Ian Poulter - All mouth no trousers?

First topic message reminder :

I always like to see fellow Englishmen perform well at all tournaments and not just the Majors. Seeing Westwood come so close at the Masters and Open in 2010 and even the US Open in 2008. That has to be the closest I have seen since the Faldo years. I like watching Donald, Fisher, Rose, Casey, Wilson, Wood all but to name a few. When I watch Poulter I just cringe. I think of all the things he has said in the past. Like saying that when he plays to his potential only he and Tiger would contest titles. Tiger would miss out of the top 5 in this year's Masters, when infact he finished tied for 4th and he finished T27.

He has always talked a good game and seems to fail to deliver so often. At the Ryder Cup in Valhalla in 2008 I thought he was our best player in the Europe team. My question is will he ever deliver the goods at a Major?

I always find it funny how Poulter (and other loaded sports stars) get kudos for helping kids etc, not that it isn't good work, but would he do it if he wasn't a very rich man or a sports star?? I doubt it!

Of course it is bound to be called the IAN POULTER something or other, and like someone said, will look great in a few of his sponsors photo scrap books!

Damned if he does, damned if he doesn't.

This negativity towards Poulter is getting very petty now - criticising his work with charities!?!? Of course it would be called the Ian Poulter something or other because that is how the charity will attract money, through his profile. Turn your other question around and ask yourself, "if you had more money than you do, would you give more time and money to charitable causes?"

If people do not like the person that they see in the media then that's fine - you either cannot understand that it might be a front to keep his true self for his family and friends or maybe you could just ignore everything that he says. His golf is far better than any of the hackers on here can even dream of playing yet apparently being consistently in the top 25 in the world means that he hasn't got the game to win a major. This guy is British and we should all be hoping that he can win a major because there is hardly an abundance of talent knocking about at the moment.

This, for me, shows what is so wrong with British sport. People just love to criticise someone for their own personal pleasure when they do not achieve - if they are wrong, they get to enjoy a win/if they are right, they get to enjoy being right. Rickie Fowler has an equally different image but you can rest assured that the Americans will worship him until he has built up enough self confidence to fulfil their hopes of success. Poulter already comes fully loaded with self belief and people are trying to tell him that he can't do it???

Not really, like I said it is good that he puts a bit back, but it doesnt serve as a 'well done' because all people in his position should do likewise

I dont see much love given to Woods and the Woods foundation does a lot of good work. Doesn't come up much when he is getting hammered on here.
Poulter gives his name and a bit oftime, fair play, but I stand by original comment that young kids today will be looking at Fowler and McIlroy, not Poulter.

Self belief is fine JPX, if only other British golfer had the same amount, but there is a difference between self belief and his lack of respect.

I am certain that the way he presents himself is all a facade, but that doesn't mean that it is acceptable to go on the way he does and expect no critisism!

I am well aware that he has been ranked highly, but this is mainly down to his matchplay successes, and sadly no majors are matchplay. Put him in a stroke play event and there are easily 50 players I would pick to win over Poulter.

As for charity, yes if I could afford it, I would give plenty to charity, who wouldnt? But is his charity work really that comendable given the opportunity he has to do it?

As I am sure you can tell, I do not have much time for Mr Poulter, but I would have more time, if he thought a bit more about what he said, toned down his petulance and actually backed up his swanky attitude and challenged in the odd major

Probably Diggers because they are much younger, don't necessarily think Poulter is a bad example though in the way that Woods on course behaviour is concerned.

Diggers wrote:I dont see much love given to Woods and the Woods foundation does a lot of good work. Doesn't come up much when he is getting hammered on here.
Poulter gives his name and a bit oftime, fair play, but I stand by original comment that young kids today will be looking at Fowler and McIlroy, not Poulter.

Yet the way that Fowler and Rory have been shot down on here over the past few days would suggest differently.

It was brought up here because you asked what kids would look up to him. If you asked the same question on a Woods thread I'm sure his charitable work would be highlighted.

You're both letting your huge dislike of Poulter cloud your judgement. I have to say I've never got the impression of people disliking someone they don't know as much as you. I find it really strange, it comes across as hatred almost, I seriously don't know what he's done to deserve that, okay you don't like his image and he talks a good game (as I've said), but come on he's not public enemy number 1.

