It’s one thing to be the No. 1 Majors angler in the world. But realistically, it may be harder to be the No. 1 Minor angler.
Both have their arguments. The Majors compete against the top competition and have to fish across the country. The Minors compete against local talents that know the waters better.
You all can argue those points. We stick to the facts. And statistically, it’s harder to be the No. 1-ranked Minors angler.
The Majors World Ranking uses a 10-tournament criteria over two years. The Minors-only World Ranking uses a five-tournament criteria, meaning one tournament for a Minors angler can have twice the effect as it can for a Major angler.
Case in point, look at what happened to Michael Tuck this weekend. He finished 73rd at the FLW EverStart at the California Delta. It’s obviously not a great finish, but he still beat 40 percent of the field. In that light, it’s not bad. However, that one mediocre finish destroyed his average by nine points and dropped him from first to 10th in the Minors-only World Ranking.
So what does it take to be the No. 1 angler in the world? Well, you better not finish any worse than 50th in any event for two years. Actually, unless you string in some top fives, you better keep yourself in the top 35.
That’s what Trevor Fitzgerald has done. His five finishes in the last two years are 44th, first, third, 46th and 13th. The win and the third cancel out his two finishes in the 40s.
Behind him is Roy Hawk. His finishes over the last five years are 31st, third, 28th, 18th and 10th. He doesn’t have any tournaments in the 40s, but he doesn’t have as many top 5s either.
To drive the point home one more time, Joe Uribe (currently third) has three top 10s in the last two years and only one tournament in the 40s. So why isn’t he No. 1? Because he’s fished six tournaments the last two years, lessening his average just enough to put him behind Fitzgerald and Hawk.
Like we said, it’s tough being the No. 1-ranked Minor angler in the world.
