PDA

View Full Version : Tiger Wins


frerottenextelway
03-29-2009, 05:52 PM
16 footer on the 72nd hole. Unbelievable he is.

TheElusiveKyleOrton
03-29-2009, 05:54 PM
He is astounding. Maybe the most dominant athlete in his sport of any athlete in any sport, ever. He started the day, what, 4 strokes back? Guys just crumble when he's involved. I've never seen anything like it.

Bronx33
03-29-2009, 05:55 PM
yaaaaa!!! hes still super rich!

frerottenextelway
03-29-2009, 05:56 PM
He is astounding. Maybe the most dominant athlete in his sport of any athlete in any sport, ever. He started the day, what, 4 strokes back? Guys just crumble when he's involved. I've never seen anything like it.

Yeah. He was actually 5 back enterring today. Pure awesome.

enjolras
03-29-2009, 05:56 PM
It's nice to be able to watch golf on Sundays again.

SouthStndJunkie
03-29-2009, 05:57 PM
That was a clutch putt for the win.

Inkana7
03-29-2009, 05:57 PM
Wow.

TheElusiveKyleOrton
03-29-2009, 05:57 PM
Yeah. He was actually 5 back enterring today. Pure awesome.

I'd say "Pure awesome" is a total understatement. Most dominant athlete I've ever seen.

DivineBronco
03-29-2009, 06:01 PM
made up for the uneventful UNC OK game.......fun fun stuff

Killericon
03-29-2009, 06:02 PM
He is astounding. Maybe the most dominant athlete in his sport of any athlete in any sport, ever. He started the day, what, 4 strokes back? Guys just crumble when he's involved. I've never seen anything like it.

http://www.sites.si.edu/images/exhibits/Sports/images/Lance-Armstrong_jpg.jpg

dEADmANwALKING
03-29-2009, 06:02 PM
That guy is un-freaking real! what a freaking putt!

vancejohnson82
03-29-2009, 06:06 PM
awesome sports moment

TheElusiveKyleOrton
03-29-2009, 06:11 PM
http://www.sites.si.edu/images/exhibits/Sports/images/Lance-Armstrong_jpg.jpg

He definitely comes the closest. But he's in a sport that nobody really gives a **** about, and Tiger is. His sport doesn't require any cold-blooded, high-stress situations like Golf does. Tiger is at his best when the stress is at its highest point.

Killericon
03-29-2009, 06:18 PM
He definitely comes the closest. But he's in a sport that nobody really gives a **** about, and Tiger is. His sport doesn't require any cold-blooded, high-stress situations like Golf does. Tiger is at his best when the stress is at its highest point.

Perhaps not, but it'd be different for Lance if he won by a few seconds every time. There would be a clutch situation at hand if Lance were to not win by minutes every time. His last race, he won by almost 5 minutes.

That would be like if Tiger won every game by 10 strokes, and then claiming there's no high pressure situations.

azbroncfan
03-29-2009, 06:32 PM
Where is the guy that was claiming Phil is a better putter than Tiger?

UberBroncoMan
03-29-2009, 06:35 PM
I don't watch golf much but for some reason throughout my life when golf has been on the TV, it's always on or right next to the last hole and I literally see Tiger get a final put to win it. I think this has happened to me like 5+ times, as of today... the man is just crazy good and for some reason I always end up watching him show me that.

UberBroncoMan
03-29-2009, 06:38 PM
Perhaps not, but it'd be different for Lance if he won by a few seconds every time. There would be a clutch situation at hand if Lance were to not win by minutes every time. His last race, he won by almost 5 minutes.

That would be like if Tiger won every game by 10 strokes, and then claiming there's no high pressure situations.

Lets not forget either that Lance came back from Cancer. I'd easily put Lance in the same category as Tiger and Michael Jordan.

gyldenlove
03-29-2009, 06:43 PM
Perhaps not, but it'd be different for Lance if he won by a few seconds every time. There would be a clutch situation at hand if Lance were to not win by minutes every time. His last race, he won by almost 5 minutes.

That would be like if Tiger won every game by 10 strokes, and then claiming there's no high pressure situations.

No, 5 minutes out of a race lasting almost 90 hours is not even equivalent to 1 stroke.