JDandfries wrote:Self belief is fine JPX, if only other British golfer had the same amount, but there is a difference between self belief and his lack of respect.

I am certain that the way he presents himself is all a facade, but that doesn't mean that it is acceptable to go on the way he does and expect no critisism!

I am well aware that he has been ranked highly, but this is mainly down to his matchplay successes, and sadly no majors are matchplay. Put him in a stroke play event and there are easily 50 players I would pick to win over Poulter.

As for charity, yes if I could afford it, I would give plenty to charity, who wouldnt? But is his charity work really that comendable given the opportunity he has to do it?

As I am sure you can tell, I do not have much time for Mr Poulter, but I would have more time, if he thought a bit more about what he said, toned down his petulance and actually backed up his swanky attitude and challenged in the odd major

The element i'm particularly unsure about is that everyone seems upset about what he says, bar the quote about me and Tiger which it was always informed was part of a conversation for a fantasy golf tournament i can't see anything ridiculous. Some may be honest answers like he didn't think Tiger would be top 5 in the Masters but that's not exactly an extreme comment.

I see not a lot has changed since 606!

Also on the charity front, things like the invitational mean another day away from the family when they are already on the road regularly so it could be considered a reasonable sacrifice. I'm sure money wise Poulter is set for life so there is no desperate financial need for them.

And for those saying if they had more money they would do charity, you can volunteer at plenty of places for free, but i'm expecting that like me, others don't do that (or at least don't regularly).

JDandfries wrote:Self belief is fine JPX, if only other British golfer had the same amount, but there is a difference between self belief and his lack of respect.

I am certain that the way he presents himself is all a facade, but that doesn't mean that it is acceptable to go on the way he does and expect no critisism!

I am well aware that he has been ranked highly, but this is mainly down to his matchplay successes, and sadly no majors are matchplay. Put him in a stroke play event and there are easily 50 players I would pick to win over Poulter.

As for charity, yes if I could afford it, I would give plenty to charity, who wouldnt? But is his charity work really that comendable given the opportunity he has to do it?

As I am sure you can tell, I do not have much time for Mr Poulter, but I would have more time, if he thought a bit more about what he said, toned down his petulance and actually backed up his swanky attitude and challenged in the odd major

Yet he receives little praise for making that opportunity himself to help people?

I agree that his comments are sometimes stupid and his image is not for everyone but he has created much more than a golfer out of himself. Would his name at the top of a charity or sponsors event attract the same interest as, say, Lee Westwood? No, but then Lee Westwood will not offend or annoy anyone in an interview - nor will he excite anyone or say anything of remote interest.

The game needs it's Ian Poulters as much as it's Lee Westwoods and if it was full to the brim with either it would be equally as bad. His game may or may not be good enough for a major. There are enough players that win them that are not even mentioned in this respect but I just don't get how people can almost want him not to win one.

Very few sports stars in Britain just do what they want to without any consideration for what people think. Rory does this, as did Faldo and their common denominator is success. People also criticise them...

goldwolf wrote:I see not a lot has changed since 606!

You'd be amazed at how much worse it's got. Everyone is still hacking it around their local courses and then coming on here and criticising how the tour stars play. Throw in some politics and insults and the BBC must now be glad to be rid of it.

Fabulous golfer who has made the most of his talent. Turned pro off same handicap as D4S is today!!!
People who know him speak highly of him. Personally I would never wear his trousers, but would love his short game!

sharrison01 wrote:

goldwolf wrote:I see not a lot has changed since 606!

You'd be amazed at how much worse it's got. Everyone is still hacking it around their local courses and then coming on here and criticising how the tour stars play. Throw in some politics and insults and the BBC must now be glad to be rid of it.

Strewth, what is there to get so precious about. Its a debate about a player who divides opinion. the guy is a multi millionaire golfer, clearly he doesnt care what I think and its not like he comes on here as he is far too busy tweeting away.
How can you be offended offended because somebody you dont actually know dislikes a golfer...that you dont actually know..... ?

puligny wrote:Fabulous golfer who has made the most of his talent. Turned pro off same handicap as D4S is today!!!
People who know him speak highly of him. Personally I would never wear his trousers, but would love his short game!

