous comment.

eagle eye

Mysterypunter wrote:

Steve Palmer, who is a tipster of sorts, was doing a betting preview on the open won by Shane Lowry, and described Jim Furyk as a veteran plodder. I thought that was a ridiculous comment.

How many players have broken 60 twice? That's what I'd be asking Palmer.

First Up

Mysterypunter wrote:

Didn't say he's no good, I said he has 4 wins in 10 years. Westwood and himself played together in Scotland a couple of weeks ago, very exciting day for the sky boys, but they gave absolutely no credit to Aaron Rai who won, and were furious when Tommy Fleetwood missed a short one in the playoff. It's not always his fault that he doesn't live up to the hype, but he doesn't. Rory McIlroy is considered an underachiever by many, but he has 4 majors, Speith is slated every week now, and he has 3. Poulter and Westwood between them have 0. Depending on what basis you are judging careers, statics and numbers can be used in different ways, but Ryder Cup record should be way down that list. And I don't mind Poulter myself, there are a lot worse players and characters in the game.

I asked if 13 years in the world's top 50 was any good. He has 17 career wins and his record speaks for itself. How Sky cover him is a side issue.

Mysterypunter

First Up wrote: »

I asked if 13 years in the world's top 50 was any good. He has 17 career wins and his record speaks for itself. How Sky cover him is a side issue.

His record does speak for itself, 4 wins in 10 years, and no majors, its OK, but not amazingly good, he is a journeyman these days, and will struggle to win again, as he is an infrequent winner. 13 years in the world's top 50 is good, but Jim Furyk, who I mentioned before was described as a veteran plodder, was in the world's top 10 for over 8 years, won a major and was in the top 4 in every major, shot rounds of 59 & 58 as the poster above said, and is still playing to a high standard. That's a very solid career for a plodder, Poulter is nothing more than a good golfer. Of course he is good, but you are promoting him on the basis of his ranking while I am using his win record as a negative. Sky coverage is a side issue, but they are a joke anyway, they now have feature groups on a Sunday and we're showing Rickie Fowler hacking around 10 shots behind. Meanwhile the leaders were at the turn, and they only started showing them on the 10th hole. Probably not completely their fault, as the feed came from the golf channel.

First Up

Mysterypunter wrote:

His record does speak for itself, 4 wins in 10 years, and no majors, its OK, but not amazingly good, he is a journeyman these days, and will struggle to win again, as he is an infrequent winner. 13 years in the world's top 50 is good, but Jim Furyk, who I mentioned before was described as a veteran plodder, was in the world's top 10 for over 8 years, won a major and was in the top 4 in every major, shot rounds of 59 & 58 as the poster above said, and is still playing to a high standard. That's a very solid career for a plodder, Poulter is nothing more than a good golfer. Of course he is good, but you are promoting him on the basis of his ranking while I am using his win record as a negative. Sky coverage is a side issue, but they are a joke anyway, they now have feature groups on a Sunday and we're showing Rickie Fowler hacking around 10 shots behind. Meanwhile the leaders were at the turn, and they only started showing them on the 10th hole. Probably not completely their fault, as the feed came from the golf channel.

World rankings reflect consistency of performance. You don't get to be in the top 50 in the world without playing better than many others week in week out and Poulter did that for 13 years.

Give out about Sky all you want but you'll need to find more than Poulter's career to hang it on.

By the way, the Golf Channel coverage is just of Featured Groups which are announced in advance. Its just a couple of cameras following some big names. It doesn't pretend to be full coverage and Sky has no control over it.

Seve OB

Mysterypunter wrote: »

His record does speak for itself, 4 wins in 10 years, and no majors, its OK, but not amazingly good, he is a journeyman these days, and will struggle to win again, as he is an infrequent winner. 13 years in the world's top 50 is good, but Jim Furyk, who I mentioned before was described as a veteran plodder, was in the world's top 10 for over 8 years, won a major and was in the top 4 in every major, shot rounds of 59 & 58 as the poster above said, and is still playing to a high standard. That's a very solid career for a plodder, Poulter is nothing more than a good golfer. Of course he is good, but you are promoting him on the basis of his ranking while I am using his win record as a negative. Sky coverage is a side issue, but they are a joke anyway, they now have feature groups on a Sunday and we're showing Rickie Fowler hacking around 10 shots behind. Meanwhile the leaders were at the turn, and they only started showing them on the 10th hole. Probably not completely their fault, as the feed came from the golf channel.

