Tiger Woods Master Catch-All Discussion

[sheepdog]

20 minutes ago, Vinsk said:

You’re really making an ass out of yourself with the Tiger #2 GOAT when you’ve provided zero stats/data that favor anyone above Tiger. Your profile name suits you well. Carry on kiddo.

I'm entitled to my opinion as you are to yours. 18 major wins 19 times placing second, 18 is more than 14,  works for me.

 

Tiger #2 GOAT

Edited May 17, 2018 by sheepdog

[klineka]

26 minutes ago, sheepdog said:

18 is more than 14,  works for me.

18 is more than 14 when all else is equal. 18 Honda Civics are worth less than 14 Ferrari's, just like 18 majors against weaker fields are worth less than 14 majors against stronger fields.

You can have your 18 Honda Civics, I'll keep my 14 Ferrari's. After all 18 cars are better than 14 cars right?

Edited May 17, 2018 by klineka

[Vinsk]

7 minutes ago, klineka said:

18 is more than 14 when all else is equal. 18 Honda Civics are worth less than 14 Ferrari's, just like 18 majors against weaker fields are worth less than 14 majors against stronger fields.

You can have your 18 Honda Civics, I'll keep my 14 Ferrari's. After all 18 cars are better than 14 cars right?

 Now don’t go talking logic on @sheepdog. The 18>14 crowd still think that having a handful of other all time greats makes Jack’s wins that much more impressive. They’ll never get it. They also love to ignore that Tiger won more tournaments than Jack. Period. Jack emphasized majors being the top priority when he realized he wasn’t gonna catch Snead. Same way he de-emphasized the US Amateur when Tiger won 3. 

Tiger GOAT. 

Tiger #2 GOAT is an opinion that just happens to be wrong. 

[Groucho Valentine]

22 minutes ago, klineka said:

18 is more than 14 when all else is equal. 18 Honda Civics are worth less than 14 Ferrari's, just like 18 majors against weaker fields are worth less than 14 majors against stronger fields.

You can have your 18 Honda Civics, I'll keep my 14 Ferrari's. After all 18 cars are better than 14 cars right?

Interesting analogy, but i think 18 wins is still 18 wins. Winning majors has never been easy. Only two or three players in the history of the game have won more than 10, i believe. So if there is one thing i think you can carry over generationally is how many majors a player has won. So just in terms of winning, i think you can only say that Jack is king. Tiger isnt getting to 19. But i don't think many objective viewers doubt that Tiger is the best player that has ever picked up a golf club, either. He just wont have jacks numbers. 

[Vinsk]

12 minutes ago, Groucho Valentine said:

Interesting analogy, but i think 18 wins is still 18 wins. Winning majors has never been easy. Only two or three players in the history of the game have won more than 10, i believe. So if there is one thing i think you can carry over generationally is how many majors a player has won. So just in terms of winning, i think you can only say that Jack is king. Tiger isnt getting to 19. But i don't think many objective viewers doubt that Tiger is the best player that has ever picked up a golf club, either. He just wont have jacks numbers. 

It’s not really just numbers though. Just like NCAA Football. Yes UCF was undefeated but they’re not the national champion. Just like Kyle Bronsman (something like that) was QB for Boise St. Sure he racked up impressive stats but he did them against much weaker teams than say a 3rd ranked Big 10 or SEC team. No, winning a major was never easy. But it was certainly easier for a player of Jack’s skill in his time than it was for Tiger in his. Again, 1956-1965 Jack won 3 Masters. But you have to remember those fields had only a handful of players that had any real chance to win. Yes there are outlier situations in golf, like every other sport. Hell top ranked players didn’t even play in The Open because of cost/logistics and really low interest. It was Arnold who revitalized it. Jack was a phenom of his time and he was able to capitalize on that situation early on. Jack won 18 majors with many being very impressive but there are a good number of them that were pretty much achievable with only average playing by Jack.

[Zeph]

This discussion belongs in the designated GOAT thread.

[turtleback]

19 hours ago, Groucho Valentine said:

Interesting analogy, but i think 18 wins is still 18 wins. Winning majors has never been easy. Only two or three players in the history of the game have won more than 10, i believe. So if there is one thing i think you can carry over generationally is how many majors a player has won. So just in terms of winning, i think you can only say that Jack is king. Tiger isnt getting to 19. But i don't think many objective viewers doubt that Tiger is the best player that has ever picked up a golf club, either. He just wont have jacks numbers. 