Besides, Lance won how many races per year? the tour, one or two warm up races and that was his season.

Tiger wins or finishes in the top of many tournaments every year and he has a shot at winning each and every one. Tiger dominates much much more than Lance ever did, Lance is nowhere near the top 10 for career wins among cyclists.

Tiger is the greatest golfer since Jack Nicklaus, Nicklaus not only won 18 majors and 73 PGA tournaments, he had a run of 15 years of finishing in the top 6 at the British open, and 10 years of finishing in the top 8 of the Masters. Nicklaus finished in the top 10 of a major 73 times!

Atwater His Ass
03-29-2009, 07:10 PM
Are people really trying to compare, on an athletic scale, a golfer and a cyclist? Really?

Killericon
03-29-2009, 07:11 PM
Well, for me, it's Gretzky, Jordan, Armstrong and Tiger on the sports dominance Rushmore.

broncogary
03-29-2009, 07:15 PM
Lets not forget either that Lance came back from Cancer. I'd easily put Lance in the same category as Tiger and Michael Jordan.

Yeah, steroids will do that to you. 8')

enjolras
03-29-2009, 07:19 PM
Well, for me, it's Gretzky, Jordan, Armstrong and Tiger on the sports dominance Rushmore.

SACRILEGE!

No sports Rushmore without Elway.

:) :)

gyldenlove
03-29-2009, 07:28 PM
In terms of sports dominance I would say Jack Nicklaus, Pele, Eddy Meckx, Michael Schumacher, Wayne Gretzky are in a very rare class. Each set unbeatable career records as well as dominating year after year on every imaginable level.

SoDak Bronco
03-29-2009, 07:37 PM
Was there ever a doubt he was going to make that putt?? Man, Twoo is a freaking stud.

OABB
03-29-2009, 07:46 PM
Are people really trying to compare, on an athletic scale, a golfer and a cyclist? Really?

lol! I always laugh at this. When I think of great athletes I usually imagine at least a broken sweat. Golf should only be compared to darts, bowling and horseshoes.


calling him an athlete is even debatable...

azbroncfan
03-29-2009, 07:53 PM
In terms of sports dominance I would say Jack Nicklaus, Pele, Eddy Meckx, Michael Schumacher, Wayne Gretzky are in a very rare class. Each set unbeatable career records as well as dominating year after year on every imaginable level.

Well you have to throw Tiger in there if you have Nicklaus. Barring injury Tiger is going to eclipse his total wins and majors before he is even out of his prime. Tiger wins 1 of every 3 tournaments he has played in on average for his career which is plain crazy.

broncogary
03-29-2009, 07:55 PM
lol! I always laugh at this. When I think of great athletes I usually imagine at least a broken sweat. Golf should only be compared to darts, bowling and horseshoes.


calling him an athlete is even debatable...

I always sweat when I play golf. I guess that's because I play it so athletically. Hilarious!

gyldenlove
03-29-2009, 07:57 PM
Well you have to throw Tiger in there if you have Nicklaus. Barring injury Tiger is going to eclipse his total wins and majors before he is even out of his prime. Tiger wins 1 of every 3 tournaments he has played in on average for his career which is plain crazy.

I will throw Tiger in there when he achieves that.

cabronco
03-29-2009, 08:04 PM
Well dummy me for only recording the golf game and not the infomercial show afterwards. Now my dvr recorder stopped recording on the 15th hole. Son of a b*tch ! With all the technology you'd think it would continue recording your program until its finished. Next time I tell the girlfriend we fool around after or during the sporting event, so I can still see the tv !;D

Pony Boy
03-29-2009, 08:08 PM
One of the commemtators said "Tiger is a one man stimulus package for golf"

SouthStndJunkie
03-29-2009, 08:08 PM
Well dummy me for only recording the golf game and not the infomercial show afterwards. Now my dvr recorder stopped recording on the 15th hole. Son of a b*tch ! With all the technology you'd think it would continue recording your program until its finished. Next time I tell the girlfriend we fool around after or during the sporting event, so I can still see the tv !;D

You scored, Tiger made the putt....it all worked out ok.

