Talk:Official World Golf Ranking

Golf B‑class High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Golf, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Golf-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GolfWikipedia:WikiProject GolfTemplate:WikiProject GolfGolf
B	This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

World Golf Rankings

The fact that the World Golf Rankings gives the players a ranking based, in part, upon performance from up to two years ago seems to me to lead to highly innaccurate results. There are golfers in the Top 20 that are having dismal 2009 seasons. Is golf the only sport that does this? I have created an alternative ranking method and would like to post the link to the Golf Rankings 2009 on this site to allow viewing and discussion. Would you allow me to list this link? Golfrank (talk) 16:40, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In short, no. External links must conform to WP:EL, and your site does not. _wjemather ^bigissue 17:44, 1 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Jack Nicklaus 600

600 weeks means nearly 12 years. He had significant competition in his prime. this is evidenced by his only 5 PGA awards. I would presume the no of weeks would be closer to 450-500 maximum. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.176.105.40 (talk) 14:31, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

From 1962 to 1978, Nicklaus was 1st on the money list 8 times and was in the top four the other 9 times. From 1962 to 1978 he never finished lower than 4th on the money list. He won at least 2 tournaments each year. He won 15 majors in that span as well. 600 weeks sounds like a good estimate. michfan2123 14:51, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Still, it may be true, but it is speculation, and WP is not the place for it. Removed. bigissue (talk) 16:20, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Top 10 tables

I made significant modifications to the world top 10 table. I think it reduced clutter/redundancy and improved the ease of comparisons across the years. I "sacrificed" player country info to streamline the table. Let me know what you think. Jxyama 06:11, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What does this mean "The "Order" column indicates the sequence in which the players first reached number 1." I don't understand... -Mikedelsol 07:38, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The player with a 1 in the order column was the first to be #1. Tiger Woods was the 9th to make it to #1, so he has a 9 in the column.--Berol 18:12, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Current rankings

I'm just guessing here...but I don't think Luke Donald is the number one player in the world rankings right now.

That was vandalism. Supertigerman 00:51, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Older info

A big thank you to whoever added the breakdown by nationality back to 1996. The official site has recently added archives back to 1986, so it anyone has time to extend the table.... Mowsbury 15:06, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It would take a really long time, I am not up for it, lol. michfan2123 14:48, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This probably isn't the right place, but the article has an error re: Vijay Singh. He did not take over first place following his win at the 2004 PGA. His win two weeks later at the Deutsche Bank is where he usurped the #1 spot from Tiger. —Preceding unsigned comment added by MikeWeirFan (talk • contribs) 20:19, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

2007

I can't count or I am just missing something obvious because my numbers are not adding up. michfan2123 (talk) 15:27, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You are missing Finland and Austria, plus I think Trinidad + Tobago should lose 1 and Canada gain 1. Catchpole (talk) 15:31, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ames

I think we should remove Trinidad from the list. He is always recorded as Canadian. Plus we marked him down in Trinidad for 2004 and Canada for 2007. michfan2123 (talk) 21:04, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, if you look at the 2004 year end rankings, his country is listed as T&T not Can - so I think it should stay as is. Tewapack (talk) 19:11, 18 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ah ok. michfan2123 (talk) 22:50, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No updates?

hmmm. I think there was a tourney last week... --Npnunda (talk) 03:41, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Countries

Why is it necessary to list the UK as a separate statistic from the individual countries that comprise the UK? It just seems redundant to me and no other states are done this way. Individual countries should be listed e.g. England, Scotland, etc OR the United Kingdom, but not both.--69.145.90.43 (talk) 03:15, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The UK is a sovereign state, its constituent countries are not. If it wasn't listed, that would be inconsistent with the treatment of every other sovereign state. Abberley2 (talk) 04:02, 25 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As you put it;The UK is a sovereign state, its constituent countries are not.So when are we going to take down the listings of Northern Ireland, Wales and Scotland ? Or are we going to break it down further in general, adding fx Cornwall, Rutland or East Riding of Yorkshire from within the area of UK,Baden-Württemberg,Mecklenburg-Vorpommern or Rheinland-Pfalz from the area of Germany, not to mention each state within the United States of America ( atleast they are " states " )? Flight714 (talk) 14:24, 16 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

