McBeth vs. Climo

[discgolfdillydilly]

Let's just say, McClimo...

 

[araytx]

Elway? Seriously?

Yes. Seriously.

Actually watched the games; I'm not just blinded by statistics .

 

[araytx]

I agree. I recently watched the 2001 USDGC on youtube and the lead card is Barry, Ken, and people with about 325' max power.

The competition today is much tougher than it was 15 to 20 years ago. I look back and see guys like Barry Schultz and maybe a Feldman (is he old enough to have gone that far back?) as Climo's toughest competition on a semi-regularly basis. Over time some of the courses have gotten a bit harder to play as well, especially the wooded courses as those trees continue to grow and new ones get bigger.

Those are opinions, and I understand why you have them. Someday, 20, 25 + years in the future, you'll be the older guy trying to explain to some younger guy how great McBeth was before that guy was even born. Every generation has the same issue.

I've seen them play. In person. You've watched videos that someone else has edited. I know for a fact that Ken Climo in his prime could throw 450' when he needed to. And that was primarily with an Eagle as the fastest, most overstable driver. Not internet distance; what's been seen/witnessed.

I got back and watch old Worlds vids and his competition is a joke minus one or two people. A lot harder to win Player of the Year these days, I would think. Wins would also be harder to come across when golfing against other 1030+ rated golfers. How many different 1030 rated golfers did Climo ever have to beat?

Climo is the greatest ever, PM is the best ever.

Not sure I understand the difference .. "best ever" vs "greatest ever", so clarify if you wish. But to answer your question about the ratings of the players he played against, the answer is we don't know. Climo already had 8 World Championships, 6 Player of the Years, and was in his 30s before ratings were invented.

But even going back just one decade past -- Champ won four of his five USDGCs in the 2000s decade, during the time Doss, Avery, Feldberg were winning Worlds. He also shot the 1117-rated round in 2009, after his 40th birthday. McBeth's accomplishments can't compare, certainly not yet, because Paul's not that point in his career yet. In truth you cannot really compare eras -- that's always the case in all sports. What you can compare is the athlete's dominance over his contemporaries.

 

[nrihan]

Those are opinions, and I understand why you have them. Someday, 20, 25 + years in the future, you'll be the older guy trying to explain to some younger guy how great McBeth was before that guy was even born. Every generation has the same issue.

I've seen them play. In person. You've watched videos that someone else has edited. I know for a fact that Ken Climo in his prime could throw 450' when he needed to. And that was primarily with an Eagle as the fastest, most overstable driver. Not internet distance; what's been seen/witnessed.




Not sure I understand the difference .. "best ever" vs "greatest ever", so clarify if you wish. But to answer your question about the ratings of the players he played against, the answer is we don't know. Climo already had 8 World Championships, 6 Player of the Years, and was in his 30s before ratings were invented.

But even going back just one decade past -- Champ won four of his five USDGCs in the 2000s decade, during the time Doss, Avery, Feldberg were winning Worlds. He also shot the 1117-rated round in 2009, after his 40th birthday. McBeth's accomplishments can't compare, certainly not yet, because Paul's not that point in his career yet. In truth you cannot really compare eras -- that's always the case in all sports. What you can compare is the athlete's dominance over his contemporaries.

Greatest ever= Most accomplishments against contemporaries
Best Ever= On any given day,the most skill and the best golfer. Better athlete.


To say it again, today's fields are so much more stacked with consistently good players. Paul's win rate against today's field is still more impressive to me than Climo's dominance. In today's game, we actually have many people touring full-time. I don't know how many people toured full-time back then, even KC. The courses are tougher and longer than ever, with more OB than ever, making even the most skilled 1000+ rated players (which there are plenty of nowadays) look human. Meanwhile, Mcbeth's name is at the top, week after week.

Even going back to the early 2000's, the competition is steeper, but not like it is now. Climo won USDGC's during this stretch which is impressive, but I still think that for the majority of his career, he played against much lesser competition.

I said earlier this year to my brother that I would take the field over Mcbeth in every tournament because the field is getting so stacked with talent. Boy, was I wrong. Mcbeth is still beating most everyone. The more rounds, the more likely he is going to finish on top.

