The great debate

Nick Bonfield explores the concept of greatness in professional golf and ponders how it should be defined

- Nick Bonfield

The concept of greatness is one that permeates all areas of professional sport - players strive for it, fans heatedly debate it and legacies are forged because of it. Of course, greatness is a broad concept and its definition will vary based on the subject matter, but is it even something that can be objectively defined? If so, what constitutes greatness in professional golf?

I had this discussion with GM contributor Wayne Riley recently and it occurred to me it was a topic that warranted further thought. Like me, he feels the word 'great' is used too often, so we set about attempting to define it in a golfing context. It quickly became clear how challenging it would be.

Every time we thought we'd managed it, a player would pop into our minds who threw our methodology into question. And how do you standardise achievements in a game that's changed markedly since the first Open Championship in 1860? There's no doubt it's a tricky undertaking, but in this piece, I'll attempt to establish if greatness can be systematically defined in golf, or whether we have to judge each person on a case-by-case basis.

Major Championships

Most, understandably, believe the starting point for defining greatness is Major Championships; that you simply can't be considered a premier player if you haven't got over the line at least once in one of golf's big four tournaments. But is this fair and, if so, how many Major titles is the minimum requirement?