Opinion & Analysis
Ranking the 2013 major championships: The significance of each victory

When Jason Dufner gently tapped in his final putt at the PGA Championship at Oak Hill Country Club, he both secured his first major victory and ended the 2013 major season.
Dufner’s cruise-control final-round 68 made the Auburn grad the closing entry on the list of 2013’s major winners, following Adam Scott, Justin Rose and Phil Mickelson.
Looking back at this year’s four most significant tournaments (apologies to the Tour and Players championships), it’s fitting to examine the significance of each victory within the respective victor’s career.
No. 1: Adams Scott’s Masters win
With his compelling playoff victory over Angel Cabrera at this year’s Masters, Adam Scott did two important things: The then 32-year-old shed the mantle of “best golfer without a major” and became the first Australian to capture the green jacket.
Further for Scott, who famously melted down over the final holes of the 2012 Open Championship, there was a significant element of redemption in the win. For the Australian’s confidence and forward momentum, the major win couldn’t have been more significant.
When Scott stood victorious, replete with his green jacket in the rain, there was a sense of order in the golfing gods’ universe. No other major win this was nearly so poetic or profound. Thus, Scotty tops this list.
No. 2: Justin Rose’s U.S. Open win
In the same way that Adam Scott rid himself of an unwanted epithet, Justin Rose’s last-man-standing-style win at the U.S. Open at Merion removed the Englishman from consideration for the best golfer without a major designation.
Further, outlasting a field of the world’s best, including the charging Phil Mickelson, and holing critical putts, the statistically poor putter’s week was truly inspired. Rose, who fired rounds of 71-69-71-70 at Merion, capitalized on the promise most golf fans first saw at the 1998 Open Championship, where he finished fourth.
His ability to get up-and-down for par at the final hole displayed a steely resolve more often association with another Sean Foley pupil. That, plus the entirity of the experience, from lifting the U.S. Open Championship trophy to the resultant whirlwind media tour, will make Rose a more comfortable and confident major contender going forward … and likely a multiple major winner.
No. 3: Phil Mickelson’s Open Championship win
Until a week before the Open Championship, it was widely believed that Phil Mickelson wouldn’t win in Europe and couldn’t win on a traditional links style course. The left-hander dispelled both myths with his Scottish Open triumph the week before the Open Championship.
Four birdies over the final six holes and a spectacular final-round 66 facilitated Mickelson’s victory at Open Championship, a tournament where he had only two previous top 10s in his career. With the win, Mickelson captured his fifth career major and the third leg of the career grand slam.
Significant, career-defining achievements, all.
No. 4: Jason Dufner’s PGA Championship Win
The winner of the final major of the year brings up the rear in this ranking. It’s not that the Duf’s hoisting of the almost comically oversized Wanamaker Trophy wasn’t significant for the 36-year-old. Rather, the other wins were narrowly more so.
Dufner’s major could mark a quantum leap forward for the runner-up of the 2011 PGA Championship. However, this remains to be seen, as the dip-packing waggler has only announced himself as one of the Tour’s elite over the past couple of seasons, it’s unclear whether he’ll win as many times on the PGA Tour as Scott (9) or Rose (5), and certainly not as many times as Mickelson (42).
Make no mistake about it, though. Dufner’s first major win is significant. It is redemptive, and it is validating. The wins of the three golfers who precede him in this list are only more significant as a result of the expectations we have for them.
Opinion & Analysis
The 2 primary challenges golf equipment companies face

As the editor-in-chief of this website and an observer of the GolfWRX forums and other online golf equipment discourse for over a decade, I’m pretty well attuned to the grunts and grumbles of a significant portion of the golf equipment purchasing spectrum. And before you accuse me of lording above all in some digital ivory tower, I’d like to offer that I worked at golf courses (public and private) for years prior to picking up my pen, so I’m well-versed in the non-degenerate golf equipment consumers out there. I touched (green)grass (retail)!
Complaints about the ills of and related to the OEMs usually follow some version of: Product cycles are too short for real innovation, tour equipment isn’t the same as retail (which is largely not true, by the way), too much is invested in marketing and not enough in R&D, top staffer X hasn’t even put the new driver in play, so it’s obviously not superior to the previous generation, prices are too high, and on and on.
Without digging into the merits of any of these claims, which I believe are mostly red herrings, I’d like to bring into view of our rangefinder what I believe to be the two primary difficulties golf equipment companies face.
