2018 Tour Championship - FedExCup Finale

[HJJ003]

5 hours ago, GolfLug said:

I think $10M is a lot of money not some consolation prize. It's not like he was guaranteed coming into East Lake. I think he was happy as can be, even proud, especially because of how he hung in there, driving on fumes bringing home the booty after his game deserted him.

I think what he did not just throughout the season but also at EL stand out alone on it's own considering Tiger's year and week. 

I agree it’s not a small consolation. I think i saw his net worth was between 25-40 million prior to this tournament. Assuming 40 mil, he made roughly an extra 25% of his net worth by winning the cup. No small consolation at all. I would love even a 25% bonus on my salary (I’ll keep dreaming)!!!

Edited September 24, 2018 by HJJ003
Spelling

[brocks]

18 hours ago, Vinsk said:

And @brocks...let’s not forget this win wasn’t just a tourney of 30 best golfers...he had to start with a full size and make the cut to even be there.

That makes it arguably the hardest event to get into, not to win.  Once you're in, it's a very short field, which makes it comparatively easy to win.  I concede that it's almost impossible to win if you don't get in.

Please note that I say this in the context of Tiger playing well.  Of course it's not easy to win against the 30 best players in the world in the normal sense of "easy," but it's easier than winning against the top 70 players in the world, which in turn in easier than playing against the top 100.  And assuming he's now all the way back, if we're talking about Tiger when he's on his game, then he's playing well enough to win against any competition.  Whether he does win or not depends on who else has a hot week, and the more good players in the field, the better the chance that somebody gets hot enough to beat him.  And everybody with a major tour card is good.

Look at the PGA.  Tiger played well enough to win -- he actually missed tying the previous record for lowest score ever at the PGA by one shot.  Koepka played two shots better (and set a new record) that week, which wasn't a big surprise from a guy ranked #4 in the world at the time.  But Adam Scott played only one shot worse than Tiger, and he was ranked #76 that week.  A couple puffs of wind or different bounces, and Scott could easily have won.  And right behind Scott in 4th place was Stewart Cink, ranked #99, and ranked #181 as recently as last June.

Anybody with a card can get hot enough to win any given week.  The more players in the field, the better the chance of that happening.

 

17 hours ago, iacas said:

Correction, @brocks: just because Tiger Woods won them more than twice as frequently doesn't mean they were twice as easy to win. It just means that Tiger Woods won them more than twice as often.

Maybe he tried harder in those than in regular PGA Tour events. There's some info to support this, too: I've seen him hitting the "wrong" shots in regular PGA Tour events as major prep, for example. Talked with him about that same thing, too, and his instructors. He doesn't care about the regular PGA Tour events as much.

Again, the context of "easy to win" is Tiger on his game, not a typical player.  My assumption is that if Tiger is on his game, then he will win unless somebody else has a hot week.  For a top 5 player, maybe it doesn't have to be a very hot week, but he still can't phone it in --- look at Koepka finishing T26 out of 30 last week.  For somebody ranked #396, like Ben Curtis in 2003, it has to be the week of his life.  But anybody with a major tour card can win if he gets hot, so the more players in the field, the harder it is to win.  If you still don't agree, then I guess we just mean different things by "easier to win."

As for Tiger not trying as hard to win regular PGA events, my stats are from his prime, which I define as 1996 through 2009.  I know that after that, when he was in various stages of rehab from various injuries or setbacks, he "needed more reps" and would play events he normally didn't play for major prep.  And I'm prepared to believe that even during his prime, he might practice shots for majors during events when he was hopelessly out of contention.

But his regular events during his prime when he was in contention, no, I can't believe that.  Note that for the purpose of my stats, I'm defining a regular PGA event as any official tour event other than a major or WGC, but in Tiger's case, except for his first couple of years and a few lower tier events like the Buick Open that he played to keep his sponsors happy, Tiger played only top tier events, invitationals, WGCs, and majors.  You can't tell me that if he was in contention at Bay Hill, or Memorial, or Quail Hollow, he wasn't going to hit the optimal shot for his situation.

[rehmwa]

3 minutes ago, brocks said:

That makes it arguably the hardest event to get into, not to win.  Once you're in, it's a very short field, which makes it comparatively easy to win.  I concede that it's almost impossible to win if you don't get in.

Please note that I say this in the context of Tiger playing well.  Of course it's not easy to win against the 30 best players in the world in the normal sense of "easy," but it's easier than winning against the top 70 players in the world, which in turn in easier than playing against the top 100. 

It's a wierd point to contest.  Of course it's easier to win against the Top 30 players in the world, than it is to win against those same 30 players plus the next 70.........  But it's still a world class field and thus  a legitimate win.  I can't downplay it - there's also an increased pressure for this tourney that just isn't the same in the previous 3 events despite the smaller field.....

Liken it to a playoff after regulation - those 2 or 3 playoff holes are completely different than the 72 proceeding holes - even if you're only up against a couple others instead of the whole field.

