Jump to content
Evelyn

Tiger Woods

Recommended Posts

Please don't come now with little stories about Hogan, Nicklaus, Snead or whomever.

 

Jack Nicklaus was a dominating force in golf. That is beyond dispute. 73 tournament victories and 18 Majors, with second place finishes in 19 more majors, plus two U.S. Amateurs.

 

Do you really want to do this? Tiger is 30 today.

 

 

yes, I am totally comfortable debating you on whether Jack Nicklaus was one of the greatest golfers of all time and a totally dominating force in his prime. What that has to do with Tiger''s age, I have no idea.

 

 

Of course you know Ron. You are quoting Nicklaus career numbers. I am not saying Woods is "one of the the greatest," I am saying he is the greatest and you know it.

Maybe someone like Bill James could settle this. Is it that Tiger's that good, or that his competitors just aren't in his league? Did Nicklaus have tougher competition? Have changes in courses, equipment and training changed the game?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Adam Lawrence

I don't think it's reasonable to say Tiger is clearly the greatest ever. Yes, he has won significantly more than Jack at the same stage of his career. But where are the Trevinos, Watsons and Palmers of today? Who has the nerve to stand toe to toe with Tiger? Look at this year's Open - everyone other than Chris DiMarco, who kept in it as long as he kept holing miracle putts, choked like dogs on the last day at Royal Liverpool.

 

Tiger may very well be the greatest ever. I don't say he's not. But at the moment he is a giant among pygmies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please don't come now with little stories about Hogan, Nicklaus, Snead or whomever.

 

Jack Nicklaus was a dominating force in golf. That is beyond dispute. 73 tournament victories and 18 Majors, with second place finishes in 19 more majors, plus two U.S. Amateurs.

 

Do you really want to do this? Tiger is 30 today.

 

 

yes, I am totally comfortable debating you on whether Jack Nicklaus was one of the greatest golfers of all time and a totally dominating force in his prime. What that has to do with Tiger''s age, I have no idea.

 

 

Of course you know Ron. You are quoting Nicklaus career numbers. I am not saying Woods is "one of the the greatest," I am saying he is the greatest and you know it.

 

:P Thank you for reminding me what I know. Please point out where in this thread, or any other, I have ever disputed that Tiger Woods is the greatest golfer in the world. Nothing huh?

 

My point, which you have yet to refute, was that Jack Nicklaus is one of the greatest to ever play the game, and until Tiger surpasses his multiple records, remains so. I made this point in response to your dismissive statement: "Please don't come now with little stories about Hogan, Nicklaus, Snead or whomever."

 

I don't think the stories about Nicklaus are "little" by anyone's definition. Nicklaus won each major at least three times. He placed in the top three of 46 majors. Along with the other records that I mentioned above, it is clear that he deserves to be mentioned in the same sentence with Tiger Woods. To dismiss him when he still holds records that Tiger has yet to surpass is silly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think it's reasonable to say Tiger is clearly the greatest ever. Yes, he has won significantly more than Jack at the same stage of his career. But where are the Trevinos, Watsons and Palmers of today? Who has the nerve to stand toe to toe with Tiger? Look at this year's Open - everyone other than Chris DiMarco, who kept in it as long as he kept holing miracle putts, choked like dogs on the last day at Royal Liverpool.

 

Tiger may very well be the greatest ever. I don't say he's not. But at the moment he is a giant among pygmies.

 

Have you heard of Vijay Singh, Ernie Els, Retief Goosen, Phil Mickelson, etc?

 

If anything, the pool of pro golfers today is far broader and deeper than during the time of Nicklaus, Palmer etc. In addition, golf technology has brought the players shot making ability closer together. This makes Woods achievement even greater. Paul Azinger was making this point yesterday during the telecast. He and many fellow tour players believed club and ball technology would make it impossible for anyone to dominate the tour. Woods has proved that theory wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please don't come now with little stories about Hogan, Nicklaus, Snead or whomever.

 

Jack Nicklaus was a dominating force in golf. That is beyond dispute. 73 tournament victories and 18 Majors, with second place finishes in 19 more majors, plus two U.S. Amateurs.

 

Do you really want to do this? Tiger is 30 today.

 

 

yes, I am totally comfortable debating you on whether Jack Nicklaus was one of the greatest golfers of all time and a totally dominating force in his prime. What that has to do with Tiger''s age, I have no idea.

 

 

Of course you know Ron. You are quoting Nicklaus career numbers. I am not saying Woods is "one of the the greatest," I am saying he is the greatest and you know it.

 

:P Thank you for reminding me what I know. Please point out where in this thread, or any other, I have ever disputed that Tiger Woods is the greatest golfer in the world. Nothing huh?

 

My point, which you have yet to refute, was that Jack Nicklaus is one of the greatest to ever play the game, and until Tiger surpasses his multiple records, remains so. I made this point in response to your dismissive statement: "Please don't come now with little stories about Hogan, Nicklaus, Snead or whomever."

 

I don't think the stories about Nicklaus are "little" by anyone's definition. Nicklaus won each major at least three times. He placed in the top three of 46 majors. Along with the other records that I mentioned above, it is clear that he deserves to be mentioned in the same sentence with Tiger Woods. To dismiss him when he still holds records that Tiger has yet to surpass is silly.

 

 

Hmmm. I think you are right Ron.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please don't come now with little stories about Hogan, Nicklaus, Snead or whomever.