The bolded statement is not even close to being true.  I've said it before but I guess I have to say it again.  The year Gary Player won his first major it was a British Open in the late 50s, a time period when Americans completely dominated golf, there were only 4 Americans in the field and you never heard of any of them.  That year EVERY SINGLE PGA EVENT had a stronger field than the British Open.

[Groucho Valentine]

57 minutes ago, turtleback said:

The bolded statement is not even close to being true.  I've said it before but I guess I have to say it again.  The year Gary Player won his first major it was a British Open in the late 50s, a time period when Americans completely dominated golf, there were only 4 Americans in the field and you never heard of any of them.  That year EVERY SINGLE PGA EVENT had a stronger field than the British Open.

He should have won it every single year then. But he didn't. 

[iacas]

11 minutes ago, Groucho Valentine said:

He should have won it every single year then. But he didn't. 

🤦‍♂️

[nevets88]

Impromptu long drive contest w/current ladies long drive champion. Drop the mic!

 

[colin007]

18 hours ago, nevets88 said:

Impromptu long drive contest w/current ladies long drive champion. Drop the mic!

 

Off topic, but Troy Mullins is effing gorgeous.

[rehmwa]

On 5/22/2018 at 1:01 PM, colin007 said:

Off topic, but Troy Mullins is effing gorgeous.

yes she is - seriously - and her energy just makes it even more so

on topic - the Memorial - once again 2 out of 4 excellent rounds.  He's definitely going to put 4 together in one tournament again.  It's just a matter of time now.  even 3 with a mediocre round will likely do it.  I think it's sooner rather than later...

[iacas]

2 minutes ago, rehmwa said:

on topic - the Memorial - once again 2 out of 4 excellent rounds.  He's definitely going to put 4 together in one tournament again.  It's just a matter of time now.  even 3 with a mediocre round will likely do it.  I think it's sooner rather than later...

You could almost say 4 out of 4… minus the putting.

[rehmwa]

7 minutes ago, iacas said:

You could almost say 4 out of 4… minus the putting.

"without the putting" I really can't.  I'd like to..... but no....gotta have it all on this tour.

But he knows how to putt.  it'll happen.

it's really close.....

 

I missed Thurs - was that also putting?

Edited June 4, 2018 by rehmwa

[Zeph]

Thursday problem was the first nine holes, where he made one birdie, two bogies and one double. He got the shots back on the last nine, but only ended up at even par. With 4-5 under after day one, he would've been up there all the way. He lost some shots off the tee overall, but most of them on the green, where he lost strokes to the field every round.

 

 

 

Edited June 4, 2018 by Zeph

[nevets88]

Is it too early to think Comeback PotY?

[iacas]

4 hours ago, nevets88 said:

Is it too early to think Comeback PotY?

I don't think they have awarded that award for a few years.

[Ty_Webb]

On 6/4/2018 at 3:25 PM, Zeph said:

Thursday problem was the first nine holes, where he made one birdie, two bogies and one double. He got the shots back on the last nine, but only ended up at even par. With 4-5 under after day one, he would've been up there all the way. He lost some shots off the tee overall, but most of them on the green, where he lost strokes to the field every round.

 

 

 

He did lose some shots off the tee, but he hit it OOB twice during the week. Those two shots comprise -4 to his strokes gained off the tee. Apart from those two shots he was pretty good off the tee (based on his shots gained), although he also hit that weird pull hook in round 3 on 15. Brandel Chamblee seems to think that when he's on a hole that has no hazards, he drives it fine, but as soon as there is OB around or water, he gets quicker in transition and hits it all over the place. I thought that was an interesting comment. I wonder why that happens. Thoughts? 

I do think he'll figure the putting thing out. Steve Stricker made the US Open, so hopefully Tiger will bump into him on the putting green and Stricker will give him a tip. I don't know Shinnecock particularly well, but I don't think there's a whole heap of OB or water there, so hopefully he'll keep it together. Had he putted like an average PGA Tour player last week and didn't hit the two drives OB, he would have won by 6 shots. I like his chances at Shinnecock, except for that his play in majors since 2009 has been very lackluster. Personally I think it's in his head. Hope he gets past it. One thing I am fairly confident of is that he won't finish his career with 15 majors. If he wins another one, I think he'll win a few more too. Only way I see him winning 15 total is if he doesn't win any for a few years and then at 48 he catches lightning in a bottle and takes one more, then retires because his back is done.