Brandel Chamblee Podcast (EP 1 Tiger vs Jack)

2»

Comments

  • Pent08Pent08 Members Posts: 1,051 ✭✭



    Like other sports, modern athletes and players are better, the ironic thing is they are better because the forerunners helped evolved their games. I don't think Jerry West would be a start in todays NBA, I don't think Johnny Unitas would be a starter in the NFL, and I don't think Walter Hagen would win a major today. Equipment or not, todays players are just generally better




    Interesting how the scoring average hasn't markedly improved the past 40 years given the vast improvement in course conditions, the relative ease of modern tour life on the body and the mind, and the fact that the modern pro usually has flip wedges into the par fours and rarely faces a par five that they can't reach. If they're so much better, one would think the scoring average would be a lot lower than 71.




    As evidenced by the U.S. Open, the scoring average on any given golf course can be easily manipulated. Therefore, it's hard to discount the impact of course setup over time.
  • Man_O_WarMan_O_War Members Posts: 2,747 ✭✭
    Pent08 wrote:




    Like other sports, modern athletes and players are better, the ironic thing is they are better because the forerunners helped evolved their games. I don't think Jerry West would be a start in todays NBA, I don't think Johnny Unitas would be a starter in the NFL, and I don't think Walter Hagen would win a major today. Equipment or not, todays players are just generally better




    Interesting how the scoring average hasn't markedly improved the past 40 years given the vast improvement in course conditions, the relative ease of modern tour life on the body and the mind, and the fact that the modern pro usually has flip wedges into the par fours and rarely faces a par five that they can't reach. If they're so much better, one would think the scoring average would be a lot lower than 71.




    As evidenced by the U.S. Open, the scoring average on any given golf course can be easily manipulated. Therefore, it's hard to discount the impact of course setup over time.


    especially since courses are longer and harder now to accommodate the improvement in play. better athletes, better equipment = modifications on courses...scoring averages etc look similar.
    Cobra LTD PRO/LTD BLACK  Matrix F6M2/F7M3/Project X LZ 6.0 71g HC/ Fuji 661 III
    Cobra LTD 3/4 Kai'li 80
    Cobra LTD 4/5 Kai'li 80
    TM Mid_Rescue TP 22*
    Cobra Fly Z  Pro Irons Modus 120x SSx2 4-pw
    RTX 3.0 50, 54, 60 Modus 125
    Machine LN M6
  • tacrispytacrispy Members Posts: 162 ✭✭
    I can see why Chamblee could irritate people but honestly, I really enjoy listening to him and his takes. You can't argue how he prepares and golf commentary would be pretty boring without people like He, diaz, and bamberger. He also loves the game and its history.
    [font=arial,helvetica,sans-serif]TM M2 '16 10.5 Projext X Hzrdus 6.5 75Gr[/font]
    [font=arial,helvetica,sans-serif]Cobra F8 3wood Aldilla Tour Green XS[/font]
    [font=arial,helvetica,sans-serif]Adams A7 3Hybrid Aldilla RIP Alpha XS[/font]
    [font=arial,helvetica,sans-serif]Srixon Z745 4-PW Project X 6.5[/font]
    [font=arial, helvetica, sans-serif]Callaway MD3 50[/font]
    [font=arial, helvetica, sans-serif]Callaway MD3 54,58 S400[/font]
    [font=arial, helvetica, sans-serif]Piretti Cottonwood 2[/font]
    [font=arial, helvetica, sans-serif]TM TP5 ball[/font]
  • GolfnutgalenGolfnutgalen Members Posts: 2,531 ✭✭
    dlygrisse wrote:


    Weird mixing the men and women together. Being that they don’t compete against each other they need their own list.

    Inbee Park is better than Arnie? LOL.




    In the majors relative to her peers. But as a whole which is way more subjective? Not in a million years.
  • playar32playar32 Members Posts: 274 ✭✭
    It's also important to realize that games are different today because they are continually changing.



    For example, Lee Trevino was great, would he be great today with his swing? Probably not. The game has been geared more toward hitting it long and straight.



    Same with football or basketball. Would Brady since be playing today if they played football like they did in the 40s, handing it off and throwing blocks?
  • CrushSticksCrushSticks Members Posts: 621 ✭✭
    Let’s face it , it’s will always depend on opinion when deciding the GOAT.




