Tiger and the modern game

Full disclosure is I've never been a fan of Tiger's. But I have a genuine question.

If he came out in 2012 instead of 1996/1997, would he have won 10 majors? 5?

I honest to god think his winning would have been half what it has been. He feasted at a time with no rivals, and the only two players who really played with him for more than a year (Singh, Duval) both fizzled quickly.

What do you guys think?

Dead horse.

How would MJ do on the NBA today?

Who cares?

He's the GOAT. Until somebody dominates like he did, he will be.

Full disclosure is I've never been a fan of Tiger's. But I have a genuine question.

 

If he came out in 2012 instead of 1996/1997, would he have won 10 majors? 5?

 

I honest to god think his winning would have been half what it has been. He feasted at a time with no rivals, and the only two players who really played with him for more than a year (Singh, Duval) both fizzled quickly.

 

What do you guys think?

He'd probably have 13. Maybe 12.

If he played in the 60s and 70s, he'd have at least 20.

In 2012?

Having grown up with 460cc and graphite?

And a 120mph + swing speed?

And his long iron, short game, and putting?

And his closing ratio?

Fish in a barrel ; )

Full disclosure is I've never been a fan of Tiger's. But I have a genuine question.

 

If he came out in 2012 instead of 1996/1997, would he have won 10 majors? 5?

 

I honest to god think his winning would have been half what it has been. He feasted at a time with no rivals, and the only two players who really played with him for more than a year (Singh, Duval) both fizzled quickly.

 

What do you guys think?

Yes. He played the best golf ever played.

In 2012?

 

Having grown up with 460cc and graphite?

 

And a 120mph + swing speed?

 

And his long iron, short game, and putting?

 

And his closing ratio?

 

Fish in a barrel ; )

Agree and I think he was pushing 130mph with 43" steel.

i dare say Nicklaus would be a web.com player if he came out today..lol... jeez. Tiger would still blow these guys away...he was that good..on all types of courses. Ypu are just watching the same performances the tour had before tiger came on...they said...no one can dominate golf...he did swimmingly.

In 2012?

 

Having grown up with 460cc and graphite?

 

And a 120mph + swing speed?

 

And his long iron, short game, and putting?

 

And his closing ratio?

 

Fish in a barrel ; )

 

Agree and I think he was pushing 130mph with 43" steel.

NO WAY DUDES!! 150!!! And he'd totally have 25 majors against these boring unwatchable losers out there today! Won't even watch golf without tiger. Oh tiger!

In all fairness if he had come up in 2012 he would only have 6 or so. Of course that's of the 20 he would have played in so far. He would have finished his career somewhere around 14. :)

In 2012?

 

Having grown up with 460cc and graphite?

 

And a 120mph + swing speed?

 

And his long iron, short game, and putting?

 

And his closing ratio?

 

Fish in a barrel ; )

 

Agree and I think he was pushing 130mph with 43" steel.

I wasnt thinking it was that high.

But watching this, maybe close (125+?) on certain occassions.

If a cat had kittens in the oven would you call them biscuits?

Full disclosure is I've never been a fan of Tiger's. But I have a genuine question.

 

If he came out in 2012 instead of 1996/1997, would he have won 10 majors? 5?

 

I honest to god think his winning would have been half what it has been. He feasted at a time with no rivals, and the only two players who really played with him for more than a year (Singh, Duval) both fizzled quickly.

 

What do you guys think?

It's impossible to tell. I'll take give the safe answer and say exactly the same as right now.

It's improbable that he'd have more but I don't want to say he'd have less either. You can say he'd have more "rivals" today but how many of those rivals would be around and play the game they do without Tiger.

Tiger has been around long enough that he has essentially created the type of player that he plays against today. How many athletic type players (say a Tony Finau or Dustin Johnson) would be pursuing professional golf rather than another sport because the money isn't as good? How many kids would have been drawn to picking up a golf club rather than throwing a football if it wasn't for Tiger?

Technology is technology, everyone will essentially be playing with the same equipment of the era, it's a non factor IMO.

Like it or not, IMO Tiger created the influx of people playing the game and the type of game most of them sport. More players = more people that's naturally talented that might never have found the sport to beat you. Like I repeat, in comparing eras, we will always cite competition (or in some case the lack thereof) from each time, but at the end of the day, the guy can only beat who's standing in front of him.

If a frog had wings

I don't think there's any question that if you dropped young Tiger into the modern era that he wouldn't come near achieving the preposterous numbers that he did. With that being said, it's an exercise in futility to even ponder it. Tiger quite literally created the golfing landscape as we know it today. For all intents and purposes, he singlehandedly pushed the standard of play to its current absurdly high level (not to mention being the reason that untold numbers of today's players even got into the game). Just like in any other competitive endeavor, the current generation pushes the next to new heights that were previously thought to be unachievable. So, in my humble opinion, if Tiger never came along, and then he showed up in 2012, he would still revolutionize the game. However, if somehow you dropped young Tiger into today's post-Tiger game, he would just be one of the best of the crop of young studs. I almost feel dumb for biting on this nice little troll post. Almost

Never liked the guy, but love the golfer. Sergio had him pegged I think. And I sure hope he's not done.

He would dominate. In his prime it was obvious to so many that the other golfers were playing for second if Tiger had had even his B game.

Where would golfers be today if Tiger never existed. Did he change how the game was taught? Did anybody lash at the ball like he did? Pretty sure today most of these guys learned to hit the dang thing as far as you can and the go find it. Tigers double edge sword that did him in it looks like.

