Tiger Will Never Be the GOAT???

[k-troop]

Originally Posted by sean_miller

Would everyone else in the field have to play with persimmon, steel, and balata too?

There are horses for courses and Watson at Turnberry is but one example. He probably would have made the cut at any Open that week, just like he did at the Open last year (2011 - two out of 3 ain't bad). His use of hybrids over a 2-iron is proof of what exactly? That he took advantage of the same technology as most of the other players in the field? If using a fairway wood or hybrid is proof that a player can only win because of technology, then most of the LPGA tour players are frauds.

Yes.  If everyone in the field was playing persimmon, steel, balata, and 1&2 irons, Watson would have stood no chance.  He can't generate the clubhead speed, nor does he have the hand action at his age, required to flight and shape the ball with that equipment.  Don't even talk about distance, because he's already far enough behind the field as it is--but with the 1980 Titleist 90-compression balata, he'd really be hurting to get it out past 250.  Which would leave him with 1&2 irons into every green, which he can't get into the air anymore.

I think he has said the same--those on the forum with databases of every golf quote ever uttered can probably confirm this.

[k-troop]

The point of this entire thread is to illustrate that the modern fields are much more competetive from 1-149 than the fields were in the 60s, 70s, and 80s.  Equipment is one reason why, because it allows Watson to still compete at the Open Championship well beyond when he would have been competitive with the older gear.  Just as modern equipment makes Watson better than he otherwise would be, it makes many in the 75-1000 OWGR range better able to compete with the folks who have more natural talent or athletic ability.

I agree that Watson is one of the greatest links players ever, but he would have barely made the cut in 2009, if at all, if the field were using 1970s equipment.

[sean_miller]

Originally Posted by k-troop

Quote:

Originally Posted by sean_miller

Would everyone else in the field have to play with persimmon, steel, and balata too?

There are horses for courses and Watson at Turnberry is but one example. He probably would have made the cut at any Open that week, just like he did at the Open last year (2011 - two out of 3 ain't bad). His use of hybrids over a 2-iron is proof of what exactly? That he took advantage of the same technology as most of the other players in the field? If using a fairway wood or hybrid is proof that a player can only win because of technology, then most of the LPGA tour players are frauds.

Yes.  If everyone in the field was playing persimmon, steel, balata, and 1&2 irons, Watson would have stood no chance.  He can't generate the clubhead speed, nor does he have the hand action at his age, required to flight and shape the ball with that equipment.  Don't even talk about distance, because he's already far enough behind the field as it is--but with the 1980 Titleist 90-compression balata, he'd really be hurting to get it out past 250.  Which would leave him with 1&2 irons into every green, which he can't get into the air anymore.

I think he has said the same--those on the forum with databases of every golf quote ever uttered can probably confirm this.

So, if Watson lost in a playoff, but had to cheat, and Tiger didn't make the cut but bags a 2-iron, did they have about the same result? Is that why we're trashing Watson now?

EDIT: question answered in the meantime, yes this is why we're belittling Watson's heroic efforts in 2009 and I'm assuming in 2011 as well.

[k-troop]

Originally Posted by sean_miller

So, if Watson lost in a playoff, but had to cheat, and Tiger didn't make the cut but bags a 2-iron, did they have about the same result? Is that why we're trashing Watson now?

EDIT: question answered in the meantime, yes this is why we're belittling Watson's heroic efforts in 2009 and I'm assuming in 2011 as well.

No one is belittling Watson's 2009 Open--it was one of the all-time great moments in championship golf, at least for me.  I love Tom Watson--he came to visit us in Ramadi (Anbar, Iraq) in 2007 and I practically knocked down Feherty to get Watson's autograph (which is a funny story, actually).  All I'm saying is without the modern ball, lightweight driver shafts, and 85COR hot faces, he had no chance of contending with the 20 and 30-somethings in 2009.  I recall Watson himself saying the same thing in one of the interviews following the event (or leading up to the 2010 Open).