Mr Chatterboodamn
03-29-2009, 09:01 PM
lol! I always laugh at this. When I think of great athletes I usually imagine at least a broken sweat. Golf should only be compared to darts, bowling and horseshoes.


calling him an athlete is even debatable...



i find it equally and oppositely hilarious. can you bench 400 like tiger? hit a 370 yard drive? If he, in particular, isn't an athlete, then I guess the line must be drawn at Le Bron. They walk a few miles each round. Golf is also, I would argue, the most difficult sport. I think it incorporates the feel of darts, but I imagine it is just as much exertion to hit a drive as it is to throw a football. Although QB's like Cassell do need to exert themselves a lot to throw the ball.

Rock Chalk
03-29-2009, 09:12 PM
Where is the guy that was claiming Phil is a better putter than Tiger?

Overall Phil is a better putter than Tiger. Tiger is definitely the most clutch guy ever but Phil is consistently one of the best putters I have ever seen.

And Im not a Lefty fan. He just is what he is.

Pony Boy
03-29-2009, 09:25 PM
Are golfers really athletes?
The question was given serious analysis in a study conducted in 2004 by ESPN.com, and, for golf lovers, the process resulted in an unflattering answer. A panel of experts which included sports scientists from the U.S. Olympic Committee, academics who study the science of muscles and movement, sports journalists and former pro baseball and football player Brian Jordan was polled to identify the most demanding of 60 sports. Various activities were graded on 10 components of athleticism: endurance, strength, power, speed, agility, flexibility, nerve, durability, hand-eye coordination and analytic aptitude. Boxing ranked first, followed by hockey, football and basketball. Golf ranked -- take a deep breath -- 51st out of the 60 sports, just behind table tennis and horse racing. It did, however, place just ahead of cheerleading and roller-skating, with fishing finishing last. Those poor fish have no one to defend them.

Rock Chalk
03-29-2009, 09:32 PM
I wouldnt call golfer's athletes per se. I mean, John Daly is a pretty good golfer and he is the most out of shape person ever. Football linemen are big hefty dudes, but most of them are pretty damn athletic, can move and have some agility and some of them run in the high 4s in their 40 times.

Gold itself IS sport. There is eye hand coordination involved and competition. Whereas, chess is a game. Competition in and of itself does not constitute sport. And not all sports require athletes.

Now, Tiger Woods himself IS an athlete. He may not be the most agile, or fastest or strongest, but he does have those qualities.

Killericon
03-29-2009, 09:38 PM
Are golfers really athletes?
The question was given serious analysis in a study conducted in 2004 by ESPN.com, and, for golf lovers, the process resulted in an unflattering answer. A panel of experts which included sports scientists from the U.S. Olympic Committee, academics who study the science of muscles and movement, sports journalists and former pro baseball and football player Brian Jordan was polled to identify the most demanding of 60 sports. Various activities were graded on 10 components of athleticism: endurance, strength, power, speed, agility, flexibility, nerve, durability, hand-eye coordination and analytic aptitude. Boxing ranked first, followed by hockey, football and basketball. Golf ranked -- take a deep breath -- 51st out of the 60 sports, just behind table tennis and horse racing. It did, however, place just ahead of cheerleading and roller-skating, with fishing finishing last. Those poor fish have no one to defend them.

That's got to be cheerleading on the whole. The cheerleaders who throw the other ones into the air are more athletic than roller-skaters.

Pony Boy
03-29-2009, 09:48 PM
Overall Phil is a better putter than Tiger. Tiger is definitely the most clutch guy ever but Phil is consistently one of the best putters I have ever seen.

And Im not a Lefty fan. He just is what he is.

I agree both Tiger and Phil are deadly accurate and clutch putters but could they do it with Ray Lewis bearing down on them at full speed.

Arkie
03-29-2009, 09:50 PM
The PGA started testing golfers for perfermance enhancing drugs last year. Why would they do that for "nonathletes?"

gyldenlove
03-29-2009, 10:09 PM
The PGA started testing golfers for perfermance enhancing drugs last year. Why would they do that for "nonathletes?"

They actually test people who do competitive shooting for performance enhancing drugs. I have never seen a group of more out of shape people than shooters, they make golfers look like all-world athletes.

