Tiger will not win another major

[Zwick]

You can argue that Jack actually had the weaker competition, only a few guys dominated in every major. Today everybody in the field can win without beeing the biggest surprise (i.e. Darren Clarke, Charl Schwartzel, Louis Oosthuizen).

Jack had to beat ~10 guys, today you have to beat ~100 guys

Originally Posted by The Gill

The thing that's stands out to me is that there were a lot more dangerous golfers in Jack's time span. Watson, Player, Travino... Cool that he won against those legends. Of course you can argue the opposite with that same data.

I'm not going to comment on Tiger...

[turtleback]

Originally Posted by Zwick

You can argue that Jack actually had the weaker competition, only a few guys dominated in every major. Today everybody in the field can win without beeing the biggest surprise (i.e. Darren Clarke, Charl Schwartzel, Louis Oosthuizen).

Jack had to beat ~10 guys, today you have to beat ~100 guys

I think a guy named Jack Nicklaus would be a pretty good authority on this issue.  This is what he wrote in his 1996 book:

“In 1945, Byron Nelson won eighteen tournaments, eleven of them in a row, a record that more experts are convinced will never be broken. The following year Ben Hogan won thirteen times. From then on, as the nation recovered from the Second World War and professional golf entered its greatest boom years, it would become increasingly harder for one player to dominate the American tournament game.”

“Ben won eleven tournaments in 1948, and Sam Snead ten in 1950, but the highest total for the next quarter century would be seven, achieved by Arnold Palmer in 1962 and 1963 and equaled by me in 1972 and 1973. The modern record is now eight, and here, just for you to wonder at, are the scores that produced it, as compiled by Johnny Miller in 1974:”

…

“Six years later, in 1980, Tom Watson won six American tournaments. As I write, the best anyone has been able to do since then on the PGA Tour is five victories, by Nick Price in 1994, including the PGA Championship (just prior to which he had also won the British Open). With three wins in his first nine pro outings, Tiger Woods would seem likely to match or better such numbers, but it is hard to imagine even a player of his incredible talent matching the Nelson-Hogan-Snead numbers.”

“I am often asked to comment on the causes for the ‘decline of the superstar’, as many writers have chosen to call it. To my mind there are essentially three. Although it may not be the most critical, the first is golf equipment.”

…

“As equipment has improved, but particularly the ball, more of our great old courses have become less challenging or less interesting to play, or both. Merion is perhaps the best example” …

…

“Even more unfortunate to my mind than the impact of equipment advances on our finest courses is their contribution to the homogenizing of the players. Simply put, the more forgiving the tools, the tougher it becomes for the best to rise above the rest”. …

“I am convinced that at least a partial answer would be to have all top tournaments worldwide played with a uniform ball…, manufactured with say a 5-to-10 percent reduction in distance capacity.” …

“…I believe the benefits of such a system would be the return of the superstar, and perhaps even the dominating player, to professional golf. This would happen as the hungriest and most talented players separated themselves from the rest by making up for what they lost in distance through better self- and course-management, improved shotmaking skills, and great competitive intensity. A bonus would be the continued use of Merion and the like for championship play.”

…

“Improved equipment is, of course, not the only reason for golf’s lack of dominating performers in recent years.”

“One of the biggest changes in professional golf during my time in the game has been the physical fitness of the players. Thirty years ago, with a few exceptions like Gary Player, nobody did anything to increase his athleticism or improve his physical condition. Some guys after they had played might hit balls for awhile – most notably Ben Hogan – but the majority would just sit around and tell each other stories while having a few beers.”

“Those days are gone. … Most players eat more healthily than they used to, and they smoke and drink less, too. With a few exceptions like Greg Norman, who for years has trained strenuously under professional supervision, their athletic abilities might not compare with pro basketball players or marathon runners. Nevertheless, it is way beyond the standards of my early years. And, of course, the fitter the mass of golfers, the harder standing out becomes for any one of them.”

“Then there is the incentive factor.”

“Except for the Masters, the biggest purse on the tour in my first year as a professional in 1962 was the Thunderbird Classic’s $100,000, with most tournaments offering between one-third and one-half that amount, to be divided between thirty-five to forty players. Win and you generally took home between $5,000 and $9,000. Finish last and you hardly made the bus fare to the next event – usually well under $100.”