I've got a lower handicap than when he turned pro - would be scared to death giving it a go! That's why some of the kids out there can learn something from him. There are very few complete role models for kids so the best way is surely to admire strengths from a variety of people - Poulter's self belief is more than worth admiring.

Got to agree Diggers, there's a fair bit of tension going on here.

Diggers wrote:

sharrison01 wrote:

goldwolf wrote:I see not a lot has changed since 606!

You'd be amazed at how much worse it's got. Everyone is still hacking it around their local courses and then coming on here and criticising how the tour stars play. Throw in some politics and insults and the BBC must now be glad to be rid of it.

Strewth, what is there to get so precious about. Its a debate about a player who divides opinion. the guy is a multi millionaire golfer, clearly he doesnt care what I think and its not like he comes on here as he is far too busy tweeting away.
How can you be offended offended because somebody you dont actually know dislikes a golfer...that you dont actually know..... ?

I am certainly not offended. I think that is a term that is all to easily used when people disagree with one another. I am disappointed that a British sports star can divide opinion that much in that those that do not like him cannot at least respect him and see some good in what he/she has achieved. I am also not surprised that there are not many British sports stars.

I retract everything I have written previously about Ian Poulter and would like to say that in my opinion he is God!

Amen

JDandfries wrote:I retract everything I have written previously about Ian Poulter and would like to say that in my opinion he is God!

Amen

You now know that you will be shot down for believing in God...

I imagine I can name the individuals who would be so petty as to chastise such an OPINION

JDandfries wrote:YE YAng is much more likely to win another major than Poulter is to win one.

I think people get blinkered by his blaze attitude and dreadful dress sense, watch him play, and ignore the circus that he surrounds himself with.

If he wasn't a gobs**** and didnt dress like a tw** he would be no more recogniseable or lauded than someone like Simon Khan or Graeme Storm

Errrrr.. IP is 16 in the OWGR.. I don't think either Simon Khan or Graeme Storm appear in the top 100 so I'm struggling to understand your point. Does being a gobs**** and dressing like a tw** earn ranking points now, because if so, I'm off down to the Fancy Dress shop?

The question really reads to me as "Is Ian Poulter a good golfer or just a big mouth". My answer is he's both - the former being confirmed by his world ranking, the latter being my opinion.

The world ranking can tell you what you like, if that's all you go by, then you will no doubt believe that Tiger Woods is the 19th best golfer in the world?

Poulter won a WGC matchplay event, and that is why he is so high, he only has 3 top 10's in majors in his career, and is vastly overrated by people who listen or look at him, rather than watch him play!

[quote="JDandfries"]The world ranking can tell you what you like, if that's all you go by, then you will no doubt believe that Tiger Woods is the 19th best golfer in the world?

Poulter won a WGC matchplay event, and that is why he is so high, he only has 3 top 10's in majors in his career, and is vastly overrated by people who listen or look at him, rather than watch him play!

Is he a good golfer, yes, infact he is better than good, is he likely to win a major, IMO no, and I can easily name 50 players more likely.

[quote="JDandfries"]

JDandfries wrote:The world ranking can tell you what you like, if that's all you go by, then you will no doubt believe that Tiger Woods is the 19th best golfer in the world?

Poulter won a WGC matchplay event, and that is why he is so high, he only has 3 top 10's in majors in his career, and is vastly overrated by people who listen or look at him, rather than watch him play!

Is he a good golfer, yes, infact he is better than good, is he likely to win a major, IMO no, and I can easily name 50 players more likely.

Money where your mouth is time - start naming them...

JD,
Woods is nowhere near being 19th best golfer in the world at the moment, and he's incredibly lucky to still be ranked that highly.

Poulter isn't just ranked as he is due to Matchplay alone, he won the Hong Kong Open late last season and was second the following week losing in a playoff in the Dubai World Championship.

There is no shame in being better at matchplay than strokeplay, people seem to treat it as something to be ashamed of, though I bet you're all behind him come the Ryder Cup.