OABB
03-29-2009, 10:52 PM
i find it equally and oppositely hilarious. can you bench 400 like tiger? hit a 370 yard drive? If he, in particular, isn't an athlete, then I guess the line must be drawn at Le Bron. They walk a few miles each round. Golf is also, I would argue, the most difficult sport. I think it incorporates the feel of darts, but I imagine it is just as much exertion to hit a drive as it is to throw a football. Although QB's like Cassell do need to exert themselves a lot to throw the ball.

He may be an athletic man because he benchpresses 400, but he isn't an athlete because he golfs. hell, I watched a fat John Daly golf while having DT's from alcohol withdraw...

Can you imagine a 240 pound man with the shakes playing a 48 minute basketball game?

so yes, I would draw the line at Lebron or anyone who actually is involved in an athletic contest.

but that's just me I guess.

hitting a ball and than walking to where it lands is not the same as dribbling, running, shooting and playing defense against another team of athletes for three hours.

Can Bob Barker dunk?

Mr Chatterboodamn
03-29-2009, 11:22 PM
I think your argument is pretty reasonable. It shows the key difference in our arguments is that you don't consider the type of exertion in golf to be athletic. Various estimates put the calorie burn for golf between 500 to 2000 calories per four-hour round depending on conditions, so if you've ever panted while staring at a stairmaster calorimeter (as i have), you know that's a lot of aggregated work. I'd say it's more than David Ortiz puts out on a given night, unless he hits 5 triples and gets into 45 minute run-down as a 275lb man. Fitness and exertion are relative to each sport.

All of that said, I think reverence for his accomplishments really comes down to whether you play the game/sport or not. Golf is so freaking difficult that I wouldn't really care if it was considered a 4 hour parlor game. The guy hits so many shots that demonstrate that he is a master of understanding and navigating the practical physics of the world.

OABB
03-29-2009, 11:29 PM
I think golf is great, and Tiger is the best golfer period.... I just get tired of hearing him compared to people that exert their bodies to the limit and are in peak condition for their sport.


Comparing Tiger woods to Lance armstrong is like saying that stupid attention whore "Pippa Bacca"(the "artist" that put on a wedding dress and hitch hiked through Turkey) is as brave as a soldier diving on a live hand grenade to save his fellow soldiers. (yes someone actually said that here!)


that is the only point I was trying to make.

Dagmar
03-29-2009, 11:32 PM
http://img.timeinc.net/golf/i/tours/2008/05/june_tiger_600x400.jpg

:notworthy :notworthy :notworthy :notworthy :notworthy :notworthy :notworthy

broncogary
03-30-2009, 06:00 AM
He may be an athletic man because he benchpresses 400, but he isn't an athlete because he golfs. hell, I watched a fat John Daly golf while having DT's from alcohol withdraw...

Can you imagine a 240 pound man with the shakes playing a 48 minute basketball game?

...


You think JD only weighs 240? ;D

Beantown Bronco
03-30-2009, 06:41 AM
Are people really trying to compare, on an athletic scale, a golfer and a cyclist? Really?

Where in this thread did anyone say anything about golfers being in better shape than cyclists? Nobody ever did this.

The comparison is "level of domination" of an individual within a particular sport. Nothing more, nothing less.

Traveler
03-30-2009, 06:43 AM
http://img.timeinc.net/golf/i/tours/2008/05/june_tiger_600x400.jpg

:notworthy :notworthy :notworthy :notworthy :notworthy :notworthy :notworthy

His short game is off the charts rights now. Guess he put in some work while he was out.

SoDak Bronco
03-30-2009, 08:38 AM
I don't have the stats but I can guarantee Woods is statistically the better putter than Phil w/o a doubt.

Gcver2ver3
03-30-2009, 09:06 AM
I will throw Tiger in there when he achieves that.

Tiger is already there...

Tiger is already consider by many the greatest golfer of all time...

If Tiger were to hang them up right now, he'd already be considered in that elite class...no question...

garandman
03-30-2009, 11:57 AM
i find it equally and oppositely hilarious. can you bench 400 like tiger? hit a 370 yard drive? If he, in particular, isn't an athlete, then I guess the line must be drawn at Le Bron. They walk a few miles each round. Golf is also, I would argue, the most difficult sport. I think it incorporates the feel of darts, but I imagine it is just as much exertion to hit a drive as it is to throw a football. Although QB's like Cassell do need to exert themselves a lot to throw the ball.

