Talk:List of male golfers who have been in the world top 10

Accounting for weeks

OWGR occasionally has a very odd way of handling the end of years. For most years the situation is straightforward, the final Sunday of a year is (say) 29 Dec (this is the end of year list). Week 1 for the following year starts on the next Sunday (in this example 5 Jan).

However for the 4 years in "69 players ..." that have 53 weeks the situation is very confusing. Take 2005 for instance. 25-Dec-2005 was the last Sunday in the year, was used for the end of year (http://dps.endavadigital.net/owgr/doc/content/archive/2005/owgr52f2005.pdf) and is called week 52. However week 1 of 2006 is Sunday 8-Jan-2006 (http://dps.endavadigital.net/owgr/doc/content/archive/2006/owgr01f2006.pdf). So how can 2005 have 53 weeks? What they've done is to treat the rankings for Sunday 1-Jan-2016 as week 53 of 2015. Quite why is not clear (personally I'd have thought it would have been better to treat it as week 0 of 2016). If you download the CSV file for, say, Tiger Woods (from http://www.owgr.com/en/Ranking/PlayerProfile.aspx?playerID=5321 Player's ranking history) what you find is this:

• 2006 1 08/01/2006 Tiger Woods 17.0166 1
• 2005 53 01/01/2006 Tiger Woods 17.1635 1
• 2005 52 25/12/2005 Tiger Woods 17.1635 1

confirming (I think) that the 1-Jan-2006 week is treated as week 53 of 2005 (even though week 52 was published as the end of year list). All very confusing. The same situation applies to 2011/2012 and 2016/2017. Nigej (talk) 20:41, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

They have repeated this in 2022/2023 where 1 Jan 2023 was again a Sunday. The week ending 8 Jan 2023 is week 1. So I have followed the previous system and added a week 53 to 2022. Nigej (talk) 08:29, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

Chip Beck 1988

The OWGR ref "69 players ..." http://dps.endavadigital.net/owgr/doc/content/2007%20Stats/86TO0810.pdf (line 47) has Chip Beck in the top 10 for 7 weeks in 1988. This is incorrect. He was in the top 10 for weeks 17 to 19 and then weeks 41 to 47, 10 weeks for the year. http://dps.endavadigital.net/owgr/doc/content/archive/1988/owgr17f1988.pdf http://dps.endavadigital.net/owgr/doc/content/archive/1988/owgr18f1988.pdf http://dps.endavadigital.net/owgr/doc/content/archive/1988/owgr19f1988.pdf http://dps.endavadigital.net/owgr/doc/content/archive/1988/owgr41f1988.pdf etc to http://dps.endavadigital.net/owgr/doc/content/archive/1988/owgr47f1988.pdf The total number of weeks for 1988 then adds to 533 instead of 530. This is actually correct since there were 3 weeks when there were joint number 10s (weeks 5, 40 and 43). My numbers for the other players match the ref. Nigej (talk) 20:22, 22 December 2018 (UTC)

Errors in the 2000s

I have (I think) found a couple of errors in the "69 players ..." file: http://dps.endavadigital.net/owgr/doc/content/2007%20Stats/86TO0810.pdf

In 2005 the column adds 1 short: 529 instead of 530. Originally I had 26 for Furyk where "69 players ..." had 25. This was wrong. 25 was correct and the error was for DiMarco who should be 32 not 31 (weeks 15 to 26, 34 to 53).

2004 adds 3 short but these had been changed already: Furyk/Perry.