[TourSpoon]

Originally Posted by k-troop

No one is belittling Watson's 2009 Open--it was one of the all-time great moments in championship golf, at least for me.  I love Tom Watson--he came to visit us in Ramadi (Anbar, Iraq) in 2007 and I practically knocked down Feherty to get Watson's autograph (which is a funny story, actually).  All I'm saying is without the modern ball, lightweight driver shafts, and 85COR hot faces, he had no chance of contending with the 20 and 30-somethings in 2009.  I recall Watson himself saying the same thing in one of the interviews following the event (or leading up to the 2010 Open).

The modern equipment which allowed him to compete is the same modern equipment that made it harder to distance himself from the field which he did convincingly especially given that he was 59.  It would have broken Snead's record by 7 years and that was at the GGO.  I guess it speaks to Watson's greatness to play links golf and if he had won, may have been one of the greatest feats in golf.

[TourSpoon]

Originally Posted by k-troop

No one is belittling Watson's 2009 Open--it was one of the all-time great moments in championship golf, at least for me.  I love Tom Watson--he came to visit us in Ramadi (Anbar, Iraq) in 2007 and I practically knocked down Feherty to get Watson's autograph (which is a funny story, actually).  All I'm saying is without the modern ball, lightweight driver shafts, and 85COR hot faces, he had no chance of contending with the 20 and 30-somethings in 2009.  I recall Watson himself saying the same thing in one of the interviews following the event (or leading up to the 2010 Open).

Originally Posted by TourSpoon

The modern equipment which allowed him to compete is the same modern equipment that made it harder to distance himself from the field which he did convincingly especially given that he was 59.  It would have broken Snead's record by 7 years and that was at the GGO.  I guess it speaks to Watson's greatness to play links golf and if he had won, may have been one of the greatest feats in golf.

Since I brought up Snead, he also lends to the experience factor as his victory at the GGO at age 52 was his 8th at the same tournament, another PGA record that Tiger can break with one more win at the WGC Bridgestone. Horses for courses for sure.

[k-troop]

Originally Posted by TourSpoon

The modern equipment which allowed him to compete is the same modern equipment that made it harder to distance himself from the field which he did convincingly especially given that he was 59.  It would have broken Snead's record by 7 years and that was at the GGO.  I guess it speaks to Watson's greatness to play links golf and if he had won, may have been one of the greatest feats in golf.

How did Watson distance himself from the field in the 2009 Open if he didn't even win?  Seems like you're saying if everyone was playing 1980 equipment, 59-year old Watson would have whipped all those poor little pups.

[TourSpoon]

Originally Posted by k-troop

How did Watson distance himself from the field in the 2009 Open if he didn't even win?  Seems like you're saying if everyone was playing 1980 equipment, 59-year old Watson would have whipped all those poor little pups.

I don't know...T1 losing in a play-off maybe to get second by himself? Wouldn't you agree that he and Cink were separated from the field?  If not, what would you call it, especially in a major with only four players under par?

I didn't say the above, but if you think about the equipment staying the same all these years who is to say he wouldn't have replaced his 2i with a 5w. I am quite sure the courses would never have been lengthened to today's standards so it is entirely possible for him to have a Snead-esque performance.  Who knows if golf would have ever become what it is today without more forgiving technology. I hesitate to even write this because it is a dead end arguement.

I think my point is that everyone agrees that it is harder to win because the equipment makes it harder to seperate yourself from the field.  Then an almost 60 year old with 8 majors ties for first and it is discounted even though he makes the cut again at 61! I mean why not give the guy his due? He benefitted from technology and he showed his prowess by almost winning with the same technology.

[jhwmusic]