Uh, Tiger does NOT bench press 400 lbs, let's not get crazy with the stories, I have worked out in the gym with him before (He used to live here in Orlando) and yea he was in damn good shape for a golfer but let's have some perspective.

Golfer's are athletes, just like it takes an athlete to drive Nascar, but neither is on the same scale as a BBALL or Football player....IMO

gyldenlove
03-30-2009, 12:16 PM
Tiger is already there...

Tiger is already consider by many the greatest golfer of all time...

If Tiger were to hang them up right now, he'd already be considered in that elite class...no question...

He doesn't have as many wins as Nicklaus, not as many Majors, and nowhere near the consistency that Nicklaus had in major tournaments. The people who consider Tiger the greatest golfer of all times have very short memories.

Tiger is great, no doubt about that, but he is still behind Nicklaus.

The Joker
03-30-2009, 01:41 PM
He doesn't have as many wins as Nicklaus, not as many Majors, and nowhere near the consistency that Nicklaus had in major tournaments. The people who consider Tiger the greatest golfer of all times have very short memories.

Tiger is great, no doubt about that, but he is still behind Nicklaus.

By the time he's finished, he'll have beaten every record Nicklaus ever set into the ground.

With the shape he keeps himself in, and the incredible desire the man has, I fully expect he'll be competitive well into his 40's.

He's 33 now, in his first 12 years on tour he has 14 majors to his name. I see nothing to suggest he can't replicate that or at least come close over the next 12 years.

Barring further injury, he'll shatter Nicklaus' mark of 18 majors. 25 majors, minimum, would be my guess.

He's also doing it in a time where there are is a much deeper talent level in golf than there has ever been. Or at least, the technology has helped lesser players than Tiger compete with him due to clubs that are more forgiving.

Not to take anything away from Jack, but back in his day there were rarely more than a dozen guys who you'd expect to have much chance of winning the tournament. These days a much larger portion of people can win if they have a good week.

The Joker
03-30-2009, 01:58 PM
Also, the notion that Mickelson is anywhere near Tiger in terms of putting is more or less laughable.

Mickelson is the guy I root for in tournaments and try to play like when I go out on the course myself. His style of play so much fun to watch, and in terms of creativity around the green and his ability with a wedge in his hands, he's Tiger's superior.

Long range putting they're pretty equal, both make some absolute snakes and on their good days will knock in two or three twenty footers. I'd probably just give Phil the edge.

But the place where a golfer makes his score is on putts from 3 to 8 feet, and this is where Tiger is absolutely phenomenal. He almost never misses, time after time he'll sink those difficult putts and save par.

Mickelson though can be dodgy from that length, part of the issue for him is that he has a very long, fluent stroke and the tendency for him is to decelerate on the short putts, which leads to impure strokes and as a result missed putts.

So often you'll see Mickelson go out and play great golf, make 6 birdies but also miss a few 4 footers for par and end up with a 68.

Meanwhile Tiger will go out, drive badly, miss a lot of greens but time and time again he'll make 6 footers for par to keep his round alive. Then he'll get it together and make a couple of birdies over the last 3 holes and all of a sudden he's signing for a 69 (with his wife, who wouldn't?).

Most guys that round would turn into a 74 or 75, but Tiger's sheer will and courage to make putt after putt and keep is round going when he plays poorly is what seperates him from every other guy in tour.

Tee to green, Sergio Garcia is actually a much better player than Tiger. But he can't putt for ****, which is why Tiger has 14 majors and Sergio has none.

Best putter I've ever seen, as powerful as he is and as many great shots as he plays it's his putting that makes him what he is.

Gcver2ver3
03-30-2009, 02:44 PM
He doesn't have as many wins as Nicklaus, not as many Majors, and nowhere near the consistency that Nicklaus had in major tournaments. The people who consider Tiger the greatest golfer of all times have very short memories.