One: As Terry Koehler, back when he was the CEO of Ben Hogan, told me at the time of the Ft Worth irons launch, if you can’t regularly hit the golf ball in a coin-sized area in the middle of the face, there’s not a ton that iron technology can do for you. Now, this is less true now with respect to irons than when he said it, and is less and less true by degrees as the clubs get larger (utilities, fairways, hybrids, drivers), but there remains a great deal of golf equipment truth in that statement. Think about it — which is to say, in TL;DR fashion, get lessons from a qualified instructor who will teach you about the fundamentals of repeatable impact and how the golf swing works, not just offer band-aid fixes. If you can’t repeatably deliver the golf club to the golf ball in something resembling the manner it was designed for, how can you expect to be getting the most out of the club — put another way, the maximum value from your investment?
Similarly, game improvement equipment can only improve your game if you game it. In other words, get fit for the clubs you ought to be playing rather than filling the bag with the ones you wish you could hit or used to be able to hit. Of course, don’t do this if you don’t care about performance and just want to hit a forged blade while playing off an 18 handicap. That’s absolutely fine. There were plenty of members in clubs back in the day playing Hogan Apex or Mizuno MP-32 irons who had no business doing so from a ballstriking standpoint, but they enjoyed their look, feel, and complementary qualities to their Gatsby hats and cashmere sweaters. Do what brings you a measure of joy in this maddening game.
Now, the second issue. This is not a plea for non-conforming equipment; rather, it is a statement of fact. USGA/R&A limits on every facet of golf equipment are detrimental to golf equipment manufacturers. Sure, you know this, but do you think about it as it applies to almost every element of equipment? A 500cc driver would be inherently more forgiving than a 460cc, as one with a COR measurement in excess of 0.83. 50-inch shafts. Box grooves. And on and on.
Would fewer regulations be objectively bad for the game? Would this erode its soul? Fortunately, that’s beside the point of this exercise, which is merely to point out the facts. The fact, in this case, is that equipment restrictions and regulations are the slaughterbench of an abundance of innovation in the golf equipment space. Is this for the best? Well, now I’ve asked the question twice and might as well give a partial response, I guess my answer to that would be, “It depends on what type of golf you’re playing and who you’re playing it with.”
For my part, I don’t mind embarrassing myself with vintage blades and persimmons chasing after the quasi-spiritual elevation of a well-struck shot, but that’s just me. Plenty of folks don’t give a damn if their grooves are conforming. Plenty of folks think the folks in Liberty Corner ought to add a prison to the museum for such offences. And those are just a few of the considerations for the amateur game — which doesn’t get inside the gallery ropes of the pro game…
Different strokes in the game of golf, in my humble opinion.
Anyway, I believe equipment company engineers are genuinely trying to build better equipment year over year. The marketing departments are trying to find ways to make this equipment appeal to the broadest segment of the golf market possible. All of this against (1) the backdrop of — at least for now — firm product cycles. And golfers who, with their ~15 average handicap (men), for the most part, are not striping the golf ball like Tiger in his prime and seem to have less and less time year over year to practice and improve. (2) Regulations that massively restrict what they’re able to do…
That’s the landscape as I see it and the real headwinds for golf equipment companies. No doubt, there’s more I haven’t considered, but I think the previous is a better — and better faith — point of departure when formulating any serious commentary on the golf equipment world than some of the more cynical and conspiratorial takes I hear.
Agree? Disagree? Think I’m worthy of an Adam Hadwin-esque security guard tackle? Let me know in the comments.
@golfoncbs The infamous Adam Hadwin tackle ? #golf #fyp #canada #pgatour #adamhadwin ? Ghibli-style nostalgic waltz – MaSssuguMusic
Podcasts
Fore Love of Golf: Introducing a new club concept

Episode #16 brings us Cliff McKinney. Cliff is the founder of Old Charlie Golf Club, a new club, and concept, to be built in the Florida panhandle. The model is quite interesting and aims to make great, private golf more affordable. We hope you enjoy the show!
Opinion & Analysis
On Scottie Scheffler wondering ‘What’s the point of winning?’

Last week, I came across a reel from BBC Sport on Instagram featuring Scottie Scheffler speaking to the media ahead of The Open at Royal Portrush. In it, he shared that he often wonders what the point is of wanting to win tournaments so badly — especially when he knows, deep down, that it doesn’t lead to a truly fulfilling life.
View this post on Instagram
“Is it great to be able to win tournaments and to accomplish the things I have in the game of golf? Yeah, it brings tears to my eyes just to think about it because I’ve literally worked my entire life to be good at this sport,” Scheffler said. “To have that kind of sense of accomplishment, I think, is a pretty cool feeling. To get to live out your dreams is very special, but at the end of the day, I’m not out here to inspire the next generation of golfers. I’m not out here to inspire someone to be the best player in the world, because what’s the point?”
Ironically — or perhaps perfectly — he went on to win the claret jug.
