When's Tiger playing again?

[colin007]

...and I know I will get some arguement here, but he is not the most gifted talent wise on the tour, and never has been.

What do you base this on?

he has said so himself. i believe phil is more naturally talented than tiger. john daly probably as well.

[Deryck Griffith]

he has said so himself.

Do you really think Tiger (or any other golfer for that matter) would go around telling everyone that they are the most talented golfer ever? Most golfers resort to the modest attitude for not trying to sound like self centered a-holes. This applies to tiger. He may have said so himself, but it's clear that he was being extremely modest because his golf resume speaks for itself...and when you look at the tapes from when he was slightly older than an infant, there is NO QUESTION that he is possibly the most talented golfer ever...end of story.

Fast forward to today, and I think the debate isn't about talent, but rather how the most physcially talented and mentally talented golfer in the world ruined his life ... we will see if hasn't screwed it up enough to prevent himself from winning consistetly again. Being that golf requires an uncanny amount of mental concentration, it's sparkling clear that his head is full of thoughts right now that do not involve golf.

[bplewis24]

he has said so himself.

What Tiger says is sort of irrelevant.

i believe phil is more naturally talented than tiger. john daly probably as well.

And I disagree.

What I want to know is what do you base more and less talent on? If Tiger isn't as talented as Phil or Daly, what makes it so? Higher swing speed? Longer driving distance? Great short game? What? I find it hard to make a case that anybody is more talented than he is. So for those that believe it to be, I'd like to hear that argument. Either way, I believe to say he was "never" the most talented guy on tour is nearly baseless. Brandon

[Chillmoon91]

What Tiger says is sort of irrelevant.

I think hes referring to feel and imagination rather than swing speed any donkey can swing a club quick, I probably agreed phil is more talented just because he can play both sided and can do things with wedges no one else can, but pro golf is about 80% mental and thats where tiger is just supreme, thats where is counts too

[Kieran123]

he has said so himself.

conlin007, post mickelsons and dalys resume and we'll compare it to Tigers on the previous page

[colin007]

guys, its not about resumes. talent doesnt necessarily mean that others have won more.

if youre talking talent, then i think there are other guys who have more gold given talent, giftedness, whatever you want to call it. tiger has more drive, mental toughness, works harder, numerous things that account for him winning as much as he does. to say that he won so many times mainly because of his talent is to minimize his work ethic and killer instinct and practice time put in. phil wins because of his talent, not because of his technically perfect swing. in fact, many would tell you that he wins in spite of his swing, because he has uncanny natural ability.

[Kieran123]

guys, its not about resumes. talent doesnt necessarily mean that others have won more.

They both started at the same age.

Tiger shot a 48 at age 3......sorry, but that didn't come from practice NEAR as much as it come from natural talent. Tiger does not have a technically perfect swing at all, so he must have uncanny natural ability too. Phil and Tiger have similar work schedules, yet who has won more times? Phil can't play in the wind, even though he has played for 37 years.....that's because his natural ability to adjust ( ie. his talent ) isn't as high as Tiger's. Phil also can't play links after playing for 37 years, again, no natural talent to be able to adjust after 37 years. Tiger ( well nto at the moment ) can read putts like no one else....that is talent.

[bplewis24]

if youre talking talent, then i think there are other guys who have more gold given talent

Do you really think that Tiger works so much harder and practices so much longer than everybody else on tour? Tour pros eat, sleep and breath golf on a daily basis. Even if you assume Tiger works harder than the next guy, it's probably a negligible percentage.

Do you believe Tiger's swing is absolutely perfect? His is more dissected and scrutinized than almost anybody's. Lastly, is there a shot that Phil has that you think Tiger doesn't? Phil is obviously more famous for his flop shots, but I've seen Tiger execute them perfectly when he has needed to. Even if he has more chipping "talent" than Tiger, is Tiger not more talented in other facets? Does putting count in the talent category (sincere question)? I've heard many contend that Tiger's putting stroke is among the best of all time. I just don't think you can prove anybody has MORE talent than Tiger, but you can make the case that a handful come close, but lack other things. My contention is that he has at the very least as much talent as every single person on tour, and clearly more than all but a very select few. I believe Mickelson is very close in terms of pure physical talent (not necessarily athleticism, but a combination of athleticism and skill/coordination), but very far away in game/course management and general I.Q. Brandon

[colin007]

ok, you guys are right. whatever. peace out.