Tiger is great, no doubt about that, but he is still behind Nicklaus.

i disagree but i wasn't really expressing an opinion on Tiger being better than Nicklaus...i was just saying that he's already in the class of greats you had previously mentioned...

but as far as Tiger vs Nicklaus, i find it hard to believe that Jack accomplished more in the same span of time that Tiger has...but then again i'm no expert on golf so maybe he did...

i find it hard to believe anyone has ever dominated golf like Tiger is doing now...

The Joker
03-30-2009, 03:00 PM
i disagree but i wasn't really expressing an opinion on Tiger being better than Nicklaus...i was just saying that he's already in the class of greats you had previously mentioned...

but as far as Tiger vs Nicklaus, i find it hard to believe that Jack accomplished more in the same span of time that Tiger has...but then again i'm no expert on golf so maybe he did...

i find it hard to believe anyone has ever dominated golf like Tiger is doing now...

At the same age Nicklaus had 12 majors to his name, 2 less than Tiger.

Not a massive difference, but certainly puts to bed any notion that Nicklaus was ever more dominant than Tiger has been.

Gcver2ver3
03-30-2009, 03:09 PM
At the same age Nicklaus had 12 majors to his name, 2 less than Tiger.

Not a massive difference, but certainly puts to bed any notion that Nicklaus was ever more dominant than Tiger has been.

thats what i figured...

sounds good...

azbroncfan
03-30-2009, 03:49 PM
He doesn't have as many wins as Nicklaus, not as many Majors, and nowhere near the consistency that Nicklaus had in major tournaments. The people who consider Tiger the greatest golfer of all times have very short memories.

Tiger is great, no doubt about that, but he is still behind Nicklaus.

I think more wins at this point in his career at the same age is more consistency. How do you define consistency? I'm sure your going to bring up second place finishes but Tiger usually wins instead of finishing second.

worm
03-30-2009, 05:29 PM
Woods biggest problem is that he suffers from not have an arch nemesis. It is like being Superman without having the World to save from Lex.

People keep trying to give him one but they have all turned out to be paper villains.

When all of Jacks records are put down...the one thing that he will have is Travino, Palmer, Watson, Player in his era. His star shines brighter due to his contemporaries.

By contrast, Tigers 'peers' are no competition on the course..or in the ratings.

lex
03-30-2009, 05:36 PM
He is astounding. Maybe the most dominant athlete in his sport of any athlete in any sport, ever. He started the day, what, 4 strokes back? Guys just crumble when he's involved. I've never seen anything like it.

No, there have been several who were more dominant: Michael Jordan; Lance Armstrong; Carl Lewis; Alexander Karelin; Al Oerter; Sergei Bubka; Nadia Comaneci; and Eric Heiden. I could probably think of more if I took the time.

JJJ
03-30-2009, 11:39 PM
Overall Phil is a better putter than Tiger. Tiger is definitely the most clutch guy ever but Phil is consistently one of the best putters I have ever seen.

And Im not a Lefty fan. He just is what he is.

I am a huge Lefty fan. But are you serious with this? How many clutch 3 and 4 footers has Phil lipped out in his career? Shinnecock ring a bell?

Phil is not a consistent putter at all. In fact he is one of the streakiest putters on tour. If he were as consistent a putter as Tiger he would have 7 or 8 majors. He has a new putter or new putting style just about every year.

baja
03-30-2009, 11:51 PM
No, there have been several who were more dominant: Michael Jordan; Lance Armstrong; Carl Lewis; Alexander Karelin; Al Oerter; Sergei Bubka; Nadia Comaneci; and Eric Heiden. I could probably think of more if I took the time.

Hey Lex that is a pretty impressive list of Broncos fans you got on your list of pats fans in your Sig. , could you add my name to the list.

baja
03-30-2009, 11:52 PM
You know how you know when there is a great one in sports?

Everyone agrees he is great.

lex
03-31-2009, 12:06 AM
Hey Lex that is a pretty impressive list of Broncos fans you got on your list of pats fans in your Sig. , could you add my name to the list.


What does this have to do with Tiger Woods?

baja
03-31-2009, 10:01 AM
Come on put me on your list I'm a good Broncos fan too...

lex
03-31-2009, 01:31 PM
Come on put me on your list I'm a good Broncos fan too...


Youre more likely to go on my ignore list. Your insistance doesnt validate your reason.

gyldenlove
03-31-2009, 01:50 PM
By the time he's finished, he'll have beaten every record Nicklaus ever set into the ground.

