PGA Tour: Ian Poulter - Overachiever or Underachiever?: Notes from the Ballwasher

First topic message reminder :

1).With the PGA Tour season still in its infancy, and golfing galacticos in Abu Dhabi, in Palm Desert or still in hibernation, two people who can't get out of the headlines made news again last week with resumption of rhetorical love/hate between Ian Poulter and Johnny Miller.
Once the "Johnny miller why don't you come and interview me live and say that stuff straight to my face . . . . Was you watching a different channel" twitterage over inferences that Poults was a drama queen had been resolved, they get in to it again over whether IJP is an "overachiever" (Miller) or an "underachiever" (Poults).

2).Not the first time of course that Poults has taken umbrage at Miller's commentary - it was just three years ago that Miller was scorning Poulter's "ball striking" whereupon the player responded by forwarding Miller the Genworth stat's for the E.T., which showed him leading the ball-striking way.

3).Miller was a great player, probably a better golfer than his two-Major record would suggest: watched an old film once of him striping long irons on the Harbour Town range - left-handed!
A genius, at least until he reached the putting green. But he has made his fortune from broadcasting and Steve Eubanks' piece, linked here, is revealing and interesting:

http://www.pga.com/news/eubanks/miller-feud-fizzling

I liked Azinger's zinger from the 1991 Ryder Cup at Kiawah, calling Miller "the biggest moron". Then, backtracking, he offered that what he meant to call Miller was "the biggest Mormon".

4).Perhaps because he tends to favour American golfers, or perhaps it's that he prefers to take cheap shots and Europeans won't take it, it seems to be guys like Casey, Poults and Westwood who take exception these days.
But perceptions about "achievement" are interesting, what do you think about Poults?

5).Has he overachieved to have two WGC titles in his locker, not to mention a hatful of other titles outside America? He also has three highly creditable runners up finishes in The Open and The Players (possibly unlucky there, getting caught in some nonsense in Round 3 and losing strokes) and an Amex WGC.
Or should he have done more, on the PGA Tour at least? He's yet to reach the Tour Championship despite having an enviable record of consistency including not having a missed cut since September 2011.

6).He's been consistently outstanding in the Ryder Cup, but has seldom contended in Majors, his runner-up to Harrington and his flash of front-nine brilliance at Kiawah notwithstanding. His PGA Tour record is:
Tournaments played: 149
Cuts made: 115 (77%)
Top 25's: 57 (38%)
Top 10's: 26 (17%)
Top 3's: 8: (5%)

7).Was Miller right about Poults's "ball striking' (total driving plus greens in reg)? Miller tends to forget there's golf outside the States except for Ryder and Pres.Cup jollies, so in his myopic eye he's right. Poulter's Tour rank these past eight years has been mediocre at best:171st in his first year (2005) and since then: 29th, 185th, 194th, 164th, 174th, 118th and 131st.
Not exactly anything to Tweet home about. But his European Tour record has been consistently better. Perhaps an undue proportion of "Tour" outings are on more difficult courses than for the average player? Quite probably.

8).What's the Poulter outlook looking forward then? He'll continue to play the biggest tournaments so that his chances of winning are somewhat diminished. (Hartford suits him down to the ground, though.)
Unless he wins, he's not likely to play enough to prosper in the FedEx Play-Offs. But he'll still be a MatchPlay genius, the Piggott-, Woods-like will to win, especially at Ryder Cup level will cause him to stand apart. And continue to be a golfing enigma.

9).Ross Fisher and David Lynn embark on their PGA Tour odyssey this week, at the "Humana Challenge", where they'll be joined by Messrs Davis and Owen (bad missed cuts for both last week) and Martin Laird (who?). Laird finished 14th last year, but how much rust has crept in to his game? We'll see soon enough, but The Laird needs a good finish or five, or he'll be watching the Majors on TV.
Very good to see Brett Quigley and Lucas Glover back in action.
Difficult to have strong feelings about likely winners here, but perhaps unwise to ignore the most recent form of Tim Clark, my very lukewarm fancy who has two second-place finishes here.
But if Russell Henley (Snedeker-like?) putts like he did last week he may win 25 times this year.

10).And the Champions Tour season revs up this week, only in first gear as the "Mitsubishi Electric Championship" has just forty runners, many of them there by invitation rather than merit. But that didn't diminish the quality of shot-making three years ago when Watson just edged out Couples.
All the Russell Henleys in the world couldn't compete with that exhibition.