How about I start naming players that people feel are more likely to win a major than Poulter. I'll stick to the rankings to narrow it down to start with and skip the top 10:

11.GMac
12.Schwartzel
13.Choi
14.Bubba Watson
15.Casey
16.Poulter
17.Adam Scott
18.Mahan
19.Karlsson
20.Woods
21.Goosen
22.Furyk
23.F Molinari
24.Quiros
25.Els
26.Laird
27.David Toms
28.Jiminez
29.Manassero
30.Darren Clarke

I'd say that they would all be as likely as one another to win the next major. People will pick flaws in all of their games, be it too young with no experience, too old and past it, can't putt, have no bottle, wear the wrong clothes. I'd say that Poulter's place in the rankings is not far off where it should be and the next major could go to any of them...

All you've done there is list a lot of names, anyone could do that. There is no particular reason for any of them standing a better chance than Poulter of winning a major.

I think that virtually anyone who makes the cut at a major is capable of winning it, and if Poulter makes the cut, then he is too.

People who IMO are more likely to win a major than Poulter

Lee Westwood
Luke Donald
Martin Kaymer
Phil Mickleson
Dustin Johnson
Steve Stricker
Shabba Ranks
Tiger Woods
Rory McIllroy
Adam Scott
Matteo Mannaserro
Eduardo Molinari
Frnacesco Molinari
Stewart Cink
Bill Haas
Sergio Garcia
Matt Kuchar
Jason Day
Nick Watney
Lucas Glover
Charl Scwartzel
Ernie Els
Reteif Goosen
Rupert Murdoch
Ryo Ishikawa
Ricky Fowler
Darren Clarke
Martin Laird
YE Yang
KJ Choi
Gary Woodland
Jim Furyk
Robert Karlsson
Graeme Storm
Brandt Snededker
Margaret Thatcher
Geoff Oglivy
Tom Watson
Bubba Watson
Dr Watson
Paul Lawrie
Anthony Kim
Padraig Harrington
Graeme McDowell
Angel Cabrera
Camillo Villegas
Freddie Jacobson
Colin Montgomery
Gareth Maybin
Hunter Mahan
M A Jiminez
Justin Rose
Anders Hanson
Peter Hanson
Johan Edfors
Henrick Stenson

that enough or do i need to look at rankings?

JDandfries wrote:People who IMO are more likely to win a major than Poulter

Rupert Murdoch

Judging by the response to the grilling he's getting at the moment I doubt he'll live till the next major.

sharrison01 wrote:

puligny wrote:Fabulous golfer who has made the most of his talent. Turned pro off same handicap as D4S is today!!!
People who know him speak highly of him. Personally I would never wear his trousers, but would love his short game!

I've got a lower handicap than when he turned pro - would be scared to death giving it a go! That's why some of the kids out there can learn something from him. There are very few complete role models for kids so the best way is surely to admire strengths from a variety of people - Poulter's self belief is more than worth admiring.

Sorry for going off topic but I'm intrigued by this. I'm sure I can recall you saying it wasn't value for money for you being a member of a club and therefore you weren't and just played top courses when you played. Can I be nosey and ask what your handicap is and how you maintain it without being a member somewhere and playing in competitions?

JDandfries wrote:People who IMO are more likely to win a major than Poulter

Lee Westwood
Luke Donald
Martin Kaymer
Phil Mickleson
Dustin Johnson
Steve Stricker
Shabba Ranks
Tiger Woods
Rory McIllroy
Adam Scott
Matteo Mannaserro
Eduardo Molinari
Frnacesco Molinari
Stewart Cink
Bill Haas
Sergio Garcia
Matt Kuchar
Jason Day
Nick Watney
Lucas Glover
Charl Scwartzel
Ernie Els
Reteif Goosen
Rupert Murdoch
Ryo Ishikawa
Ricky Fowler
Darren Clarke
Martin Laird
YE Yang
KJ Choi
Gary Woodland
Jim Furyk
Robert Karlsson
Graeme Storm
Brandt Snededker
Margaret Thatcher
Geoff Oglivy
Tom Watson
Bubba Watson
Dr Watson
Paul Lawrie
Anthony Kim
Padraig Harrington
Graeme McDowell
Angel Cabrera
Camillo Villegas
Freddie Jacobson
Colin Montgomery
Gareth Maybin
Hunter Mahan
M A Jiminez
Justin Rose
Anders Hanson
Peter Hanson
Johan Edfors
Henrick Stenson

that enough or do i need to look at rankings?

