Tiger Woods Appreciation Thread

[arloiginla]

Originally Posted by JohnnyFlame

Every great golfer of every generation has been able to play the best golf of his time but some of them actually had to beat other guys who could do it as well.

Maybe the reason Tiger hasn't had to beat other guys at his skill level is because there isn't anyone who is in his league?

[Clever_Iggy]

Originally Posted by JohnnyFlame

As I said name his competitor. Rather than using a lame weak grasping at straws junk address the question. Who is it? Name a player who has come up against him and played his best and been defeated because Tiger was simply better.

Meanwhile there were at least half a dozen guys who could give Jack a run for his money anyday and guess what? He was doing shots nobody else attempted at the time. Driving the ball way down the fairway. Had a huge gallery following him around. Was a super clutch putter. SOUND familiar.

Difference was Trevino, Watson et. al. would just match him shot for shot.

Watching Jack vrs Tom at the US Open at Pebble Beach has no match in Tiger's era. Nothing even close. Two bigtime talents going at it shot for shot hole after hole. That was only one of their titantic struggles.

So rather than show your boy love for Tiger name his competitor? Every great golfer of every generation has been able to play the best golf of his time but some of them actually had to beat other guys who could do it as well.

I suppose Phil Mickelson would be the one player that could be considered Tiger's challenger. It seems like every tournament, Tiger is challenged by someone having a great round and who usually falls short (Dimarco, Mediate, Mickelson, Garcia, etc...). Does Tiger have 1 or 2 guys that challenge him on weekly basis? Not really. I think overall, the average golfer is considerable better than it was during Jack's prime. The game has gotten more and more popular, the skill level and training of the average PGA golfer is superior than years ago, etc... so, I believe that it's harder to get through the field in this era than it was in Jack's era.

I think Tiger goes up against better golfers on average than Jack did. That makes his accomplishments as impressive as Jack's, who faced a lesser field but perhaps a couple better golfers that stood out from the pack. Tiger has more accomplishments than Jack - more wins, more top x finishes, more money (even looking at inflation). Any category he trails Jack in will be overtaken in a few years.

I don't have a "man love" for Tiger, I just think he's better than Jack and I have quite a few arguments to support that. You have one that I dont give much weight too.

[JohnnyFlame]

Originally Posted by arloiginla

Maybe the reason Tiger hasn't had to beat other guys at his skill level is because there isn't anyone who is in his league?

Could well be but that isn't the argument. There are other very good players out there but when then play Tiger they choke. It's not Tiger shooting 20 under to beat their 19 under. It's him just playing par and them going +5, +6, +7. Heck he does not even have to produce good golf to beat them as they beat themselves. How many times has he just managed his way around and waited for the inevitable choke job?

Meanwhile Nicklaus would be battling some guy who was firing birdies at him hole after hole. Watson in the 77 Masters zipped four stinkin birdies in the last six holes to beat Nicklaus.

What would be the equivalent of that today?

No doubt Woods is a great player but where is his Watson?

[JohnnyFlame]

Originally Posted by Clever_Iggy

I suppose Phil Mickelson would be the one player that could be considered Tiger's challenger. It seems like every tournament, Tiger is challenged by someone having a great round and who usually falls short (Dimarco, Mediate, Mickelson, Garcia, etc...). Does Tiger have 1 or 2 guys that challenge him on weekly basis? Not really. I think overall, the average golfer is considerable better than it was during Jack's prime. The game has gotten more and more popular, the skill level and training of the average PGA golfer is superior than years ago, etc... so, I believe that it's harder to get through the field in this era than it was in Jack's era.

I think Tiger goes up against better golfers on average than Jack did. That makes his accomplishments as impressive as Jack's, who faced a lesser field but perhaps a couple better golfers that stood out from the pack. Tiger has more accomplishments than Jack - more wins, more top x finishes, more money (even looking at inflation). Any category he trails Jack in will be overtaken in a few years.

I don't have a "man love" for Tiger, I just think he's better than Jack and I have quite a few arguments to support that. You have one that I dont give much weight too.

Mickelson--you can't be serious. Captain choke? He was the poster boy for falling apart against Tiger for years. The training/equipment argument is just plain stupid. The players in Nicklaus's day had the training/equipment they had and the players now have what they have. If you switch them in time what is the result? Worthless comparison.

