Tiger Woods Master Catch-All Discussion

[jamo]

1 hour ago, colin007 said:

I honestly don't think he does. I think if we had a window to his honest and frank thoughts, he didn't give a greasy turd about the President's or Ryder Cups. I think he's an incredibly selfish player and he'd give international competition and wins for a couple of Valspar or other no name tourney wins that would pad his individual stats. His international record does not matter one bit in assessing his career overall. 

I can be wrong.

That certainly was true at one point. He said as much plenty of times. Whether it still is is anyone's guest. Sometimes that sort of thing mellows with age. 

[mdl]

10 hours ago, Braivo said:

I think it was noted on the broadcast, but I find it fascinating that Tiger is now beating a whole different generation of golfer in this "Phase II" of his career or whatever you want to call it. At 43, while most of his challengers from 10+ years ago have faded from the tour, he is out there beating long hitters in their 20s and 30s.  He is no longer a big hitter by today's standards, yet he finds a way to  gain strokes with the irons and putter. Incredibly smart, disciplined golf. 

His being a bomber back in the day certainly helped. But as many people already know, his real dominance came from the fact that he was so much better than everyone else with the long and mid irons, without glaring weaknesses elsewhere. So it makes sense to me that his being long but not a bomber at this point in  his career doesn't hobble him or anything.

[dennyjones]

I believe he will continue to play and play well so he can participate in the Olympics.   That's probably the only medal he doesn't have.   If that means playing in the President's Cup, so be it.    I believe, like others, he likes team events. 

[Zeph]

9 hours ago, rehmwa said:

The delivery of the "incredulous question" - like you can't figure out what he meant?

picking nits, we know what he meant.   3 times since this true comeback - and it's pretty close to 3 in a year's period (13 months and 5 days?) even if it spans 3 seasons......

I specifically said "season" for a reason. If I wanted to include all three events, I would've said "14 month span" or something. First he played close to a full season in 2018, capitalized by a win at the Tour Championship. At that point he knew he would have knee surgery, but decided to postpone it since he was doing so well. He continued playing and ended up winning the Masters the next season. Following that win, the rest of the season didn't yield much: CUT, T9, T21, CUT, WD, T37, not even making the Tour Championship. After the BMW he didn't play until his surgery and recovery was done, and when returning he won Zozo.

My point was that without the Masters win, he would've been winless in the 18-19 season, which possibly could be blamed on postponing the surgery. No wins might not have been a complete disappointment if he'd been healthy all the year and made progress, but after the Masters that was not the case.

[boogielicious]

15 hours ago, iacas said:

Of course he's picking himself. He loves competing, being one of the guys, etc.

He doesn't care about it? Huh?

You're probably right. It will be fun if he does and certainly boost ratings.

14 hours ago, colin007 said:

 

 

 

I honestly don't think he does. I think if we had a window to his honest and frank thoughts, he didn't give a greasy turd about the President's or Ryder Cups. I think he's an incredibly selfish player and he'd give international competition and wins for a couple of Valspar or other no name tourney wins that would pad his individual stats. His international record does not matter one bit in assessing his career overall. 

I can be wrong.

How greasy? Are we talking a bit oily or covered in lard? Asking for a friend.

[jlbos83]

20 hours ago, colin007 said:

 

 

 

I honestly don't think he does. I think if we had a window to his honest and frank thoughts, he didn't give a greasy turd about the President's or Ryder Cups. I think he's an incredibly selfish player and he'd give international competition and wins for a couple of Valspar or other no name tourney wins that would pad his individual stats. His international record does not matter one bit in assessing his career overall. 

I can be wrong.

I believe that if padding his stats was his goal, his schedule would be a lot different.  He plays the tournaments with the toughest fields, and historically wins a ridiculous percentage.  If he had played more "no name" events, what would his record have been?  The "padding" of his stats has taken care of itself.  He's a pretty good golfer, after all.  And a fierce competitor.

And to think he lost a big portion of the last ten years to injury, years which would have been in his prime, at least based on a normal golf career.  Of course you can only count what he actually won, but without the back issues, I would guess Jack would be well in the rear view mirror by now.

[Zeph]

@colin007 You got direct contact with Tiger. Send him a text asking him to include a chapter about his feelings on Ryder and President's Cup in his book.

[nevets88]

Did not know Davis Love III four times runner up. Maybe that's why he got the gig. Not an accurate count, but about 10 are in the Senior Tour and maybe a handful are retired, not playing anymore.

[colin007]

4 hours ago, Zeph said:

@colin007 You got direct contact with Tiger. Send him a text asking him to include a chapter about his feelings on Ryder and President's Cup in his book.

I'll ask him next time I'm giving him a backrub...

[nevets88]

Gonna have to lookup what the 15x15 challenge is.

