Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Sandbagger

About TigerIsNumeroUNO

  • Rank

Your Golf Game

  • Handedness

Recent Profile Visitors

219 profile views
  1. But you ignored the most important part. He was more accurate relative to the average player on tour than Tiger is to the average today. Ummm.. No I didn't. He said nothing in that post. Nothing. That was a zero value added post. And he still thinks it is isn't clear Jack was more accurate. You are not smart enough to have an opinion.
  2. Statistically Jack was straighter both in percentage and he ranked higher relative to his peers in an era that placed a higher premium on accuracy. And it should just intuitively be correct, because Tiger is known for being inaccurate off the tee. The end. Can I definitively prove Jack would be much better than just top 10? No. But Jack was so far ahead of anyone during his time and before with his record and his continued well play into more recent times. Jack was runner up for the Vardon Trophy in 1983 past his prime. The quality of play didn't jump that much in the thirteen years between that point and when Tiger joined. Jack won ten money titles despite playing fewer tournaments than any other top golfer in his era. He didn't even qualify for the Vardon Trophy most years. Jack was the first or second best player every year of his career up until age 40 regardless of whether he won player of the year in the same way Lebron James or Michael Jordan is the best player every year regardless of who they give the MVP to. Jack was not just another very good player most years who had a long career. He was the best or second best nearly every year of his career up to 40. I use other sports because I like people who have studied such things, not random internet opinions. That's why I linked the Ted talk. Baseball has been studied more than any sport. A guy just made the assertion Babe Ruth would be MEDIOCRE AT BEST against Hank Aaron's pitching. I can't prove that Babe Ruth would be a star in Hank Aaron's era with 100% certainty. But you can get 99.9% of the way there. Close enough. Here is Bill James pointing out how far of statistical outlier Babe Ruth adjusting for changes in era I feel like the guy who revolutionized how sports are analyzed has more credibility than random internet poster. And he was looking at 1927 to today. Hank Aaron played 40 years ago. On Babe Ruth Lost In Time | Articles | Bill James Online
  3. So I see saying Jack was just a top 10 player (though charitably thought maybe top 5) and it is not clear if Jack was more accurate off the tee than Tiger. And oh yeah, Babe Ruth would be mediocre at best in Hank Aaron's era. I couldn't imagine getting through life not possessing such basic critical thinking skills. This thread would be good to study for someone interested in how financial bubbles form or how cults sustain themselves.
  4. I don't expect you to get banned for being such a nasty person but you should be... And given that even small FACTS that favor Jack are discounted it just shows how intellectually lazy most are in this thread. Jack had two top top 10s in his 50s and had a stretch where he made 12 out of 15 cuts at a time where he barely played. He wasn't exactly grinding like Bernard Langer. It is easy to find this info. Pretty good play by Jack. Vijay, Tiger's toughest competitor at his peak, still grinds and has done worse as an old man. And Jack was both longer and straighter off the tee for the bulk of his career vs Tiger vs the bulk of his career. And lol at using Jack's distance numbers is his FIFTIES vs Tiger. Great argument there. He is even shorter now at 80. And they only kept driving stats one year (1968) before Jack was 40 so I am not sure how you divined Jack's typical driving accuracy stat at 65% throughout his career. Please cite. Here is an actual citation. "Even though official PGA Tour statistics were not kept until 1980.....Nicklaus also finished 10th in driving distance and 13th in driving accuracy in 1980 at age 40, which equated to a "Total Driving" composite of 23 – a statistical level not attained since, by a comfortable margin." The accuracy stats are self evident. They are what they are. Jack was straighter using that metric. Jack in his early 40s averaged around 270. Is that longer than Tiger at 40? Yes. Jack used a wooden driver with a wound ball. All you need to do is look at what Fred Couples averaged in 1982 (268) vs what he averaged when he was 58 (297) to realize that 270 in 1980 is longer than 294 in 2019. Jack Nicklaus - Wikipedia
  5. We already know he wouldn't because he didn't. He played a full schedule of majors in the 90s against Vijay and Tiger and Ernie, etc and did fairly well. And no reason to think he would struggle today. He was longer and straighter than Tiger and hit far more greens using longer irons into the greens. (I get the iron stats are inflated because Jack had a weak short game.) Who is the Better Golfer...Tiger or Jack?? who is the better golfer? Tiger and Jack clearly value majors more than regular events based on their actions. Ben Hogan clearly thought majors were more important because he had years where he played in just the majors and a couple of other events.
  6. Athletes are not nearly that much better than they were in the past as people think. Jesse Owens, when you adjust for track conditions, was barely slower than the Usain Bolt. The same goes for things like swimming. Most of the gains in time are from simple things like how they turn and something a past generation athlete would easily be able to incorporate if they had that knowledge. Babe Ruth would very likely still be near the top in Hank Aaron's era not "mediocre at best." In golf most of the gains at the top would be from things like learning how to use a 60 degree wedge which no one used until Tom Kite. And putting strokes were much different when you putted on slow grainy greens. Those strokes wouldn't work well today just like a pendulum stroke would have more problems in the 1950s. Would Jack have any trouble in this era? It is pretty easy to see he wouldn't. He finished sixth twice at the Masters in his 50s and played pretty well in other majors. Tom Watson, a contemporary, has the same number of top 10s in majors as the top player Tiger faced in his prime, Vijay Singh, since 2007. Tiger is far better but has a ten year hole in his career. Jack may have played against very weak fields in the 60s but most of his majors were won after that, which should cause people to question the assumption how important field depth is. Tiger may have had triple the number of people capable of winning majors but on a small fraction of those capable would be playing well enough to win on a given week. So if Jack had to beat 2 or 3 people playing well. Tiger maybe had 7 or 8 people playing well. Also it is pretty easy to see Jack valued majors far more heavily than regular events. We know this not because of what he says but his actions.. 1) He played better in the majors relative to how he played in regular events. In his 40s, he won five events. Three were majors. He was capable of winning regular events into his 50s if he so desired. 2) He played a limited schedule and went to majors weeks early. Jack is probably most comparable to Kareem Abdul-Jabbar. No one really says Kareem is the greatest basketball player. Lebron and Michael are more talented. But Kareem was so good for so long, there is a pretty good argument Kareem is the greatest. Kareem has one more MVP, the same number of titles, five more All-Star appearances, and went to the finals four more times than Michael.