UK and Ireland

Isn't Northern Ireland a part of Ireland when it comes to organisation of golf, rather than a part of the UK? I'm pretty sure it was that way 15 years ago, but has it changed since then? Fomalhaut76 (talk) 10:00, 12 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No it is not. If you look at the actual rankings they separate the UK into England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. The European Tour and PGA Tour do the same. Tewapack (talk) 13:42, 12 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

According to the Golfing Union of Ireland, it organises the province of Ulster (which is Northern Ireland, I think). I don't doubt that the World ranking as well as the PGA and European tours in their lists show the nationalities of golfers rather than which individual golfing union they belong to, but it seems strange. Why have they chosen to do that way? Does someone know? Fomalhaut76 (talk) 13:58, 12 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The UK is a sovereign state, whereas the island of Ireland is not, and players from the other 99% of the world are sorted by sovereign state. Abberley2 (talk) 04:03, 25 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

2011 ranking

Is that Decemeber 11 ranking final for 2011 or not? 2011 PGA Tour gives last tournament date as December 4 and 2011 European Tour as December 8-11. Most probably it is the final ranking, at least for top players. 85.217.15.135 (talk) 01:47, 17 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No the final ranking will not be available until after 18 December, two tournaments, with top-ranked players, Asian Tour and Australasia Tour, (and TLA) still playing. Tewapack (talk) 02:43, 17 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Right rankings

THis comparison is interesting:

The 5th placed in a major gets the same points as the winner of a 24-point tournament (PGA alternate).
The 10th placed in a major gets the same points as the winner of a 14-point tournament (Nationwide Tour).
The 5th place in a 50-point tournament (PGA regular, Scottish Open) gets the same points as the winner of a 12-point tournament (Challenge Tour)
The 12th place in a 50-point tournament gets the same points as the winner of a 6-point tournament (PGA Latin America).

-- 190.134.66.195 (talk) 17:06, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A question about "Rank"

I'm curious, about the category furthest to the right on the table in the main article, "Rank". What does it represent, and where is the information for it found?

It says below the table: "Rank refers to the player's world ranking before the event." Not very easy to see Nigej (talk) 05:52, 3 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Is there a way to retroactively go back and see a player's ranking at a particular point? How was it done for this chart?

The OWGR web site has the old rankings in Home -> About -> Rankings (eg http://www.owgr.com/about?tabID={BBE32113-EBCB-4AD1-82AA-E3FE9741E2D9}). The purpose of the column was really to show that the big tournaments are mostly won by players with high world rankings. Nigej (talk) 07:02, 10 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Scott/Woods changes

Not really relevant here but it's interesting to see why Scott and Woods have switched this week (between weeks 19 and 20 of 2014) despite not playing:

Last 2 years: Woods total points 750.38, Scott 606.92
Last 13 weeks: Woods 3.58, Scott 42.37
So subject to 1/92 reduction: Woods 746.80, Scott 564.55
Week 19 points: Woods 322.10, Scott 333.87
So Week 19 reduction: Woods 318.52 (42.65%), Scott 291.50 (51.63%)
So Week 20 reduction (extra 1.09%): Woods 310.41 (41.56%), Scott 285.36 (50.54%)
So Week 20 points: Woods 313.99, Scott 327.73

So Woods lost 2.5% of his points while Scott lost only 1.8% of his. This is because Scott's points were earned more recently.