That question — what’s the point of winning? — cuts straight to the heart of the human journey.
As someone who’s spent over two decades in the trenches of professional golf, and in deep study of the mental, emotional, and spiritual dimensions of the game, I see Scottie’s inner conflict as a sign of soul evolution in motion.
I came to golf late. I wasn’t a junior standout or college All-American. At 27, I left a steady corporate job to see if I could be on the PGA Tour starting as a 14-handicap, average-length hitter. Over the years, my journey has been defined less by trophies and more by the relentless effort to navigate the deeply inequitable and gated system of professional golf — an effort that ultimately turned inward and helped me evolve as both a golfer and a person.
One perspective that helped me make sense of this inner dissonance around competition and our culture’s tendency to overvalue winning is the idea of soul evolution.
The University of Virginia’s Division of Perceptual Studies has done extensive research on reincarnation, and Netflix’s Surviving Death (Episode 6) explores the topic, too. Whether you take it literally or metaphorically, the idea that we’re on a long arc of growth — from beginner to sage elder — offers a profound perspective.
If you accept the premise literally, then terms like “young soul” and “old soul” start to hold meaning. However, even if we set the word “soul” aside, it’s easy to see that different levels of life experience produce different worldviews.
Newer souls — or people in earlier stages of their development — may be curious and kind but still lack discernment or depth. There is a naivety, and they don’t yet question as deeply, tending to see things in black and white, partly because certainty feels safer than confronting the unknown.
As we gain more experience, we begin to experiment. We test limits. We chase extreme external goals — sometimes at the expense of health, relationships, or inner peace — still operating from hunger, ambition, and the fragility of the ego.
It’s a necessary stage, but often a turbulent and unfulfilling one.
David Duval fell off the map after reaching World No. 1. Bubba Watson had his own “Is this it?” moment with his caddie, Ted Scott, after winning the Masters.
In Aaron Rodgers: Enigma, reflecting on his 2011 Super Bowl win, Rodgers said:
“Now I’ve accomplished the only thing that I really, really wanted to do in my life. Now what? I was like, ‘Did I aim at the wrong thing? Did I spend too much time thinking about stuff that ultimately doesn’t give you true happiness?’”
Jim Carrey once said, “I think everybody should get rich and famous and do everything they ever dreamed of so they can see that it’s not the answer.”
Eventually, though, something shifts.
We begin to see in shades of gray. Winning, dominating, accumulating—these pursuits lose their shine. The rewards feel more fleeting. Living in a constant state of fight-or-flight makes us feel alive, yes, but not happy and joyful.
Compassion begins to replace ambition. Love, presence, and gratitude become more fulfilling than status, profits, or trophies. We crave balance over burnout. Collaboration over competition. Meaning over metrics.
Interestingly, if we zoom out, we can apply this same model to nations and cultures. Countries, like people, have a collective “soul stage” made up of the individuals within them.
Take the United States, for example. I’d place it as a mid-level soul: highly competitive and deeply driven, but still learning emotional maturity. Still uncomfortable with nuance. Still believing that more is always better. Despite its global wins, the U.S. currently ranks just 23rd in happiness (as of 2025). You might liken it to a gifted teenager—bold, eager, and ambitious, but angsty and still figuring out how to live well and in balance. As much as a parent wants to protect their child, sometimes the child has to make their own mistakes to truly grow.
So when Scottie Scheffler wonders what the point of winning is, I don’t see someone losing strength.
I see someone evolving.
He’s beginning to look beyond the leaderboard. Beyond metrics of success that carry a lower vibration. And yet, in a poetic twist, Scheffler did go on to win The Open. But that only reinforces the point: even at the pinnacle, the question remains. And if more of us in the golf and sports world — and in U.S. culture at large — started asking similar questions, we might discover that the more meaningful trophy isn’t about accumulating or beating others at all costs.
It’s about awakening and evolving to something more than winning could ever promise.
Mick
Aug 16, 2013 at 10:22 pm
Adam Scott was easily the most consistent performer through all the majors and thoroughly deserves the #1 spot
Matt
Aug 15, 2013 at 10:24 pm
placing Phil’s win at #3 means the author has no idea what he’s talking about.
Between the overwhelming agreement from even Phil himself that his game was questionable to conquiring The Open, and the bounce back from an epic 6th runner-up heart break losing The US Open…..Phil’s final round 66 at the The Open was the moment of the 2013 major season.
Tim
Aug 15, 2013 at 12:30 pm
I love Duf and his wife is HOT, but it was an absolute bore to watch him win. He is very introverted. Him and Furyk in the last group was a snooze fest.
Troy Vayanos
Aug 14, 2013 at 5:18 pm
I agree Ben, you got it spot in. Adam Scott’s win was very significant for himself and Australian golf. Justin Rose’s win did the same for him and his country England.
