Rory McIlroy - 4 Time Major Winner

Hitch2222

Dav010 wrote: »

True, but sometimes being a top class player is not enough to win, what’s between the ears is equally important. How many times during Woods career did he grind out wins when playing badly or injured? When you watch that documentary on sky about him, he said if he was in the last or next to last group, he always thought he would win.

Well let's not dwell on a documentary with an obvious narrative to fulfil. They could make one about me that flatters to deceive about the time I got 2 holes in one on the 5th on a pitch n putt course

We need to just say Rory is not Tiger, Tiger is arguably the greatest golfer ever and greatest athlete of his generation. It's hard to compete with him.

They call it the clutch gene in basketball and other American sports.
Michael Jordan was clutch by objective measures and by folklore.
Kobe Bryant was clutch by folklore but not by objective measures.
LeBron James is more clutch than Kobe and less than Jordan by objective measures but not by folklore.

Objectively Jordan>LeBron>Kobe

Folklore Jordan>Kobe>>>>> My Granny >>>>>LeBron

I wonder if this is a similar situation for Rory

Objectively Tiger >Rory>Field

Folklore Tiger>TheField>>>>> My Granny >>>> Rory

Just a thought not an assertion

stockdam

Hitch2222 wrote: »

I find that the vast majority of criticisms of McIlroy outside of the putting are often focused on things that are not quantifiable "killer instinct" or "winners mentality".

Yes it's almost as if some players can pull out the shots when they need to. So if that is the case why don't they do that for every shot or are they just apathetic or lazy?

It is the case that some players will implode when they get close to winning but that generally gets better the more they are in that position.

The truth is that the better players appear to be able to get over the line because they are better. It's not that they are "winners" who up their game when needed. The press like to paint certain players as winners who can flick a switch. However that's just BS.

prawnsambo

Hitch2222 wrote: »

Well let's not dwell on a documentary with an obvious narrative to fulfil. They could make one about me that flatters to deceive about the time I got 2 holes in one on the 5th on a pitch n putt course

We need to just say Rory is not Tiger, Tiger is arguably the greatest golfer ever and greatest athlete of his generation. It's hard to compete with him.

They call it the clutch gene in basketball and other American sports.
Michael Jordan was clutch by objective measures and by folklore.
Kobe Bryant was clutch by folklore but not by objective measures.
LeBron James is more clutch than Kobe and less than Jordan by objective measures but not by folklore.

Objectively Jordan>LeBron>Kobe

Folklore Jordan>Kobe>>>>> My Granny >>>>>LeBron

I wonder if this is a similar situation for Rory

Objectively Tiger >Rory>Field

Folklore Tiger>TheField>>>>> My Granny >>>> Rory

Just a thought not an assertion

That Granny of yours is some sportswoman.

rooney30

I wouldn’t be expecting much from him this weekend at the Players. Sawgrass is a quirky kind of course of which he has expressed his frustration with in the past . Wasn’t there a time at the start of his career when he wouldn’t even play in it !
Let’s just hope he saves his first win of the season for Augusta . He can then come on here and personally give the two fingers to half of the posters on this thread , then retire happy

prawnsambo

rooney30 wrote: »

I wouldn’t be expecting much from him this weekend at the Players. Sawgrass is a quirky kind of course of which he has expressed his frustration with in the past . Wasn’t there a time at the start of his career when he wouldn’t even play in it !
Let’s just hope he saves his first win of the season for Augusta . He can then come on here and personally give the two fingers to half of the posters on this thread , then retire happy

His best finish was T6 in 2014 I think. So yeah, it's not a great place for him.

Over the past 5 years he is 3rd in strokes gained at TPC Sawgrass behind scott and Molinairi

He is 4th in strokes gained over all years of who is in the field.

And he is 7th if you average the scoring out, of people who have played 10 rounds or more

Slanty

Did anybody see the incident with the spectator on the 4th? Rory was certainly uncomfortable by what was said.

Lost total concentration and blocked his iron way right.

prawnsambo

Slanty wrote: »

Did anybody see the incident with the spectator on the 4th? Rory was certainly uncomfortable by what was said.

Lost total concentration and blocked his iron way right.

Saw it alright, but no idea what was said. It's often pretty toxic out there on the PGA tour. Lads getting absolutely plastered and becoming [even more] obnoxious.

ligerdub

Dr Devious wrote: »

If you see him winning anything, even a major then it’s purely based on a hunch, even the most misguided follower couldn’t make a case for him based on what he’s doing on the golf course.

Come on now.....that's just nonsense.

He is the number 1 player in the tournaments he has played this year. Himself and Dustin Johnson are well clear of the pack in terms of performance versus the field.

https://www.pgatour.com/stats/stat.02675.html

5 out of 6 tournaments he has played this year he has been in the top 6. That's excellent form.

