Tiger Woods Master Catch-All Discussion

[jamo]

4 minutes ago, nevets88 said:

This book is new right? I think it's new.

The Second Life of Tiger Woods | Book by Michael Bamberger | Official Publisher Page | Simon & Schuster

---

“Fascinating...[Bamberger] knows the world of professional golf, and the pressures it exacts, like few others.” —The Wall Street Journal It’s one of...

 

Yeah, I think it came out a week or so ago. 

[iacas]

3 hours ago, nevets88 said:

This book is new right? I think it's new.

The Second Life of Tiger Woods | Book by Michael Bamberger | Official Publisher Page | Simon & Schuster

---

“Fascinating...[Bamberger] knows the world of professional golf, and the...

 

Yeah. Reviews aren’t great.

[nevets88]

New interview.

Tiger talks sports: Woods on the time Muhammad Ali hit him, how he compares to Michael Jordan - Golf Digest

---

Tiger Woods video-conferenced in for a conversation about all things sports.

 

[Groucho Valentine]

Is ESPN producing Tigers 30 for 30 special yet? Im running out of TV to watch. 

[nevets88]

I don't know if he's said it before, but here he says running 30 mile weeks for the first 5 years on tour probably killed his knees and body. Let's say you take 2 days off a week, that's 6 miles each run, in addition to the range and course time.

 

[turtleback]

I've been using some of this downtime to watch the pgatour summaries of Tiger's 82 wins, in order.

Damn he was good!!

[Vinsk]

2 hours ago, turtleback said:

I've been using some of this downtime to watch the pgatour summaries of Tiger's 82 wins, in order.

Damn he was good!!

So that’s where you’ve been!

[woodzie264]

2 hours ago, turtleback said:

I've been using some of this downtime to watch the pgatour summaries of Tiger's 82 wins, in order.

Damn he was good!!

Watched it myself last night. Always impressive how dominating he’s been

[turtleback]

I had completely forgotten that in his first tour win in Las Vegas he didn't wear a red shirt on the final day.  But he did for his second win at Disney.

It is also funny hearing things like, "Davis [Love] has 143 yards to the pin.  That will take a hard 9 iron".  Which nowadays would be a 3/4 sand wedge.

[Vinsk]

Tiger Woods' handicap index history is as amazing as you'd imagine—but his peak year might surprise you

---

Stats by Alex Myers It's been a long time since Tiger Woods had an official USGA handicap index. When you post...

Just incredible. +9.4? Sick.

[saevel25]

Tiger Woods' handicap index history is as amazing as you'd imagine—but his peak year might surprise you | Golf World | GolfDigest.com

---

 

Quote

It also shows Woods was at his best in 2008 with a +9.4 index—and not 2000 when he won nine PGA Tour titles, inclduding three majors.

That is a bit crazy sounding. Nearly averaging +10 for an entire year!!! YIKES!!!!

 

[colin007]

Makes my nipples right hard

[brocks]

On 5/21/2020 at 1:45 PM, turtleback said:

I've been using some of this downtime to watch the pgatour summaries of Tiger's 82 wins, in order.

Damn he was good!!

Hi TB, that sounds like a good project.  I'm glad they posted the recaps, but I do miss the full broadcasts.  I've watched the 2019 Masters full replay about 50 times since the lockdown started.  I'm pretty sure that woman at the sixteenth tee has a thing for me.

Yesterday they replayed the final round of the 2012 Memorial, when Tiger hit what Jack called the best shot he had ever seen, given the circumstances.  The circumstances were he was on the 70th hole, a shot behind, with a terrible lie forcing him to make a full swing flop shot which would roll back down if he hit it a foot short, and would go into the water if he hit it few feet too far.  The announcers thought he had little chance to get it up and down.  So, being Tiger, he holed it for a birdie.

Yeah, he was good.

Wouldn't be the same without the crowd, so I'm glad to hear that they'll allow spectators at the Memorial this year (moved to July 16).  It would be great if Tiger broke the record there.  Since most of Tiger's PGA Tour wins had tougher fields than most of Jack's majors, IMO it should end the debate on GOAT (but of course it won't, and that's fine, too.)