In any sport it's who have you beat. Lennox Lewis in boxing is always dogged by who did he beat. Way bigger than Ali and stronger, better training etc. but he beat nobodies. Meanwhile Ali had Frazier who was his match. Heck my Dallas Cowboys who I love have won a bunch of Super Bowls but memorable? Fart they beat some palooka teams in those games like the Broncos. It was harder getting out of the NFC East for pities sake.

It's very hard comparing players from different era's. Really the only measuring stick I see is if they had some competition that everyone felt was just as good. That played them and played their best and they still won out.

It's not Wood's fault but the guys with talent choke against him.

[Peanut]

Originally Posted by JohnnyFlame

Could well be but that isn't the argument. There are other very good players out there but when then play Tiger they choke. It's not Tiger shooting 20 under to beat their 19 under. It's him just playing par and them going +5, +6, +7. Heck he does not even have to produce good golf to beat them as they beat themselves. How many times has he just managed his way around and waited for the inevitable choke job?

Meanwhile Nicklaus would be battling some guy who was firing birdies at him hole after hole. Watson in the 77 Masters zipped four stinkin birdies in the last six holes to beat Nicklaus.

What would be the equivalent of that today?

No doubt Woods is a great player but where is his Watson?

It's a rare Sunday when Tiger is winning a tournament and "just playing par". If he's leading, then yeah I guess he can just play par and see if anyone can catch him, but I'm not sure he really does that? If he's coming from behind to try and take the lead, he definitely doesn't just play conservative and wait for the field to choke.

If you're referring to the Major tournaments where the guys are shooting over par on the final day, well, those courses are set-up to be so insanely, ridiculously hard that (in my opinion) posting an even-par round on Sunday has got to be basically equivalent to at least 5-6 under on a "regular" PGA course. Wasn't it the last US Open that the players were saying a 10-handicapper would've done well to break 100 on that course?

[Clever_Iggy]

Originally Posted by JohnnyFlame

Mickelson--you can't be serious. Captain choke? He was the poster boy for falling apart against Tiger for years. The training/equipment argument is just plain stupid. The players in Nicklaus's day had the training/equipment they had and the players now have what they have. If you switch them in time what is the result? Worthless comparison.

In any sport it's who have you beat. Lennox Lewis in boxing is always dogged by who did he beat. Way bigger than Ali and stronger, better training etc. but he beat nobodies. Meanwhile Ali had Frazier who was his match. Heck my Dallas Cowboys who I love have won a bunch of Super Bowls but memorable? Fart they beat some palooka teams in those games like the Broncos. It was harder getting out of the NFC East for pities sake.

It's very hard comparing players from different era's. Really the only measuring stick I see is if they had some competition that everyone felt was just as good. That played them and played their best and they still won out.

It's not Wood's fault but the guys with talent choke against him.

Mickelson is the 2nd ranked golfer in the world... it's the best I could come up with. It's not like I presented his name as a bullet proof comparison to Watson. Jesus.

I believe the field is better now than it was in Jack's era. You are stating that the fact that Tiger Woods doesn't have a Tom Watson detracts from his claim to be "the greatest" of all time. Both of us have stated that we don't give as much weight to the other's argument.

I think we're at a stalemate.

[JohnnyFlame]

Originally Posted by Peanut

It's a rare Sunday when Tiger is winning a tournament and "just playing par". If he's leading, then yeah I guess he can just play par and see if anyone can catch him, but I'm not sure he really does that? If he's coming from behind to try and take the lead, he definitely doesn't just play conservative and wait for the field to choke.

If you're referring to the Major tournaments where the guys are shooting over par on the final day, well, those courses are set-up to be so insanely, ridiculously hard that (in my opinion) posting an even-par round on Sunday has got to be basically equivalent to at least 5-6 under on a "regular" PGA course. Wasn't it the last US Open that the players were saying a 10-handicapper would've done well to break 100 on that course?

I'm referring to when he has met any of the other names in a big tourney and the result has been anything but they choke. Els=choke, Mickelson=choke, Garcia=choke. Tiger has the great mental game and just does what he needs to do to win. There is nothing wrong with that and nor does it diminish his wins.

Just that Nicklaus had to drop a birdie on the 18th more often than not to beat a charging Watson, Trevino, Player, Palmer etc. Not cruise as his playing partner shot a closing day 79.

[moon]

Originally Posted by JohnnyFlame

Mickelson--you can't be serious. Captain choke? He was the poster boy for falling apart against Tiger for years. The training/equipment argument is just plain stupid. The players in Nicklaus's day had the training/equipment they had and the players now have what they have. If you switch them in time what is the result? Worthless comparison.