In 2002 Montgomery is down as being in the top 10 for 3 weeks. This is incorrect, he was there from weeks 46 to 52: 7 weeks. The difference is accounted for Price who was only is only 5 not 7 (weeks 20 to 22, 24 to 25) and DiMarco 14 not 16 (weeks 6 to 16, 18 to 19, 23), Price and DiMarco were 11th at times when Montgomery was 10th, perhaps accounting for the problem. Nigej (talk) 16:05, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

Errors in the 1980s

1987 is the only problem (excluding 1986 where there's no data). "6 players ..." has Pavin 15, Lyle 46, Sutton 21 and McNulty 17 where I get 14, 45, 22 and 18: weeks: Pavin (3 to 16), Lyle (2, 5 to 8, 13 to 52), Sutton (1 to 20, 22 to 23) ,McNulty (24, 35 to 36, 38 to 52). Have made these 4 changes. Nigej (talk) 10:42, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

Errors 1990 to 1996

The only problem I can find in this period is 1992. There was a tie for 10th place in week 45 (http://dps.endavadigital.net/owgr/doc/content/archive/1992/owgr45f1992.pdf between Seve and Love) so there must be an error somewhere. Actually I find three minor differences: Price, Cook and Kite. "69 players" has 18 weeks for Price and Cook and 10 for Kite while I get 19 weeks for Price and Cook (Price: 33 to 35, 37 to 52, Cook: 34 to 52) and only 9 for Kite (25 to 26, 28 to 32, 36, 42). Nigej (talk) 11:58, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

Errors 1997

Seem to be minor errors in 1997. Faldo should be 18 not 17 (1 to 14, 24 to 27), Love should be 30 not 32 (1 to 9, 11, 33 to 52) and Elkington should be 20 not 19 (10, 13 to 31). Nigej (talk) 12:42, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

Errors in 1998 and 1999

In 1998 and 1999 there are more differences between my data from the owgr site and the "69 players ..." spreadsheet, than for other years. Spreadsheet number given first and then my calculation:

• 1998: Mickelson 39 or 48 (weeks 1 to 32, 36 to 38, 40 to 52), Couples 18 or 15 (22 to 28, 33 to 35, 37 to 39, 41 to 42), Ozaki 15 or 16 (1 to 14, 16 to 17), O'Meara 33 or 31 (1 to 5, 15, 24, 29 to 52), Westwood 26 or 25 (28 to 52), Lehman 21 or 19 (1 to 14, 18 to 22), Leonard 17 or 15 (13 to 27).
• 1999 Mickelson 22 or 14 (1, 25, 42 to 53), Price 48 or 53 (all), Stewart 20 or 21 (26 to 46), Furyk 12 or 11 (3 to 5, 15 to 21, 23), O'Meara 46 or 47 (1 to 37, 39 to 41, 47 to 53 - not 38, 42 to 46), Leonard 7 or 9 (6 to 12, 22, 24)

Leonard's two cancel each other out while Mickelson is either 61 or 62 for the two years combined, despite being 9 and 8 out for the individual years. All a bit mysterious at the moment. (https://www.golfrankingstats.com/player/Phil-Mickelson agrees with me as to dates (but not total weeks - probably the end of year issue again) but not a reliable source and https://www.golfrankingstats.com/player/Nick-Price from the same source has him in the top 10 for all of 1999 and https://www.golfrankingstats.com/player/Payne-Stewart has Stewart 21 weeks in 1999). Nigej (talk) 12:22, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

Country flags

Should players country have own column or just a flag by players name?PNwood213 (talk) 12:51, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

Per discussions at WT:GOLF we decided to remove the country columns from articles replacing it with the flagicon to the left of the players name. I had tried to amend this page but didn't get it all completed. Jimmymci234 (talk) 13:39, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

Not a big deal for me personally. Happy to go with either. I suppose that the original was more conforming to MOS:FLAG "Accompany flags with country names" but hardly any golf articles (or indeed sports articles) satisfy that, and personally I find that overly pedantic. I suppose the merit of the "flag by player" is that its much more compact, while "own column" is better in terms of sorting, at least in theory if you use sortname or similar (currently most of the tables sort by christian name). Nigej (talk) 16:48, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

Only problem I see is now list is sorted by country and not players name.Tomrtn (talk) 10:56, 2 November 2021 (UTC)