Super

I am sure there are many ways to get into the city, that is not something I have doubted. Mysti made specific reference to working in risk management. So please show me a risk management job advert where they do not ask for a numerate degree? And we are talking risk management in financial services firms like goldman or JP morgan (as his claim was he worked for lehman).

Mac, A mate of mine is high up in Risks and Assets in Barclays but he has a Physics degree. That's not directly related.

Just because Lehman WAS a big bank, make no mistake that there would be a broad variety of people from various backgrounds working in all different types of sectors, many with completely unrelated degrees.

A degree shows you have an aptitude for learning, but you don't learn until you are on the job.

As you won't admit what it is you do, I can only imagine it is something which isn't all that important or skilled. ONce you have worked for a few firms, large ones, small ones, Multi nationals etc you will see the enormous depth and breadth of backgrounds and skills. That's what makes a strong diverse company with good ideas. If everyone came out of the same mould it would stagnate.

I don't doubt Oakey at all, why should I? But then again I actually know people in the city in those types of jobs who haven't come from that background, so I know it isn't a pre-resquisite.

super_realist wrote:Mac, A mate of mine is high up in Risks and Assets in Barclays but he has a Physics degree.

Do they offer a physics degree with no maths in it these days?

Your degree only matters in your first job, to get a foot in the door. After that, it's all down to experience, acheivements, personality and connections - all dependant on which type of job you're after. And yes, you can BS on much of that.

Mac, of course there is Maths in a Physics degree, but it doesn't give you a knowledge of Risks and Assets. An English degree doesn't make you a journalist or a writer. A chemistry degree doesn't make you a pharmacist.

A mate of mine is a chemical engineer, he's now a Business Director in the UK arm of the Worlds biggest company (Exxon) As far as I know they don't teach Business in a Chemical Engineering degree.

You have no proof at all that Oakey isn't numerate enough to have a Maths based degree, and as I've already said if you think that everyone working in those positions in the city and merchant banks has a numerate degree you are living in cloud cuckoo land.

Furthermore for every Maths based degrees there are just as many people in that industry with poncy Arts/Humanities degrees with no connection at all between figures or statistics.

Next time you go for an interview try to realise that while your degree may have helped you get that foot in the door, the process of interviewing is about proving that A) You can do the job, B) That you can learn and contribute and add value C) to prove you'll fit in.
It's also a lot to do with whether they like you.
Interviewers look for common sense, hard work, intelligence, ability to learn, lateral thinking, character. You could have the best maths based degree in the world, but if you are a timid, quiet, introverted, shy and frightened person you won't get the job.

Of course your education is important, but there is no reason to suggest someone without a Maths degree or a numerate degree couldn't succeed in Finance, or any other position unrelated to their degree.

How do you think I changed discipline to Oil Exploration from Engineering. Versatility is the key. My education barely came into it.

If you keep harking back to your degree, all you'll get is black marks and they'll pick someone who looks forward and not back.
Everyone has got a degree these days, most have Masters( you don't if I recall, but doesn't mean you couldn't usurp someone who had), it's personality that sets you apart, and the finance industry requires a certain type (often a fairly ghastly, ruthless, boorish personality) that over-rules statistical based degrees.

Mac I think you are viewing this in terms of a job specification. In the real world many people are recruited in house and rise through the ranks, so they might never have the qualifications you see advertised.
Also there is a lot of nepotism in the city, jobs to sons and family. My ex had two brothers who worked in the city, nice guys but seriously dim, still on 6 figure salaries though.

I think Mac needs to go back and actually read what i said- I havent once lied about my quals- However I did lie about my time off work..

And as hard as this may be for some/Mac to realise . I can actually draft a decent email. I have to send 50 odd every day of my life.. My clients these days actually funnily enough include UBS and barclays Corp..

I was luckily enough to go to a private school. It was at Boarding school but i was day. It specialised in Dyslexic day students. Almost half the day kids were!!

Almost every single one of us are dong well in our lifes.. Yes many are that due to there parents Standing. But many others are just motivated with a decent outlook on life!

I have very advanced excel/access skills and when I was at the arab bank my job was to work on how to automate the Risk reports every day. I ended up turning a job that took 8 hours into one that took 2!!