you guys all just argue to argue. its obvious that EVERYONE benefits from technology, but especially those who are older, weaker etc.. Watson does deserve all the respect in the world for what he did in 2009! But at the same time technology didn't prevent him from blowing that putt from the fringe or the one after that. His nerves or lack there of caused it. But watson still deserves respect for who he is and what he has accomplished.. He still had to make the swings. Whether technology allowed him to hit an 8 iron instead of a 6 into the 18th doesn't matter...the ball still bounced over the green. And he couldn't get it up and down! Now for the question at hand about Tiger being the "GOAT." For those of you who that are saying he is done...you are out of your f#@$ing minds! Jack went through bigger slumps than the 2 year slide Tiger is taking...And Jack NEVER practiced like Tiger practices. Jack would show up and go with it...and beat a bunch of unathletic fat guys who drank and smoked while they played. Jack just had so much more talent than the rest of them. And I am not even a Tiger fan, but I'm also not an idiot. He will break Jacks record and then some!! Those who think otherwise are just recycling what they hear on Golf Channel from journalist who just disagree to make news...they need to say that tiger is done so people like you watch their shows or read their articles. you guys do realize that those guys aren't athletes, right? Other than those two idiots Johnny Miller and Nick Faldo, you will not hear an actual player making such claims. The guy went through an injury and a nasty divorce. I am sure a bunch of you guys are divorced...you probably even cheated on your wife...did you have the world talking about it? Give the guy a break. And watch what happens when Tiger wins a couple of tournaments, those same numbnuts who were bashing him will be jumping right back on the Tiger band wagon.

[TourSpoon]

Originally Posted by jhwmusic

you guys all just argue to argue. its obvious that EVERYONE benefits from technology, but especially those who are older, weaker etc.. Watson does deserve all the respect in the world for what he did in 2009! But at the same time technology didn't prevent him from blowing that putt from the fringe or the one after that. His nerves or lack there of caused it. But watson still deserves respect for who he is and what he has accomplished.. He still had to make the swings. Whether technology allowed him to hit an 8 iron instead of a 6 into the 18th doesn't matter...the ball still bounced over the green. And he couldn't get it up and down!

Now for the question at hand about Tiger being the "GOAT." For those of you who that are saying he is done...you are out of your f#@$ing minds! Jack went through bigger slumps than the 2 year slide Tiger is taking...And Jack NEVER practiced like Tiger practices. Jack would show up and go with it...and beat a bunch of unathletic fat guys who drank and smoked while they played. Jack just had so much more talent than the rest of them. And I am not even a Tiger fan, but I'm also not an idiot. He will break Jacks record and then some!! Those who think otherwise are just recycling what they hear on Golf Channel from journalist who just disagree to make news...they need to say that tiger is done so people like you watch their shows or read their articles. you guys do realize that those guys aren't athletes, right? Other than those two idiots Johnny Miller and Nick Faldo, you will not hear an actual player making such claims. The guy went through an injury and a nasty divorce. I am sure a bunch of you guys are divorced...you probably even cheated on your wife...did you have the world talking about it? Give the guy a break. And watch what happens when Tiger wins a couple of tournaments, those same numbnuts who were bashing him will be jumping right back on the Tiger band wagon.

Welcome to the forum. I have to agree with some of your points especially the point about arguing.  I also agree that people will jump on the Tiger bus, with the obvious hold out being Brandel Chamblee who has held fast to his opinion from day one. Say what you want about him, but he has not wavered or flip flopped.  He is the only talking head that has ever posted on this forum as well. Obviously, people talk about Tiger for ratings and that is when I usually tune out because it is so redundant and sensationalized.

The one line that you said about Watson is so true, "He still had to make the swings." I will add the good ones and the bad ones. So did all the other guys there that day that didn't even break par. Clearly he is exempt from the non-athletic fat drunk smoker group that you referenced.  We all know that to make it today to the highest level, it is essential to have every advantage mentally and physically to go along with your level of talent.

Tiger should make some kind of splash this year and I think you always have to count on him contending in the Master's.  It's no secret that Augusta will be the pivotal major in his run for breaking the record.

[Ernest Jones]

Originally Posted by TourSpoon

Welcome to the forum. I have to agree with some of your points especially the point about arguing.  I also agree that people will jump on the Tiger bus, with the obvious hold out being Brandel Chamblee who has held fast to his opinion from day one. Say what you want about him, but he has not wavered or flip flopped.  He is the only talking head that has ever posted on this forum as well. Obviously, people talk about Tiger for ratings and that is when I usually tune out because it is so redundant and sensationalized.

The one line that you said about Watson is so true, "He still had to make the swings." I will add the good ones and the bad ones. So did all the other guys there that day that didn't even break par. Clearly he is exempt from the non-athletic fat drunk smoker group that you referenced.  We all know that to make it today to the highest level, it is essential to have every advantage mentally and physically to go along with your level of talent.