  7. Men's US Open ratings: "Ratings: Gary Woodland’s US Open Victory Tees Up Father’s Day Win for Fox" "Fox was first in ratings with a 1.4 rating/7 share in the advertiser-coveted 18-49 demographic and in total viewers with an average of 7.3 million, according to preliminary numbers. That was the golf’s numbers." https://www.thewrap.com/members/2019/06/17/us-open-gary-woodland-fox-ratings/ US Women's Open ratings "Up against Tiger Woods, U.S. Women’s Open earns record-low TV ratings" "he final round of the U.S. Women’s Open on Sunday earned a 0.5 rating and 728,000 viewers on Fox Sports Up against Tiger Woods, U.S. Women's Open earns record-low TV ratings | Uswomensopen | postandcourier.com Those beauty shots of the Country Club of Charleston and the Lowcountry during the U.S. Women's Open golf tournament looked fantastic on Fox Sports last weekend, but the TV ratings Imagine if Stephen A. Smith got in trouble for not knowing anything about women's basketball. Or imagine if instead of Korean players, Irish women dominated the tour and Haney's comments were about Irish women. The biggest women's golf tournament got a third of the ratings random summer baseball games get.
  8. That is 100% wrong and the worst possible advice. The people who don't apologize and punch back like Tucker Carlson or Brett Kavanaugh keep their jobs. I don't like Trump's character but he never apologized and got elected. The people who show weakness end up like Jimmy the Greek never working again. Never show weakness to the outrage mob. There is nothing you can do to appease them. There is no redemption with these people. That was Haney's big mistake with his initial statement.
  9. I remember the situation as well as you can for it being 20+ years later. That was five weeks later after Fuzzy lost his major sponsor K-Mart. Tiger initially said something along the lines of how hurtful Fuzzy's comments were and how disappointed he was in him. I distinctly remember an interview where Fuzzy was not his playful self and pretty sour on Tiger about how Tiger handled the situation basically not sticking up for him and feigning outrage. I think Fuzzy chalked it up to Tiger's handlers though.
  10. I just found the actual audio of this. At the 1:10 mark Had I heard this live, it would not have registered as anything. It was more mild than I ever imagined. This is crazy. Haney should go on the offensive. "Get in the hole" guy permeating golf is bad enough. Now call out culture on college campuses is infesting golf shouting people down.
  11. The bigger issue isn't this particular situation, it is the totalitarian instinct of most people calling Haney out. It is what Jonathan Haidt calls "call out culture", where everyone tries to one up each other in being offended. And the most aggrieved hold the most power. This woman thinks Haney shouldn't even be allowed to make a living anywhere in golf!!! Think how divorced from reality that is. Opinion: If Hank Haney isn't fired from his radio job, golf's leaders are condoning racism, sexism Hank Haney's racist, sexist, xenophobic behavior was on display for anyone who listens to him on PGA Tour Radio. If he is not fired, golf's leadership is saying it condones his remarks. I can see how his comment would offend someone sensibilities. But the reaction is way out of proportion to the content. I hope Haney continues to punch back. You can't show weakness to terrorists. And it is interesting how quickly so many top golfers are quick to mess with someone's livelihood. Tom Watson getting McCord off the air. Jack and Arnie with Casey Martin. Tiger with Fuzzy Zoeller and now this.
  12. That's not how this works. It is their fault. It is their job to sell me and the general population that they are worth watching. They are the product. I am the consumer. I along with virtually everyone else on the planet do not consume their product. Back to the point, what Hank Haney said was neither racist nor sexist. He maybe should get in trouble for not promoting golf on PGA Tour but he shouldn't have his life ruined by the PC crowd for expressing a sentiment that probably 80% of golf fans share to some degree. Edit: Upon further examination, 80% was a really good estimate. LPGA will play for record $70 million, but long way from parity - Reuters The LPGA season kicks off on Thursday for a season that will comprise 34 events and distribute some $70 million in prize money, a record amount for the circuit although it is still barely one-fifth on...
  13. Actually I do. My original statement was "controversial among people with fully functioning brains". I changed it and left it implied.
  14. Hank Haney said nothing remotely wrong or even controversial. That is a pretty mild joke, Besides the low quality of play, it is also alludes to the reason no one watches the LPGA Tour. I could name every Masters champion by year going back to the 1960s on the spot if I had to. Here are all the current LPGA Tour players I know: Lexi Thompson, Morgan Pressel, Natalie Gulbis, Michelle Wie, and Paula Creamer. I literally could not tell you even one Asian player on that tour. Not even one. Is that supposed to be racist? I am sorry. I don't know any. I don't purposefully ignore them but they apparently don't have compelling enough personalities or looks to break through so that someone who does not watch that high school golf of a tour to know who they are. It is disgraceful that Haney would get suspended over this. The golf demographic is not politically correct leftists who call everyone racist. This reminds me of the non-controversy involving Elkington and the hand bag throw a few years back. Leftists are enemies of clear thinking and humor.
  15. How many cuts did you make? How many top 10s?
  • 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...