He has only truly contended as a potential winner for maybe 2 or 3 of those, but building consistency is a very encouraging thing from his point of view.

If Rory keeps this quality of play up he's not just going to win a tournament, he's going to win multiple tournaments this year.

We're dealing with an unknown here, but if you put the proviso you can use current form as an indicator then his prospects improve greatly.

slave1

He just can't dig deep enough to motivate his winning mentality, I'm just so bored with this "great signs" etc.
To win you need to close out, you need determination, you need to kick your opponent when they are down etc. Rory the last 3/4 years has lost it, quoting stats is irrelevant to me, the only stat is wins at his level.
Such a crying shame, his Saturday round was super stuff but he needs to do it Saturday AND Sunday

Hitch2222

slave1 wrote: »

He just can't dig deep enough to motivate his winning mentality, I'm just so bored with this "great signs" etc.
To win you need to close out, you need determination, you need to kick your opponent when they are down etc. Rory the last 3/4 years has lost it, quoting stats is irrelevant to me, the only stat is wins at his level.
Such a crying shame, his Saturday round was super stuff but he needs to do it Saturday AND Sunday

Yeah I'd refer to my previous post about the issues people have with McIlroy largely not being quantifiable. I think alot of the issues highlighted above fall into that category.

IMO you can't criticise someone for their performance if you can't look beyond your subjective perception of his mentality. You can't see inside his mind and judge whether it's correct or not.
How someone can conclude he doesn't dig deep enough blah blah blah is beyond me.

You can however view a variety of pro/con object measures on McIlroy and deduce that he is performing better or worse.

Everything else beyond that is largely conjecture which holds far less weight than the stats you so easily dismiss.

Dav010

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Over the past 5 years he is 3rd in strokes gained at TPC Sawgrass behind scott and Molinairi

He is 4th in strokes gained over all years of who is in the field.

And he is 7th if you average the scoring out, of people who have played 10 rounds or more

Do you honestly think Rory Mcilroy would quote those statistics to you, or be happy with them? In fact would any golfer quote “strokes gained” as an achievement? “Strokes gained” is made for TV BS, for top golfers there is winning, that is it. They don’t count up the number of strokes gained over their career.

ligerdub

Dav010 wrote: »

Do you honestly think Rory Mcilroy would quote those statistics to you, or be happy with them? In fact would any golfer quote “strokes gained” as an achievement? “Strokes gained” is made for TV BS, for top golfers there is winning, that is it. They don’t count up the number of strokes gained over their career.

Winning a tournament is essentially the same as have the best strokes gained overall (not just on a specific aspect of the game) score for that week.......so it's not exactly irrelevant.

Rory hasn't achieved this in any individual week, but has been the star performer in 2019 based on maintaining a high standard across the board. There's not a player out there he hasn't finished above this year. It stands to reason that if he keeps it going then it won't be long before he banks some wins.

Hitch2222

Dav010 wrote: »

Do you honestly think Rory Mcilroy would quote those statistics to you, or be happy with them? In fact would any golfer quote “strokes gained” as an achievement? “Strokes gained” is made for TV BS, for top golfers there is winning, that is it. They don’t count up the number of strokes gained over their career.

No h wouldnt and nobody is claiming that he would. They are though indicative of performance and is largely what people here and TV BS use them for.

I suspect McIlroy has a team from Nike or a statistician that relays far more granular statistics to him than the very basic strokes gained.

He definitely embraces quantitative measurements, what do you think Trackman is? The margins are tiny and players at that level know it. I imagine whether it's them directly or their team but they certainly make adjustments based on a wide variety of measurements.

Dav010

ligerdub wrote: »

Winning a tournament is essentially the same as have the best strokes gained overall (not just on a specific aspect of the game) score for that week.......so it's not exactly irrelevant.

Rory hasn't achieved this in any individual week, but has been the star performer in 2019 based on maintaining a high standard across the board. There's not a player out there he hasn't finished above this year. It stands to reason that if he keeps it going then it won't be long before he banks some wins.

No it isn’t.

How many times after do you hear that the “strokes gained” prize goes to Mcilroy, but the winners are XXXXX?

It’s just stats for bluffers, what matters is winning. You could have the best strokes gained over 3 days, but get passed on the 4th day, they don’t give a prize for winning to anyone except the winner.

There are probably other golfers who have also finished above all the others at some stage this season, but if they didn’t win, I don’t know who they are, nor indeed does it matter.

The stats that matter are, it is the one year anniversary since his last victory, and there was none the year before. He has been in the final group in 8 tournaments, and in most he has finished lower than position at the start of the round. And, too often when he is in with a chance, he falls flat.

Hitch2222

Dav010 wrote: »

No it isn’t.

