Does the course matter in determining the greatness of a win?

[Steve West]

Does the course matter in determining the greatness of a win?

Given the same competitors, does the greatness of a win depend on whether the course was:

Low-scoring v high-scoring?

Random v a good test of skill?

Wide-open v wooded v mixed?​

 

[Doofenshmirtz]

Low-scoring v high-scoring? No.

Random v a good test of skill? Yes.

Wide-open v wooded v mixed? No.

 

[Puckstopper]

Simple answer: yes. The more challenging the course, the more impressive the victory. I'm assuming we're talking in a tourney situation, where multiple rounds mitigate against a lucky, one off type victory of course.

 

[biscoe]

I think there is probably some threshold of course difficulty that needs to be met for me (since greatness is always going to be a personal thing) to be impressed by a win but once that threshold is passed I don't think a harder course necessarily makes something more impressive. The quality of the field is more of a factor to me but that can be misleading as well. The 2 wins that come to my mind as most impressive over the last couple years are Eagle at European Open last year and Isaac at Champion's Cup this year and the 2 impress me for different reasons. Eagle faced down Paul playing at the top of his game pretty much trading haymaker after haymaker. Isaac stomped the bejesus out of a super strong field. The Nokia course is far from one of the most difficult on Tour. Jackson is very challenging but scores are always way under relative to par. Short answer would be no.