2013 Challenge Tour graduates
This is a list of players who graduated from the Challenge Tour in 2013. The top 15 players on the Challenge Tour's money list in 2013 earned their European Tour card for 2014.
2013 Challenge Tour | 2014 European Tour | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Player | Money list rank | Earnings (€) | Starts | Cuts made | Best finish | Money list rank | Earnings (€) | |
1 | 147,811 | 31 | 14 | T8 | 119 | 204,022 | ||
2 | 123,697 | 24 | 11 | T10 | 156 | 83,276 | ||
3 | 119,423 | 15 | 10 | Win | 8 | 1,658,574 | ||
4 | 118,323 | 26 | 17 | T12 | 87 | 302,647 | ||
5 | 113,066 | 26 | 16 | T5 | 98 | 263,580 | ||
6 | 104,870 | 28 | 15 | T12 | 136 | 156,087 | ||
7 | 104,811 | 32 | 15 | T6 | 118 | 204,874 | ||
8 | 100,293 | 27 | 16 | T10 | 130 | 173,873 | ||
9 | 95,708 | 30 | 15 | T9 | 132 | 166,057 | ||
10 | 92,114 | 30 | 19 | T2 | 36 | 689,241 | ||
11 | 87,297 | 31 | 12 | 8 | 133 | 164,650 | ||
12 | 86,489 | 11 | 5 | T22 | n/a | 45,733 | ||
13 | 85,534 | 27 | 10 | T23 | 165 | 69,867 | ||
14 | 82,785 | 32 | 21 | T15 | 121 | 194,692 | ||
15 | 78,676 | 32 | 12 | T20 | 152 | 94,131 |
* European Tour rookie in 2014
T = Tied
The player retained his European Tour card for 2016 (finished inside the top 110).
The player did not retain his European Tour card for 2016, but retained conditional status (finished between 111–147).
The player did not retain his European Tour card for 2015 (finished outside the top 147).
Koepka earned a direct promotion to the European Tour after his third win of the season in June. Pavan and Otaegui regained their cards for 2015 through Q School.
Winners on the European Tour in 2014
No. | Date | Player | Tournament | Winning score | Margin of victory | Runner-up |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 16 Nov | Turkish Airlines Open | −17 (69-67-70-65=271) | 1 stroke |
European Tour Final Series
Runners-up on the European Tour in 2014
No. | Date | Player | Tournament | Winner | Winning score | Runner-up score |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 9 Feb | Joburg Open | −19 (65-68-69-66=268) | −16 (67-69-69-66=271) |
gollark: I believe this is what good hash table implementations do.
gollark: ↑
gollark: You don't have to use a linked list. Use an array for the first N elements.
gollark: Also, they may actually be worse due to something something cache locality.
gollark: Binary trees would have overhead.
External links
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.