I've already listed some rankings for you. I'm pretty sure that you have just named a load of players that you can think of or used google to think of. What a ridiculous list.

Hibbz wrote:

sharrison01 wrote:

puligny wrote:Fabulous golfer who has made the most of his talent. Turned pro off same handicap as D4S is today!!!
People who know him speak highly of him. Personally I would never wear his trousers, but would love his short game!

I've got a lower handicap than when he turned pro - would be scared to death giving it a go! That's why some of the kids out there can learn something from him. There are very few complete role models for kids so the best way is surely to admire strengths from a variety of people - Poulter's self belief is more than worth admiring.

Sorry for going off topic but I'm intrigued by this. I'm sure I can recall you saying it wasn't value for money for you being a member of a club and therefore you weren't and just played top courses when you played. Can I be nosey and ask what your handicap is and how you maintain it without being a member somewhere and playing in competitions?

Not being nosey at all!

I am a member at a club that offers a tier of membership where you pay a small fee every year and then play at a reduced rate every time that you play. This lets me hold a handicap, play in their competitions and for the club etc but without committing financially to only playing at that course. My handicap is 2.3.

When I said about club memberships, I was probably referring to your bog standard club where you pay a joining fee and then annual subs of <£1000. Even in playing a good schedule of club comps I have a fair amount left over to play when and where I choose. I prefer this to being tied to one club as I am limited in the amount of golf that I can play with work commitments etc so can enjoy a good deal of variety.

sharrison01 wrote:

Hibbz wrote:

sharrison01 wrote:

puligny wrote:Fabulous golfer who has made the most of his talent. Turned pro off same handicap as D4S is today!!!
People who know him speak highly of him. Personally I would never wear his trousers, but would love his short game!

I've got a lower handicap than when he turned pro - would be scared to death giving it a go! That's why some of the kids out there can learn something from him. There are very few complete role models for kids so the best way is surely to admire strengths from a variety of people - Poulter's self belief is more than worth admiring.

Sorry for going off topic but I'm intrigued by this. I'm sure I can recall you saying it wasn't value for money for you being a member of a club and therefore you weren't and just played top courses when you played. Can I be nosey and ask what your handicap is and how you maintain it without being a member somewhere and playing in competitions?

Not being nosey at all!

I am a member at a club that offers a tier of membership where you pay a small fee every year and then play at a reduced rate every time that you play. This lets me hold a handicap, play in their competitions and for the club etc but without committing financially to only playing at that course. My handicap is 2.3.

When I said about club memberships, I was probably referring to your bog standard club where you pay a joining fee and then annual subs of <£1000. Even in playing a good schedule of club comps I have a fair amount left over to play when and where I choose. I prefer this to being tied to one club as I am limited in the amount of golf that I can play with work commitments etc so can enjoy a good deal of variety.

Cool, thanks. I only ask as I find I'm having less and less time to play at the club I'm a member at (and pay the £1,500 a year you mention) but have started to play in some open competitions which are always fantastic value but require you to have a current handicap. Seemed like a bit of a catch 22 but not if I can find a system such as yours.

Hibbz, the maths on my club works as follows, assuming a £1500 annual budget. I play around once a fortnight between March-September, so lets say 20 rounds:

£99 annual membership
5 x comps @ £20 round with discount
£1300 left over for 15 rounds of golf

Factor in the joining fee at the clubs local to me and this way makes for a better option. The course that I am a member at is okay, nothing special, but a pay and play owned by a private individual so they have obviously been a bit innovative to entice former golfing nomads like me!