That is how i moved up the ranks.. The reason I got the job in risk in the first place was due to skill level, experience and performance as an assitant accountant- However this job bored me to death- but the two jobs require a very similar skill level!!

As Sr/diggs says many of the dealers today are dim as fk!!

But dont mistake me as dim!

Mysti = Rainman

By the way my job at lehmans was on the Risk management team for FX dealers.(i was a risk analyist) In banking we are just really part of the middle office- and risk really is its primary function. I was not a senior risk manager or anything. However it was a very interesting job and i learned alot.. But hey it came to an abrubt end. And probally the best thing for me.. I am lucky to have so many skills to be able to save costs in my own business!!

Diggers wrote:Mysti = Rainman

You are all being very disrespectful to Mysti with some of your comments!

Degrees etc are all very well for those who predisposed and wealthy enough to gain them but skills and experience can be and sometimes are much more important.

I know a lot of accountants and finance people (its my job), some are very accademic good a-levels, degrees from red bricks etc and tend to go through large accountancy firms or big banks to get their quals, ACA usually for accountants and tend to go through the audit type routes. Some go on to progress in to more commercial roles but most stay in their little comfort zones in large LLP's or PLC's.
You also get the not so academic who come into accts/fin because they enjoy working with numbers, they have a skill for it. Numbers paint pictures for them. The may study a qual, CIMA or ACCA (you dont need a degree, unlike ACA) or they may not and become whats known in the industry as QBE (qualified by experience) now most of these guys will never get past junior man/controller levels but some, and I know a few, will do very well esspecially if they are gifted with commercial acumen (like Mysti)

I suppose my point is, you can be anything you want if you are prepared to learn, have some talent and work hard. Which as Mysti has said, he has done. He is part qual ACCA so he has the hands on Accts exp, he obviously has a skill for numbers & spread sheets and is very commerically minded. The perfect recipe for a successful business man...good luck!!

Experience and vocation should not be understated. On a completely different level the govts plans to change the nursery raios prove this.
They think that having better educated nursery workers...maths GCSE to look after an 18 month baby ?......means they can manage more kids with less people.
I havent heard one word of support for this proposal outside of the govt, not from parents, staff or nursery owners...and yet its going to happen.
And lots of existing great staff.....older ladies with years of practical experience...may well lose their jobs if they cant get better qualifications.
Utter madness from fat Dave and his cronies yet again.

Thanks for the support Higun.

I think you are all debating a point that I did not raise. Your point, and one I agree with, is that you can achieve success in many different roles in many different business sectors not matter what your degree is.

My point is that for some roles however - for example working in risk for a bank - you need certain skills and knowledge which come from study. If we are talking about risk in terms of understanding probability and statistics can anyone really claim you dont need a numerate degree to carry out even a junior position in such a role?

If all mysti was doing was using excel to automate a process that is hardly the same as constructing models for risk using proper maths and statistics.

I was learning the trade mac.. but as a stated before i worked In RISK at lehmans and at a commercial arab bank(you celarly cant differenciate working in something or being one!!(thats your own ignorance).. Would i have gone futher in risk if we all wernt made redundent. Well thats something I cant answer..I would have probally gone down the operations route in fairness!!

Mac-

Anyway You know abit about me, and you wanna judge me!

I think its only far you explain what you do and why you are such an expert.


PS. I dont expect an answer, i would like one. But i certainly dont expect you to!

I know a lady who has worked for Barclays and RBS Coutts, specialising in corporate risk who has no degree, in fact her best quals are 2 A-levels in...wait for it...English Lit and Geography. She earns six figures and is highly respected in her industry.

I'm not denying that a degree is useful and can give you a leg up but there are certainly other ways of doing it.

I agree with you higun completely and she has certainly gone further in the field than myself with much less quals!!

However

ACCA at my level is regarded as degree standard anyway.

These days the format of the modules has changed but If i was to take the professional modules and pass them(which i am perfectly entitled to do) , It is the equivelant of a masters degree!

the good thing about these quals is they prepare you for business(as you probally know)- the modules are things like coprate law, financial reporting, perfomance management etc etc - and not just specifically financial accounting!

If My business failed for some out there reason. I have that to fall back on!

To add to this discussion- I took the fundemental exams while i was off work at crappy croydon college!!

I was also on income support and my courses where paid for by the state!!..

benefits do help if not abused!- i certianly took everything i was entitled to at the time!