[clubhousehero]

Colin, i hear what your saying. Just because someone is the greatest, doesn't mean they are the most gifted or talented. look at other sports. In football, jerry rice is the best WR based on his resume, but he IS NOT the most talented WR to have ever played the game. Same could be said for Emmitt Smith at rb. Greg maddox is one of the best pitchers of his generation and he too was not the most talented but he got the job done...very well at that!

Now maybe tiger is the most talented, maybe he isn't but he is the best right now, one of the best ever. but he does have certain things you can't teach or quantify, like nerves will to win or course management.

To the people saying, well prove someone has more talent than tiger...well that can go both ways. Without bringing up wins, using other criteria, prove tiger is more talented than say... Rory Mclroy. All the players on tour have a ton of talent but there is something else that makes tiger that much better than the rest. I guess what i'm trying to say is based on his resume, tiger is far better than anyone else on tour. But looking at their talent, he isn't THAT much better than the rest of the golfers on tour. Its that something extra that makes tiger tiger.

[Deryck Griffith]

guys, its not about resumes. talent doesnt necessarily mean that others have won more.

Having more drive and mental toughness is part of talent IMO. You have to be a "special" or talented person to be able to focus all of your energy for 18 holes and on absolutey every shot. It's clear that many have very short memories when it comes to Tiger Woods when looking at how he is playing today.

If you rewind to the 2000 US open at pebble beach, what he did in that tournament alone is the epidemy of extraordinary talent. I still remember the interviews that players made after that tournament and they all where shaking their heads at what Tiger was able to do. How can you argue that? Has Phil or John Daly ever won in such a matter? As for Phil and John Daly, there is NO question are super talented as well. Phil's swing is ugly yes, which, shows that he has amazing hand eye coordination and skill. Yes, that is talent...but still dones't mean that he is MORE talented than Tiger? Does tiger woods have to have a bad swing for everyone to say, "wow, he has a bad swing but wins so he is more talented that everyone else?" I don't understand that logic with Phil...

[Bigtank]

Brandon, I base my comments that Tiger is not the most gifted on the fact that he is a decent driver of the ball, he is a great iron player and good short game guy. There are othes better in every category, and Phil is head and shoulders a more gifted player...and a resume is not a talent list, because you look at Phil, and people forget his is pretty impressive, and he did something Tiger never came close to doing, and that is winning a PGA event as an amatuer!

I am not a Tiger hater, but I also dont drinnk his Kool-aid either.

However, when it came to the mental game, there might not be anyone better ever??? He did not make the little mistakes that take out those other golfers. However, that is not a god given talent. Tiger's came from an extremly focused father that taught him the techniques learned from years as a special forces operative. As far a a 48 at age 3, you have to take that in context, course, tees, ex. I am not trying to take anmything away from the guy, I like to watch him operate (I am certainly not capabable of anything close to him). I just dont understand this unquestionable devotion people have to him.

[senorchipotle]

Brandon, I base my comments that Tiger is not the most gifted on the fact that he is a decent driver of the ball, he is a great iron player and good short game guy. There are othes better in every category, and Phil is head and shoulders a more gifted player...and a resume is not a talent list, because you look at Phil, and people forget his is pretty impressive, and he did something Tiger never came close to doing, and that is winning a PGA event as an amatuer!

dude... you're nuts, seriously. tiger has a ''good short game.'' if tiger had a good short game, he wouldn't have even made the cut at augusta. tiger's short game is THE best ever. granted phil's shots may look more creative often times, but that's cause he's in trouble every other hole so he has to improvise. tiger's short game may not be as exciting as phil's, but that's due to the fact that 9 times out of ten, he hits the exact shot that he wanted to hit, whereas with phil it's a toss up, so we take tiger for granted. there is absolutely no chance phil is more talented. in fact, that argument doesn't even make sense, it's completely baseless and incredibly dumb.

ok, i'll see your winning a pga event as an amateur, and raise you 10 majors.

[Bigtank]

Ok Senor... "tiger's short game is THE best ever." That is just rediculous, there are numerous guys through history that have a far better short game than Tiger. Lets begin with Phil, The best around the green, minus the putting. The there is Seve, Lee Travino, Ben Crenshaw....

Tiger has yet to ever hit the "exact shot he wants"!

and lastly, I understand Tiger has 14 majors...but take away his mental focus and we are left with the current version, granted he is better than 90% of the world in that state, but not the man he was.

be careful call others thoughts "dumb" when you are make ignorant statements yourself.

[senorchipotle]

Ok Senor... "tiger's short game is THE best ever." That is just rediculous, there are numerous guys through history that have a far better short game than Tiger. Lets begin with Phil, The best around the green, minus the putting. The there is Seve, Lee Travino, Ben Crenshaw....

the short game is generally thought to include all shots from within 100 yards, that includes putting.

and of course tiger says he hasn't hit the exact shots he wants, but every single person in the world would trade tiger's most accurate day with his wedges on the course for theirs. i bet phil would take that trade as well. which of my statements are ignorant?

