Parity on tour

[Jack Watson]

Seems very difficult these days on the PGA Tour to become dominant.  In a sense it makes it tougher to watch.  Everybody was all about golf in the Tiger era-great to watch.

I think it's just too tough now to gain significant advantage.  Is golf in a new era now?

Have we seen the last of a few players dominating majors?  

For me,  I hope not.  I hope SPIETH can get and hold number one for a long time.  

It's not really fun to me to watch on Sunday with this much parity.

Aside from SPIETH and Phil and some of the vets none of the younger  new golfers really inspire me much.  I am kinda thinking too much parity makes it harder for me to watch.  I kinda like Fowler but the rest?  

Matsuyamas mechanics broke down hard today.  I think his pause is a big liability under stress.  I knew Kisner and Stroud would choke.  I can't relate to Koepka.  DJ is a dummy.  Sergio is Sergio I've never been a fan I hate his move.  Rory...I KINDA like Rory but I don't think he has the hunger.  Hooks under pressure killed him at Augusta.  Day meh-he's gonna have a short career imo.  I like Stenson.  

I dunno maybe it's crotchety but when I turn on a major Sunday I wanna see a guy I know.  Maybe parity is hurting ratings.

They are all phenomenal golfers now.  There's little to seperate one from another.

 

[upndown21]

I think it is great. If you don't like parity you can watch just about any other sport our there. What is the fun in watching if you know what is going to happen?

[Jack Watson]

I do like Patrick Reed.  He has some flair.

In a way I think these guys are over coached.  I think they are hurt under pressure.

Really hope SPIETH doesn't do what Tiger did and chase a ghost.

Edited August 14, 2017 by Jack Watson

[David in FL]

Harder to watch?

I find it a LOT more entertaining that in any given tournament, there can be a dozen or more highly talented players that are neck and neck throughout.  

As to wanting to "know" the guys on Sunday, here's the top10 on the final leaderboard from today.   You don't know all of them?!  

 

 

[Jack Watson]

On that board I like Reed and Fowler.  Thomas might emerge but it's very early to say much.  

Molinari has a nice move.

I dunno,  I think if there's say a big three you either love or hate but you watch.  If it could be anyone than meh.  I just wanna know if Thomas was going at the pin on that last par three.  I think he missed that shot.

[David in FL]

3 minutes ago, Jack Watson said:

On that board I like Reed and Fowler.  Thomas might emerge but it's very early to say much.  

Molinari has a nice move.

I dunno,  I think if there's say a big three you either love or hate but you watch.  If it could be anyone than meh.  I just wanna know if Thomas was going at the pin on that last par three.  I think he missed that shot.

Going for what pin?  He hit the center of the green and the ball came down, a bit, towards the pin off the slope.  Regardless though, what difference could it possibly make?

But back to parity, it sounds like you just miss having a single, dominant player that you personally like, in the mix week after week.  I much prefer a closely contested tournament that keeps me watching until the end.  

[chilepepper]

I'm sure the golf industry benefits from a dominant player like in the tiger era. But for myself I like a good horse race on Sunday rather than a blow out

[ChrisP]

Don't like Reed at all. And it's not just his top-5 comment from a few years ago. Saw an incident at a tournament where he was a complete ass and it's going to be hard for me to ever change my opinion on him. I've heard others also share similar experiences.

As for the parity, I think there's nothing wrong with it. The guys who are winning these majors for the first time aren't nobodies. They're great players breaking through, most of them young talent with lots of promise. Of the three first-time winners this year, I wouldn't be surprised if all of them get a 2nd major at some point in their career....yes, even Sergio even though he's getting up there in age.

I do think Spieth has the best chance of this generation to pile up a lot of majors. I'm not sure I see anyone else in this current generation right now that will win more than 3. Maybe Thomas, but I don't know. I think Rory's career will be shortened some, but I do think he'll win at least 1 or 2 more majors.

 

[Piz]

Patrick Reed's stock rises, and subsequently falls, exactly once every two years.  He is the bad guy, on the other team, who doesn't seem so bad when he is playing for you.  That being said...Parity on dudes!  Where's the cold beer at?

[Jack Watson]

I like Reed from Ryder Cup.  He might be a total ash?.. in real life.  That match with Rory was better than a lot of golf I have seen.

@David in FL

My bad on the par three.  Missed the actual shot live.  You are correct.  No miss,  perfect line and distance and caught the slope perfect.

Edited August 15, 2017 by Jack Watson

[BaconNEggs]

Tiger was fun to watch, no doubt. When he was dominant, he was dominant; he was intimidating. It was fun watching someone so utterly on top of their game and so far ahead of the field.

I really like this young class of kids, but they seem so... cookie cutter. It was like Tiger was a new mold, altogether. He changed the game. I don't see anyone out there as intimidating as him. Spieth? Great player. Great competitor. Intimidating? Meh. I feel like these guys are all good buddies. That's not a bad thing, but it makes for less drama. 

