Jump to content
Check out the Spin Axis Podcast! ×
IGNORED

Tiger: Better in 2000 or 2006?


Note: This thread is 6476 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

Recommended Posts

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

Erik J. Barzeski —  I knock a ball. It goes in a gopher hole. 🏌🏼‍♂️
Director of Instruction Golf Evolution • Owner, The Sand Trap .com • AuthorLowest Score Wins
Golf Digest "Best Young Teachers in America" 2016-17 & "Best in State" 2017-20 • WNY Section PGA Teacher of the Year 2019 :edel: :true_linkswear:

Check Out: New Topics | TST Blog | Golf Terms | Instructional Content | Analyzr | LSW | Instructional Droplets

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted
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.

Here's what I play:

Titleist 907 D2 10.5* UST ProForce V2 76-S | Titleist 906F4 18.5* Aldila VS Proto "By You" 80-S | Titleist 585H 21* Aldila VS Proto "By You" 80-S | Titleist ZB 4-PW TTDG S300 | Bob Vokey Spin Milled Oil Can 54.10 | Bob Vokey Spin Milled Oil Can 60.08 | Scotty Cameron Red X5 33" |


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

Posted
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.

In the Bag:
Driver:Adams Speedline F11 9 degree RIP Gamma 

3 Wood: Adams Fast 10 15 degrees Voodoo shaft
Hybrid: Irons: Mizuno MP59 Sensicore  XStiff

Wedges: Cleveland Gun Metal 52 56 degree

Putter: Rife: Belly Barbados Tropical

Ball: Titliest Pro V 1


Posted
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.


Posted
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.

In the bag:

driver Big Ben CS3 9.5º
3-wood 906F4 15.5º
hybrid rescue mid 19ºirons: MP-60 3-PWwedges vokey spin-milled 54º and 60ºputter tracy IIball Pro V1


Posted
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!

Posted
'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

Posted
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

What's in my bag:

Driver: R7 CGB Max, regular shaft
4-wood and 7-wood: :: Launcher, regular shafts
4-iron to A-wedge: X-20, regular steel shafts56- and 60-degree wedge: forged, stiff steel shafts, vintage finish, MD groovesPutter: Circa '62, No. 7, steel shaft, 35"Ball: NXT Tour or ProV1(x)...


Posted
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!

Posted
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. . .

  • 2 weeks later...
Posted
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

  • 4 months later...
Posted
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....

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

Erik J. Barzeski —  I knock a ball. It goes in a gopher hole. 🏌🏼‍♂️
Director of Instruction Golf Evolution • Owner, The Sand Trap .com • AuthorLowest Score Wins
Golf Digest "Best Young Teachers in America" 2016-17 & "Best in State" 2017-20 • WNY Section PGA Teacher of the Year 2019 :edel: :true_linkswear:

Check Out: New Topics | TST Blog | Golf Terms | Instructional Content | Analyzr | LSW | Instructional Droplets

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Note: This thread is 6476 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.


  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • TST Partners

    PlayBetter
    Golfer's Journal
    ShotScope
    The Stack System
    FitForGolf
    FlightScope Mevo
    Direct: Mevo, Mevo+, and Pro Package.

    Coupon Codes (save 10-20%): "IACAS" for Mevo/Stack/FitForGolf, "IACASPLUS" for Mevo+/Pro Package, and "THESANDTRAP" for ShotScope. 15% off TourStriker (no code).
  • Posts

    • Nah, man. People have been testing clubs like this for decades at this point. Even 35 years. @M2R, are you AskGolfNut? If you're not, you seem to have fully bought into the cult or something. So many links to so many videos… Here's an issue, too: - A drop of 0.06 is a drop with a 90 MPH 7I having a ball speed of 117 and dropping it to 111.6, which is going to be nearly 15 yards, which is far more than what a "3% distance loss" indicates (and is even more than a 4.6% distance loss). - You're okay using a percentage with small numbers and saying "they're close" and "1.3 to 1.24 is only 4.6%," but then you excuse the massive 53% difference that going from 3% to 4.6% represents. That's a hell of an error! - That guy in the Elite video is swinging his 7I at 70 MPH. C'mon. My 5' tall daughter swings hers faster than that.
    • Yea but that is sort of my quandary, I sometimes see posts where people causally say this club is more forgiving, a little more forgiving, less forgiving, ad nauseum. But what the heck are they really quantifying? The proclamation of something as fact is not authoritative, even less so as I don't know what the basis for that statement is. For my entire golfing experience, I thought of forgiveness as how much distance front to back is lost hitting the face in non-optimal locations. Anything right or left is on me and delivery issues. But I also have to clarify that my experience is only with irons, I never got to the point of having any confidence or consistency with anything longer. I feel that is rather the point, as much as possible, to quantify the losses by trying to eliminate all the variables except the one you want to investigate. Or, I feel like we agree. Compared to the variables introduced by a golfer's delivery and the variables introduced by lie conditions, the losses from missing the optimal strike location might be so small as to almost be noise over a larger area than a pea.  In which case it seems that your objection is that the 0-3% area is being depicted as too large. Which I will address below. For statements that is absurd and true 100% sweet spot is tiny for all clubs. You will need to provide some objective data to back that up and also define what true 100% sweet spot is. If you mean the area where there are 0 losses, then yes. While true, I do not feel like a not practical or useful definition for what I would like to know. For strikes on irons away from the optimal location "in measurable and quantifiable results how many yards, or feet, does that translate into?"   In my opinion it ok to be dubious but I feel like we need people attempting this sort of data driven investigation. Even if they are wrong in some things at least they are moving the discussion forward. And he has been changing the maps and the way data is interpreted along the way. So, he admits to some of the ideas he started with as being wrong. It is not like we all have not been in that situation 😄 And in any case to proceed forward I feel will require supporting or refuting data. To which as I stated above, I do not have any experience in drivers so I cannot comment on that. But I would like to comment on irons as far as these heat maps. In a video by Elite Performance Golf Studios - The TRUTH About Forgiveness! Game Improvement vs Blade vs Players Distance SLOW SWING SPEED! and going back to ~12:50 will show the reference data for the Pro 241. I can use that to check AskGolfNut's heat map for the Pro 241: a 16mm heel, 5mm low produced a loss of efficiency from 1.3 down to 1.24 or ~4.6%. Looking at AskGolfNut's heatmap it predicts a loss of 3%. Is that good or bad? I do not know but given the possible variations I am going to say it is ok. That location is very close to where the head map goes to 4%, these are very small numbers, and rounding could be playing some part. But for sure I am going to say it is not absurd. Looking at one data point is absurd, but I am not going to spend time on more because IME people who are interested will do their own research and those not interested cannot be persuaded by any amount of data. However, the overall conclusion that I got from that video was that between the three clubs there is a difference in distance forgiveness, but it is not very much. Without some robot testing or something similar the human element in the testing makes it difficult to say is it 1 yard, or 2, or 3?  
    • Wordle 1,668 3/6 🟨🟨🟩⬜⬜ ⬜🟨⬜⬜🟨 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
    • Wordle 1,668 3/6 🟨🟩🟨🟨⬜ 🟩🟩🟩🟩⬜ 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩 Should have got it in two, but I have music on my brain.
    • Wordle 1,668 2/6* 🟨🟨🟩⬛⬛ 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Welcome to TST! Signing up is free, and you'll see fewer ads and can talk with fellow golf enthusiasts! By using TST, you agree to our Terms of Use, our Privacy Policy, and our Guidelines.