Edited June 9, 2020 by iacas
embedded video

[turtleback]

On 6/8/2020 at 6:58 PM, brocks said:

Hi TB, that sounds like a good project.  I'm glad they posted the recaps, but I do miss the full broadcasts.  I've watched the 2019 Masters full replay about 50 times since the lockdown started.  I'm pretty sure that woman at the sixteenth tee has a thing for me.

You probably already know this, but I just watched the 2001 Masters, and the announcers mentioned something I don't think I had been previously aware of.  Hogan was going for 4 majors in a row at the 1954 Masters.  And he came d@mned close, losing in an 18 hole playoff to Snead, 70-71.  

[brocks]

8 hours ago, turtleback said:

You probably already know this, but I just watched the 2001 Masters, and the announcers mentioned something I don't think I had been previously aware of.  Hogan was going for 4 majors in a row at the 1954 Masters.  And he came d@mned close, losing in an 18 hole playoff to Snead, 70-71.  

No doubt about it, Hogan was clearly the best player in the world in the early 1950's, even though he never fully recovered from his accident.  Of all the what-if's about golfers of different eras competing against each other, I think Hogan's case is the most fascinating, because he was up against a quadruple-whammy:  

1. The lack of modern technology, which tells today's players their clubhead speed, launch angle, spin rate, etc., and allows them to diagnose swing faults in half an hour.  When you think of all time great old-timers, you think of great natural swings, like Snead's and Nelson's.  Most of them didn't practice much.  Hogan was the exception; his natural swing was a snap hook, and he famously spent years of trial and error before he cured it, so he didn't win a major until he was 34, and not even his first individual regular event until he was 28.  You would think that with the talent he obviously had, he gave up close to ten years of his career trying to dig it out of the dirt.

2. When he finally did find his swing, WWII broke out, cancelling many PGA events and majors outright, and his army duties preventing him from playing most of the events that weren't cancelled.  Another three years down the tubes.

3. Shortly after the war ended, and he emerged as the best golfer in the world with 13 wins in 1946 (Nelson won 6 times that year, IMO settling the question of whether it was the depleted fields of 1944-45 that were responsible for his records), he had that horrific accident, never fully recovering, and playing in pain for the rest of his life.  Not only playing in pain, but practicing in pain, which had to affect his preparation for tournaments.  Since he got a top ten in the 1967 Masters, that was at least 20 years that could have been much better.

4. And finally, the fact that the Open Championship had lost so much prestige, paid so little, had such ridiculous eligibility requirements (everybody had to play in a 36-hole qualifier, even the defending champion), and was so expensive in terms of both time and money to compete in, that few Americans played it at all, and most of those who did (including Hogan) only played it once.

So that adds up to over 30 years of obstacles that modern golfers don't face, even if you don't take into account that he played only zero to three majors a year.  I don't think there's much doubt that if he had been able to play four majors a year, every year, like Jack did, and hadn't had his accident, Hogan would have won at least 20 majors.  It's why I can't forgive Jack for his comment about majors being the only fair way to compare golfers of different eras.

All that said, Hogan does get almost universal credit for something he never did, namely winning three consecutive majors.  Obviously, if he had won the '54 Masters, that wouldn't be a slam, because he wouldn't have all four trophies on his mantle.  No Wanamaker Trophy.  He would not have won four consecutive majors; he would have won the last four majors he entered.  Great, but not a slam.

But that also applies to 1953, because the PGA Championship was actually held the week before the British Open that year (The PGA began on July 1, the Open on July 8).  So Hogan won the first, second, and fourth majors of that 1953.  Three majors, and the last three he entered, but not three consecutive majors.  Tiger remains the only pro golfer to win three consecutive majors, let alone four.

And I've mentioned this many times, but there may be some new guys here: the scheduling conflict between the PGA and Open did not rob Hogan of a chance to win the Grand Slam; his accident did.  Hogan couldn't have played the PGA even if it had been held in September, because the match play format required several consecutive 36-hole days, and his injured legs simply could not handle that.  He could have played the PGA any year other than 1953 after his accident, but he never did until 1960, after it had changed its format to stroke play.

