Rory McIlroy - 4 Time Major Winner

GreeBo

OEP wrote: »

I don't think anyone has been saying Rory is all conquering.

No, they have been saying that on his day he beats anyone else on their day.
Which I disagree with.

OEP wrote: »

You say you'd have many more players above him to win the majors, but then absolute contradict yourself by saying they've missed the cut and the reason is golf is erratic. Yet, that same reasoning doesn't apply to Rory. You can of course have your own opinion but it's not based on solid foundations.

Firstly, thats not actually what I said.

there are many of them who have a great chance of winning any major they are playing in, and lots of them I'd put above Rory

Secondly only one guy gets to win any week.

I think you are confusing generalisations with specifics.

Generally:
There are golfers who I would fancy to win whatever major is on above Rory.

Specifically:
In this Open *some* of those I fancied more than Rory did not make the cut. *Some* of them are still there.

There is no contradiction here at all.

Mantis Toboggan

With significant wind forecasted for tomorrow if Rory is to win he'll need to make hay today.

GreeBo

ligerdub wrote: »

He has one of the highest ball flights of any of the top players, that isn't going to succeed in windy conditions.

Shouldnt a player of his discussed ability be able to hit the ball higher or lower on demand?

Or does "on his day" also mean when the conditions perfectly suit him?

ligerdub

GreeBo wrote:

Shouldnt a player of his discussed ability be able to hit the ball higher or lower on demand?

Or does "on his day" also mean when the conditions perfectly suit him?

I'm not sure why you're putting on his day in quote marks, I never used the term. Perhaps you're referring to somebody else.

A player of his calibre probably should, but there's no doubt that when you have to force it you're more likely to suffer a greater loss of performance than somebody who doesn't have to adjust from their natural style as much to suit those particular conditions. Rory has said himself (admittedly a long time ago) that he's not prepared to change his game for 1 week of the year, possibly at a detriment to the rest of the year.

Certain styles suit certain situations, and a lot of sports create idiosyncrasies, perhaps none more than golf.

OEP

GreeBo wrote: »

OEP wrote: »

I don't think anyone has been saying Rory is all conquering.

No, they have been saying that on his day he beats anyone else on their day.
Which I disagree with.

OEP wrote: »

You say you'd have many more players above him to win the majors, but then absolute contradict yourself by saying they've missed the cut and the reason is golf is erratic. Yet, that same reasoning doesn't apply to Rory. You can of course have your own opinion but it's not based on solid foundations.

Firstly, thats not actually what I said.

there are many of them who have a great chance of winning any major they are playing in, and lots of them I'd put above Rory

Secondly only one guy gets to win any week.

I think you are confusing generalisations with specifics.

Generally:
There are golfers who I would fancy to win whatever major is on above Rory.

Specifically:
In this Open *some* of those I fancied more than Rory did not make the cut. *Some* of them are still there.

There is no contradiction here at all.

I'm not confusing generalisations with specifics. Generally Rory's performance in majors is better than most, excluding maybe Spieth? I'm open to correction here because I couldn't be arsed looking it up. So as I said, you can fancy other golfers but I think that's because you seem to dislike Rory, as opposed to basing it on past performance.

I'm not a Rory fan boy and generally like your posts, but it seems to me that you dislike Rory and that this is causing bias in some of what you are saying.

GreeBo

ligerdub wrote: »

I'm not sure why you're putting on his day in quote marks, I never used the term. Perhaps you're referring to somebody else.

It is a quote, but I wasn't attributing it to you, merely posing the question.

The rest of the field seems to be able to hit the ball high or low on demand without it ruining their game.
I would have expected that someone as apparently naturally talented as his is wouldnt have an issue with this.
How did a comparably low-talent grinder like Harrington manage it I wonder?

GreeBo

OEP wrote: »

I'm not confusing generalisations with specifics. Generally Rory's performance in majors is better than most, excluding maybe Spieth? I'm open to correction here because I couldn't be arsed looking it up. So as I said, you can fancy other golfers but I think that's because you seem to dislike Rory, as opposed to basing it on past performance.

Im sorry but you are if you are accusing me of a contradiction based on someone I fancied over Rory missing the cut. How they performed in this tournament is irrelevant to the generalisation I made.

OEP wrote: »

I'm not a Rory fan boy and generally like your posts, but it seems to me that you dislike Rory and that this is causing bias in some of what you are saying.

