A Thread for Contrarian Takes


I understand soft fairways makes them bigger which would favor the bombers. Thats my whole point though. Narrow fairways favor shorter hitters while wider fairways favor the longer guys. Not the other way around.

By the way, I havent seen a report about the fairways being soft


Long hitters will always have an advantage. There isn’t really anything the USGA can do to stop this. That doesn’t mean a “short” hitter can’t win.


Ya and the percentage of total distance gained by roll for the shorter guys is almost always greater than for the bombers, also alot of the added width was to make guys worry about the ball bouncing and running into hazards, if it’s soft the bombers will have less to worry about, I disagree with @stinger10 that width on it’s own heavily benefits the long hitter but I will agree that wide and soft does. Look at the variety of winners at St. Andrews ZJ, Louis, Catx2, Daly, Faldo, two bombers, a middle of the road guy and two tacticians.


Agreed. Hitting it long has always been a hugely important skill and will provide a big advantage. I just think a guy like Furyk or Webb Simpson would rather see a tighter setup compared to a wider one


It certainly doesn’t help your argument. I’m almost positive that Koepka is the only guy with a red number for total strokes at the U.S. Open since 2015. Erin Hills was an anomaly. There are typically only a handful of guys each year under par, and having a winner above par is fairly common.

Of course ANGC is going to have a skewed number of strokes under par for Jordan since strokes under par is rare for the U.S. Open.

He’s -24 at the Open Championship and -21 at the PGA Championship since 2015. Those numbers are better than anyone on tour other than probably Day at the PGA and Stenson at the Open Championship due to their -20s (lowest winning score for a major…ever). Jordan has a better track record at 3/4 majors than those 2 guys. And JT. And DJ.

For comparison, Tiger Woods is -89 at ANGC. He’s +109 at the U.S. Open, -27 at the Open Championship, and -37 at the PGA. Tiger Woods is -44 in majors in his career. He’s got twice that at ANGC alone.

What an overrated bum, amirite?


If you can’t discern the difference between overrated and being bad, or a bum, or sucking, then there really isn’t much of a point in debating this issue. But don’t be upset, you aren’t the only one!

Now below, here are a few concrete reasons as to why I think Spieth is overrated.

Dustin Johnson has been better than Spieth. Rory and Jason Day are right up there too. When the narrative stops being “Jordan Speith and no one else” as this generations best player, I’ll stop saying he’s overrated. When the narrative stops being “First Jack, then Tiger, now Spieth” I’ll stop saying hes overrated.

I think that a big reason why DJ doesn’t get the same credit as Spieth is because he hasn’t regularly been the focal point on Sunday at the Masters.


Talk about moving the goalposts. Your original argument for him being overrated was that Jordan is arbitrarily good at one golf course. Those are YOUR words. And when everyone was like “uhhhh…he’s accomplished a whole lot more than just doing well at one course” and listed his accomplishments, that’s when you switched to “yeah, but OTHER guys are just as good”

NO ONE is saying other golfers aren’t up there with Jordan. Of course DJ, Day, Rory, JT are all up there. That is obvious. No one is debating that. When someone says “look at what Jordan has done” and lists things that other great golfers have not done, it’s not them saying that Jordan is unmatched, it’s them saying that he RIGHTFULLY is in the conversation for best golfer on tour.

And it’s asinine to argue that he’s only a part of that conversation because he’s “arbitrarily good on one golf course.”


DeepFriedEgg is digging a DeepFriedHole for himself…


What do you think overrated means?

To me, it means that people rate him higher than they should - like rated higher than other people.

They haven’t moved an inch bud.

I literally just quoted people suggesting that.

I don’t know why you continuously need to misconstrue my argument in order to have a chance at refuting it. I’ve never said that he isn’t a part of the conversation. Goodness.


:musical_note: Meet me in Temecula :musical_note:


For those who think the goal posts have moved. Here is a quick recap:

  1. I think Jordan Spieth is overrated.
  2. I think he’s overrated because he is good a ANGC, when people pay attention to golf more than ever.
  3. I think people that struggle to find names to mention next to Spieth (in this thread and also in the real world, yes I have friends) is further evidence of him being overrated.
  4. This entire time I have been mentioning other guys are overrated (Palmer) or underrated (DJ, Trevino) because, IMO, a lot of weight is given to performance at ANGC.
  5. I don’t think Spieth is a bum. I don’t think he sucks. I don’t think he should quit golf. I think there is a debate as to who the best golfer of this generation is, and he is in it. IF you agree with me on that, then you aren’t overrating Spieth. If you think its Spieth and then a mile down the road maybe its Rory, then I think you are overrating Spieth.


@DeepFriedEgg your Jordan takes are downright bad.

He had a top 10 all time season in just his 3rd season on tour, so of course the cat/golden bear comparisons are going to be made. Happened to tiger after 2000, and many people called the periods between that and ‘05 a slump and talked overrated.