Edited September 24, 2018 by rehmwa

[brocks]

1 minute ago, rehmwa said:

It's a wierd point to contest.  Of course it's easier to win against the Top 30 players in the world, than it is to win against those same 30 players plus the next 70.........  But it's still a world class field and thus  a legitimate win.

Oh, for the love of God.  Of course it's a legitimate win.  I'm the biggest Tiger fan on this board; I'm not trying to diminish what he's done.  But I'm also a mathematician, and it's just a fact that a short field event was always his best chance to win.

[rehmwa]

3 minutes ago, brocks said:

Oh, for the love of God.  Of course it's a legitimate win.  I'm the biggest Tiger fan on this board; I'm not trying to diminish what he's done.  But I'm also a mathematician, and it's just a fact that a short field event was always his best chance to win.

I'm with you.  I had the same thoughts.  I think the points structure is a bit backwards really.  Bryson's win are worth more just in terms of the bigger field - but I won't get much traction here with that comment....

Edited September 24, 2018 by rehmwa

[iacas]

12 minutes ago, brocks said:

Again, the context of "easy to win" is Tiger on his game, not a typical player.

@brocks, before we get too far into the weeds on this one, my response is to this:

21 hours ago, brocks said:

The WGCs typically had the top 70 or so players in the world, but they were still over twice as easy to win as the full field regular tour events,  which probably didn't have more than 50 of the world top 100 players.

Just because Tiger won them about twice as frequently doesn't mean they're "twice as easy to win."

That's the only point I was trying to make.

12 minutes ago, brocks said:

If you still don't agree, then I guess we just mean different things by "easier to win."

My point, again, was that you can't just look at two winning percentages and deduce that it's that % easier to win.

That's all I've tried to point out here.

12 minutes ago, brocks said:

And I'm prepared to believe that even during his prime, he might practice shots for majors during events when he was hopelessly out of contention.

No. Tiger would practice shots at, for example, The Memorial to prepare for the U.S. Open while he was winning The Memorial. He'd hit the wrong shot just to make it more difficult on himself to see if he could pull it off because he knew he'd need that shot two weeks later. I've confirmed it with Tiger, his caddie (only ever Stevie), and with his coaches (two of them).

12 minutes ago, brocks said:

But his regular events during his prime when he was in contention, no, I can't believe that.

I'm not lying, but beyond that, I can only tell you that it came from the three sources above.

12 minutes ago, brocks said:

You can't tell me that if he was in contention at Bay Hill, or Memorial, or Quail Hollow, he wasn't going to hit the optimal shot for his situation.

He absolutely did. And he'd pull it off.

Honestly, it's just another measure of how good he was. I saw it with my own eyes on several occasions, and I'd confirm it with multiple sources.

[Vinsk]

50 minutes ago, brocks said:

Oh, for the love of God.  Of course it's a legitimate win.  I'm the biggest Tiger fan on this board; I'm not trying to diminish what he's done.  But I'm also a mathematician, and it's just a fact that a short field event was always his best chance to win.

I’m not a mathematician by any means. My point was almost all tournaments have a cut. You play with a large field and then players are cut. Same here. Tiger made those cuts to get to the ‘only 30 players.’ That was my point. I see it as a very long tournament that ended with the top 30 in which Tiger beat them all. And I know you’re a fan. I just saw the TC as conclusion to a long tourney that did begin with a large, strong field.

[GolfLug]

6 minutes ago, Vinsk said:

 I just saw the TC as conclusion to a long tourney that did begin with a large, strong field.

+1. All 4 playoff events are directly connected as in each event feeds the next eliminating part of the field. He beat all of them starting in NJ at The Northern culminating at TC. 

[colin007]

1 hour ago, brocks said:

I'm the biggest Tiger fan on this board; 

 

[brocks]

1 hour ago, iacas said:

No. Tiger would practice shots at, for example, The Memorial to prepare for the U.S. Open while he was winning The Memorial. He'd hit the wrong shot just to make it more difficult on himself to see if he could pull it off because he knew he'd need that shot two weeks later. I've confirmed it with Tiger, his caddie (only ever Stevie), and with his coaches (two of them).

Of course I'm not doubting your word, but I doubt the implied conclusion in your earlier post that it may have affected his winning percentage.  If he had a seven shot lead (as he did during at least one Memorial), then sure, he could afford to indulge himself.  But if he was one shot back, I very much doubt he would have done it then.

[xrayvizhen]

Excuse me for not reading all 15 pages (so far) of this thread but I agree with those previously who have said the Fed Ex cup is a joke. I have never been so confused watching a golf tournament as I was watching this year's broadcast, especially Sunday's with one of the announcers showing the chart saying if this guy finishes here and that guy finishes there than Tiger wins and if someone else does this and someone else does that then someone else wins. Jeez, it was a mess, that's what it was.

IMO - the combo contest took something away from both. I'm glad Tiger finally won a tournament but at the same time I felt bad for Rose who literally apologized for winning and in effect was saying, "Sorry folks, but gimme my 10 million dollars and this big trophy over here I'll get out of the way."