With the shape he keeps himself in, and the incredible desire the man has, I fully expect he'll be competitive well into his 40's.

He's 33 now, in his first 12 years on tour he has 14 majors to his name. I see nothing to suggest he can't replicate that or at least come close over the next 12 years.

Barring further injury, he'll shatter Nicklaus' mark of 18 majors. 25 majors, minimum, would be my guess.

He's also doing it in a time where there are is a much deeper talent level in golf than there has ever been. Or at least, the technology has helped lesser players than Tiger compete with him due to clubs that are more forgiving.

Not to take anything away from Jack, but back in his day there were rarely more than a dozen guys who you'd expect to have much chance of winning the tournament. These days a much larger portion of people can win if they have a good week.

That is a big assumption.

When this happens I will gladly accept Tiger as the greatest every, but not before, he actually has to do it. Hell, when Michelle Wie was showing up the world as a 14 year old, should we call her the greatest female golfer ever because she was on her way to shatter every record? no, we have to wait until things have actually happened, if you determine greatness based on projections and what-ifs your pantheon will consist of shadows and disappointment.

At the same age Nicklaus had 12 majors to his name, 2 less than Tiger.

Not a massive difference, but certainly puts to bed any notion that Nicklaus was ever more dominant than Tiger has been.

Here is how Nicklaus and Tiger compare in terms of Major finishes, I have counted the year they turned 20 as the first year and then the same amount of seasons:

Nicklaus: 12 wins, 11 runner up, 27 top 3's, 33 top 10's.

Woods: 14 wins, 5 runner up, 22 top 3's, 28 top 10's.

Nicklaus is more consistent in those years than Woods has been. In the first 13 years of his pro career, Nicklaus never finished out of the top 3 in yearly PGA earnings, Woods has finished 24th in his first year and 4th twice.

Woods will never come close to matching Nicklaus 15 year run of finishing in the top 10 in the British open or 10 years in a row finishing top 10 in the Masters. In the 1970's Nicklaus finished out of the top 10 in a major 5 times, that is 5 times in a whole decade, 5 out of 40.

Irish Stout
03-31-2009, 02:50 PM
Personally I think Nicklaus' competition was greater and more solid than Tigers. That being said, Tiger is the most exciting thing prowling a golf course and I can't keep my eyes off his rise to dominance. Hopefully some young punks start showing up and seriously challenge Tiger.

azbroncfan
03-31-2009, 02:52 PM
Woods biggest problem is that he suffers from not have an arch nemesis. It is like being Superman without having the World to save from Lex.

People keep trying to give him one but they have all turned out to be paper villains.

When all of Jacks records are put down...the one thing that he will have is Travino, Palmer, Watson, Player in his era. His star shines brighter due to his contemporaries.

By contrast, Tigers 'peers' are no competition on the course..or in the ratings.

The no competition argument doesn't work because today's players are much better than the old days. Golf used to be a country club rich only sport in the old days now there are many more people playing. In Jack's era there were only a handful of players who had a chance to win everyweek and nowdays anyone can win the tournament because they are that good.

rbackfactory80
03-31-2009, 02:58 PM
Rory Mcilroy, he will challenge Woods. Oh Tiger is a much better putter then Mick.

frerottenextelway
03-31-2009, 03:37 PM
I like how peeps can either question or downplay Tiger's greatness. It's the contrarian culture where people would argue that the sky isn't blue, it's aqua.

azbroncfan
03-31-2009, 03:42 PM
I like how peeps can either question or downplay Tiger's greatness. It's the contrarian culture where people would argue that the sky isn't blue, it's aqua.

Exactly, now all they say is until he does bla, bla, bla. What will be the Jack excuses then?

frerottenextelway
03-31-2009, 03:50 PM
Nicklaus is more consistent in those years than Woods has been. In the first 13 years of his pro career, Nicklaus never finished out of the top 3 in yearly PGA earnings, Woods has finished 24th in his first year and 4th twice.



Here they are in pretty graph form. I'll let others decide if you portrayed this accurately.

