Tiger's toys:
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
For the most part, golf is meaningless to me;However, watching Tiger obliterate the Master’s in ‘97 was amazing.
Of course, anyone with a competitive fire in his belly has to say his opponent is ‘beatable’. It’s the snarky, juvenile, punky attitude with which you say it that makes you look like a schmuck.
Tiger lost in Scotland, Tiger has lost a few I’ve seen. He is not 100% undefeated.
Sabbatini came across as disdainful, and overconfident. Tiger owed him a ‘nyah nyah’ after he walked over him like a cheap bathmat. But Tiger knows he’s the ‘top gun’ and the one everyone is shooting at- he just handles defeat, and victory, like a class act.
And this female think’s he’s hot- so there! lol
That was my point, just from another angle :) It is the course that is played not other plaers.
Tiger's toys:
Yowza!
Very impressive.
Exactly. Tiger has four now, I don’t see him winning 10 more to surpass Jack [6], Arnie [4], and Gary [3].
In addition to his 18 majors, Nicklaus was runner-up in 19 other majors. Tiger is a great front runner, but he will have to go some to equal Jack in runner-up finishes in the majors.
Yup. And the reason for that, as I mentioned, was the extraordinary high quality of Jack's opposition, both in terms of natural talent and competitive spirit. There are no Watsons, Palmers, Players, Millers, Trevinos, and Caspers for Tiger to contend with. His competition is weak by comparison, unfortunately. If all Jack had to compete against were the likes of Els, Mickelson, Furyk, Goosen, and Singh he'd have won 30+ majors.
Tiger is a walking legend. Best thing to do is to watch him and enjoy the ride. Better yet, go see him play in person, it will make for great stories for your young children or grandchildren when you can tell stories about watching the best golfer ever to have walked this earth...to date.
“...go see him play in person...”
Saw him at Oakmont (where, if he has sunk two putts on 13, he would have won the Open)
I tend to disagree. Today, golf is truly an international sport attracting the best from around the globe to the PGA Tour. Tiger has been dominant in the majors, but folks like Els, Goosen, Singh, Mickelson, Faldo, Nick Price, Payne Stewart, etc. would have won more if the talent level had not been so deep across the board. The fact that three of the four majors were won by first timers this year says something about the quality today.
Johnny Miller only won 2 majors and Billy Casper 3. The talent level today is much deeper.
The main difference between the players I mentioned that dominated in the 50s, 60s, and 70s and the top players today is that the former appeared to be a lot tougher mentally. ....not easily intimidated. Today's bunch appear to be a lot more pampered and sensitive. You think Trevino, Watson, or Palmer would've mentally folded in Tiger's presence like today's players? Not a chance.
The talent was deep back then too -- the best international players usually played the majors.
-------------------------------------
There are only 34 Rules Of Golf.
Email me if you want on the Golf Ping List: mmanager;elc;dakine;Hat-Trick;They'reGone2000;cleveland gop;Baynative
Visit PGA.com, an excellent site.
Pure conjecture. Most of his contempories folded mentally in the presence of Nicklaus. Before their careers are all over Mickelson, Els, Goosen, and Singh could have 5 or more majors. I am 64 so I have seen Trevino, Watson, and Palmer play. In those days, the winners of majors came out of a small group of elite players. Today, a Rich Beem, Shaun Micheel, John Daly, or Ben Curtis can pop up out of nowhere and win a major.
The talent was deep back then too -- the best international players usually played the majors.
Their participation is no where near as many as today. Moreover, the US must really struggle to beat them in the Ryder and President's Cups. We used to dominate the Ryder Cup. We have lost five of the last six matches. And since the British and NI team was expanded by adding the rest of Europe to the team in 1979, the Europeans have won 7 and we have won 6 with one tie. Take a look at the majors and see how many non-US players have won in the past 20 years compared to the previous 20 years. It is a matter of sheer numbers as more people are playing golf than ever before. The talent level and competition has grown with it.
Of the top 20 money leaders today on the PGA Tour, nine are foreign born. That was not the case in the days of Nicklaus.
And in the old days it was guys like Doug Ford, Gay Brewer, George Archer, Orville Moody, etc. Longshots winning majors isn't a new phenomenon.
Of the top 20 money leaders today on the PGA Tour, nine are foreign born. That was not the case in the days of Nicklaus.
That's because they spent most of the year playing in Europe. But they came here for the majors, and Jack beat them all with regularity.
Jack's main competition is (rightly) considered to be some of the greatest players to ever play the game. Els, Furyk, Singh, and Mickelson, while all very good, aren't quite in the same class.
I didn't say it was a new phenomenon, just a more common one. Nicklaus, Watson, Trevino, Player, and Watson took a greater share of the majors. Even with Woods' domination of winning 13 majors in 11 years, the remaining titles have been more evenly spread among the field. Azinger, Beem, Cabrera, Calcavecchia, Campbell, Couples, Curtis, Duval, Elkington, Furyk, Hamilton, Harrington, Zack Johnson, Steve Jones, Lawrie, Lehman, Leonard, Micheel, Mize, Pavin, Toms, Weir, and Woosnam are all one time major champs playing on the tour now.
That's because they spent most of the year playing in Europe. But they came here for the majors, and Jack beat them all with regularity.
The European Tour was nothing then like it is now, in terms of numbers, quality, and prize money. Many of the European players who don't play in the US on the PGA Tour, but do compete in the majors have shown themselves quite capable of competing with the best of the PGA. Some like Els, Goosen, Harrington, and Garcia split their time between the two tours.
Jack's main competition is (rightly) considered to be some of the greatest players to ever play the game. Els, Furyk, Singh, and Mickelson, while all very good, aren't quite in the same class.
It is always the age old arguments comparing players from one era to another. Tiger Woods is the greatest player of all-time and he is compiling the record to prove it. Today's players are generally more fit, bigger, and stronger. It is far more difficult to hold a PGA card to play on tour given the global competition and the money involved. Right now Jack Nicklaus is 144 on the career money list and falling fast. Even taking into account inflation, there is no doubt in my mind that the increased rewards in the form of prize money and endorsements have raised the level of competition compared to the days of Nicklaus.
I have heard Nicklaus decry the lack of any challenger to Woods as Tiger creeps closer to breaking his records, but I attribute the dominance of Tiger to his superior talent rather than the talent level of his competitors. Tiger would probably have dominated Nicklaus in the same way, but we will never know.
lol...right, Jack is on par with Tiger's main competition? Delusional, but hilarious.
I'd say Jack and Tiger are on par with each other.
When all is said and done, Tiger will hold all of the records except perhaps second place finishes at the majors. He will win more majors, more PGA Tournaments, etc. Tiger has already won 12 times Jack's career earnings. And he has won his 13 majors and 59 tournament wins in less than half of the time it took Jack to win his 18 majors and 73 wins. In another 5 years, Jack will no longer be on a par with Tiger, but an also-ran.
I love Woods and he lives about 3 miles from me.
However, when he is in the lead, it’s just boring and predictable. And I can take that because I love golf.
But I can barely listen to the broadcasts as the mouths practically drool on the guy. It isn’t Tiger’s fault, but there are a boat load of self-loathing, guilty white-liberals who USE Tiger as a means of gaining their liberal bonafides. Tiger’s a smart guy and I’m sure he’s aware of it.
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.