# If Golf Majors Used Match Play Format with 7 Rounds....

Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by JennyS, Aug 5, 2009.

1. ### JennySHall of Fame

Joined:
Jun 10, 2004
Messages:
2,294
Some argue that since a player has to beat the "entire field" in golf that makes it harder. But the non elimination also allows players to have a mediocre round and still recover.

If the Golf Majors were formatted like Golf tournaments and had 7 rounds of head to head play, anyone else think Tiger would have FEWER majors? I do. Obviously it would still not be true head to head, they'd still be playing the golf course. But they would still face elimination in every golf round, which is what I think makes tennis majors (and heck, every tournament outside the Masters Cup) so hard to win.

Win and you're out week in and week out is pretty tough.

2. ### S H O W S T O P P E R !Hall of Fame

Joined:
Aug 17, 2008
Messages:
1,938
Location:
In your thredz, stealin ur bukkits
How does this relate to pro tennis?

3. ### JennySHall of Fame

Joined:
Jun 10, 2004
Messages:
2,294
I was asking if golf tournaments were formatted like tennis tournament would they be harder to win?

4. ### tacouLegend

Joined:
Jun 30, 2007
Messages:
8,408
TIger and Roger's accomplishments are often compared

5. ### OrangePowerHall of Fame

Joined:
Sep 7, 2007
Messages:
4,926
Location:
NorCal Bay Area
Well.

Did a quick search for some statistics on match play winning percentages. This is the best I could find:

http://www.pgatour.com/2008/tournaments/r470/02/11/records/index.html

Probably out of date, but let's assume that Tiger has a 80% win percentage in match play. Sounds impressive, right?

So now let's do some math: Assuming he has a constant 0.8 chance of winning each match, his chance of winning 7 in a row is 0.8 to the power of 7, which is 0.21. Let's call it 1 in 5 to make it easy.

Based on this rough calculation, he would have to play in 75 majors in order to win 15, if majors were 7 rounds of match play.

Looking at it another way: Federer has won 15 slams out of 41 times he has appeared in the draw, a ratio of about 0.37, or 1 in 2.75. So Federer is almost twice as likely to win any given slam as Tiger is to win 7 golf match play rounds in a row.

6. ### clayman2000Hall of Fame

Joined:
Jun 30, 2006
Messages:
2,849
Ya but the only golf tourneys with match play are: WGC, Ryder Cup and Pres Cup. Now the Pres Cup and Ryder Cup only include a select group of players from the world. the WCG is the only PGA golf tourney. Tigers won it 3 times

So hard to compare

7. ### OrangePowerHall of Fame

Joined:
Sep 7, 2007
Messages:
4,926
Location:
NorCal Bay Area
Yes, agree it's hard to compare. But the stats I quoted are from WGC only. Take with a pinch of salt but I can't find a more objective way to compare.

8. ### JennySHall of Fame

Joined:
Jun 10, 2004
Messages:
2,294
Very interesting, thanks for posting!

9. ### clayman2000Hall of Fame

Joined:
Jun 30, 2006
Messages:
2,849
Thats the point, you cant make it objective.

Now the arguments are simple: tennis is harder to become good at, but golf is harder to dominate at.

10. ### フェデラーHall of Fame

Joined:
Jun 12, 2009
Messages:
2,421
Do you even play golf? Golf is easily 10x harder than tennis. There is so much technicality to it that far surpasses tennis.

11. ### clayman2000Hall of Fame

Joined:
Jun 30, 2006
Messages:
2,849
What i mean is that tennis requires so many different aspects of training. You must be fit as a hockey player, as fast as a runningback, as co-ordinated as a baseball player.

Golf is hard too, but while training, you can really just focus on your driving and putting.

While i do not play golf regularly, i have played golf.

12. ### ChanceEncounterProfessional

Joined:
Mar 4, 2009
Messages:
1,463
You don't need to be as fast as a runningback (in fact, I doubt you can find any professional tennis player as fast as the faster runningbacks in the NFL) or as coordinated as a baseball player. A little bit of hyperbole there.