Tiger: 2x as Good as Phil?

[iacas]

Currently in OWGR:
1. Woods 18.98
2. Mickelson 9.69

Tiger has nearly 2x as many wins as Phil. He has nearly 4x as many majors (both in less tournaments played, less years on Tour, and against tougher fields on average). Tiger places higher than Phil in events they play at more than a 2-to-1 clip (almost 3:1).

Though clearly, on any given week, anyone on the PGA Tour could be better than Tiger, I think the evidence points overwhelmingly to Tiger being 2x as good as Phil, yes.

[Rafcin]

well... you could also ask if the Pope is catholic?

[Thrash13]

Tiger isn't two times better than Phil. His career so far has been two times better than Phil, but he isn't "currently" twice as good.

I don't believe "three majors out of the last seven" is twice as good as "three majors out of the last eleven."

You Tiger-ites need to settle down a little bit. Don't go overboard. Try to keep the past tense (career to this point) and currently differentiated.

Tiger is about 1.35 or 1.40 times better than Phil right now.

[iacas]

Ah, yes, Cody is not one to let us down...

Tiger isn't two times better than Phil. His career so far has been two times better than Phil, but he isn't "currently" twice as good.

His career has been about 3-4x as good as Phil's to this point. Again, 3:11 and 29 to 50 (in far fewer events). Also, Tiger whipped Phil's butt at the last two events they played. Define "currently"? Others answering the poll can define it any way they like.

I don't believe "three majors out of the last seven" is twice as good as "three majors out of the last eleven."

Factor in where they finished when they weren't winning and Tiger's 2005 (two wins, a second, a third) is pretty darn compelling.

Of course, I'm leaving out Tiger's U.S. Open this year. Earl's death had a big, big effect, clearly.

You Tiger-ites need to settle down a little bit. Don't go overboard. Try to keep the past tense (career to this point) and currently differentiated.

Like Tiger's four wins this year to Phil's two, one of which (admittedly, a blowout) occurred - as is common for Phil - against a weak field? That's about as current as it can get. Or you could count Tiger's win in Dubai, and then it's 5 to 2. Is that "currently"?

The OWGR is a two-year rolling period; is that "currently"? Clearly "currently" has to be longer than any given week on the PGA Tour, but shorter than a career. One year... two years... those seem like good blocks of time.

[Rafcin]

...You Tiger-ites need to settle down a little bit. Don't go overboard. Try to keep the past tense (career to this point) and currently differentiated....

Putting emotions aside... it's a simple math Cody.
You want to talk "CURRENT" right? How much more current can you get than 2006 season? Tiger : 4 wins, Phil: 2 wins. That sure looks like 2:1 to me.
Of course if you think about the fact, that Phil entered 18 tournaments to Tiger's 11 - it's even more lapsided.

[Thrash13]

Well, this is a losing battle for me either way. There is no such thing as one-upping Erik and Rafi in anything, so I'll just bow out now.

I have nothing against Tiger Woods, and I gave him serious credit in this week's Thrash Talk. But use common sense for once instead of crunching numbers. Tiger isn't twice as good as Phil Mickelson, Jim Furyk, Retief Goosen, Ernie Els, Vijay Singh, etc. That is just silly to think.

This will be my last post in this topic at the Tiger Trap.....I mean Sand Trap. It's getting ridiculous around here. This is the reason I dislike Tiger more and more everyday. People continuously hanging off his jock strap gets old.

[iacas]

I have nothing against Tiger Woods, and I gave him serious credit in this week's Thrash Talk. But use common sense for once instead of crunching numbers. Tiger isn't twice as good as Phil Mickelson, Jim Furyk, Retief Goosen, Ernie Els, Vijay Singh, etc. That is just silly to think.

No, you're right. He's not twice as good as Jim Furyk. He's at least 5x better. 10 more majors, 40 more career PGA Tour wins. Yeah, 5x is cutting it too close.

C'mon Cody, just because you're not a fan of Tiger Woods doesn't mean we've all lost our minds or that we're "silly." You can't just put us down without any claim to the contrary. Your argument boils down to "nuh uh".

This is one of the few times in sports that stats can actually back up the wild assertions people make. In fact, frequently, Tiger's stats are even more overhwelming than people's beliefs!

This will be my last post in this topic at the Tiger Trap.....I mean Sand Trap. It's getting ridiculous around here. This is the reason I dislike Tiger more and more everyday. People continuously hanging off his jock strap gets old.

Boy, now there's a logical approach. "Everyone likes him, so I will not."

How someone could choose to believe Barry Bonds is a good guy, yet dislike Tiger Woods... that's what's "silly" to me.

I'd have dropped it after my last post, too, but you called me "silly" and I don't really care for that.

[aquacooled]

I like tiger, every taylor made pro player, Jim Furyk, Retief Goosen, Ernie Els and Vijay Singh. However fact is his world raking is #1.. fact is fact..

ps I hate mickelson dont know why.. just dont like him..

[Rafcin]

...ps I hate mickelson dont know why.. just dont like him..

I'm with you on that one - and I think I know why. It's that arrogant smile of his, just reeks of a a.hole. IMHO it's written on his face "I'm better than you and you are pathetic". His man boobs are pretty disturbing too
Sorry for wondering off topic, let's get back to the inter-staff fight, it's much more exciting