ACCA are a great and the qual is flexible in the way you describe, taking in not just accounts but business management.

Im sure it has some degree equiv but Id rather have the full qual than any degree!

Also, you only have 10 years from first reg to finish your exams or they will time bar you...you also have to be within a relevant role to have your professional exams signed off.

yeah i think i remember that time baring thing!- am actually on that level now- its been 10 years!!

What are you .. ACA?

noooo........im a head hunter, specialising in Accts and Fin, thats why I have to know and keep up to date with all this stuff.

Arr i see!

I'm with McLaren.

Mysti you couldn't even calculate a simple percentage the other day and now you're trying to tell us you're a whizz with figures?

Sounds like another of your stories about playing with guys from the European Tour to me.

Believe what you want mate..

what was this story about playing with players from the euro tour hibbz.

you mean when monty come to my club.. and i played a hole with him as he played through us. or when i have said i played with a pro today that I played with in a juniour open(one of which actually used to post on here!!!), or when i said that i have members at my EX course that i have played with that have played on the european PRO tour!!



Or would you like to make up your own version of events

To be honest banban i would like to know what the heck he is talking about tbh!!

I reakon postman pat is just macs sock anyway!

Sorry barragan but he did ask.

We were discussing an event and somebody (not me) said you didn't know what you were talking about because you'd never seen "these guys" hit.

You replied that not only had you seen them but that you'd played with them.

Turned out you'd played in a junior event that Westwood had played in, you'd once let Monte through and played with a guy from the Europro Tour. Not quite the same thing.

Definite Faverick tendencies.

So why bring it up then. I explanied exactly what i had done. maybe i posted the original one in a bit of an embelshing way. But I straight away explained the facts!!

As i said believe what you want. no skin of my nose.. I will refrain from talking about myself in the future!

Please don't, I was looking forward to hearing more about your time on the semi-pro pool circuit.

Or reading between the lines "I once beat my mate in a £10 best of three match".

there is no such thing as a semi pro pool circuit..

there is however a pro circuit and anyone can enter if they pay the registration fees!!(uk 9 ball tour- check it out all you want pal- you yourself could go and enter an event if you like!!)

players that play in those and are willing to exept prize although they have another income are known as semi pro!- however once you do that you cant play in amatuer stuff!!

But hey lets not let your judgement out way the facts.. shall we

you see yours and macs problem is lack of understanding- he assumes because I worked in risk mangement i was saying i was a senior risk manager or something.. Because i stated that i have played with some players that have or will be pros you think i bigging it up like i am mates with tiger woods. Again because i say i played events on the (was) uk 9 ball tour that i am making out i am the next earl strikland!!

I'd say a desperate need to try and impress people you'll never meet was more of a problem for you than a problem for either myself or McLaren.

Meanwhile somewhere back on topic.. Ian P was born in the wrong era.. years ago, there were a lot more match play competitions and I suspect he'd have ranked higher statistically than he does in the modern era, which rewards consistency as much as "talent".

I think it's harsh and potentially impossible to quantify if he's underachieved for his talent level, but I subjectively put him in the same group as the likes of Harrington and Westwood who have lesser natural talent, but bring other qualities of determination, mental strength and discipline to become very competitive.

Not trying to impress at all.

Just use life examples when we get involved in debates. I even bring up my negatives.

Its your problem that you want to judge people. I infact I feel sorry for you. You clearly havent acheived a thing in your life and that is proved with your bitter behaviour on message boards!

Hmm, good point Bob. He may have had a chance with the USPGA as that was matchplay for a time.

"Hmm, good point Bob. He may have had a chance with the USPGA as that was matchplay for a time."


he would have won half of them that he entered

Hibbz - your also a hypocrite- because you yourself have even mentioned that you have played with players from the europro tour as well. However the only difference between me and you is that i dont treat that kind of comment like a bull does to a red flag!

Worry about yourself. And if you wanna keep trying to bring people down by sensationalising comments. i suggest you do it to others..

Mysti- as the sex pistols might say, never mind the b*llocks!

Mysti, guys like you makes this board worth visiting.

pedro wrote:Mysti, guys like you makes this board worth visiting.

If you like barely literate bullsh!t that is.

We can't all be Guardian journos. Barely literate bullsh!t is far more honest than highly literate bullsh!t.