I don't like or dislike him tbh, I don't see much in him to like or dislike, though I do dislike what I perceive as the poor attitude he appears to display when things go badly.
But thats no different than disliking someone spitting or attacking a bunker, they are not likable traits imo.

I'd like to see him win more majors, but I disagree with this idea that he is the worlds most talented golfer, as everytime you hear it its couched with excuses for why he hasnt performed well over the 4 days. (Greens too slow, was too windy, ball flight, etc, etc)

If he was truly the best player in the world then he would be dominating, which he clearly isnt. The other excuse of the field being stronger now is also nonsense in my opinion, at every generation there is a group of 20-30 players who can win on their day, thats no different now.

ligerdub

GreeBo wrote: »

It is a quote, but I wasn't attributing it to you, merely posing the question.

The rest of the field seems to be able to hit the ball high or low on demand without it ruining their game.
I would have expected that someone as apparently naturally talented as his is wouldnt have an issue with this.
How did a comparably low-talent grinder like Harrington manage it I wonder?

The rest of the field haven't had to change their style this week, conditions have been favourable in terms of the choice of strategy available to them. Taking my pedantic hat off for a second, and pretending it's windy out there, I dare say there would be quite a few other players out there who would struggle just as much as Rory, but nobody would make much comment about them watching the rest of this tournament from their sofa. I've already made the point that other players merely wouldn't have to adjust their style as much, that's exactly the point, that their ball flights aren't as high as Rory, therefore no real adjustment made. Is this a weakness in Rory's game? Yes, sometimes. Does it come into play all that often in the events he plays? Not really.

Harringtons low-talent narrative is oversold, he was an outstanding golfer in his prime. I'd argue his major wins came after his peak too. You sort of contradict yourself there to be fair, you use Harrington as a counterpoint to McIlroy, but by doing so you are only focusing on his wins, and forgetting the huge inconsistent periods of his career. McIlroy is also inconsistent, but has more wins than Padraig. Why does Padraig get a pass on that but Rory doesn't? Harrington also had different strengths to McIlroy, McIlroy's strengths being from the tee-box rather than Padraig's strengths being around the green.

Good scramblers tend to perform at a similar level in all conditions, their range of scoring from worst to best tends to be a lot smaller than those who tend to have an edge with the long game. Using Padraig as an example again, he rarely contended as well in the easier format tournaments where the winning score would be -20 or so and beyond.

Like I say, idiosyncrasies create these openings for certain players, and there's never been a perfect golfer. Golf is hard, requires so many different aspects to be good at, and there are a hell of a lot of people to beat, people would do well to remember that.

OEP

GreeBo wrote: »

Im sorry but you are if you are accusing me of a contradiction based on someone I fancied over Rory missing the cut. How they performed in this tournament is irrelevant to the generalisation I made.

If Rory missed the cut it would be used as a stick to beat him but when other players do, it's just down to the nature of golf being erratic. So the players that you would pick before Rory are judged on a different scale. That's the point that I made a poor attempt of making.

GreeBo wrote: »

If he was truly the best player in the world then he would be dominating, which he clearly isnt. The other excuse of the field being stronger now is also nonsense in my opinion, at every generation there is a group of 20-30 players who can win on their day, thats no different now.

I don't think he's the best player in the world right now, but if you base the best player on who's dominating, then there isn't a best player in the world because no one is dominating. Spieth and Mcilroy are the only one's to have had significant periods of domination since Tiger.

I very much disagree, Tiger's generation did not have a group of players that deep. Jacks generation probably did.

GreeBo

ligerdub wrote: »

The rest of the field haven't had to change their style this week, conditions have been favourable in terms of the choice of strategy available to them. Taking my pedantic hat off for a second, and pretending it's windy out there, I dare say there would be quite a few other players out there who would struggle just as much as Rory, but nobody would make much comment about them watching the rest of this tournament from their sofa. I've already made the point that other players merely wouldn't have to adjust their style as much, that's exactly the point, that their ball flights aren't as high as Rory, therefore no real adjustment made. Is this a weakness in Rory's game? Yes, sometimes. Does it come into play all that often in the events he plays? Not really.