 

[Golfnutgalen]

I did some digging and found out some more information regarding Tiger Woods' consecutive  cut streak and cut streaks in general. I remember clearly back when people tried to diminish his record because it included many no-cut events. Well, it turns out the same can be said of every other player as well! According to a sports illustrated article from 2003 only around 30% of the events included in Byron Nelson's 113 steak had a 36-hole cut. To make this clear, even the Masters had no cut until 1957 and players who finished outside of the money are not labeled as a missed cut. Anyway the point is Tiger's record 142 consecutive cuts looks as good as ever. If you do have to remove no cut events Tiger is still on top with 111 and number 2 is none other than Jack Nicklaus with 101.

But anyway, using the modern definition of consecutive cuts made - which includes no cut events -  here is a new list. Hogan, Nelson, and Snead would be up here except once again those events didn't have cuts as we know them today. I am sure there are more missing names, but the data is way too uncertain pre 1980. Also these totals include the Open Championship which is overlooked in the official stats.

1. Tiger Woods - 1998-05:  142

2. Jack Nicklaus - 1970-76: 111

3. Hale Irwin - 1975-78: 90

4. Dow Finsterwald - 1955-58: 72

5. Arnold Palmer - 1961-65: 65+

 

Modern Era 1980-2019:

1. Tiger Woods - 1998-05: 142

2. Tom Kite - 1980-82: 54

3. Vijay Singh - 1995-98: 49

4. Steve Stricker - 2009-12: 49

5. Ernie Els - 2004-07: 46

Edited October 30, 2019 by Golfnutgalen

[Golfnutgalen]

Not important, but I messed up on Vijay's numbers. there was a tournament which was cancelled after two rounds and I thought it was a missed cut. He should be 3rd alone with 53 consecutive cuts made. Vijay was a beast!

[colin007]

12 hours ago, nevets88 said:

 

 

This is just.....If he meant to did this, I have no words.

[Vinsk]

2 hours ago, Golfnutgalen said:

I did some digging and found out some more information regarding Tiger Woods' consecutive  cut streak and cut streaks in general. I remember clearly back when people tried to diminish his record because it included many no-cut events. Well, it turns out the same can be said of every other player as well! According to a sports illustrated article from 2003 only around 30% of the events included in Byron Nelson's 113 steak had a 36-hole cut. To make this clear, even the Masters had no cut until 1957 and players who finished outside of the money are not labeled as a missed cut. Anyway the point is Tiger's record 142 consecutive cuts looks as good as ever. If you do have to remove no cut events Tiger is still on top with 111 and number 2 is none other than Jack Nicklaus with 101.

But anyway, using the modern definition of consecutive cuts made - which includes no cut events -  here is a new list. Hogan, Nelson, and Snead would be up here except once again those events didn't have cuts as we know them today. I am sure there are more missing names, but the data is way too uncertain pre 1980. Also these totals include the Open Championship which is overlooked in the official stats.

1. Tiger Woods - 1998-05:  142

2. Jack Nicklaus - 1970-76: 111

3. Hale Irwin - 1975-78: 90

4. Dow Finsterwald - 1955-58: 72

5. Arnold Palmer - 1961-65: 65+

 

Modern Era 1980-2019:

1. Tiger Woods - 1998-05: 142

2. Tom Kite - 1980-82: 54

3. Vijay Singh - 1995-98: 49

4. Steve Stricker - 2009-12: 49

5. Ernie Els - 2004-07: 46

Seems odd they would ever include ‘no cut’ tournaments in a record labeled ‘ most consecutive cuts’. That would just be most completed tournaments. To count as a ‘made cut’ there has to be a cut. Common sense no? Or was this another idea by Jack to boost his numbers? 

[boogielicious]

8 hours ago, Vinsk said:

Seems odd they would ever include ‘no cut’ tournaments in a record labeled ‘ most consecutive cuts’. That would just be most completed tournaments. To count as a ‘made cut’ there has to be a cut. Common sense no? Or was this another idea by Jack to boost his numbers? 

I'm sorry, but I can't read your posts without hearing a lisp due to your avatar.

Quote

Theemths odd they would ever include ‘no cut’ tournamenths in a record labeled ‘ most conthecutive cuths’. 

 

[Vinsk]

1 hour ago, boogielicious said:

I'm sorry, but I can't read your posts without hearing a lisp due to your avatar.

 

Lol! I’ll thange it thoon.

[Zeph]

Theemth odd that they would ever include 'no cut' tournamenth in a record labeled 'moth conthecutive cut'th'. That would juth be the moth completed tournamenth. To count ath a 'made cut' there hath to be a cut. Common thenthe no? Or wath thith another idea by Jack to booth hith numberth?

[turtleback]

You guys are being thilly.