 

[TimSyl]

Yes. Seriously.

Actually watched the games; I'm not just blinded by statistics .

Put down the pipe.

Why not add Brian Sipe? Or Vince Ferragamo? (exaggerated names for effect).

Other than you and Elways family, NO ONE else thinks he's the GOAT.

 

[biscoe]

Put down the pipe.

Why not add Brian Sipe? Or Vince Ferragamo? (exaggerated names for effect).

Other than you and Elways family, NO ONE else thinks he's the GOAT.

Elway at the top of his game was the best I have ever seen but he was much less consistently at the top of his game than many others. Brady=GOAT.

 

[Dcinmd]

Elway at the top of his game was the best I have ever seen but he was much less consistently at the top of his game than many others. Brady=GOAT.

I don't think Elway was even the best of his draft class. I think Marino was much better. As a second year player Marino threw for 5,084 yards and 48 TD.

Elway career high was 27 TD passes. And threw over 4,000 yards once.

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/E/ElwaJo00.htm

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/M/MariDa00.htm

I might agree that John was better in the 90's.

 

[rhatton1]

All considerations as well. My contention is that players improve more rapidly than they decline (barring injury) and that there are more improving players than declining ones. Player ratings differing from course to course is obviously a thing but i don't know that it is germane to this particular question.

I suspect the same as this. I would be really interested to see if anyone has looked into this one way or the other?

We have seen a considerable ratings deflation in the UK in the last 10 years as we have very few stable more experienced players. Most of our PDGA players are newer and developing quickly and most of our comps are closed pools without many external propogators, it's meaning we're having to work harder and harder to hang on to the ratings we had let alone improve on them!

Looking at leagues played at the same course over the last 4 years with the same layout and spread over 10 weeks so taking into account different weather:

2019 - currently playing at about 920 rated to par will probably increase to 925ish as the course gets a bit tougher in the next month with growth.
2018 - played at around 930 rated to par
2017 - played at around 950 rated to par
2016 - played at around 960 rated to par


Having played in all years of the league I've had to get better and better to just stand still!

we tend to find travelling US players shoot rounds below their rating when they play in our comps over the last couple of years and players from quick growing European countries (eg. Iceland/Estonia) tend to shoot above their ratings.

All this suggests to me that ratings deflation is a very real thing in areas of rapid growth, especially if those pools are generally closed to outside competition. I'd imagine it is amortised out over a worldwide scene but my suspicion is there has been more ratings deflation than inflation especially with longer tougher courses coming on tour where incredible rounds don't get rated too highly. There are a lot more of these now than 10 years ago and as Chuck has said many times ratings on a 54 - 60 par course will vary from those on a 60 - 70 par course. The more long courses get played the more players will have to work to get higher ratings.

 

[Monocacy]

Interesting:

Ricky Wysocki's 2016 average was a hair shy of Ken Climo's from 1998. But, to be fair, that 1998 performance by "The Champ" at 2.6 would still have put him in first every year except 2017, when Paul McBeth shattered course records while averaging 2.5 over the first two rounds. For that matter, Scott Stokley's (PDGA #3140) first two rounds in 1994, at 2.7, bests or ties the majority of years, including last year.

DeLegacy: History & Changing Scores Of The Masters Cup

 

[araytx]

I don't think Elway was even the best of his draft class. I think Marino was much better. As a second year player Marino threw for 5,084 yards and 48 TD.

Elway career high was 27 TD passes. And threw over 4,000 yards once.

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/E/ElwaJo00.htm

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/M/MariDa00.htm

I might agree that John was better in the 90's.

Yes. Seriously.

I actually watched the games; I'm not just enslaved by statistics .

FTFM.

 

[Jay Dub]

The Great Debate. opcorn:

http://frolfer.com/the-great-goat-d...1ObHr_95bc1y2JmjSQ6pB5voOMaPZQPWayI0oxPcRxk4s

 

[araytx]

Greatest ever= Most accomplishments against contemporaries
Best Ever= On any given day,the most skill and the best golfer. Better athlete.

....

Interesting argument, and/or way to put it. Because by that definition, Pat Mahomes is the "best ever" NFL quarterback. And I don't think many would say that today.