Harringtons low-talent narrative is oversold, he was an outstanding golfer in his prime. I'd argue his major wins came after his peak too. You sort of contradict yourself there to be fair, you use Harrington as a counterpoint to McIlroy, but by doing so you are only focusing on his wins, and forgetting the huge inconsistent periods of his career. McIlroy is also inconsistent, but has more wins than Padraig. Why does Padraig get a pass on that but Rory doesn't? Harrington also had different strengths to McIlroy, McIlroy's strengths being from the tee-box rather than Padraig's strengths being around the green.

Good scramblers tend to perform at a similar level in all conditions, their range of scoring from worst to best tends to be a lot smaller than those who tend to have an edge with the long game. Using Padraig as an example again, he rarely contended as well in the easier format tournaments where the winning score would be -20 or so and beyond.

Like I say, idiosyncrasies create these openings for certain players, and there's never been a perfect golfer. Golf is hard, requires so many different aspects to be good at, and there are a hell of a lot of people to beat, people would do well to remember that.

When its windy everyone struggles more than when its not windy, thats just a fact of the game, like when its pissing rain, scores are higher, no matter what your ball flight.

Sure, some are impact more than others, but a top 10 player should be able to hit the ball low or high on demand. For crying out loud, I can do it.

I dont believe for 1 minute that the entire rest of the field dont have to change their style when playing links golf. Thats just plain wrong.
I also dont believe that his ball flight is SO much higher than the rest of them that they are not impacted and yet he is.
In any case, Nicklaus had a very high ball flight and he seemed to do ok?

Im not using Harringtons career to make any point, I'm using the fact he could adjust his game and win 2 Opens to question why McIlroy has such a problem adjusting his ball flight. No one is saying that he needs to re-design his swing for a lower ball flight, but if he cant hit 20 odd shots a day a bit lower than normal, perhaps he isnt the most naturally gifted player that some say he is?

Seve or Palmer or O'Connor could hit whatever height you wanted with whatever club you wanted.
I dare say Bubba and Mickelson also can.
I can.

Why cant Rory? Why is it such a big deal for him? Why would learning this skill ruin his game for the rest of the year?
It just doesnt add up that the most naturally talented golfer in the world can hit the ball a bit lower for 4 days.

GreeBo

OEP wrote: »

If Rory missed the cut it would be used as a stick to beat him but when other players do, it's just down to the nature of golf being erratic. So the players that you would pick before Rory are judged on a different scale. That's the point that I made a poor attempt of making.

Other players would be beaten in their own threads if they existed. This is the Rory McIlroy thread so he is who we are talking about.
Also, the other players are distinctly NOT being called the most talented in the world.

OEP wrote: »

I don't think he's the best player in the world right now, but if you base the best player on who's dominating, then there isn't a best player in the world because no one is dominating. Spieth and Mcilroy are the only one's to have had significant periods of domination since Tiger.

Others are saying that he is the most naturally talented golfer and that if everyone plays their best, he still wins. I dont buy this and dont see any evidence for it.

I dont think Speith or McIlroy have ever dominated tbh.
In recent history its Tiger and Jack.

OEP wrote: »

I very much disagree, Tiger's generation did not have a group of players that deep. Jacks generation probably did.

I think thats a contradiction. You disagree but then you agree that Nicklaus did, which is it? :P

The players around Tiger were just as strong as ever, you dont deem them to be that good *because* Tiger was dominating and beating them pretty much every time he turned up. A few challenged him, such as Duval, but they couldnt keep his level up for as long as he did.

You cant use his dominance to prove that he didnt have peers, otherwise anyone who dominates by definition is peerless. Tiger & Jack came along and were just much better than everyone else at the time. The helped improve the standard of others, raised the bar if you will.
I dont think Rory has raised anyone elses game, in fact I would say that he badly needs to raise his own game.
No one in the top 10 of the world should be consistently missing greens with wedges as Rory has done over the last couple of seasons.
He seems to have made improvement on that area recently, but lets see if it lasts before we start applauding.

prawnsambo

Just when he starts getting his approach shots close, he goes and has a bad day from the fairway/rough. Still managing to eke out an under par round with his best stuff hidden in the bag, so pehaps that's his usual bad round out of the way. And not as bad as it could have been.

FixdePitchmark

GreeBo wrote: »

When its windy everyone struggles more than when its not windy, thats just a fact of the game, like when its pissing rain, scores are higher, no matter what your ball flight.