Interestingly enough, Jim furyk hasn’t had a win in over 4 years and only 1 win in the last 10 years, so I guess he is also a journeyman.
Tiger only has 3 wins in the last 7 years.....journeyman carry on is that.

I don’t really think you understand what a journeyman actually is

Seve OB

http://www.leaderboard.com/GLOSSARY_JOURNEYMAN

eagle eye

If you asked me who I'd call great and who I'd call a plodder out of Jim Furyk and Ian Poulter I'd have to call Poulter the plodder.

Truth is neither are. Poulter has been a very good golfer made great by his legendary Ryder Cup performances.

Furyk has been Mr Consistency for a long, long time. He has a major and has broken 60 twice, 17 PGA Tour wins, a European tour win and wins on other tours, been scoring average season leader on the PGA tour, Fed Ex Cup champion, golfer of the year and has multiple top fives in major championships to go along with his US Open win.

Furyk is a truly great player.

First Up

eagle eye wrote:

Truth is neither are. Poulter has been a very good golfer made great by his legendary Ryder Cup performances.

Furyk and Poulter are both a long way from being plodders. Furyk has more achievements to his name, including 21 years in the Top 50 (compared to Poulter's 13).

Both are in the golfing stratosphere compared to many.

Deeper Blue

I'm no fan of Poulter but to call him a journeyman is beyond ludicrous

Russman

Mysterypunter wrote: »

He beat beef in a playoff in India, beef absolutely chucked it away, Wallace is a nothing player, loads of English journeymen on the scene, Ross Fisher and Andy Sullivan are two who come to mind, Wallace will end up like them two. Poulter is a journeyman as well, but he is a Ryder Cup hero.

I can see what you’re getting at alright, but i wouldn’t quite go with “journeyman” tbh, they’re much better than that. Maybe “not as good as Sky say” would be more accurate. Certainly they’re nowhere near the real elite of the game, but then that’s why the elite are elite.

Wallace may well become a top player, time will tell. My gut feeling is his own expectations will hold him back til he matures and by then it might be too late. Plus I don’t trust anyone who holds the putter the way he does , way too mechanical for longevity imo.

There are no bad players on tour, but of the English/Euro players mentioned in recent posts I’d put Westwood head and shoulders above the rest of them and probably the only one who was ever really “world class”.

Furyk is definitely a great player, no debate at all. Solid records like his, backed up with a major, absolutely equals a great.

Mushy

So those player interviews as they walk down the fairway just went as well as expected. Camera cuts to Jamie Donaldson who just says Ah ****...Tim Barter making him apologise.

My video wont attach

eagle eye

This apologising for any bad language by commentators really annoys me. It's just making a bigger deal out if it and potentially having an affect on a players reputation. Most people don't even notice these things until they apologise for it.

Mushy

eagle eye wrote: »

This apologising for any bad language by commentators really annoys me. It's just making a bigger deal out if it and potentially having an affect on a players reputation. Most people don't even notice these things until they apologise for it.

If you mean the Macintyre one, then I definitely agree. The Donaldson one he would have to, was directly into the camera. Even though everyone knows it was done jokingly

Deeper Blue

The filming of Shinkwin talking to his wife and son is so invasive and unnecessary

eagle eye

El SueÃ&#177 wrote: »

The filming of Shinkwin talking to his wife and son is so invasive and unnecessary

Unless he's agreed to it.

Deeper Blue

eagle eye wrote: »

Unless he's agreed to it.

Even if he did, I don't think anybody wants to watch it. Private moment between himself and his family.

Mantis Toboggan

3 finnish players in the top 20, seem to be coming more regular must be doing something right under age.

charlieIRL

eagle eye wrote: »

This apologising for any bad language by commentators really annoys me. It's just making a bigger deal out if it and potentially having an affect on a players reputation. Most people don't even notice these things until they apologise for it.

true, most of the time you rewind on sky to hear it!!! If the commentators said nothing you wouldn't bother!!!