 

[turtleback]

1 hour ago, brocks said:

No doubt about it, Hogan was clearly the best player in the world in the early 1950's, even though he never fully recovered from his accident.  Of all the what-if's about golfers of different eras competing against each other, I think Hogan's case is the most fascinating, because he was up against a quadruple-whammy:  

1. The lack of modern technology, which tells today's players their clubhead speed, launch angle, spin rate, etc., and allows them to diagnose swing faults in half an hour.  When you think of all time great old-timers, you think of great natural swings, like Snead's and Nelson's.  Most of them didn't practice much.  Hogan was the exception; his natural swing was a snap hook, and he famously spent years of trial and error before he cured it, so he didn't win a major until he was 34, and not even his first individual regular event until he was 28.  You would think that with the talent he obviously had, he gave up close to ten years of his career trying to dig it out of the dirt.

2. When he finally did find his swing, WWII broke out, cancelling many PGA events and majors outright, and his army duties preventing him from playing most of the events that weren't cancelled.  Another three years down the tubes.

3. Shortly after the war ended, and he emerged as the best golfer in the world with 13 wins in 1946 (Nelson won 6 times that year, IMO settling the question of whether it was the depleted fields of 1944-45 that were responsible for his records), he had that horrific accident, never fully recovering, and playing in pain for the rest of his life.  Not only playing in pain, but practicing in pain, which had to affect his preparation for tournaments.  Since he got a top ten in the 1967 Masters, that was at least 20 years that could have been much better.

4. And finally, the fact that the Open Championship had lost so much prestige, paid so little, had such ridiculous eligibility requirements (everybody had to play in a 36-hole qualifier, even the defending champion), and was so expensive in terms of both time and money to compete in, that few Americans played it at all, and most of those who did (including Hogan) only played it once.

So that adds up to over 30 years of obstacles that modern golfers don't face, even if you don't take into account that he played only zero to three majors a year.  I don't think there's much doubt that if he had been able to play four majors a year, every year, like Jack did, and hadn't had his accident, Hogan would have won at least 20 majors.  It's why I can't forgive Jack for his comment about majors being the only fair way to compare golfers of different eras.

All that said, Hogan does get almost universal credit for something he never did, namely winning three consecutive majors.  Obviously, if he had won the '54 Masters, that wouldn't be a slam, because he wouldn't have all four trophies on his mantle.  No Wanamaker Trophy.  He would not have won four consecutive majors; he would have won the last four majors he entered.  Great, but not a slam.

But that also applies to 1953, because the PGA Championship was actually held the week before the British Open that year (The PGA began on July 1, the Open on July 8).  So Hogan won the first, second, and fourth majors of that 1953.  Three majors, and the last three he entered, but not three consecutive majors.  Tiger remains the only pro golfer to win three consecutive majors, let alone four.

And I've mentioned this many times, but there may be some new guys here: the scheduling conflict between the PGA and Open did not rob Hogan of a chance to win the Grand Slam; his accident did.  Hogan couldn't have played the PGA even if it had been held in September, because the match play format required several consecutive 36-hole days, and his injured legs simply could not handle that.  He could have played the PGA any year other than 1953 after his accident, but he never did until 1960, after it had changed its format to stroke play.

 

Just to clarify, I meant 3 or 4 majors in a row in the sense of consecutive wins in majors played.  Like Tiger's 6 consecutive wins in 99/00 or his 7 consecutive in 06/07 were consecutive wins in events played.

As to Hogan, I've made the argument that the Tiger v. Jack debate unfairly excluded Hogan.  I still put it as Tiger, Jack, Ben on the basis of strength of competition.  Hogan had to only beat a handful of players to win an event as compared to Jack and even (way) more so with Tiger.

[brocks]

10 hours ago, turtleback said:

Just to clarify, I meant 3 or 4 majors in a row in the sense of consecutive wins in majors played.  Like Tiger's 6 consecutive wins in 99/00 or his 7 consecutive in 06/07 were consecutive wins in events played.

As to Hogan, I've made the argument that the Tiger v. Jack debate unfairly excluded Hogan.  I still put it as Tiger, Jack, Ben on the basis of strength of competition.  Hogan had to only beat a handful of players to win an event as compared to Jack and even (way) more so with Tiger.

100% agree.  As you know, in the mid-60's Jack thought Hogan was the GOAT, even though he had fewer major wins than Walter Hagen.  Jack was way too smart to think 11 > 9.

[colin007]

I'm a cord cutter, been watching a lot of the PGA Tour channel on Pluto, they've been showing a slew of old Tiger victories. It's sometimes shocking how mediocre he played his final rounds and how he flirted with disaster on the last holes. 1999 WGC Firestone for example.