John75402
Aug 14, 2013 at 12:12 pm
I’d rank Phil’s Open Championship as first… it was pretty riveting to watch. I would also rank Scott’s Masters as second, because it was such a gutty finish for both him and Cabrera… then the deciding birdie putt was amazing. Justin Rose comes in a close 3rd… He was a rock on a Sunday when everyone else was falling away, and he just kept hitting superb shot after superb shot. The PGA was a very good contest, but the course detracted some… very straight lines, single doglegs… The course was beautiful and well manicured, but kind of repetitive. The quasi match play final group made for great viewing, and Dufner played amazing golf, but it was a little anti-climactic, partially because of how stoic he is.
All in all, it was a great year of majors and I can’t wait for the Masters to roll back around.
MB
Aug 15, 2013 at 3:45 am
The UK coverage hardly showed Phil until the 5 or 6 holes when he started his run, and once he finished that was it, tournament over with several groups still to come in. So while I agree it was top class golf from Phil to win on a links course, I wouldn’t describe it as riveting. The way that Scott and Cabrerra birdied 18 in regulation then went at it in the playoff, especially with Scott’s record … now that was riveting. So Scott for me a clear first, then toss up between Phil and Justin. Sorry Duff, you played great golf and totally deserved it but it was by far the least interesting major of the year.
John75402
Aug 16, 2013 at 10:21 am
Well, you’re certainly entitled to your opinion…
Nevin Wilson
Aug 14, 2013 at 9:03 am
I’d put Phil’s win first.
Henrik
Aug 14, 2013 at 4:47 am
It as been a great Majoryear with great tournaments.
However, Phil deserves more than 3d place…
Mateo
Aug 14, 2013 at 12:47 am
And the most exciting tournament of the year was The Players. The only reason I bring it up is because IT SHOULD BE A MAJOR.
Either have 5 majors or change The Masters to what it always has been……. an invitational. An invitational should not be a major. Augusta gets way too much hype.
I’m sure I won’t get a single reply on this one. 🙂
aaron
Aug 15, 2013 at 1:22 am
Agreed….The Players should be a major…I also think there should be more emphasis on more tournaments that arent majors….it sucks that we only have the intensity that comes with the majors 4 times a year within a 4 month period…I think we would like to see more of the major quality fields and excitement from the players
Mateo
Aug 14, 2013 at 12:36 am
The best major of the year was BY FAR Phil’s win at the BRITISH Open (hate when people call it “the open”. It’s the British Open).
I’ll call the rest a 3 way tie. Actually no……… I’d say it’s a tie for second between The Masters and the US Open.
The PGA was a distant 4th. It felt more like the John Deere Classic than a major.
James
Aug 13, 2013 at 11:30 pm
All of the wins this year were great for their own reasons and relevant to the winners. I’d agree with the article, but certainly think no-one played better (or to a higher standard) than Duffman. His ironsand distance control were especially amazing.
I thought the course setup at Oak Hill was AWFUL – sure it looked beautiful, and the greens / conditioning etc were lush and groomed to the highest standards, but the course may as well have been the same one played the week before at Firestone.
No variation in rough, fairway width, approach options etc, just driver/iron over the flag with boring 4 – 6 inch cabbage rough. Lucky the hole numbers were on the broadcast, as almost every Par 4/Par 5 tee box and drive was the same.
Huge Kudos to Duff though – his was just so solid and holed some great long and short putts under immense pressure whist Furyk and Stenson just kept coming and making amazing pars putts also.
Woeful course. Amazing Tournament. Great Win.
PS. I thought that one of Ross’ key design principles was to encourage run-up shots (Pinehurst No. 2(+1+3)?), Seminole, Pine Needles? etc etc.
John
Aug 13, 2013 at 10:05 pm
you got it wrong. phil’s OC was the number one major of the year. close second is scott becoming the first aussie to win at ANGC.
aaron
Aug 13, 2013 at 11:30 pm
Agreed…5 shots back in a tournament nobody including himself thought he would ever win….bettering the field average by over 7 strokes….birdies on the last 2 holes….no way the best major victory of the year doesnt go to Phil….then Adam then Justin then Dufner
ev
Aug 17, 2013 at 9:19 am
Easily. I’m really happy for Adam Scott, but his win was #2 behind Phil. Or at least 1b. We’ve assumed for the better part if 2 decades Phil wouldn’t win the British.
paul
Aug 13, 2013 at 9:16 pm
Lol. yeah, she’s a babe.
Winmac
Aug 13, 2013 at 8:10 pm
The moment he married Amanda, Jason Duffner is already a winner 😉