 

Jack Nicklaus was a dominating force in golf. That is beyond dispute. 73 tournament victories and 18 Majors, with second place finishes in 19 more majors, plus two U.S. Amateurs.

 

Do you really want to do this? Tiger is 30 today.

 

 

yes, I am totally comfortable debating you on whether Jack Nicklaus was one of the greatest golfers of all time and a totally dominating force in his prime. What that has to do with Tiger''s age, I have no idea.

 

 

Of course you know Ron. You are quoting Nicklaus career numbers. I am not saying Woods is "one of the the greatest," I am saying he is the greatest and you know it.

 

:P Thank you for reminding me what I know. Please point out where in this thread, or any other, I have ever disputed that Tiger Woods is the greatest golfer in the world. Nothing huh?

 

My point, which you have yet to refute, was that Jack Nicklaus is one of the greatest to ever play the game, and until Tiger surpasses his multiple records, remains so. I made this point in response to your dismissive statement: "Please don't come now with little stories about Hogan, Nicklaus, Snead or whomever."

 

I don't think the stories about Nicklaus are "little" by anyone's definition. Nicklaus won each major at least three times. He placed in the top three of 46 majors. Along with the other records that I mentioned above, it is clear that he deserves to be mentioned in the same sentence with Tiger Woods. To dismiss him when he still holds records that Tiger has yet to surpass is silly.

 

 

Hmmm. I think you are right Ron.

 

Well of course he's right, Miguel. But that doesn't mean you have to concede the fact quite so abjectly, or indeed so early in the game :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well of course he's right, Miguel. But that doesn't mean you have to concede the fact quite so abjectly, or indeed so early in the game :P

Isn't concession against the guidelines?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From today's NY Times:

 

Woods’s presence as the leader or a strong contender in the final round of a tournament has thrilled the networks that televise golf. CBS and ABC have been the most recent recipients of his magic.

 

¶In the final round of the British Open on July 23, ABC drew nearly 6.4 million viewers, up 6 percent from a year ago.

 

¶In the fourth round of the Buick Open on Aug. 6, he pushed viewership for CBS up by 3 percent from 2005, to 5.24 million.

 

¶His victory at the P.G.A. Championship on Aug. 20 led to a 29.5 percent leap in viewership, to 10.1 million, for the final round on CBS.

 

¶When he won the Bridgestone Invitational on CBS on Aug. 27, the 8.4 million watching the final round represented a 23 percent increase.

 

¶And when he won the Deutsche Bank Championship on Monday, the overnight rating on ABC showed a 17 percent increase over a year ago, although viewership figures for the tournament were unavailable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Anecdotal evidence suggests that play is significantly down at Golf Clubs around the country.
Interesting - I know more people who play golf now than I ever did, including an 18-year-old nephew who has been playing for at least two years. Is play really down, or down only at tony clubs?

 

Fly

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Anecdotal evidence suggests that play is significantly down at Golf Clubs around the country.
Interesting - I know more people who play golf now than I ever did, including an 18-year-old nephew who has been playing for at least two years. Is play really down, or down only at tony clubs?

In Britain there was a huge surge in interest in golf in the 1980s, when if you wanted to join a club you had to wait up to five years, and pay a large joining fee (typically equivalent to 5 years' membership fees).

 

Since the late 1990s, very few clubs around the country have their target number of members. I think I read that there is a total over-capacity of about 20% ! Anyone, even someone just starting the game, can get immediate membership at almost any club, with zero or only nominal joining fees. Most clubs are offering incentives to existing members to introduce new members.

 

So the evidence in Britain is absolutely clear.

 

To return to the interesting figures that mitchells posted --- why on earth do additional people switch on to watch Tiger Woods coasting the last six holes of a tournament ? Clearly they're not regular golf wtachers, so it must be some kind of groupie thing. It's interesting that whenever I ask a golfing friend about this, they all confirm that they do what I do --- switch over to watch something else. So exactly who are these people who suddenly switch on the TV just to watch Woods win, and what do they get out of it ? Or is it just an American thing ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People would rather watch Tiger Woods win by 6 than watch Billy Andrade go to the wire with David Howell III.

 

Woods is the greatest of our time and people want to see greatness.

 

I am an avid golf fan and while I don't profess to watch every tournament to the end, I can say that I love watching Woods play no matter how many strokes he is ahead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Adam Lawrence

I don't think it's reasonable to say Tiger is clearly the greatest ever. Yes, he has won significantly more than Jack at the same stage of his career. But where are the Trevinos, Watsons and Palmers of today? Who has the nerve to stand toe to toe with Tiger? Look at this year's Open - everyone other than Chris DiMarco, who kept in it as long as he kept holing miracle putts, choked like dogs on the last day at Royal Liverpool.

 

Tiger may very well be the greatest ever. I don't say he's not. But at the moment he is a giant among pygmies.

 

Have you heard of Vijay Singh, Ernie Els, Retief Goosen, Phil Mickelson, etc?

 

 

All of whom choke like dogs pretty much every time they come down the stretch against Tiger in a big one. Pygmies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People would rather watch Tiger Woods win by 6 than watch Billy Andrade go to the wire with David Howell III.

True. But ten times as many people would rather watch Tiger Woods go to the wire with David Howell or Billy Andrade than wtatch him win by 6 against Phil Mickelson or Vijay Singh.

 

N'est ce pas ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...