Those 15 rounds are pretty dear.

sharrison01 wrote:Hibbz, the maths on my club works as follows, assuming a £1500 annual budget. I play around once a fortnight between March-September, so lets say 20 rounds:

£99 annual membership
5 x comps @ £20 round with discount
£1300 left over for 15 rounds of golf

Factor in the joining fee at the clubs local to me and this way makes for a better option. The course that I am a member at is okay, nothing special, but a pay and play owned by a private individual so they have obviously been a bit innovative to entice former golfing nomads like me!

Makes sense but you must be pretty skilled to maintain your handicap playing only once a fortnight. Well done to you. Actually that said if you only play five qualifying rounds a year you could play to 28 and you'd still comfortably be a single figure golfer for the next decade!!

super_realist wrote:Those 15 rounds are pretty dear.

Didn't mean that I actually pay that, just that I could. Or keep the money in the bank, either way not give it to a golf club that I wouldn't be using.

Sharrison

What is ridiculous about the list?

I started it while you obviously listed some rankings, It's off the top of my head, and included a few tonngue in cheek individuals incase i couldnt get to 50 without looking at Google or anything!

Hibbz wrote:Makes sense but you must be pretty skilled to maintain your handicap playing only once a fortnight. Well done to you. Actually that said if you only play five qualifying rounds a year you could play to 28 and you'd still comfortably be a single figure golfer for the next decade!!

To be honest, I practice an absolute load and find that when I come to playing I am so up for it that my game is okay. Having to play a minimum of three qualifying games a year also helps - one level par and two 90's and your handicap stays the same! To be fair, I do play well enough to it but probably don't play enough to get it down.

JDandfries wrote:Sharrison

What is ridiculous about the list?

I started it while you obviously listed some rankings, It's off the top of my head, and included a few tonngue in cheek individuals incase i couldnt get to 50 without looking at Google or anything!

Taking out the oldies like Goosen, Els, Furyk etc, most of them have barely figured in the top 10 in the majors that have played?!? Not exactly a list of prolific tour winners either. Sounds more to me like a list of people that you prefer to Poulter - was surprised that Adolf Hitler, Chairman Mao, Pol Pot and Robert Mugabe weren't on there. Maybe you knew that I would spot them as non golfers...

Mugabe, has the yips, but would have gotten in if Simon Khan hadn't made the cut at RSG.

I don't prefer these players, I can't stand 'G-Mac' but if I was placing a bet, I would back those listed befoe Poulter in a major.

I'd probably cut that list in half as "likely to win the next major" and "unlikely to win the next major" - regardless of where you put Poulter there are a lot of players there that will be rank outsiders, if they even qualify?!?

I forgot Kim Jong Il - a legend of the game apparently...

Yes you could, but all I said was that I would back them to win, before i backed Poulter!

Kim Jong Il, has a great short game, but has been banned for using illegal clubs

Some of them make it all a bit silly. Half of them either struggle to qualify, are a bit old or have hardly made the cut in their majors.

Poulter is more likely than them by default that he plays golf...

In your opinion that is!!

I cannot think of another golfer who can divide the golfing community, as much as Poulter does, a lot of people admire the guy, but just as many cant stand him, and the way his golf is just now, will be surprised if last as long as Els,Mickleson or Furyk would expect him to just slowly fade away, except being a good wild card pick for the Ryder Cup

I think that most of the British players divide opinion, such is the way that we like to cover ourselves in defence of being wrong. Poulter may win a major, in which case we can all celebrate a British major winner - if he doesn't win one then we can say "I told you so." You get to win either way.

A quick glance over the threads in any given couple of weeks and Rory won't win a career slam because he has only won a couple of events, Westwood won't win a major because he's a bottle job, Poulter doesn't strike it well enough etc etc. I think that it is a big flaw in Britain succeeding in sport, especially when the media get the bit between their teeth and as much as some other countries might have blind faith in their sports stars, they at least fulfil their potential.

I think that it would be far better if people actually used constructive criticism - I'm not a huge fan of Poulter's but would prefer to have a discussion as to how he can improve as a player and person rather than engage in an argument where nobody budges. We might all have a chance to actually learn something from this as well as they are players that are, let's face it, far better than any of us will ever be at the game.

Not many thought that Darren Clarke still had a Major in him, when comparing his form over the last 2 years, so in some way Poulter might, some time in the future be in with a chance, but I doubt it very much.