    Guess you couldn’t last a whole year, huh?�
    Wilson Fg Tour M3- Black Ops Black Mamba
    Adams Tight Lies 3-16
    Adams Tight Lies 5-19(Fuji Speeder 7.2)
    Wilson FG Tour V4 Utility - 3
    Wilson FG Tour M3 4-GW (Dynamic Gold XP)
    Vokey SM 09 56
    Odyssey Versa 1W WBW 34"
  • Big Cat 3Big Cat 3 Members Posts: 627 ✭✭
    tacrispy wrote:


    I can see why Chamblee could irritate people but honestly, I really enjoy listening to him and his takes. You can't argue how he prepares and golf commentary would be pretty boring without people like He, diaz, and bamberger. He also loves the game and its history.
    okay ... thanks Brandel but you are kind of boring too
  • NoTalentLeftyNoTalentLefty Members Posts: 3,454 ✭✭
    Let’s face it , it’s will always depend on opinion when deciding the GOAT.




    Guess you couldn’t last a whole year, huh?�




    Explained in the post.
    Livin' proof that Lefties are not naturally talented.

    Driver Titleist 913 D3 44 inches also a Cleveland Classic 310 43.5 inches
    3 and 5 Wood Ping G15
    3-5 Hybrids Cobra Baffler XL
    6-GW Titleist AP1s
    53 degree Wedge Titleist AP1
    58 degree SW Vokey SM6
    Putter White Hot V LINE Fang w/round Edel Grip
  • CrushSticksCrushSticks Members Posts: 621 ✭✭
    Let’s face it , it’s will always depend on opinion when deciding the GOAT.




    Guess you couldn’t last a whole year, huh?�




    Explained in the post.




    Just messing with you Lefty. Saw your comment here and remembered your name from your original post and had to double check the timeline. Got a chuckle out of it.



    Welcome back.
    Wilson Fg Tour M3- Black Ops Black Mamba
    Adams Tight Lies 3-16
    Adams Tight Lies 5-19(Fuji Speeder 7.2)
    Wilson FG Tour V4 Utility - 3
    Wilson FG Tour M3 4-GW (Dynamic Gold XP)
    Vokey SM 09 56
    Odyssey Versa 1W WBW 34"
  • MelloYelloMelloYello Upstate, SCMembers Posts: 3,229 ✭✭
    I really like the podcast TBH. I was only disappointed to hear them say it's going to be monthly. I get that they want to have actual content, but I kind of thought the whole point of podcasts was that they were relatively easy to produce because so much of the content is just chatter.



    Anyhow, I thought they raised some good points including:



    Tiger peaked at a higher level than Jack but Nicklaus stuck with (more or less) one swing and thus had a better career.



    We are wrong to treat "the majors" like constants when they've been somewhat fluid through the years. Some events, like the Masters, have gained prominence over time. Others, like the Western Open have done the opposite. Still others, like the PGA have simply changed formats. The yearly schedule is not a static thing.



    The tour today doesn't penalize erratic driving as it could and thus most of the "big winners" are bombers.
    Driver: TaylorMade M3 (10.5)
    Fairway: TaylorMade RBZ Black (16.5)
    Hybrid: Tour Edge Exotics E8 (19)
    Irons: Titleist 716 CB (4-Pw)
    Wedges: Vokey SM6 52-F / 56-F / 60-S
    Putter: Nike Method Milled 003
  • BarfolomewBarfolomew #worstWRXer Members Posts: 1,242 ✭✭
    Inbee kickin Arnies a$$ has got to make for great shiii talkin for her when she's chuggin beers with her friends out on the links...
    G30 LS
    M2 BMW
    XR 4 Hybrid
    OnOffOnAgain Kuros
    Cleveland Blob
    Square Strike
    SeeMore Butts
  • GolfnutgalenGolfnutgalen Members Posts: 2,531 ✭✭
    MelloYello wrote:


    I really like the podcast TBH. I was only disappointed to hear them say it's going to be monthly. I get that they want to have actual content, but I kind of thought the whole point of podcasts was that they were relatively easy to produce because so much of the content is just chatter.



    Anyhow, I thought they raised some good points including:



    Tiger peaked at a higher level than Jack but Nicklaus stuck with (more or less) one swing and thus had a better career.



