I was just sitting here at work thinking about how lucky we are as sports fans to be able to watch Tiger in his prime. I know he generates a ton of press already, but I just wanted to start a thread to give him his props. He's had such a huge influence on golf today, and even on the sports world in general. So here's the beginning of the Tiger Woods Appreciation Thread. Because in spite of the unbelievable amount of hype already surrounding him, it's still not enough.
Most of the stats I'm about to post are just a result of bored wikipedia browsing by me.
Part I: Who's career has been affected most by Tiger Woods' dominance?
Well, I went through and found out who finished as a runner-up to Tiger during all his tour victories. In instances where there was more than one runner-up, I divided a point among the finishers. Here's what I found.
Ernie Els and Phil Mickelson both would've won four more PGA tournaments, and one more major had it not been for Tiger. That would've put Phil at 40 wins and four majors for his career, and Ernie at 20 wins and 4 majors.
Davis Love III is next on the list, and he would've had four more PGA tour wins. This would've given him 24 career PGA Tour wins and 1 career major.
Vijay Singh would've won 3.33 more tournaments, but no majors putting his total at over 37 PGA tour wins.
Then there's poor Chris DiMarco, who would have 3 more tournament wins and 2 major championships to his name if it weren't for Tiger. His total right now - 3 tournament wins.
These guys have all been affected the most by how good Tiger is, and he's still just entering his prime. By the end of his career, he will have laid out an absolute path of destruction.
The Following User Says Thank You to malcolmk14 For This Useful Post:
By the end of the season in which he turned 32, here is what Tiger has accomplished:
65 PGA Tour wins
14 Major Championships
4 Masters Wins, 9 Top-10 Finishes
3 US Open Wins, 6 Top-10 Finishes
3 British Open Wins, 7 Top-10 Finishes
4 PGA Championship Wins, 7 Top-10 Finishes
5 2nd place Finishes in Majors
25 Top-5 Finishes in Majors
Here's Jack Nicklaus, at the same point in his career:
38 PGA Tour wins
9 Major Championships
3 Masters Wins, 8 Top-10 Finishes
2 US Open Wins, 7 Top-10 Finishes
2 British Open Wins, 8 Top-10 Finishes
2 PGA Championship Wins, 7 Top-10 Finishes
10 2nd place Finishes in Majors
26 Top-5 Finishes in Majors
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to malcolmk14 For This Useful Post:
Location: Wondering when # became hashtag and not a number sign.
Exp:
I agree....the guy is simply the best ever at a time when there are WAY more great golfers than at any time in the games history.
Having said that, Nicklaus will always be my favorite. The guy won 18 majors...but finished 2nd 19 more times....37 top 2 finishes in the hardest tournaments in the game...simply remarkable.
By the end of the season in which he turned 32, here is what Tiger has accomplished:
65 PGA Tour wins
14 Major Championships
4 Masters Wins, 9 Top-10 Finishes
3 US Open Wins, 6 Top-10 Finishes
3 British Open Wins, 7 Top-10 Finishes
4 PGA Championship Wins, 7 Top-10 Finishes
5 2nd place Finishes in Majors
25 Top-5 Finishes in Majors
Here's Jack Nicklaus, at the same point in his career:
38 PGA Tour wins
9 Major Championships
3 Masters Wins, 8 Top-10 Finishes
2 US Open Wins, 7 Top-10 Finishes
2 British Open Wins, 8 Top-10 Finishes
2 PGA Championship Wins, 7 Top-10 Finishes
10 2nd place Finishes in Majors
26 Top-5 Finishes in Majors
Tiger's numbers alone are staggering. But when you put them up against the best measuring stick in the sport, it's almost laughable.
Once he clears 18 majors I can't see an argument against him being the greatest ever. It will be neat to have been able to have followed the "greatest ever" from the very beginning (US Amateur titles).
I not a huge Tiger fan. I get sick of him becaiuse of the coverage he gets in a tournament.....sometimes they neglect the leader to see his drive even when he is 6 back with 6 to play.
But saying that....I totally agree, he will go down as the greatest golfer of all time and consider myself lucky to get to watch him play in his prime.
So I totally respect him, just don't like him very much
I've been playing and watching golf since I was 12 years old and I'm a HUGE Tiger fan. I know it annoys some people how much coverage he gets when he's playing in tournaments... and I know it should probably annoy me too... but I have to admit that I find myself losing interest pretty fast if Tiger isn't in the lead or at least in the hunt.
__________________
comfortably numb
The Following User Says Thank You to Peanut For This Useful Post:
I not a huge Tiger fan. I get sick of him becaiuse of the coverage he gets in a tournament.....sometimes they neglect the leader to see his drive even when he is 6 back with 6 to play.
That's a common complaint. When Tiger is well back of the lead, the networks are actually pretty good about switching away from Tiger and focusing on the leaders. (As tranny said, it's not his fault).
But, when Tiger is in striking distance (6 back for him), I would much rather watch him than the leader. The leaders are (*generalization alert) often playing to maintain their pace while Tiger is trying to play catch up. Plus, the odds of seeing an amazing shot by Tiger compared to 95% of the field is far greater.
My only complaint about Tiger is he doesn't play in enough tournaments. I'd like to watch him almost every weekend!
