Jump to content


Established Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


brocks last won the day on August 13 2018

brocks had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

235 First-Ballot Hall of Famer

About brocks

  • Rank
    Long-Time Member
  • Birthday 11/30/1952

Your Golf Game

  • Handicap Index

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Nobody, but it seemed implicit in some of the responses.
  2. If he keeps playing the way he has since the US Open, yes. If you look at the raw OWGR points earned since the US Open, Tiger is a very close third behind Bryson and Francesco. They have both won twice since then, and both have about 175 points to Tiger's 170. Everybody else in the top 12 is well below that -- Spieth and Day have around 40 points. From the comfort and driving he demonstrated last week, it seems to me that Tiger is in better shape now than he was at the beginning of 2013, when he won five times, so I think he'll win at least four events. Whether one is a major or not depends only on which weeks he's playing well, because he is now playing well enough to beat any competition when he's on his game.
  3. It would help if "Mt. Rushmore" weren't so ambiguous. Theodore Roosevelt wasn't a bad President, but he's not one of the top four, even excluding those who came after him, so I don't see why this list should be the top four candidates for GOAT. Also, the Mt. Rushmore project was terminated earlier than the originators planned due to lack of funding, so I don't see why it should be limited to four. Now that the groundwork is thoroughly laid for the coward's way out, I'll name the seven players who IMO have had the most impact on the game: Vardon, Jones, Snead, Hogan, Palmer, Nicklaus, and Woods. Edit: And just by the way, Snead would not be in my top 4. The fact that Tiger included him indicates to me that he is very, very desirous of breaking Snead's record.
  4. 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.
  5. 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.
  6. 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. 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.
  7. No, this was always Tiger's best chance of winning. Field size makes a huge difference, even when the extra players aren't as good as the top 30. I've written several posts on this already, so I'll just refer you to a stat: during his prime, Tiger won 26% of his regular PGA events, 28% of his majors, and 65% of his stroke play WGCs. 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.
  8. It's better this year than it will be next year. Tiger beat Rose by five shots this week, but if this had been played under next year's rules, Tiger would still be winless since 2013.
  9. https://tw itter.com/KellyTilghmanGC/status/1043975656307142658
  10. What kind of bet is that? I do that every Sunday. Then again, they're Norwegian. Maybe cinnamon rolls to them would be like sardines to me.
  11. I know, right? Even I could have made that last putt.
  12. But... but... I thought there was no comparison to all the young guns today and the retreads Tiger was beating 20 years ago.
  13. I was rooting against Rose all day because he needs to finish T5 or worse for Tiger to win the Cup, but on the last hole, I was rooting for Rose to make a birdie so he's paired with Tiger again tomorrow. Tiger has been driving it great, IMO because he's stopped trying to kill it, and that worked well paired with Rose. But paired with Rory, I have to wonder how many times Tiger gets outdriven by 30 yards before he starts swinging too hard.
  14. I think Tommy is on to something. I think I heard them say on the broadcast that this is the fourth time Tommy and Tiger have been paired this year, and Tommy beat Tiger the first three times, so that's a pretty classy tweet.
  • 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.

The popup will be closed in 10 seconds...