Edited September 24, 2018 by xrayvizhen

[Vinsk]

23 minutes ago, xrayvizhen said:

"Sorry folks, but gimme my 10 million dollars and this big trophy over here I'll get out of the way."

Well give me $10million and I’ll not only get out of the way but you can throw eggs at me and moon me on my way out.

[onthehunt526]

Just now, Vinsk said:

Well give me $10million and I’ll not only get out of the way but you can throw eggs at me and moon me on my way out.

For a little bit, it looked as of Tiger would win both.

[iacas]

1 hour ago, brocks said:

Of course I'm not doubting your word, but I doubt the implied conclusion in your earlier post that it may have affected his winning percentage.

I didn't say it affected his winning percentage.

I said, once again, that his winning percentage can't be used as proof that they're some percentage "easier" to win. There are other factors at play - how much he cares about them being among those.

Heck, other top players probably have a lower winning % in WGCs, while some others still probably also have a higher winning % in them. Tiger's an odd case because he has an almost statistically significant enough wins in either category to count, but… there are more factors than just "144 vs. 30 or 60" or whatever.

1 hour ago, brocks said:

But if he was one shot back, I very much doubt he would have done it then.

He did, but that's beside my point: he cares about WGCs more than regular PGA Tour events, and majors more than anything else. It's not just a matter of saying "Tiger is 2.15x more likely to win a WGC, so they're 2.15x easier to win."

Again: no to this:

On 9/23/2018 at 7:10 PM, brocks said:

The WGCs typically had the top 70 or so players in the world, but they were still over twice as easy to win as the full field regular tour events,  which probably didn't have more than 50 of the world top 100 players.

Anyway…

37 minutes ago, xrayvizhen said:

I agree with those previously who have said the Fed Ex cup is a joke. I have never been so confused watching a golf tournament as I was watching this year's broadcast, especially Sunday's with one of the announcers showing the chart saying if this guy finishes here and that guy finishes there than Tiger wins and if someone else does this and someone else does that then someone else wins. Jeez, it was a mess, that's what it was.

Sorry, but c'mon, it wasn't that difficult to follow. If DJ finished in a three-way tie for second or worse, and if Rose finished in a three-way tie for fifth or worse, Tiger could win the FedExCup by winning the Tour Championship.

After DJ was done, it was down to two people.

Not that confusing.

Plus, the FedExCup gets crap… but people seem to forget that the game's best players used to go into hiding for months at a time after the PGA Championship (some even skipped the Tour Championship in some years), so the FedExCup has brought meaningful, high-level golf with the game's best players into the end of September.

And if you found this year's format confusing, maybe you'll like it in 2019:

[Dr. Manhattan]

10 minutes ago, onthehunt526 said:

For a little bit, it looked as of Tiger would win both.

 

Heck, at one point DJ came out of nowhere with a great chance to grab the Cup from Rose. But DJ missed the short birdie putt on 18 and Rose made a clutch birdie to lock it down for himself. Rose really struggled with his ballstriking in that round, but showed some good determination to finish strong at the end. 

[Vinsk]

1 hour ago, Dr. Manhattan said:

 

Heck, at one point DJ came out of nowhere with a great chance to grab the Cup from Rose. But DJ missed the short birdie putt on 18 and Rose made a clutch birdie to lock it down for himself. Rose really struggled with his ballstriking in that round, but showed some good determination to finish strong at the end. 

He did....but that bounce he got on his 2nd on 18 was pretty damn fortunate. Would’ve been a tough 4 from either the deep rough or that bunker. But hell I like Rose so that’s just golf.

[boogielicious]

11 hours ago, Vinsk said:

Well give me $10million and I’ll not only get out of the way but you can throw eggs at me and moon me on my way out.

I'd do that just for fun anytime!

The cut down format has to be factored in to really understand the difficulty of the win. You have to make it to the final to have a chance.

[rehmwa]

16 hours ago, Vinsk said:

 I see it as a very long tournament that ended with the top 30 in which Tiger beat them all.

that would be true if they carried over the strokes and added up all 4 tournaments - which I think is how they should do it instead of the plan for next year  (but the idea that the Cup is a single extended event rather than 4 I completely agree with you)

14 hours ago, xrayvizhen said:

 I have never been so confused watching a golf tournament as I was watching this year's broadcast, especially Sunday's with one of the announcers showing the chart saying if this guy finishes here and that guy finishes there than Tiger wins and if someone else does this and someone else does that then someone else wins. Jeez, it was a mess, that's what it was.

IMO - the combo contest took something away from both.

Seriously?  they couldn't be more clear.  And the idea that the TC is a tournament, and the FC is the cup winner (argument that it's a season long award) isn't rocket science.  Two things, each has a winner.  C'mon - fans have to be able to hold 2 concepts in their heads at one time.  2

this is why we have unnecessary changes next year

Edited September 25, 2018 by rehmwa