All I know is a physically and mentally damaged Woods won 8 times on Tour in 2012 and 2013. I'm guessing the prime version of him would be a massive problem for the top ranked players today.

I disagree. Tiger dropped into today's game and he wins even more! Without Tiger, Phil would have been the best during that time. Golf would not have had a true leader and no intimidation would have happened either. Tiger would be even better as modern equipment would be even easier on his body. This thread is laughable, The GOAT would have been even better...

I have never seen anyone play so well for as long as Tiger did. He was dominant, and given the same advantages players now enjoy.

He might have been better than he was. Having watched it. That's scary.

Nothing about Jordan Spieth's game is better than Tiger when he came on tour, and Jordan has won 9 times and has 2 majors at age 23. That should be a fair indicator that Tiger would have dominated now just as much as in the late 90's.

Not a question if you ask me. He would have been the greatest of any era you dropped him into.

There were only two guys who played against him for more than a year? Have you been smoking that Colorado reefer bud?

I have said many times that it is impossible to compare different era's. That said, I have been alive long enough to watch the best that Palmer, Nicklaus, Trevino, Miller, Watson, Tiger, and the new crew. I have no hero worship for any player, but Tiger is the best I have ever seen.

I personally think if he grew up playing 460cc heads with graphite he would have won more. He never drove the ball better than when he played steel at 43. As soon as the guys started playing big heads at 45 inches plus and keeping up with him he started swinging even harder and then going to graphite and longer shafts. Just got worse with driver form there. If he grew up playing the long driver or if rules would have kept the driver shorter and in steel he would have won . He lost one of his advantages when equipment helped the shorter hitter keep up.

IMO

Jones would have won less 15 years later

Hogan and Snead would have won less 15 years later

Jack, Annie, Watson, and now Tiger

Eventually a couple generations is a little bigger, a little stronger, and a bit deeper.

Great players would still be great players, don't get me wrong, but adding athleticism and numbers just allows more guys

To compete when on

<ducking>

So let me get this right.....

Some people think he'd have the same number of wins/majors in 4 years as 20 years?

The Sons of Earl are out in force!

Hate these hypothetical threads, greatness is greatness whatever way you frame it. Walter Hagen, Ben Hogan, Arnold Palmer, Jack Nicklaus, Tiger Woods all would have won lots of events if they were young today.

Any time there's parity on Tour, people say 'oh nobody will ever win multiple majors, tour events' etc, it was a very common thing around 2010-2012, when you had Matt Kuchar and Luke Donald types topping the money list. Then Rory won four majors in four years, despite it being supposedly impossible for anyone to separate themselves. Spieth has 8 PGA Tour wins/2 majors in two years. Day won 8 times/1 major in 18 months. The cream rises to the top at the end, always has and always will.

And in this case, Tiger is only a few years far removed from the top of the game! The biggest indicator that Tiger would still win a lot today are that his stroke averages were lower than pretty much everyone today. Golf courses aren't that different now to how they were in the late 2000s, where you had Tiger winning 4 times, 2nd and 5th in 6 events in 2008 for example. And of course, he won five times in 2013, when Day, McIlroy etc were on Tour!

There's a whole lot of events in a season to win, people often forget that Mickelson won four times, including the Tour Championship in 2000, because of what Tiger did that year. What's more likely to happen is that less players would win in total, rather than the big players with significantly reduced totals.

Nothing about Jordan Spieth's game is better than Tiger when he came on tour, and Jordan has won 9 times and has 2 majors at age 23. That should be a fair indicator that Tiger would have dominated now just as much as in the late 90's.

Nothing about Jordan Spieth's game is better than Tiger when he came on tour, and Jordan has won 9 times and has 2 majors at age 23. That should be a fair indicator that Tiger would have dominated now just as much as in the late 90's.

Comparing Jordan and Tiger that's funny.

So let me get this right.....

 

Some people think he'd have the same number of wins/majors in 4 years as 20 years?

 

The Sons of Earl are out in force!

no i meant if he started later and played same number of years.... i mean this is fantasy yes? of course i can fortell the future too! lol

Tiger won as much as he did for 2 main reasons

1) he was tougher mentally than everyone else

2) he worked harder than everyone else.

Those two qualities will translate into any era, against any opponent.

Not a Tiger lover, but damn. Sorry OP

Tiger and Jack simply obliterated their rivals. They'd be emperors then and now. It's about not only about game but attitude, confidence, selfbelief. They new they were the best and the rest of the field simply melted when they got to the first tee.

Like Tom Weiskopft said about Nicklaus in his prime: you knew he was gonna beat you, it was in his eyes. And he knew you knew.

The biggest advantage that Tiger had during his prime, even beyond his formidable and superior physical skills, was psychological. Jack had a similar advantage during his prime.

That type of psychological advantage feeds itself. Physical advantages create a psychological advantage that in turn, improves physical performance. The player gains supreme confidence and believes he's unbeatable, and his competitors confidence is eroded as they believe he's unbeatable as well. This ultimately effects performance (scoring) on both sides.

So to me, the question is would Tiger have the same psychological edge over today's competition?I'd say it's arguable. I don't think he'd have as much of an intimidating distance advantage over today's fields, but his short game and putting would still be far better than most. Hell, Speith

has won prolifically in his short career with average distance but exceptional short game and putting.

In the end it's a fun discussion but impossible to know. Everything effects everything...