How many times after do you hear that the “strokes gained” prize goes to Mcilroy, but the winners are XXXXX?

It’s just stats for bluffers, what matters is winning. You could have the best strokes gained over 3 days, but get passed on the 4th day, they don’t give a prize for winning to anyone except the winner.

There are probably other golfers who have also finished above all the others at some stage this season, but if they didn’t win, I don’t know who they are, nor indeed does it matter.

It's a game of incredibly high variance. In order to see the signal from the noise, looking beyond 1st place is probably a worthwhile endeavour.

Dav010

Hitch2222 wrote: »

It's a game of incredibly high variance. In order to see the signal from the noise, looking beyond 1st place is probably a worthwhile endeavour.

Worthwhile, but golfers don’t measure their own endeavours by “strokes gained”, so why would people of watch the game.

The noise at the end of a tournament is for the winner, the signal is just looking at the way they won.

prawnsambo

Dav010 wrote: »

Worthwhile, but golfers don’t measure their own endeavours by “strokes gained”, so why would people of watch the game.

The noise at the end of a tournament is for the winner, the signal is just looking at the way they won.

Are you sure about that? Because I would have thought that most sports nowadays have become very statistically driven.

Dav010

prawnsambo wrote: »

Are you sure about that? Because I would have thought that most sports nowadays have become very statistically driven.

I’m pretty sure the only statistic that matters to a top golfer is the winning score.

prawnsambo

Dav010 wrote: »

I’m pretty sure the only statistic that matters to a top golfer is the winning score.

Well that's not exactly the detailed response I was expecting. I think I'll go with, 'you don't know' in that case.

Dav010

Dav010 wrote: »

Do you honestly think Rory Mcilroy would quote those statistics to you, or be happy with them? In fact would any golfer quote “strokes gained” as an achievement? “Strokes gained” is made for TV BS, for top golfers there is winning, that is it. They don’t count up the number of strokes gained over their career.

I was merely pointing out that he has played consistently well there but not outstanding by any means.

He has only ever gained strokes putting here once in 7 visits but has the flatstick performing better recently.

I've no idea if he would quote these stats to me or anyone for that matter but thats irrelevant to the point I was making.

Given how he has performed before there and his recent form I think he could go well at the weekend, I also think the change of date helps and according to Twitter at least the rough has been cut down more so then in past years which would also help him.

Also I think it was Zach Johnson but I'm not 100% sure said he plans his schedule around the tournaments he feels he was the best chance of winning using stats.

Hitch2222

Dav010 wrote: »

I’m pretty sure the only statistic that matters to a top golfer is the winning score.

No it's not. Every top level athlete attempts to peak at various times. Olympic sprinters train to peak at the Olympics and WC so 2/4 year cycles.

Golfers like Rory, DJ, Tiger etc attempt to peak for majors for example. That's not to say they always do but they measure progress away from the scoreboard.
Fairways, GIR, Dispersion rates etc.

Your logic may have worked well in Nicklaus or Snead era but the game has moved on.
You're kidding yourself if you think that's all they think about.

Dav010

prawnsambo wrote: »

Well that's not exactly the detailed response I was expecting. I think I'll go with, 'you don't know' in that case.

How many times have you heard Woods/Nicklaus/Watson etc talk about all the times they came 2nd? I include Watson in this because I saw him interviewed recently, and he spoke about the crushing disappointment of letting the Open slip in 2009. He wasn’t talking about how great it was to come 2nd.

You think the top guys go out there thinking about GIR, dispersion patterns, strokes gained? Maybe Dechanbeau does, the others go out there to hit the ball as hard and straight as they can, and get to the top of the leaderboard by sinking putts.

One of my best friends used to play on the European Tour, over the years I’ve met a lot of the European and US players when playing Pro-ams. I can assure you a lot of them do not think deeply about the game, it’s all about competing to win.

ligerdub

Dav010 wrote: »

No it isn’t.

How many times after do you hear that the “strokes gained” prize goes to Mcilroy, but the winners are XXXXX?

It’s just stats for bluffers, what matters is winning. You could have the best strokes gained over 3 days, but get passed on the 4th day, they don’t give a prize for winning to anyone except the winner.

There are probably other golfers who have also finished above all the others at some stage this season, but if they didn’t win, I don’t know who they are, nor indeed does it matter.

The stats that matter are, it is the one year anniversary since his last victory, and there was none the year before. He has been in the final group in 8 tournaments, and in most he has finished lower than position at the start of the round. And, too often when he is in with a chance, he falls flat.

The point I was making was in response to a claim that anybody backing him to win a tournament couldn't point to anything he was doing on the course to defend that point.....which is nonsense. There's plenty of evidence of what he's doing on the course this year to put him in the mix to win, as he has done many times in his career.