When has Mickelson choked that resulted in Tiger winning?

In fact when has anyone choked that resulted in Tiger winning a major?

The way people toss off Mickelson as a nobody is so stupid it almost isn't worth arguing.

Mickelson is easily as good as Watson, Trevino etc. and has shown it repeatedly.

I am no Tiger fan by any means but the BS about him not beating anyone is jsut that BS. Mickelson, Els and Singh are all great players and easily could match up to the guys that Nicklaus faced.

[JohnnyFlame]

Originally Posted by Clever_Iggy

Mickelson is the 2nd ranked golfer in the world... it's the best I could come up with. It's not like I presented his name as a bullet proof comparison to Watson. Jesus.

I believe the field is better now than it was in Jack's era. You are stating that the fact that Tiger Woods doesn't have a Tom Watson detracts from his claim to be "the greatest" of all time. Both of us have stated that we don't give as much weight to the other's argument.

I think we're at a stalemate.

Nicklaus beat Palmer, Player, Trevino, Watson and on and on at the top of games. They didn't choke and your only comparison is Captain Choke. Some stalemate. Nicklaus beat far tougher competition. Not even remotely close. He beat some of the greatest players of all time and they didn't just choke. Some stalemate.

Sorry but who you beat does in fact detract. Woods is the greatest golfer of his time--no doubt. Best of all time. Wouldn't you have to beat somebody of note to be that?

[Clever_Iggy]

Originally Posted by JohnnyFlame

Nicklaus beat Palmer, Player, Trevino, Watson and on and on at the top of games. They didn't choke and your only comparison is Captain Choke. Some stalemate. Nicklaus beat far tougher competition. Not even remotely close. He beat some of the greatest players of all time and they didn't just choke. Some stalemate.

Sorry but who you beat does in fact detract. Woods is the greatest golfer of his time--no doubt. Best of all time. Wouldn't you have to beat somebody of note to be that?

So do you suggest that Player, Trevino, Watson, etc... are superior to Tiger Woods because of who they beat?

I also would like to get clarification on who choked against Tiger Woods and when? Other than this last tournament (Tiger's first back after surgery), when did the leader shoot 5 or more over par and Tiger saunter in at even par to win? I'm drawing a blank.

[JohnnyFlame]

Originally Posted by moon

When has Mickelson choked that resulted in Tiger winning?

In fact when has anyone choked that resulted in Tiger winning a major?

The way people toss off Mickelson as a nobody is so stupid it almost isn't worth arguing.

Mickelson is easily as good as Watson, Trevino etc. and has shown it repeatedly.

I am no Tiger fan by any means but the BS about him not beating anyone is jsut that BS. Mickelson, Els and Singh are all great players and easily could match up to the guys that Nicklaus faced.

Yes I'm sure they could(cough, cough) Player alone has as many majors as all three of them but yeah they could match him. Arnold with double of any two of them and then some with seven. Watson with a mere eight. Trevino with six(again double). Fart even Ray Floyd has won one more than any of them with four. Not to mention he had to contend with Irwin as well with 3.

There is a reason you can google literally hundreds of articles on Tiger not having a competitor. Never mind the Mickelson choke jobs.

Nicklaus quite easily wins the level of competition argument by far.

I'd like nothing better than to see some non-choke job types come up and challenge Woods. I believe he would still come out on top but him beating guys that beat themselves ain't nothing like two top guys going at it.

[JohnnyFlame]

Originally Posted by Clever_Iggy

So do you suggest that Player, Trevino, Watson, etc... are superior to Tiger Woods because of who they beat?

I also would like to get clarification on who choked against Tiger Woods and when? Other than this last tournament (Tiger's first back after surgery), when did the leader shoot 5 or more over par and Tiger saunter in at even par to win? I'm drawing a blank.

I'm suggesting that in Jack's era he faced much stiffer competition and still won and there is no doubt that is true. These are guys with double at least the majors of any player of today other than Woods.

[Clever_Iggy]

Originally Posted by JohnnyFlame

I'm suggesting that in Jack's era he faced much stiffer competition and still won and there is no doubt that is true. These are guys with double at least the majors of any player of today other than Woods.

I asked whether you thought Trevino, Watson, Palmer and Player were better than Tiger given the fact that they played and beat allegedly better players.

If so, than where do you rank Tiger compared to those 4 and Jack?