[jamo]

Ok Senor... "tiger's short game is THE best ever." That is just rediculous, there are numerous guys through history that have a far better short game than Tiger. Lets begin with Phil, The best around the green, minus the putting. The there is Seve, Lee Travino, Ben Crenshaw....

Look at the stats. Statistically Tiger has a better short game than Phil:

http://www.pgatour.com/r/stats/info/xm.html?130 http://www.pgatour.com/r/stats/info/?362 http://www.pgatour.com/r/stats/info/xm.html?111 http://www.pgatour.com/r/stats/info/wm2.html?119 But hey, Phil tied him in this one: http://www.pgatour.com/r/stats/info/wm2.html?119 (Note: I used 2009 stats because Tiger doesn't qualify for 2010 stats, he hasn't played enough.) I'm not saying Tiger is the best, but Phil's short game is very overstated. He has a knack for doing the amazing but he hits a lot of average shots and, this based solely on empirical observations, he seems to hit more really crappy short games shots than just about anyone.

[bplewis24]

Brandon, I base my comments that Tiger is not the most gifted on the fact that he is a decent driver of the ball, he is a great iron player and good short game guy.

I'd have to disagree strongly then. No need for a long, drawn out discussion over it, but as to the driving point: wasn't he at one time leading the PGA tour in driving statistics? Not that driving stats are the only talent indicator, but I thought around the time he set all the records at Pebble he was one of the longest guys on tour.

Edit: it looks like in 2000, he was #2 in driving distance (3 yards behind John Daly,and 10 yards clear of the next group of guys). Not sure if that was his best year, but I didn't really feel like researching it much. Brandon

[Divot Tool]

guys, its not about resumes. talent doesn't necessarily mean that others have won more. . . if youre talking talent, then i think there are other guys who have more gold given talent, giftedness, whatever you want to call it. . . to say that he won so many times mainly because of his talent is to minimize his work ethic and killer instinct and practice time put in. phil wins because of his talent, not because of his technically perfect swing. in fact, many would tell you that he wins in spite of his swing, because he has uncanny natural ability.

. . .Tiger is not the most gifted on the fact that he is a decent driver of the ball, he is a great iron player and good short game guy. There are othes better in every category, and Phil is head and shoulders a more gifted player...and a resume is not a talent list. . .

Questions: Do you have some tool that measures "talent"? or are you going by AWE factor? Instead of debating whether talent is nurtured or natural, ask yourself what relevance does it have in professional golf? Perhaps a definition of talent would be most useful. IMO discussing raw "talent" alone has no relevance when it comes to professional golf. The players who play week in and week out are all talented, but ask yourself what separates the top 5 players in the world from the field? Ben Hogan, Gary Player, Vijay Singh and Tiger Woods all understood one thing, that being; that talent alone can only take you so far. Their games were founded on incredible discipline and work ethic. These men honed their craft and toiled for countless hours to own a shot. These men hit more balls and practiced more than you and I could imagine. They are both extremely talented men. Phil would no doubt be No.1 if it were not for Tiger coming along. Have you seen Phil's Secrets of the Short Game DVD? He is unbelievable in that DVD. The quality of his shots is sublime. He has a drill where he hits 100 consecutive putts from 3' before moving on. Out of the sand, he openly tells us that he tries every week to break his record of 28 (correct?) straight sand shots to within his 3' circle. You really think he can pull those shots out of his arse without practicing? That's absurd. Colin, I agree with you that your CV/resume doesn't truly reflect your talent. But agree with me on this: your CV/resume reflects your ability as a golfer, isn't that what matters here? Isn't true greatness achieved through consistency? Isn't that is the reason why people adore Tiger and Phil? Don't forget the old guys too . . . Bobby Jones, Byron Nelson, Palmer, Player, Hogan and of course Nicklaus! The history books don't lie fellas. Hate to break it to you but raw talent is simply overrated at the professional level. But since were just throwing out names for sh*ts and giggles, here's one that I think is talented: Bubba Watson.

. . .The there is Seve, Lee Travino, Ben Crenshaw....

Seve possessed creativity in his short game. The quintessential Trevino was a ball striker. He could play the power fade all day long and hit that one hop and stop check wedge. Crenshaw's putting stroke is beautiful. You can't teach that. Excellent players and all gifted. But what's the relevance of those skills if they don't break records and win majors?