His last few years have been a far cry from his glory years early in the decade, and he has been on the end of valid criticism for that reason. He wasn't able to finish the job when in contention because his game simply wasn't sharp enough to get over the line. Winning golf tournaments is not exactly easy!

The fact is though his form this year is significantly better than in the 2017-2018 period. Nobody has a crystal ball here so it's largely pointless to discuss future events like they've already been pre-determined. Perhaps though if you're so confident in him not winning a tournament over say the next 4 months or so that you go down to the bookies and place a whopper bet on that coming to fruition, easy money right.

slave1

At the very top winning and winning Majors is all that counts, look at Westy or even Luke Donald, World #1 for over a year with huge amount of placements but no BIG wins but in a few years guys will think back to have to remember him, look at Phil, never #1 but lots of Majors

prawnsambo

Dav010 wrote: »

How many times have you heard Woods/Nicklaus/Watson etc talk about all the times they came 2nd? I include Watson in this because I saw him interviewed recently, and he spoke about the crushing disappointment of letting the Open slip in 2009. He wasn’t talking about how great it was to come 2nd.

You think the top guys go out there thinking about GIR, dispersion patterns, strokes gained? Maybe Dechanbeau does, the others go out there to hit the ball as hard and straight as they can, and get to the top of the leaderboard by sinking putts.

One of my best friends used to play on the European Tour, over the years I’ve met a lot of the European and US players when playing Pro-ams. I can assure you a lot of them do not think deeply about the game, it’s all about competing to win.

Well that's more like it. Thanks.

I've often heard Woods getting quite technical about his game. And a lot of them are taking Trackman to the driving range, so they clearly use these aids in practice. But stuff like GIR, FIR would also be important over time. Not in one competition, but if you're losing shots, the stats would be the most accurate way of measuring that. But I suspect that they go much deeper than the kinds of things we fans look at.

You're not going to hear pros talk about their GIR to the press or amongst each other, but that doesn't mean they aren't looking at them.

GreeBo

They clearly look at stats to determine where to focus their practice efforts but they are only doing this to try to win.

Hitch2222

Dav010 wrote: »

How many times have you heard Woods/Nicklaus/Watson etc talk about all the times they came 2nd? I include Watson in this because I saw him interviewed recently, and he spoke about the crushing disappointment of letting the Open slip in 2009. He wasn’t talking about how great it was to come 2nd.

You think the top guys go out there thinking about GIR, dispersion patterns, strokes gained? Maybe Dechanbeau does, the others go out there to hit the ball as hard and straight as they can, and get to the top of the leaderboard by sinking putts.

One of my best friends used to play on the European Tour, over the years I’ve met a lot of the European and US players when playing Pro-ams. I can assure you a lot of them do not think deeply about the game, it’s all about competing to win.

Maybe they'd be as good as McIlroy if they did

Largely I have no doubts that a large proportion of the top players don't actually pursue esoteric stats themselves. At a player level you have a spectrum though with someone like Lowry on one end and DeChambeau on the other.

That said I do fully believe that whether they actively seek specific stats or not, they have a team around them that use them to guide their training etc especially at the top top level.
The stats we are exposed to are nothing compared to what players have. We are exposed to the easily digestible numbers, players have statisticians feeding them data via one channel or another that we will never see. It's not specific to golf, it's across a wide range of sports

prawnsambo

Hitch2222 wrote: »

Maybe they'd be as good as McIlroy if they did

Largely I have no doubts that a large proportion of the top players don't actually pursue esoteric stats themselves. At a player level you have a spectrum though with someone like Lowry on one end and DeChambeau on the other.

That said I do fully believe that whether they actively seek specific stats or not, they have a team around them that use them to guide their training etc especially at the top top level.
The stats we are exposed to are nothing compared to what players have. We are exposed to the easily digestible numbers, players have statisticians feeding them data via one channel or another that we will never see. It's not specific to golf, it's across a wide range of sports

If you ever saw the stuff that Kitman Labs do for sports teams in rugby, premiership soccer and NFL, you'd be gobsmacked. I wouldn't be at all surprised if the top golfers are getting that kind of analysis in terms of training and dietary requirements. And I've seen McIlroy getting the full works done on what gym work he should do. Completely wired up to machines as he goes through his swing.

Hitch2222

prawnsambo wrote: »

If you ever saw the stuff that Kitman Labs do for sports teams in rugby, premiership soccer and NFL, you'd be gobsmacked. I wouldn't be at all surprised if the top golfers are getting that kind of analysis in terms of training and dietary requirements. And I've seen McIlroy getting the full works done on what gym work he should do. Completely wired up to machines as he goes through his swing.

You don't even have to look that far to see what's going on. Book a lesson with Gavin Lunny in Naas and checkout the type of biomechanics they are exposing amateurs too