[moon]

Originally Posted by JohnnyFlame

Yes I'm sure they could(cough, cough) Player alone has as many majors as all three of them but yeah they could match him. Arnold with double of any two of them and then some with seven. Watson with a mere eight. Trevino with six(again double). Fart even Ray Floyd has won one more than any of them with four. Not to mention he had to contend with Irwin as well with 3.

There is a reason you can google literally hundreds of articles on Tiger not having a competitor. Never mind the Mickelson choke jobs.

Nicklaus quite easily wins the level of competition argument by far.

I'd like nothing better than to see some non-choke job types come up and challenge Woods. I believe he would still come out on top but him beating guys that beat themselves ain't nothing like two top guys going at it.

Part of the reason that Mickelson and others don't have so many is that Woods has been so great and won majors that they would have won.

Mickelson did choke two away (not against Woods though) so his 3 majors is pretty misleading in terms of his actual talent.

Player and Palmer weren't exactly in their primes against Jack either.

I would easily take Mickelson over Trevino and Floyd and say he is at least as good a player as Watson was.

You also conveniently ignore the fact that joe blow golfer was pretty bad in Nicklaus's day while today there are many more golfers with the ability to win in any major.

I think that Nicklaus is the best golfer ever and will likely still be when Woods is done, but that doesn't mean that Nicklaus played against greats while Woods is facing hackers out there.

[Peanut]

Huh. Well, maybe it's like the Crosby/Ovechkin debate... un-winnable. You either think Tiger is the greatest, or you don't. People can argue both sides until they're blue in the face but it doesn't really matter. Admittedly the guy is insanely talented and one of the wealthiest athletes in the world, so... I doubt he really cares what we all think. I think Tiger's the greatest, fwiw.

The only player I can think of that really choked against Woods was Mike Wier (which was unfortunate, because I kind of root for the Canadian guys too). And I'm not even sure if that was in a major, actually.

[Peanut]

Originally Posted by JohnnyFlame

I'm referring to when he has met any of the other names in a big tourney and the result has been anything but they choke. Els=choke, Mickelson=choke, Garcia=choke. Tiger has the great mental game and just does what he needs to do to win. There is nothing wrong with that and nor does it diminish his wins.

Just that Nicklaus had to drop a birdie on the 18th more often than not to beat a charging Watson, Trevino, Player, Palmer etc. Not cruise as his playing partner shot a closing day 79.

My point is that because of his great mental game, and the simple fact that he does what he needs to win - the other guys aren't choking. I'm saying that shooting 72 on the final day of the Majors is something that the rest of the field simply can't do. They just don't have the skill to compete with the game Tiger puts up, they're playing their best game and not getting it done.

[JohnnyFlame]

Originally Posted by Clever_Iggy

I asked whether you thought Trevino, Watson, Palmer and Player were better than Tiger given the fact that they played and beat allegedly better players.

If so, than where do you rank Tiger compared to those 4 and Jack?

Who knows. Tiger would have to play them to see how he would stack up. These guys could all beat each other. Watson was a legend himself and ten times the player Mickelson is. He wasn't wandering around for years known as the best player to never win a major. He was racking up nine of them. Tiger would be right there with them but he would be finding the competition was a whole lot stiffer mentally.

Phil is the poster boy for the post Jack era. His talent is right up there but the drive that Jack and Tiger possess was sadly lacking(perhaps he has some now though against Tiger he has barely shown it). Tiger arrives on the scene and has that killer instinct the bigtime guys in all sports always have and the Moma's boys just head for cover and complain about his rowdy fans. I'm hard pressed to think of a single time they actually put up a fight. Heck about the only time was just recently when they both lost LOL.

Meanwhile Phil before that did his zero for who knows how many--at least 40. I remember at the time his final round score in majors was in the mid 70's. Captain Choke was a fitting moniker and probably still is considering his Wingfoot meltdown.

The 2nd best player these days isn't even close.--He is anti-clutch though at least he has gotten rid of some of the smell.

[GirlySports]

Wowowow.. Tiger starting 4 shots back is now tied for the lead before the turn.
Everyone around him, except Ogilvy, is choking.

Ooops, he just made a bogey.

[Bagor]

I appreciated that shot!

Chips in from a horrible lie just off the green for an eagle. -10 and 1 off the lead.

[moon]

Pathetic effort from those guys at the top of leaderboard and pretty much anyone in the the top 10-15 going into the weekend.

Johnny talked about guys choking to give Tiger wins before and while it doesn't happen in majors it sure happens in the regular events.

Unbelievable how bad all the leaders played to hand Woods this tournament. Sports radio will be disgusting tomorrow.