Jack
http://erie-pa.org/jn.jpg

Tiger
http://erie-pa.org/tw.jpg

The Joker
03-31-2009, 05:40 PM
That is a big assumption. When this happens I will gladly accept Tiger as the greatest every, but not before, he actually has to do it. Hell, when Michelle Wie was showing up the world as a 14 year old, should we call her the greatest female golfer ever because she was on her way to shatter every record?

Do you honestly think this is a good comparison?

Wie was a talented young prodigy with potentially a great future who'd won absolutely nothing of note, Woods has won 14 majors by the midpoint of his career.

It's really not the same thing at all as I'm sure you know.

Here is how Nicklaus and Tiger compare in terms of Major finishes, I have counted the year they turned 20 as the first year and then the same amount of seasons:

Nicklaus: 12 wins, 11 runner up, 27 top 3's, 33 top 10's.

Woods: 14 wins, 5 runner up, 22 top 3's, 28 top 10's.

Nicklaus is more consistent in those years than Woods has been. In the first 13 years of his pro career, Nicklaus never finished out of the top 3 in yearly PGA earnings, Woods has finished 24th in his first year and 4th twice.

Woods will never come close to matching Nicklaus 15 year run of finishing in the top 10 in the British open or 10 years in a row finishing top 10 in the Masters. In the 1970's Nicklaus finished out of the top 10 in a major 5 times, that is 5 times in a whole decade, 5 out of 40.

They play in different eras, though.

In Nicklaus' time there were simply less golfers who could compete with the guys at the top, and thus the top spots were monopolised by the same guys from week to week.

Check out the major winners from the 60's and 70's, more often than not it's the same names popping up at you again and again. Very rare you see a name and think, "who on earth was that guy?".

The last decade or so though are filled with names like Ben Curtis, Shaun Micheel, Rich Beem, Todd Hamilton, Michael Campbell, Trevor Immelman, Zach Johnson.

People say that Tiger doesn't have the rivals that Nicklaus did, but a lot of that is down to how many more golfers there are out there these days that are capable of winning a major IMO. Something which makes it even more extraordinary how often Tiger closes the deal.

The Joker
03-31-2009, 05:48 PM
Rory Mcilroy, he will challenge Woods.

I'm not so sure.

I've been following him for a lot of years over here, and the one concern has always been his putting. He misses a lot of short putts, and you'll never challenge consistently unless you're more or less automatic from inside 6 feet.

He's very like Garcia at that age, probably better than Sergio but the same sort of thing. Immense talent, but needs to dedicate himself to the putting if he's to achieve all that he can.

Tee to green, he's a fabulous player. I had the pleasure of playing with him in a youths tournament when he was 11 years old and the consistency and purity which he struck the ball with even back then was absolutely out of this world.

BroncoLifer
03-31-2009, 05:48 PM
Add to all of this the fact that Tiger holds the greatest-ever winning margin in both the Masters and the US Open, plus the greatest winning margin of modern times in the British Open.

azbroncfan
03-31-2009, 05:51 PM
That is a big assumption.

When this happens I will gladly accept Tiger as the greatest every, but not before, he actually has to do it. Hell, when Michelle Wie was showing up the world as a 14 year old, should we call her the greatest female golfer ever because she was on her way to shatter every record? no, we have to wait until things have actually happened, if you determine greatness based on projections and what-ifs your pantheon will consist of shadows and disappointment.

I missed that during the first read through but that is a terrible comparison. You are comparing a golfer that has won everything he possibly could of at every level to a golfer that has won nothing at any level.

azbroncfan
03-31-2009, 05:54 PM
I'm not so sure.

I've been following him for a lot of years over here, and the one concern has always been his putting. He misses a lot of short putts, and you'll never challenge consistently unless you're more or less automatic from inside 6 feet.

He's very like Garcia at that age, probably better than Sergio but the same sort of thing. Immense talent, but needs to dedicate himself to the putting if he's to achieve all that he can.

Tee to green, he's a fabulous player. I had the pleasure of playing with him in a youths tournament when he was 11 years old and the consistency and purity which he struck the ball with even back then was absolutely out of this world.

Yep there are a lot of great ball strikers that would be super dominant if they could putt. Putting is more of a natural skill that either you got or you don't and you can only improve so much at it with practice.