 

[davetherocketguy]

Lol...Gee who's better - the current champ or the former champ. Some of the greatest exercises of futility on the internet of all time.

 

[nrihan]

Interesting argument, and/or way to put it. Because by that definition, Pat Mahomes is the "best ever" NFL quarterback. And I don't think many would say that today.

I thought people talked about Aaron Rogers like that. He's the most talented, most likely to make a certain throw at any given time, but Tom is the Greatest because he wins more.

Because golf is so much more individual, I think it works better that way. Football relies greatly on the abilities of others on your team.

 

[FlyinO]

Gretzky vs. Crosby

Jordan vs. James

The parameters in which these kind of assessments should be made don't overlap. It's just the transcendence of great players. There is (maybe ) always going to be someone that is one of a kind.

McBeth more or less equals Climo, same with other comparisons. It's a privilege we have awesome sports that evolve and players that evolve with them.

Nobody thinks Crosby is close to Gretzky and you'll be hard pressed to find people that put James over Jordan. Climo had his time. P McB is just better.

 

[FlyinO]

Because golf is so much more individual, I think it works better that way. Football relies greatly on the abilities of others on your team.

And coaching. Some football coaches are stubborn and refuse to bend their philosophy or playbook to maximize the talent on their roster. They are going to run their playbook come hell or highwater; whereas, the winning coaches like Belichick, are constantly adapting to the ebbs and flows of his roster.

 

[FlyinO]

Elway at the top of his game was the best I have ever seen but he was much less consistently at the top of his game than many others. Brady=GOAT.

These are terrible takes.

Elway had some putrid years and is most likely the most overrated player of all time.

Belichick is the engine that makes the Pats winners. He wins with back ups. He doesn't need Brady. Brady needs him.

 

[Future_Primitive]

These are terrible takes.

Elway had some putrid years and is most likely the most overrated player of all time.

Belichick is the engine that makes the Pats winners. He wins with back ups. He doesn't need Brady. Brady needs him.

Why yes they are. :doh:

 

[mmblink86]

The Great Debate. opcorn:

http://frolfer.com/the-great-goat-d...1ObHr_95bc1y2JmjSQ6pB5voOMaPZQPWayI0oxPcRxk4s

weak arguments. the competition is better, why dance around the facts and bias the argument with mixed case letters every paragraph?

winning percentage is weak. the avg. rating of mcbeth's competitors per tournament is higher than the avg. rating of climo's competitors.

average win margin, again weak. see above regarding avg. rating of competition.

age when winning worlds. really? rating longevity or avg. rating over time are the much better arguments (these should have been fleshed out a bit more in the following paragraph).

fiscally solid support system? see above arguments about avg. rating of competition. more money from sponsors = more players touring/less road grinding & panhandling/more time for disc golf practice and play with better piers = better players. plus, the fiscal system is the same for all players competing against each other in each era. every player benefits to the best of their ability.

diet, sports nutrition? what, people didn't know you can eat lean meats and vegetables in the 90's? people didn't know that a balanced diet was important for athletes playing sports? ok.

building a bag of rocs teebirds eagles? yes please, even with today's 'better equipment'. we have seen paul crush (and finesse) putters mids and fairways BH. come on, let's do better than disc tech.

oh, let me digress and throw in this one: the modern FH was not around when climo played. please. stokley was a contemporary master at FHs, with the same molds available. kenny couldn't have practiced this?

oh, zuca carts weren't around? quad straps sure were (and smaller bags too). how many pros really use a cart anyway? name 10, 20 pros other than ricky.

dry-fit clothing? now i'm ROFLing.

can't. go. on.

will.. not... forsake McBEaSt...

 

[BlueMonk]

The now vs. then argument is basically the same in all sports. It's always harder to dominate as a sport grows larger because the talent pool grows with it. Paul taking first or second place in eight straight World's is insane. But winning 12 times is also insane. Even if we remove the pure talent element from the equation, think of what kind of competitiveness, focus and commitment it takes to best your peers in nine straight championships. Even if you're better than everyone, that is SO hard to do in any discipline. That's like Michael Jordan-level stuff.

I can't decide. I am in awe of both of them.