Posted on 08/13/2007 7:16:07 AM PDT by PurpleMan
Tiger won his 13th major. All of these notable active players only have 13 victories (or less). Amazing
Mark Calcavecchia - 13 David Duval - 13 Jim Furyk - 13 Paul Azinger - 12 David Toms - 12 John Cook - 11 Scott Hoch - 11 Steve Elkington - 10 David Frost - 10 Justin Leonard - 10 Jay Haas - 9 Kenny Perry - 9
A list of everyone is here (from the Golf Channel) http://146.145.120.3/default.asp?c=thegolfchannel&page=golf-m/stat/alltime-pga-winners.htm
The problem isn't what they say it's what they think and most of the top 100 are beaten before they even tee off. If they don't think they can beat Tiger they should be playing in my Thursday Night Hackfest. OTH, there are a lot of millionaire golfers who are content to be millionaires rather than golfers. An interesting dilemma. ;-}
Sabbatini is a good guy. He is a major supporter where I donate to the troops.
Tiger is getting a real clear idea of how he has been doing in his game. He has talked golf with top players of the past and is very able to put his career into perspective.
Agreed. And thanks for the info about Sabbatini.
“The dude hit an 8 iron 208 yards yesterday. Nickaus et.al. would never even pull that club out of the bag from that distance.”
It’s not all about distance. Golf is a mind game. No doubt Tiger has an advantage with his length. In fact, I did say I think Tiger is the best ever. And I think Tiger is mentally as tough as anyone who ever played. But, I think those older guys could have run with him. So, Nicklaus hits a 5 iron from 208 instead of an 8? It’s where the ball ends up that matters, it’s not how, it’s how many. Not to mention with today’s tech, especially the new ball construction, maybe Nicklaus hits a 7?
I get beaten by guys playing “old man” golf. 400 yard par four: 200 yard drive down the middle. 180 yard fairway wood, chip, putt, par. Like freakin’ clockwork. A shorter hitting pro can run with Tiger, as long as they are steady.
The point, and one I think is valid, is that the group of pros at the top were tougher, back then.
Tiger needs his Arnold Palmer. Tiger needs a Joe Frazier. A consistent, real threat. Those other golfers who made a run yesterday, weren’t playing with Tiger. Also, it’s not the same guys. No one consistently challenges Tiger.
“Nope. Woody didn’t wilt, neither did Els.”
They both played well, Els had a great round. But, pair them with Tiger and see what happens.
My only point on the distance is this. When he is in trouble, his strength can make a stroke to 2 stroke difference on most par 4’s and 5’s. I don’t doubt that the legends could and would play with him on any given course. Because he doesn’t have a consistent challenger is not in contention. Its not his fault. He is an extremely tough competetor, and for a while it was Els, then Lefty, then Singh. Non of those could maintain their challenge.
I don’t think it would affect Woody a wit, he’s enough of a free spirit to handle it. Beating Tiger is one horse, wilting is a horse of a different color. There are a legion of wilters who can beat Tiger on a given day and few clankers who can’t beat Tiger on any given day. Woody and clanks and on the right day he could beat Tiger. A unique species in golf I think.
I have learned not to doubt any golf achievement when it comes to Tiger, but that would mean fourteen Master's titles, and I don't think even Tiger can do that! He will probably eclipse Jack's six however.
Then again, Tiger didn't have to play against Palmer, Trevino, Watson, Player, Watson, and Miller on a regular basis. Those legends are far superior to Singh, Mickelson, Els, Furyk, and Duval. .....by a wide margin.
Tiger also benefits from much better equipment - both clubs and balls - than existed in Jack's era. In some ways the tour competition is a lot deeper now than it was twenty to thirty years ago, but it's also not as deep too. A lot more talented journeymen? I mean, look at some recent major winners: Todd Hamilton and Ben Curtis and Rich Beem and Shaun Micheel? Not taking anything away from them, they won fair and square, but they haven't done much else either.
Then there are also the guys reaching the end of their primes, like Davis Love III and Fred Couples, with one major each. They made a lot of money and won a lot of tournaments, but I think in the big picture you'd have to consider it a disappointment that they won only one major each.
The old days are gone.... Nicklaus used to travel with his whole family, which grew to five children over the years. He held the celebratory dinner after winning the 1980 US Open at a McDonald’s cause that’s where his kids wanted to go! When Mark O’Meara first came out on tour, he and his new wife drove from event to event in a VW Rabbit, with all their possesions. Tiger got big bucks from Nike right off the bat and never had to experience that part of the pro golf life.
As a local writer here put it about the PGA going into the final round, all those other guys on the leader board with Tiger, other than Els, had as many major wins as John Q shank at your local muni!
Amazing.
As a local writer here put it about the PGA going into the final round, all those other guys on the leader board with Tiger, other than Els, had as many major wins as John Q Shank at your local muni!
One name to prove your assertions....... John Daly.
(although his short game did get better when he eased off the booze)
Well, yeah ... but you had to expect that. Even as a kid he was clearly destined for golfing greatness, and he certainly has lived up to the early promise.
Many can’t-miss phenoms come to the Tour and don’t do anything. Where is Ty Tryon right now? Michele Wie is struggling with her game. Tiger is that rare player who came to the pro level, won almost immediately, and has never looked back.
Tiger doesn’t play against other golfers, he plays against history.
Yeah, but the difference was that Woods was playing an adult game with the Big Boys even as an amateur. Nike took a small gamble that he'd do well -- but his previous history was such that it was only a small gamble.
Plus which, besides being young, talented, and attractive, Woods has a certain (ahem) "demographic appeal" which Nike rightly figured would be a short-term goldmine regardless of how he did on the tour.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.