Sure, some are impact more than others, but a top 10 player should be able to hit the ball low or high on demand. For crying out loud, I can do it.

I dont believe for 1 minute that the entire rest of the field dont have to change their style when playing links golf. Thats just plain wrong.
I also dont believe that his ball flight is SO much higher than the rest of them that they are not impacted and yet he is.
In any case, Nicklaus had a very high ball flight and he seemed to do ok?

Im not using Harringtons career to make any point, I'm using the fact he could adjust his game and win 2 Opens to question why McIlroy has such a problem adjusting his ball flight. No one is saying that he needs to re-design his swing for a lower ball flight, but if he cant hit 20 odd shots a day a bit lower than normal, perhaps he isnt the most naturally gifted player that some say he is?

Seve or Palmer or O'Connor could hit whatever height you wanted with whatever club you wanted.
I dare say Bubba and Mickelson also can.
I can.

Why cant Rory? Why is it such a big deal for him? Why would learning this skill ruin his game for the rest of the year?
It just doesnt add up that the most naturally talented golfer in the world can hit the ball a bit lower for 4 days.

Agree with GreeBo here .

Only reason Rory is not at top here is his short game and putting not good enough.

A few of his irons were as low as you can hit an iron.

prawnsambo

FixdePitchmark wrote: »

Agree with GreeBo here .

Only reason Rory is not at top here is his short game and putting not good enough.

A few of his irons were as low as you can hit an iron.

Funny enough, he had the fewest putts of the tournament so far yesterday. Averaged 30 in his first two rounds and had 26 yesterday. Unfortunately the approach shots let him down. His game seems a bit like herding chickens at the moment.

davo10

prawnsambo wrote: »

Funny enough, he had the fewest putts of the tournament so far yesterday. Averaged 30 in his first two rounds and had 26 yesterday. Unfortunately the approach shots let him down. His game seems a bit like herding chickens at the moment.

So what do you think prawnsambo, will he win or sink? I'd love to see him will, but with the aggressive way he will have to go after birdies, if it doesn't work out in the first few holes, I think he will sink.

prawnsambo

davo10 wrote: »

So what do you think prawnsambo, will he win or sink? I'd love to see him will, but with the aggressive way he will have to go after birdies, if it doesn't work out in the first few holes, I think he will sink.

I really don't know. Probably what makes him so frustrating and conversely exciting to watch. It's windy, which doesn't really suit his game, but yet he's played some great golf in the wind too. If he can get a good start and pick up a couple of early birdies and keep the bogeys off his card, it's not a huge ask from where he is. For all the talk of his game being off, he's carded a tidy enough three rounds under par so far. He just hasn't had a really good one yet.

davo10

prawnsambo wrote: »

I really don't know. Probably what makes him so frustrating and conversely exciting to watch. It's windy, which doesn't really suit his game, but yet he's played some great golf in the wind too. If he can get a good start and pick up a couple of early birdies and keep the bogeys off his card, it's not a huge ask from where he is. For all the talk of his game being off, he's carded a tidy enough three rounds under par so far. He just hasn't had a really good one yet.

If he gets a few early birdies before the leaders go out, then they know they have to be more aggressive then they would like to be. What a thrill it would be if McIllroy and Woods sprint out of the blocks, could be something special.

BoardsMember

If looking for an instance of evidence for Rory needing a real professional caddy that he works with like a team, then the 18th hole yesterday was a good sample. Off the tee he took a club that gets him perfectly to the danger spot, a 3 wood. Driver sees him fly it, long iron sees him short. Why go with 3 wood?

The decision to go for the green from the bunker probably reflects as much on his confidence in short wedge and or putting than anything. Most players would have left themselves an 80 yard pitch and backed themselves to get up and down. I know Spieth is exemplary in course management, but comparing rory to him, its like child against adult.

prawnsambo

BoardsMember wrote: »

If looking for an instance of evidence for Rory needing a real professional caddy that he works with like a team, then the 18th hole yesterday was a good sample. Off the tee he took a club that gets him perfectly to the danger spot, a 3 wood. Driver sees him fly it, long iron sees him short. Why go with 3 wood?

The decision to go for the green from the bunker probably reflects as much on his confidence in short wedge and or putting than anything. Most players would have left themselves an 80 yard pitch and backed themselves to get up and down. I know Spieth is exemplary in course management, but comparing rory to him, its like child against adult.

