Tiger: Better in 2000 or 2006?

[iacas]

This article makes a compelling case for 2006: http://www.golf.com/golf/tours_news/...071127-1687343

[themasteroncbs]

2000, without question. He won 3 of the 4 majors that year, you can't do much better than that!

[907golfer12]

I voted for them to be equally great, in 2006 he had to overcome a lot of emotional distractions, and still came out with 8 wins, including the British Open and the PGA. But in 2000 he just dominated the tour winning 9 tournaments, including 3 of the 4 masters, 2 in blowout fashion. So basically I think they both were amazing years, in their own ways.

[flash]

Without ? 2006 is his best so far. He lost his father and still kicked everyones' behind .What more can be said!

[Matt M]

I voted for 2000 based on majors. If we judge a player on his greatness by major victories than 2000 was clearly a better year. With that said I'm going to sound like a candidate running for President here, last year was an amazing year. That's the great thing about the Tiger he is always making us say wow.

[g-funk13]

I voted for them to be equally great, in 2006 he had to overcome a lot of emotional distractions, and still came out with 8 wins, including the British Open and the PGA. But in 2000 he just dominated the tour winning 9 tournaments, including 3 of the 4 masters, 2 in blowout fashion. So basically I think they both were amazing years, in their own ways.

YUP. Can't say it better.

[Beach Golfer]

I voted for 2006 because even though I believe that they were both great years, I think Tiger has a lot more consistency in his game now than he did in 2000. If Tiger had not lost his father during the year then I think that 2006 would have been a lot better than 2000.

[g-funk13]

What's amazing to me is that 10 years later, he can still dominate like he does.

I would call 97-2002 the "Tiger Woods: WTF??!!!" years. Winning the Masters in 97 by 12 started a crescendo that peaked with the Masters win in 2001, which completed 4 straight majors. Everyone was in disbelief about how much, and by what margin Tiger was winning.

I would call 2003-2004 the "Tiger Woods: is he catchable??" years. With 5 combined wins and no majors, he seemed more minimally dominant.

2005-current are the "Yes he is the best golfer to ever live" years. Heaven forbid, if he were to die today I would vote him the best golfer to ever play the game.

My point is, after the initial WTF years, there was time for young golfers to set new goals, or to follow him as a blueprint. There was time for more experienced golfers to say "whoa, I have to raise my expectations".

Now, 10 years since Tiger landed, he is still so far beyond as we have seen in the last 2.5 years. Swing changes in place, and having gone through personal challenges on both sides of the spectrum he is just unbelievably good.

I don't know if what he did in the first hot period is better than the more recent years, but Damn, Tiger is so good!

[SubPar]

'06 was great and 2007 was also impressive.
In '07 a 67.79 stroke average and 10 "top twos" in 16 starts (with 7 wins and 3 seconds)... that seems to be pretty good back-to-back season stats.

However you slice the numbers, he is the odds on favorite every time he tees it up. And the rest of the field can't come close. In a sport that loves comparing golfers with each other and golfers of different eras, now we're down to comparing Tiger to Tiger. That says something.

SubPar

[Alex B]

I would rank his years, from best to worst, as follows:

2000
2006
1999
2005
2002
2007
1997
2001
2003
1996 (1/2 year)
1998
2004

[tmker]

I think he played spectacular golf both years, but in my opinion, he was better in 2000. Back then, it appeared that he was more aggressive when needing birdies - and getting them when needing them! His long iron play back then was fantastic! And at the end of the day, the Sportcenter highlights would often feature some 235 yard 5 iron to 18 inches over water. You rarely see that anymore and there are lots of other snipers on tour that routinely out play him with the irons (they just haven't fallin in love with their putters like he has).

I watched most of his televised rounds in 2006 and think that his game has changed to one in which he aims at the center of every green regardless of the situation and then relies on his putting for scores. I think that's why he didn't make more of a move in the last round of the US and British Opens. The greens just looked impossible (just ask Sergio!).

Well, that's the view from my recliner, I'll take a nap now!

[g-funk13]

You rarely see that anymore and there are lots of other snipers on tour that routinely out play him with the irons (they just haven't fallin in love with their putters like he has).

Falling in love with my putter. . . perhaps that's what I need to do to get rid of those 3 putts.

I like that. . .

[albatroz]

Tiger still has a long way to go . There certainly will be more ups and downs to come . The Best of the best has still more instore for us mortals . What ever takes place in the coming years will eradicate his misfortunes of the past and Herald his coming as the Greatest this century . Amen

[Callawaytour]

Tiger played brilliantly both years os its hard to choose one of them. Mentally 2006 was an acheivment because of the emotional strain he went through. I'm going to have to say 2006, but only just....

[iacas]

Not sure why this thread was revived... but there's not much point in discussing 2006 now a year+ later.