When I saw that for the first time (I think I saw it on the highlights the same night), I think I said GTFO about 8 times.
That has got to be the greatest chip shot in the history of golf.
I mean, not only does the ball hit the cup dead center, the weight could not have been more perfect. Simply unbelievable.
And yeah, the execs at Nike probably all messed their pants when they saw that.
Tiger's numbers alone are staggering. But when you put them up against the best measuring stick in the sport, it's almost laughable.
Once he clears 18 majors I can't see an argument against him being the greatest ever. It will be neat to have been able to have followed the "greatest ever" from the very beginning (US Amateur titles).
I'll put up an argument. The thing about today's him playing against an array of top players is laughable. They have each and everyone of them crumbled when playing him.
Jack on the other hand had numerous guys who weren't intimidated in the least. Watson came right at him. So did Trevino etc. It's a whole lot different to me having to beat guys that are not choking!!!!!!!!!!!
I never got to see Bobby Orr play, and Gretzky was pretty well past his prime when I started to actually know the game of hockey. The guys that I was always amazed by while growing up were Michael Jordan, Jerry Rice, and Tiger Woods. I feel very fortunate to be able to watch Tiger play because I don't think we'll see a talent like him for a very long time.
It truly is a pleasure to be able to follow him start to finish in his career.
I remember watching the 2000 Canadian open when he hit the 6 iron 220 yards out of a bunker over water to the back fringe (30 second mark in the video) and just sitting in my chair speechless and shaking my head. Unbelievable.
I'll put up an argument. The thing about today's him playing against an array of top players is laughable. They have each and everyone of them crumbled when playing him.
Jack on the other hand had numerous guys who weren't intimidated in the least. Watson came right at him. So did Trevino etc. It's a whole lot different to me having to beat guys that are not choking!!!!!!!!!!!
So you're saying Tiger's domination on an almost weekly basis is more a product of the weakness of the field rather than Tiger's skill set?
Please. If that's the best argument against Tiger being considered the greatest of all time, I'm confident there's not a legitimate one.
So you're saying Tiger's domination on an almost weekly basis is more a product of the weakness of the field rather than Tiger's skill set?
Please. If that's the best argument against Tiger being considered the greatest of all time, I'm confident there's not a legitimate one.
Wow how did you extrapolate that out of the post? The players he is playing against have technical skill but no cajones. He has both. Nicklaus had both and played against guys who had both.
Very solid argument actually and one that is often made as in where is his chief competitor. You can't name him because he does not exist. Is he that far above them skill wise? I don't think so. But he is mentally strong and they are weak. The same wasn't true in Jack's day and he didn't finish second a lot because he played poorly but because there were guys who could go toe to toe with him and not flinch.
Wow how did you extrapolate that out of the post? The players he is playing against have technical skill but no cajones. He has both. Nicklaus had both and played against guys who had both.
Very solid argument actually and one that is often made as in where is his chief competitor. You can't name him because he does not exist. Is he that far above them skill wise? I don't think so. But he is mentally strong and they are weak. The same wasn't true in Jack's day and he didn't finish second a lot because he played poorly but because there were guys who could go toe to toe with him and not flinch.
I disagree and I don't think you have any particular knowledge base to evaluate the "cajones" of golfers back then versus today's golfers.
The "Chief competitor" is an argument that I've heard before but I chalk it up to "grasping at straws" rather than "very solid."
Is Tiger that far above everyone else skill wise? Absolutely. Some of the shots he even attempts are beyond the ability of most golfers, but to do them consistently? No one can match him. No one has caused the game to change as much as Tiger. He embarrassed the Masters so they lengthened the course dramatically (this was before Tiger adopted new age equipment - remember Mickelson's comments?). At the British Open in approximately 2006 Tiger played irons off every tee and won the tournament because (a) he's smart enough to keep the ball low and out of the wind and (b) he could drive it far enough that it wasn't a huge disadvantage.
Not to mention, Tiger's work on the greens? How many clutch chips or putts has he made? Do those go in because the rest of the field choked?
Tiger is, IMO, already the greatest golfer in history. Once he passes Jack, it will be solidified. But, I guess there will always be those who will dress up a weak argument and discount all other factors just for argument sake.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Clever_Iggy For This Useful Post:
I disagree and I don't think you have any particular knowledge base to evaluate the "cajones" of golfers back then versus today's golfers.
The "Chief competitor" is an argument that I've heard before but I chalk it up to "grasping at straws" rather than "very solid."
Is Tiger that far above everyone else skill wise? Absolutely. Some of the shots he even attempts are beyond the ability of most golfers, but to do them consistently? No one can match him. No one has caused the game to change as much as Tiger. He embarrassed the Masters so they lengthened the course dramatically (this was before Tiger adopted new age equipment - remember Mickelson's comments?). At the British Open in approximately 2006 Tiger played irons off every tee and won the tournament because (a) he's smart enough to keep the ball low and out of the wind and (b) he could drive it far enough that it wasn't a huge disadvantage.
Not to mention, Tiger's work on the greens? How many clutch chips or putts has he made? Do those go in because the rest of the field choked?
Tiger is, IMO, already the greatest golfer in history. Once he passes Jack, it will be solidified. But, I guess there will always be those who will dress up a weak argument and discount all other factors just for argument sake.
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.
Tiger Woods Appreciation Thread