“Thirty-four years later, in 1996, the average purse on tour was $1,400,000, with highs of $3,000,000 (Players and Tour Championship).” …

“In evaluating these numbers, consider if you will how many more contenders your business would have attracted, and how much more competitive it would have become, given comparably huge increases in financial incentive over the same time span. By then imagining how much harder it would have become for you to remain a market dominator, you will get a sense what it takes to become a dominating golf champion as we approach the second millennium.”

“Whether for the above reasons or any others, the fact is that, to be able to hold onto their cards, and earn a decent living, the golfers in the middle of the pack today have had to become as good as the players at the top were when I started out thirty and more years ago, while those in the top have become the equals of superstars of my generation.”

[senorchipotle]

[sean_miller]

Originally Posted by senorchipotle

[x129]

I am guessing age is a bigger factor than the years between majors.  If you win your first one around 27-28, in 11 years you are pushing 40 which tends to be when players start losing it a bit. I always though the scary part of Nichalause was the number of 2nds and 3rds. Until the last 5 or so years,  Tiger either won or wasn't in contention most of time.

It is hard to compare the competition.  It appears weaker but maybe that is just a result of the fields back then being weaker depth wise. Hard to say.

Originally Posted by The Gill

The thing that's stands out to me is that there were a lot more dangerous golfers in Jack's time span. Watson, Player, Travino... Cool that he won against those legends. Of course you can argue the opposite with that same data.

I'm not going to comment on Tiger...

[senorchipotle]

touché... well played, old boy. well played

[FLOG4]

In the period Jack won his majors there were 5 guys on the list who won 5 or more. If Phil wins another he would join that list.  There are many great players today but not many that totally immerse themselves into the majors. This new breed coming up right now though may make it very difficult for Tiger to capture majors in a few years.  Cantley is a stud and will be on this list of 5 or more. Rory will too. Will Sergio garner one/two, Retief, Adam, AK, Rickie....Only so many to go around.  So Tiger needs to get back his A game soon.  The competition isn't caught in his headlights any more...Tiger will win 1 or two more in my mind.

[Zeph]

I agree that it will only get harder to win majors and tournaments in the future. Sadly, Tiger has [i]wasted[/i] some years on injuries now. If he had gotten through the last 2-3 years uninjured, he would have won at least one major. Swing change or not.

[RoyPinhey]

its crazy to even think about writing off the guys chances of winning another major. I strongly believe he will be world number one and win numerous majors in years to come. throughout his career he has shown as determination and has always been able to turn on the style and shoot low numbers when he needs to regardless of the situation. Its fair to say the new breed of golfers are coming through such as rory, Dustin johnson, luke donald (although hes not young) etc but none of them have that same edge that tiger has shown in the past and still has deep inside him today

[deasy55]

Why is your profile picture a car? This isn't bebo!

jk

Originally Posted by RoyPinhey

its crazy to even think about writing off the guys chances of winning another major. I strongly believe he will be world number one and win numerous majors in years to come. throughout his career he has shown as determination and has always been able to turn on the style and shoot low numbers when he needs to regardless of the situation. Its fair to say the new breed of golfers are coming through such as rory, Dustin johnson, luke donald (although hes not young) etc but none of them have that same edge that tiger has shown in the past and still has deep inside him today

[RoyPinhey]

in honesty it was the only picture on my laptop

[sean_miller]

Why do you have a scene from Lord of the Rings?

Originally Posted by deasy55

Why is your profile picture a car? This isn't bebo!

jk

[deasy55]

Rory as Frodo and Gerry as Gandalf? That's a new one. I like it

Originally Posted by sean_miller

Why do you have a scene from Lord of the Rings?

[RoyPinhey]

i have now changed it to a generic picture just to please you , ,

[deasy55]

I said jk...as in just kidding

Originally Posted by RoyPinhey

i have now changed it to a generic picture just to please you , ,

[RoyPinhey]

oh i know . . . dont get too worried that you've 'scared a newbie'

[iacas]

Now that the avatar issues have been sorted out we can get back on topic...

[deasy55]

Yes boss.

Originally Posted by iacas

Now that the avatar issues have been sorted out we can get back on topic...

Tiger will likely win another major(s) but then again he may not

/thread