Tiger should make some kind of splash this year and I think you always have to count on him contending in the Master's.  It's no secret that Augusta will be the pivotal major in his run for breaking the record.

Brandel Chamblee has posted here? Really?

[bplewis24]

Originally Posted by jhwmusic

you guys all just argue to argue. its obvious that EVERYONE benefits from technology, but especially those who are older, weaker etc..

Yeah, it isn't that difficult of a concept.

Brandon

[MiniBlueDragon]

The very concept of a GOAT is that it will change. That change could be over several years or several decades. To me Tiger was the GOAT but not so any more. Could he be again? Maybe but no guarantees I'm afraid. Nicklaus was. Hogan was. Woods was. Who is it now though?

[TourSpoon]

Originally Posted by Ernest Jones

Brandel Chamblee has posted here? Really?

http://thesandtrap.com/forums/posts/by_user/id/28815

[k-troop]

Originally Posted by MiniBlueDragon

The very concept of a GOAT is that it will change. That change could be over several years or several decades. To me Tiger was the GOAT but not so any more. Could he be again? Maybe but no guarantees I'm afraid. Nicklaus was. Hogan was. Woods was. Who is it now though?

Couldn't disagree with this more.  The Greatest of All Time is just that--there has never been anyone better.  Ever.  The first guy to ever play golf was the greatest of all time.  Then he taught the game to three other guys, and the best in that foursome was the greatest of all time.  And then there was Tom Morris, and then maybe Harry Vardon.  Since then, the Greatest was probably Bobby Jones, then Jack.  (Arguable that Hogan supplanted Mr. Jones, but I'm not convinced.)

If Tiger "was" the greatest ever, then he still is--because certainly there is no one playing the game right now who is even close.  It's not like Jack stopped being the Greatest of all Time from 1987-1998 and was supplanted by whoever was #1 at the time (Norman?  Faldo?)

[jhwmusic]

Yeah, What has Tiger done or not done to all of sudden not be the GOAT (GREATEST OF ALL TIME) in your eyes.  Was it because he banged a couple of ugly strippers?  okay more than a couple..ha.  Do you think Mohammad Ali is the GOAT?  Cuz he was having sex with everything that walked.   And what has anyone else done to change your mind?  Because there isn't a golfer on the planet that has done anything close to what tiger has done.

[jhwmusic]

Originally Posted by k-troop

Couldn't disagree with this more.  The Greatest of All Time is just that--there has never been anyone better.  Ever.  The first guy to ever play golf was the greatest of all time.  Then he taught the game to three other guys, and the best in that foursome was the greatest of all time.  And then there was Tom Morris, and then maybe Harry Vardon.  Since then, the Greatest was probably Bobby Jones, then Jack.  (Arguable that Hogan supplanted Mr. Jones, but I'm not convinced.)

If Tiger "was" the greatest ever, then he still is--because certainly there is no one playing the game right now who is even close.  It's not like Jack stopped being the Greatest of all Time from 1987-1998 and was supplanted by whoever was #1 at the time (Norman?  Faldo?)

I completely agree with you!  What is he talking about?  The concept of a GOAT is that it will change?  Unless someone does something the previous "Goat" hasn't done, he is still the "Goat!"

[jhwmusic]

Originally Posted by k-troop

Couldn't disagree with this more.  The Greatest of All Time is just that--there has never been anyone better.  Ever.  The first guy to ever play golf was the greatest of all time.  Then he taught the game to three other guys, and the best in that foursome was the greatest of all time.  And then there was Tom Morris, and then maybe Harry Vardon.  Since then, the Greatest was probably Bobby Jones, then Jack.  (Arguable that Hogan supplanted Mr. Jones, but I'm not convinced.)

If Tiger "was" the greatest ever, then he still is--because certainly there is no one playing the game right now who is even close.  It's not like Jack stopped being the Greatest of all Time from 1987-1998 and was supplanted by whoever was #1 at the time (Norman?  Faldo?)

I completely agree with you!  What is he talking about?  The concept of a GOAT is that it will change?  Unless someone does something the previous "Goat" hasn't done, he is still the "Goat!"