Rory McIlroy - 4 Time Major Winner

Ive already told you my understanding of what a choke is and given you clear examples. Mcilroy's doesnt fit my definition. He did not hit truly bad shots over and over again.

14 was a bad drive. But left was no worse than right. Would have been different if there was water or OB left but there wasnt. Not his best swing but he made sure to hit it in a place he knew he could recover from. And he did.

Lots of players missed the green on 17. I get the feeling you think it's a given that a pro will hit a turtle back green from 190 yards without breaking a sweat, even before you take into account the fact that its the US Open. Golf is hard.

I'd argue he had a decent chance for birdie on 16 after his drive. Half a chance after his 2nd even. Just hit a v poor first putt and made bogey.

And again, I hate to be pedantic but at that level, barely a hole goes by that a pro doesnt make a mistake. Ben Hogan said if he plays a round where he hits 3 perfect shots, hed be satisfied. The game is about misses. Rory hit a bad drive on 10. He also overhit the putt for birdie. But he made a 4. Was that hole a choke?

Jesus are you all still at this? 😂

+3 with 4 to play. Dont know why you regard his par or any par on the 14th as some kind of underachievement.

Nobody said he wasnt under pressure and that he didnt feel it. Wouldnt be human if he didnt. Regardless, based on my observations of his golf coming in and in comparison with sequences of performances in the past which I and others have regarded as legitimate 'chokes', subjective though that term may be, I cannot classify McIlroy's loss by that term.

Agree to disagree sounds good. As a final thought, I really do hope the '24 US Open is not the defining moment in the majors post 2014 for Rory. A generational talent, and well capable of winning more majors, allbeit this is going to be very difficult to absorb.

Again with the +3 the last 5! He was +2 the last 6. He was +1 the last 7. He was E par the last 9. On 10, he hit a bad drive, an average 3rd and bashed the putt. But because it went in, youre happy just to say he made 4 birdie, ergo played the hole perfectly.

Writing off his play over the last 4 as a choke displays no appreciation for the nuances of this game, particularly on a US Open layout and most particularly on this US Open layout.

Again, a choke is not something that happens exclusively in the last 3, 4, or 9 holes of a tournament. His 1st round at Portrush in 2019 was Rory's biggest choke since 2011 in my opinion. Rattling off the scores of 7 or certainly 6 guys who had no chance to win last Sunday by the time they hit the back 9 is hardly relevant as to what constitutes a choke.

Rory did not play fantastic or brilliant golf. A US Open does not allow you to play fantastic golf. He hit the odd brilliant shot certainly. He was, however, extremely defensive between holes 2 to 8 and bogied 5 in the middle of that stretch. He was blessed on 10 that his putt hit the hole but wasnt as fortunate on 16 and 18.

Saying that 4 pars wins him the tournament is reductive to say the least. He had no way of knowing that and even if he did, its like saying to Monty in 2006 in Winged Foot on the Friday, hey, just make 54 pars and you'll win by 6. Your notion that the world's best can just par or birdie a stretch of holes on command is flattering to them (Im sure), but also ridiculous. Stupid even, as you might say yourself.

But hey, agree to disagree.

Well three in a union, it's made up of States. It's not the same but it's like the EU in ways with a population of over 300m people.

Only the Masters is less than 100 years old and it's played on the same course every year so it'll never move.

So it's down to the US Open and PGA championships.

The US Open is run by the USGA so it's unlikely to ever move outside the USA.

The PGA championship is run by the PGA of America. It's professional golfers who run it, not the PGA tour. It's the only one that could move.

Again, never said pressure wasnt a factor.

You said it only manifested itself in one shot, the putt. Which means it wasn't a significant factor in any of his other poor shots.

Your point is inconsistent and makes no sense. It's illogical.

I just dont think his finish was poor enough to be considered a choke.

+3 in 5 holes pal is awful. Around 60 golfers did better than +3 in the closing stretch that day. How's is that not a poor enough finish considering the other 14 holes?

It's such a ridiculous take.

I never said it wasnt a poor finish. Dont know why youre so eager to put words in my mouth. Poor does not equal choke. Furthermore, since youve now written off a 7 time European number 1 and hall of famer a choker because of one bad finish in a major, Im more convinced than ever that you dont fully understand the concept. A few poor shots do not constitute a choke. If you can concede (and thats a big if!) that his loss in the 2011 Masters was worse than the way he lost the US Open than you can see there are differing levels of disappointing finishes. The former was a choke. The latter wasnt.

Ive been entirely consistent but can go over it again for your benefit: the first putt on 16 was by far the most inexplicably bad shot he hit, with the only feasible reasoning being that the pressure got to him. All of the other poor shots he hit can be explained either through respective shot difficulty or circumstance, without resorting to your favourite word, whether you like it or not.

By your logic, every golfer in the world is a choker because anybody who has played the game has lost a competition at some point in their life. Monty is a choker. Rory choker. Phil choker. Tiger (75 last round in 2009 USPGA) choker. Choke choke choke choke choke choke choke choke ad nauseum.

Yeah, Monty's 4 birdies in the last 4 holes at Riviera in the 1995 USPGA to make the playoff was a choke alright. By your 'logic'.

Oh, Im sorry, did you not refer to Monty as a 'choker in majors'? Oh, wait yes you did. And then you were presented with a clear example where Monty did, in fact, not choke at a major where he had a chance to win, thereby ridiculing your specific stance on that issue. But sure yeah, I put words in your mouth :D

The Monty example is perfectly relevant to Sunday's events and came about quite organically. Dont backtrack now just because he actually lost a major that he didnt throw away!

I don’t think there is as much pressure on a player who behind with 4 holes to go and makes 4 birdies, I really am not going to look up the 1995 PGA, but being beaten by someone who made 4 birdies in the last 4 holes, is very different from being beaten by someone who played them in 1 over, after the runner up was 2 ahead with 5 to go.

'Monty was a choker in majors' but not in all of them is not a coherent point of view. By definition, if he performed exceptionally well, even once, under the gun (and he did), then he was not a 'major choker'. For sure, his most disappointing loss was in a major, and I can understand why people refer to that double on 18 as a choke, certainly moreso than I can understand the same terminology being applied to Rory's finish. No shortage of relevant comparisons between both scenarios, whatever way you look at it. But when you label a player like Montgomerie a choker (before redefining him a major choker) then I think youve lost all degrees of perception. In a game where the very best lose nearly all the time, his win rate in world golf must be in the top 10pc of elite tour pros. Do you label all players a choker based on a bad finish to a tournament? Or even 2 or 3 bad finishes? Is Tiger a choker because he blew the 09 PGA? Or because he shot 81 at Muirfield in 2002? Or course not. Ridiculous logic.

Rory felt pressure, as all of them do. He had the winning of the event in his hands. It took a fantastic shot by BDC to beat him. I just dont see it as a choke. A poor finish yes, just not a choke.

I don't care about Monty. He is a choker or he's not a choker, I didn't follow his career closely enough. I'm going off everything I heard and read

Rory felt pressure, as all of them do.

But that only led to one bad shot, the putt according to you. Correct?

I understand your point. In most circumstances, the 1st putt wouldnt have been regarded as a lapse but I think in this instance, it was. It called for lag and he gave it a run. He was ahead, playing great golf.. there was simply no need to do anything other than cosying it up and if it got sick in the front of the hole then happy days. Again, I understand your perspective but believe the circumstances made that 1st effort inexcusable.