Reevaluating Paddy Harrington's Three Major Romp
When Padraig Harrington became the first Irishman to repeat as Open Champion in 2008, the knock on his feat was that he won his second Open without Tiger Woods in the field. The number one had just ended his season by going under the knife to repair a wounded leg that he hobbled on to win the US Open at Torrey Pines.
A few weeks later at an abominable setup by the PGA at Oakland Hills, Harrington again rose to the occasion. With a putt at the 18th for par and a double clutch fist pump, Paddy had won consecutive majors for the first time since Tiger Woods did the double in '06. Woods was absent for Harrington's win.
The Irishman had three majors on his hand and just about as much respect for it as Larry Nelson gets for his three.
Now, days removed from crowing King Louis, perhaps it is time to rethink the respect that Harrington gets for his accomplishment.
In the nine majors since Tiger Woods won the Open at Torrey Pines, Harrington is the only man to have won multiple majors. True, Woods was absent for both wins, but he was fundamentally absent from the '09 Masters in which Angel Cabrera became the second of three men to back up a prior major win since Woods' drought began. Phil Mickelson is the other by winning his third Masters in April.
Tiger was a contender in the last two US Opens, losing ultimately to Lucas Glover and Graeme McDowell. We all know about the YE Yang situation. Woods was a factor at Augusta, but not really a contender on Sunday. Tiger was barely a blip at the last two Open Championships.
Sum it all up: Woods was absent for two, practically absent from another two, very close on one, and not really a factor in two others. With the very notable exception of YE Yang's staredown, what did those other men accomplish with Woods in the field that Harrington did not?
Harrington won the '08 Open in ridiculous conditions. His 5 woods to the 17th at Birkdale is one of the all time great shots in major championship golf. He stared down Greg Norman, whose charge was more than legitimate. He went under par on Sunday in obscene conditions - much tougher than what stopped play at the Open last Friday - and defended his crown.
Oakland Hills was an equally severe test. After about a handful of years of solid PGA Championship setups, the final major became quite a bear. Harrington shot a pair of weekend 66s to take the championship from Sergio Garcia who, in fairness, did give drown his chance at the 70th hole.
Harrington won all of his majors from behind after 54 holes - the complete opposite of Woods.
Paddy stopped Garcia from winning majors twice. To raise the counter argument, Garcia kind of handed two majors to Harrington. The '08 PGA certainly, but the pair traded the hot potato at Carnoustie.
Now we look at a string of major champions since Harrington that are mostly fresh faces. They're guys who win from the thirties through seventies in the Official World Golf Ranking. Harrington was the last man to truly make a charge at the majors.
Were Paddy to win again, he would tie Phil Mickelson of all people, whose legend grew significantly with a third Masters win, and did so in tournaments where Woods was only looming in one. (Could make a judgment call on a second.)
Harrington is still seeking what escaped his game so that he can win a fourth major. Still, with Tiger Woods looking to do the same now, his major run should not be lessened.
16 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Is this article about Paddy or Tiger ?
j/k Cudo’s for calling the leg wounded and not the ever popular “BROKEN” 10 years from now the story will be it was amputated on the course and kept in his golf bag until the end of the round.
"pain is only weakness leaving the body"
very good question. Seems to be more on Tiger than Paddy.
And it’s not possible to be “fundamentally absent”. You are either in the field or not…and he was in the field for Cabrera’s Masters victory.
Tiger’s leg was fractured and ligaments torn – that’s pretty severe.
I went back and checked the fial scores of Harrington’s major wins – they still have him with the lowest score – so I assume he still won. He beat the field as it was put in front of him. It is foolish to assume that just because Woods wasn’t in the field, that Harrington wouldn’t have won. Logic teaches that you can’t prove a negative.
This is a waste of time.
"this ball will fit in that fairway"
Ryan, you said "Tiger was a contender in the last 2 opens" ultimately losing
to Graeme McDowell….Really ? you sure must have been watching a different event than I was….Perhaps you were out playing golf, and missed his flame out again….A contender to me is still standing at the ffinal bell….I don’t believe he was even in the ring….STUB
Contending is always a debate at a certain point – I brought it up when talking about Mickelson’s wins. So it’s a worthwhile point, for sure.
Find me! Email: ryan@thegolfnewsnet.com, Twitter: http://twitter.com/waggleroom, or Facebook: http://facebook.com/waggleroom.
The contention point would be on the back 9 Saturday
After that, was Tiger in the mix ? Only on the Golf Channel. On Sunday, it was clear Tiger couldn’t win any major this year.
I got several texts that Brandall Chamblee spent his time sobbing hysterically during the back nine of the final round of the US Open this year.
He manned up a bit in the Open Championship and simply pouted…and watched Tiger highlights from 2003 instead.
by Charles Boyer on Jul 21, 2010 12:56 PM EDT up reply actions
Ryan, I seemed to miss something the first time
I read your post….and than it hit me….I don’t know who you were talking to, maybe one of Courts favorite talking heads….but ASK OR TALK to any PROFESSIONAL GOLFER about Larry Nelson’s 3, Paddy’s 3..Andy North’s 2 and so on….I bet you hear a completely different observation….Oh, and add Curtis Strange to the mix also….may not like his mike work, but he won the majors…..Sure, they all want to win events, but you can bet your wife’s last buck, they would give their last pound or whatever to win a MAJOR….If not, what else defines Tigers chase of Jack and his record….You did a disservice to these guys….Sorry….STUB.
You lost
me in the second paragraph of the story. Harrington’s putt on 18 at the 2008 PGA was for par, not birdie.
by southofcruiseamerica on Jul 20, 2010 9:22 PM EDT reply actions
Always enjoy these kinds of comments, thanks for coming by. It was for par.
Find me! Email: ryan@thegolfnewsnet.com, Twitter: http://twitter.com/waggleroom, or Facebook: http://facebook.com/waggleroom.
by Ryan Ballengee on Jul 21, 2010 12:33 PM EDT up reply actions
Yeah but...
Where’s Paddy been since Tiger’s been back on the circuit. Tiger’s been doing pretty well considering he hasn’t been putting worth a damn.
Back home, splitting the towels and bric-a-brac with Elin, that is.
by Charles Boyer on Jul 21, 2010 12:57 PM EDT up reply actions
2ndswing......Tiger has nothing
to do with Paddy…….have you considered the fact that Paddy made a major swing change? The world doesn’t revolve around Tiger……so tell us this…where has Tiger been since Paddy won all his majors?
The Saints ARE the SUPER BOWL CHAMPS....WHO DAT!
has nothing to do with Tiger
Harrington decided that, after winning three majors, it was time for a small but significant and difficult swing change and it still doesn’t look like it’s comfortable.
Paddy messed with the streak and it bit him.
"this ball will fit in that fairway"

by 