I don’t know who you are listening to, but I do not hear talk of him being > the rest of his peers. I think since DW won the green jacket, we have seen some of the strongest parity on tour. Guys get on streaks, but no one has been as overly accomplished as Spieth, and what I think that shows is there are many guys who are ready and willing to sit on the throne, but i don’t think we will see any sustained dominance for a long time.

Spieth isn’t overrated, he’s young, has unfair expectations, and played among a supporting cast of f****** good golfers.


Turn the volume up then.


It’s not so much that you are calling Jordan overrated, it’s your reasoning. The arbitrarily good at one course is just a really bad take. Like REALLY bad.

He’s got an incredible track record outside of Augusta. He quite literally won another major less than a year ago.

Tiger’s best major is far and away the Masters. If your entire argument for Jordan being overrated hinges on Augusta, then you have to downplay Tiger because his eye “just fits” Augusta better than others.

But of course no one is gonna say Tiger is/was overrated, because that’s just silly. And that’s my point. Jordan has performed at an elite level outside of Augusta. It just doesn’t make sense to argue otherwise.

If your point was “Jordan is overrated because he’s still too young and he doesn’t deserve to be talked about like that yet,” then I probably wouldn’t argue you and might even say “fair enough.” But you are downplaying how good Jordan has been outside of Augusta. And THAT is why your take is so bad.


If the take was “x” player is underrated because he was awful at ANGC, would that be an easier pill for you to swallow?


You keep quoting me on the “Rory is the only player…” quote and conveniently leaving out the context of it. My quote was right after I listed Jordan’s tournament win % compared to tournaments played. Rory’s is the only one that matches Jordan’s. That isn’t subjective. Those are concrete numbers.

Continue to misconstrue my quote if it helps you, I guess.

I think other guys are at Jordan’s level. I can’t say that any more clearly. But his accomplishments outside of Augusta, you seem to deny.


This is hilarious. I’m actually quoting you, and you have on half a dozen occasions just flat out made up what I said.

Then I don’t think you are overrating him. You weren’t clear on that earlier when you said that only Rory could be argued to have matched Jordan.


First, everybody tilt their angry eyes towards the top of the screen where it lists the name of this thread. Now read. It says, “A Thread for Contrarian Takes.”

Second, take two seconds to break down DFE’s Spieth take into its component parts:

  1. DFE: I feel that the public consensus agrees that Jordan Spieth the greatest player of this generation.
  2. DFE: I disagree. I think that Spieth is among a group of similarly talented players at the top that have similar talent/resumes. Why does the public seem to rate him higher than me?
  3. DFE: I think that it’s because Spieth has been in contention every Sunday at Augusta for 5 years, when the entire golfing world is watching. This is misrepresentative because certain players play disproportionately well at certain courses, and Spieth just got lucky that his course hosts the most important tournament in the world.

The reason this thread has been so ridiculous is because the take itself is nearly perfectly suited for the internet - First, overrated/underrated arguments are nuanced and difficult to have them online. Second, it’s practically impossible to discuss whether Spieth is overrated/underrated without comparing his record to other players, and here you can’t bring up Spieth’s Masters record because that plays into the TAKE. The whole thing is a dog chasing his tail.

The only way to kill the argument is:

It’s simply dumb to disregard a player’s resume just because it’s built, significantly even if not entirely, at the Masters. The Masters isn’t important because we unfairly perceive it to be important - It’s just actually important. It’s significant historically, architecturally, and has evolved into the most important week in the golf world. It fields a tremendous, if small, field, and everybody wants to win that tournament more than any other. Maybe it’s unfair that we celebrate that tournament so much, because some players don’t play well there - sorry that’s how things work, we evaluate great players based upon how they play in, and whether they win, big tournaments. One of these big tournaments is held at the same course ever year.

Maybe Spieth IS presently overrated. I don’t know - nobody will know until his career plays out. Regardless, though, it’s impossible and unhelpful to argue the point while taking ANGC out of consideration.


Me: "And it’s asinine to argue that he’s only a part of that conversation because he’s “arbitrarily good on one golf course.”

DeepFriedEgg: “I don’t know why you continuously need to misconstrue my argument in order to have a chance at refuting it. I’ve never said that he isn’t a part of the conversation. Goodness.”


“Jordan Spieth is overrated. A lot of people consider him to be on the path to become an all-time great. But this is only due to him being arbitrarily good at one golf course, and it just happens to be the one that the casual viewer cares about most.”

Dude, you are saying that I am making things up, but you can’t even keep straight what it is that you are arguing.


But I was responding to you saying that I said he wasn’t even in the conversation with DJ, Day and Rory (different conversation than all-time great, no?). You… you just made up what I was saying again… in an attempt to show that you didn’t do that…

Look Jonathan, if you can’t have a fun debate on the internet in good faith, I don’t want to be internet friends with you anymore.