In our forums, our members have been comparing the careers of Nick Faldo and Phil Mickelson. WRXer ‘Body_Visions’ asks fellow members who they rank higher and WRXers have been getting involved putting forward compelling cases for both men in what is a very evenly matched showdown.
Here are a few posts from the thread, but make sure to check out the entire discussion and have your say at the link below.
- Bigim1022: “I’d say Faldo also. Similar # of career wins, Faldo has one more Major, but Phil won 3 of the 4. Edge still goes to Faldo, 97 weeks at #1 in the world is not nothing.”
- the bishop: “Interesting question. If it were just a question of skill set I’d say Phil easily. Not a knock on Faldo but Phil has a lot more tools in the toolbox. If I had to pick one, I’d say Faldo by a whisker but can’t argue with those who pick Phil.”
- Lark: “Phil. If Faldo played the prime years of his career at the same time that Tiger was in his prime, I don’t think he would have had the same accomplishments.”
- braincramp52: “No brainer. Phil did what he did playing against Tiger.”
- Hawkeye77: “Phil was a phenom. Phil won early and often but couldn’t win majors. Came out with 10 wins (not including his am win) in his first 5 years on Tour. Who was number one Phil’s first few seasons? Faldo – the phenom couldn’t overtake him. From ’92 and through 2005 and beyond, number ones included Faldo, Price, Norman, Els, Lehman, Singh, Duval, Westwood, Donald – they manage to get to number one during the Tiger era, Phil couldn’t manage it. Just food for thought. And still, Tiger or no, why comparing players of different eras (although Phil and Faldo overlapped a bit) just doesn’t get very far because of all the hedging and qualifying either way, but it’s still fun to do.”
- Philomathesq: “For all those that keep saying Phil was hampered by Tiger, I just took a look at all Phil’s 2nd place finishes in the PGA Tour from 1997 to present. I only found three instances where Phil lost to Tiger. So, I’m not sure the argument that Phil would have won exponentially more (or, ****, more than three additional tournaments) is valid. Moreover, we have no evidence that if Tiger weren’t around that someone else wouldn’t have stepped up. That is, simply because Phil finished second to Tiger doesn’t mean Phil would have won without Tiger competing. 2001 Bay Hill/Arnold Palmer. 2002 US Open (would have given Phil the Grand Slam). 2005 Ford Championship at Doral.”
Entire Thread: “Nick Faldo vs Phil Mickelson, who was better?”