If a young Tiger was competing today, would we like and revere him nearly as much? I doubt he would be anywhere near as dominant. I'm not enough of a student of golf history to know that this is true, but my understanding is Tiger really started the age of strength, fitness, and flexibility as being vital to the game-- not to say previous generations weren't strong, fit, or flexible, but not to Tiger's level. Of course, his all around game was amazing, and some of his most memorable shots were short game, but he was the first guy I really remember taking the "bomb and gouge" approach to the level he did. Courses had to be "Tiger proofed." They never had to be "Daly proofed" (to my knowledge). It seems for most players that has become the sort of default or standard way to play golf, now. Guys like Koepka can reach 600 yard par 5s in two with ease. Heck, Justin Thomas looks like he weighs about 140 pounds soaking wet and he's ranked 7th in driving distance, averaging 310. It's impressive on an absolute level, but now much less impressive on a relative scale. 

Parity makes for more interesting finishes, but perhaps without a dominant force (or two), it's less entertaining. I'm not sure who is best positioned to take that role on, or if we're in an era of golf where it's become too hard to be dominant. My sneaking suspicion is these guys are all so close to their personal pinnacles of physical talent, and so close to each other, that luck will increasingly play a role in who is winning week to week. I hope that's not the case. In every sport I can think of, the best eras are almost always defined by dominant players/teams over a decent length of time. Maybe we're in an age where youth will continuously dominate, and players in their late 20s / early 30s -- once considered prime -- will now be over the hill. 

[Marty2019]

I don't mind the so-called parity.  I watch golf regularly, and I don't think these guys are cookie-cutter at all.   They're all different.   They all have different swings, different strengths and weaknesses, different personalities.   I know it's easier for a casual fan to catch on when there's just one guy they need to know about, and it's good for ratings when there's one hero the fans can count on to come through and win, but I find the current state of the game very interesting.   I guess I'm not a "casual" golf fan, though.  

And about Tiger's fitness level, I think his fitness level combined with that snapping the front leg is what killed his career.   Some of these guys work out too much and will have shorter careers as a result.   The body can only stand a certain amount of hard twisting and snapping the front knee and so forth. 

Edited August 15, 2017 by Marty2019

[saevel25]

38 minutes ago, Marty2019 said:

 Some of these guys work out too much and will have shorter careers as a result.   The body can only stand a certain amount of hard twisting and snapping the front knee and so forth. 

Working out actually protects their bodies, not hurt it. People who tear their ACL are recommended to do weight lifting going up to the surgery because it builds muscle and reduces physical therapy. Building muscle protects the joints and ligaments from damage caused by a very athletic golf move.

 

[NJpatbee]

I enjoy watching the horse race in today's tournaments with a number of golfers able to turn it on to win.  But watching Tiger in his prime thee was watching a phenom that occurs maybe once a generation.  Sure he was long, but insane shots he made on a regular basis was exceptional.  A young Tiger entering today's Tour with better equipment would dominate the way he did in his actual prime years since he had the ability to play great on a regular basis.  None of today's golfers are in that category although they can occasionally dominate.  The same Tiger like dominance could be attributed to Jack who dominated because he played exceptional golf on a regular basis.   Bottom line, as a golfer I enjoyed the Tiger years and also the current group of excellent golfers with no one dominant player..

Edited August 15, 2017 by NJpatbee

[Shindig]

On 8/13/2017 at 6:25 PM, David in FL said:

Harder to watch?

I find it a LOT more entertaining that in any given tournament, there can be a dozen or more highly talented players that are neck and neck throughout.  

As to wanting to "know" the guys on Sunday, here's the top10 on the final leaderboard from today.   You don't know all of them?!  

This point is spot-on.  I fell out of following golf a lot in the last five years (I used to watch far more obsessively, and I want to get back to that).  The ten names on that leaderboard?  I can tell you something offhand about each of them.

[krupa]

13 hours ago, BaconNEggs said:

I feel like these guys are all good buddies. That's not a bad thing, but it makes for less drama. 

Why would there be less drama?  I was glued to my chair for the last 9 holes (and playoff) of the Master's this year.  For me, the fact that Rose and Garcia are buddies (at least friendly) and were giving each other fist bumps actually made it better; two guys matching each other shot-for-shot and and acknowledging each other's play made for great viewing.

 

[cmj3212]

2 minutes ago, krupa said:

Why would there be less drama?  I was glued to my chair for the last 9 holes (and playoff) of the Master's this year.  For me, the fact that Rose and Garcia are buddies (at least friendly) and were giving each other fist bumps actually made it better; two guys matching each other shot-for-shot and and acknowledging each other's play made for great viewing.

 

I tend to agree with this.  Just because they are buddies off the course, I dont think it has any impact on their competitiveness on the course.  They're still going out there trying to hit all the shots to win the golf tournament.  If anything, I think it may push them more to want to beat there buddies.

[skydog]

I don't know....I think parity is OK up to a point but at some point it would be nice if the current crop of young guys (Thomas, Koepka, Rahm, etc.) stepped up and started stringing together multiple major victories. A bunch of one and doners is not good for the game IMO.

More importantly (but I don't see this happening) it would be nice if some actual rivalries developed in the sport. Sports is best IMO when you have rivalries driven by mutual respect between fellow competitors paired with a bit of disdain (Byrd v Magic was the best example of this in sports history IMO). Nowadays everybody is buds and goes on Spring break together...that doesn't sit great with me. As it relates to the poor ratings, Shack calls it the Kumbaya effect. http://www.geoffshackelford.com/homepage/2017/8/14/36-2017-pga-ratings-lowest-since-08-whats-up.html