I think he expected the three wood to go further than it did. For him, the driver would put him in danger of going in the burn. He smoked one earlier that went 408 yards.

BoardsMember

prawnsambo wrote: »

I think he expected the three wood to go further than it did. For him, the driver would put him in danger of going in the burn. He smoked one earlier that went 408 yards.

Still very poor course management. It wouldn't happen to most guys out there.

Keano

BoardsMember wrote: »

Still very poor course management. It wouldn't happen to most guys out there.

It does happen to them all. Rory just gets the blunt of it on here.

GreeBo

davo10 wrote: »

So what do you think prawnsambo, will he win or sink? I'd love to see him will, but with the aggressive way he will have to go after birdies, if it doesn't work out in the first few holes, I think he will sink.

I think he needs to play like Tiger did yesterday, safe on dangerous holes and aggressive on holes where the downside isnt too penal.

Butch etc yesterday were saying Tiger should be more aggressive, but I think his score shows he knows what he was doing.

The danger going out too hard too soon is that you take yourself out of it on the front 9 and then have to go for less than 50:50 shots on the back nine. This rarely works out and only lessens the pressure on the late guys.

prawnsambo

BoardsMember wrote: »

Still very poor course management. It wouldn't happen to most guys out there.

Really? You're lauding Jordan Spieth's course management, but his GIR for the first two days was very poor. He scrambled well, but he was missing fairways in every direction and Friday, he took the driver out on the first tee, and promptly hit it into the rough.

But if you pick a club to avoid the main danger on the 18th and don't execute it perfectly, it's bad course management?

GreeBo

Keano wrote: »

It does happen to them all. Rory just gets the blunt of it on here.

It would be pretty strange if people brought it up in the Harrington thread instead.

GreeBo

prawnsambo wrote: »

But if you pick a club to avoid the main danger on the 18th and don't execute it perfectly, it's bad course management?

Is it good course management if anything less than a perfect shot lands you in trouble?

Hitting a club that cant make the hazard means you dont need to hit it perfectly.

Sure if you need to hit it perfectly to avoid trouble then you might as well hit the driver?

Russman

GreeBo wrote: »

Why cant Rory? Why is it such a big deal for him? Why would learning this skill ruin his game for the rest of the year?
It just doesnt add up that the most naturally talented golfer in the world can hit the ball a bit lower for 4 days.

Is there any evidence that Rory can’t hit it low ?
His natural ball flight is one of the highest but I’ve never seen anything suggesting he can’t hit it low. Some of his long irons looked pretty bloody low on the shot tracer over the last few days imo.

GreeBo

Russman wrote: »

Is there any evidence that Rory can’t hit it low ?
His natural ball flight is one of the highest but I’ve never seen anything suggesting he can’t hit it low. Some of his long irons looked pretty bloody low on the shot tracer over the last few days imo.

I personally havent seen any, but its posted here multiple times as the reason why windy golf doesnt suit him and that he has said he isnt going to change his swing for 1 week a year.

My only point is that you cant reasonably be considered as the most naturally gifted golfer in the world if you cant change your ball flight on a windy day.

Russman

GreeBo wrote: »

Is it good course management if anything less than a perfect shot lands you in trouble?

Hitting a club that cant make the hazard means you dont need to hit it perfectly.

Sure if you need to hit it perfectly to avoid trouble then you might as well hit the driver?

I don’t think it needed to be perfect, just online. Plus he was probably still thick after a very poor bogey on the par 3 and wanted to try get himself back in the tournament by making birdie on 18. Fair enough it didn’t work and he’s playing for nothing today, but hey, win some, lose some.

davo10

Keano wrote: »

It does happen to them all. Rory just gets the blunt of it on here.

The clue is in the thread title.

Russman

GreeBo wrote: »

I personally havent seen any, but its posted here multiple times as the reason why windy golf doesnt suit him and that he has said he isnt going to change his swing for 1 week a year.

My only point is that you cant reasonably be considered as the most naturally gifted golfer in the world if you cant change your ball flight on a windy day.

Its all opinion, but there’s a reasonably broad consensus amongst commentators, golfers etc., that his best golf is better than everyone else’s. I tend to agree, when he’s on he makes it look ridiculous, as do lots of them, but his best always seems that little bit better imo. Its not something can be quantified though.