Woods has only played 36 events so is subject to the 40 event minimum: Week 19: 322.10/40 = 8.05 Week 20: 313.99/40 = 7.85

Scott played in the 2012 Byron Nelson (missed cut - no points) which dropped out between weeks 19 and 20 so for him: Week 19 = 333.87/42 = 7.95, but Week 20: 327.73/41 = 7.99

This dropping out of an event explains why Woods's average dropped 2.5% (in line with his points total) but Scott's average rose 0.6%.

So despite Woods scoring considerably more points in the last 2 years than Scott (and in fewer events) he is now lower in the rankings because many of Scott points were earned more recently. Nigej (talk) 09:06, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Mistake in Article

This article says Tiger Woods had the highest average ever of 24.36 on September 16, 2007. But it also says at 2000 year end Tiger's average was 29.40 which is higher. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 170.135.241.45 (talk) 06:30, 9 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No. This article says "Since the introduction of the latest rating method in September 2001" Tiger Woods has the highest average of 24.36. So the article is technically correct, although perhaps a little confusing. Actually the rating system has changed a few times since September 2001 but only in relatively minor ways, so the word "latest" needs changing. I'll rewrite it. Nigej (talk) 06:52, 9 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Olympic golf

According to the official website, it seems that OWGR has accepted Olympics into the ranking tournaments. Can anyone add something about it? Cirolchou (talk) 12:03, 16 August 2016 (UTC) Cirolchou (talk) 11:03, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Event ranking

This term is used extensively in the article, but is there any basis for it? I have never seen it used on the OWGR website, and it seems to me that it's a misnomer. pʰeːnuːmuː →‎ pʰiːnyːmyː → ‎ɸinimi → ‎fiɲimi 02:22, 30 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps me that invented it. The OWGR site says: " The number of points** allocated to an event is then determined by the "Points Breakdown" and which band the total Strength of Field rating falls into." "Number of points allocated to an event" seems a long title but I'd be happy with anything else. Maybe "Event points" Nigej (talk) 06:51, 30 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Number 2 but not number 1

I have converted this to a table. For each player I have gone to their OWGR page (via their Wikipedia page), clicked on the CSV icon to get the "Player's Ranking History in CSV format for all years", imported this into Excel and done a "custom sort" by rank_txt, yr and week. The top entry is then the first week at number 2 and it's easy to work out the total number of weeks at number 2 (row number-1 for the last week at number 2). This doesn't work for Sandy Lyle since the download only starts in 1989 but it does confirm that he was never number 2 from 1989 onwards. I have checked manually that he was number 2 from weeks 15 to 37 of 1988 and not thereafter. The exercise has highlighted one error. Stricker first reached number 2 in 2009 and not 2010 as we had previously.

If anyone thinks this is all too much, then trim as you see fit. The Weeks column is interesting but is an additional thing to keep up to date. Nigej (talk) 11:55, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Mention of Mickelson's 270 weeks eg here http://www.pgatour.com/tourreport/2015/11/09/spieth-mickelson-world-ranking.webview.html Nigej (talk) 12:41, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Official World Golf Ranking. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:02, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Current top 10

I suggest showing the current top 10 on this page Tomrtn (talk) 16:59, 30 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I moved it to List of male golfers who have been in the world top 10, thinking it was a better place than here - since it relates to the top 10. Seemed to me that it was better at the top of the sub-page rather than hidden in the middle of this one. Happy to move it back if that's what people think is better. Nigej (talk) 19:53, 30 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Why not both. I came to this page to find current rankings only to find it isnt here anymore.

Not too keen on having it twice. Perhaps something at the top, a hatnote perhaps. Nigej (talk) 10:02, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Its amazing to not have the current top ten on this page

I think this page needs a more obvious link to the current rankings. 86.139.10.224 (talk) 14:32, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Click on the top line "For the current top 10, see List of male golfers who have been in the world top 10 § Current top 10." Nigej (talk) 21:08, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Name of ranking organization

I cannot find, either in this article or on owgr.com, the name of the organization that actually creates the rankings and uploads them to owgr.com. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:BC65:4659:A882:F283:201B:889E (talk) 18:02, 12 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]