    We are wrong to treat "the majors" like constants when they've been somewhat fluid through the years. Some events, like the Masters, have gained prominence over time. Others, like the Western Open have done the opposite. Still others, like the PGA have simply changed formats. The yearly schedule is not a static thing.



    The tour today doesn't penalize erratic driving as it could and thus most of the "big winners" are bombers.




    I thought the podcast was quite enjoyable as well...we might be the only ones that listened to the whole thing though! I found it a bit funny that Brandel was pointing out that Walter Hagen should be considered in the same caliber as Tiger and Jack while bemoaning the erratic driving of today's players. After all, Hagen was considered a bomb and gouger in his day which infuriated Bobby Jones when they played together!



    I'm reading Felber's book and I find it quite enjoyable because it covers the lives and achievements of past player who usually go unmentioned. The manner which the author tackles match play events is quite unusual and possibly bogus, but I guess it's better than just ignoring those early tournaments entirely. The author does reduce the value of the two Amateur (US and British Amateur) events by 50% because the level of competition relative to the Pro ones (US Open and PGA) and of course excludes them entirely from the post WWII era. The author pretty much doesn't even mention the strength of field and makes the assumption that nothing has really changed while comparing 2007 to 2017 outside of the fact that Tiger is no longer top dog. The reason he does this is because he only really focuses on the top players of each event while practically ignoring the rest of the field a critical error in my opinion. I for one did not know that the early women's "Majors" had 25-60 competitors and of course the early Open Championships had around 7-20. The fact that non-majors are given zero value is perhaps even worse, but it would have required quite the undertaking without enough data for the earlier players.



    I do wish he had used more than 5 years to determine a peak score for the best 25 players of all time. Yani Tseng's inclusion nearly equal to Jack and Arnie looks ridiculous in retrospect.
  • MelloYelloMelloYello Upstate, SCMembers Posts: 3,229 ✭✭


    I thought the podcast was quite enjoyable as well...we might be the only ones that listened to the whole thing though! I found it a bit funny that Brandel was pointing out that Walter Hagen should be considered in the same caliber as Tiger and Jack while bemoaning the erratic driving of today's players. After all, Hagen was considered a bomb and gouger in his day which infuriated Bobby Jones when they played together!




    Wow, I did not know that--interesting.


    I'm reading Felber's book and I find it quite enjoyable because it covers the lives and achievements of past player who usually go unmentioned. The manner which the author tackles match play events is quite unusual and possibly bogus, but I guess it's better than just ignoring those early tournaments entirely. The author does reduce the value of the two Amateur (US and British Amateur) events by 50% because the level of competition relative to the Pro ones (US Open and PGA) and of course excludes them entirely from the post WWII era. The author pretty much doesn't even mention the strength of field and makes the assumption that nothing has really changed while comparing 2007 to 2017 outside of the fact that Tiger is no longer top dog. The reason he does this is because he only really focuses on the top players of each event while practically ignoring the rest of the field a critical error in my opinion. I for one did not know that the early women's "Majors" had 25-60 competitors and of course the early Open Championships had around 7-20. The fact that non-majors are given zero value is perhaps even worse, but it would have required quite the undertaking without enough data for the earlier players.



    I do wish he had used more than 5 years to determine a peak score for the best 25 players of all time. Yani Tseng's inclusion nearly equal to Jack and Arnie looks ridiculous in retrospect.




    I didn't look at the actual list but in general I think it's probably all but impossible to rank golfers in a way that will please people.



    It all depends on the metric, the selection of which can wildly impact the results. I agree about the Yani Tseng thing. She was dominating...right up until she fell off the face of the planet, haha! And that brings up the issue of whether you're going by high-water marks (i.e. significant wins) or averaging things out over time, in which case big fall-offs matter.



    The are a million variables to account for, so it's almost pointless unless you have a player like say Nicklaus or Snead who have a lot of everything: wins, majors, high finishes, great driving and putting, longevity, etc.
    Driver: TaylorMade M3 (10.5)
    Fairway: TaylorMade RBZ Black (16.5)
    Hybrid: Tour Edge Exotics E8 (19)
    Irons: Titleist 716 CB (4-Pw)
    Wedges: Vokey SM6 52-F / 56-F / 60-S
    Putter: Nike Method Milled 003
Sign In or Register to comment.