Why there can't be a Tiger now

[Shilgy]

That is actually part of the point. Look at Phil Mickelson (who was the second fiddle back then) - he was majorless in 2000 and with fewer wins under his belt when he competed back then compared to now.

 

Compared to NOW????? He hasn't won for THREE YEARS.

Competing is only winning now? Phil is still #13 in the owgr. That is #13 in the world. I would call that competing.

[Tcann32]

Spieth is in his prime and already choked a major.

 

Why do you think he is in his prime? And BTW, Furyk has choked more majors than Spieth has played in.

 

From a physiological standpoint, Speith is nowhere near his prime. If he keeps the good and works out the bad over the next few years, he will be much better in his prime.

[Shilgy]

Spieth is in his prime and already choked a major.

 

Why do you think he is in his prime? And BTW, Furyk has choked more majors than Spieth has played in.

 

From a physiological standpoint, Speith is nowhere near his prime. If he keeps the good and works out the bad over the next few years, he will be much better in his prime.

If. I am not sure why but I do not see it with Spieth. I think he is too tightly wound in the head. I could be wildly off base but I think last year was his zenith. If he had a career arc like Ralph Guldahl I would not be surprised. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ralph_Guldahl

 

Obviously none of us have a crystal ball so who the heck knows. Feel free to bookmark this page and remind me every time Spieth wins a major. :)

[redfirebird08]

Jack never won the Scoring title?

 

He didn't play enough events to be considered. Which is something people lose sight of. If Jack had played a full schedule, he might have won 100 tournaments.

 

Tiger's schedule was very limited too even while healthy. One year he won 8 of 15 starts. The Vardon Trophy used to require a crazy amount of rounds to qualify compared to more recent years. Jack made a good decision to spend more time with family.

[melo]

Of the current players, I see a much greater likelihood of Day dominating, or something close to it, than any of the others. Dustin has his own issues, despite the talent, Rory just doesn't seem to give a crap about golf, Rickie seems to be wildly inconsistent, and Stenson/Bubba/Etc are on the older side. Spieth, to be honest, I don't think is talented enough. I think he can really putt, and when he is on, he is quite good, but he doesn't have a single category where he is the best of the bunch. He is also wound tighter than a top and his inner turmoil bubbles over too much.

 

Day seems to be immensely talented, driven, willing to accept help and criticism, and a bit more family oriented and generally happy like Jack.

[Roadking2003]

 

You arent doing yourself any favors comparing Spieth, Rory or Day to TW.

 

I have NEVER compared them to Tiger. They are not even in his league and probably never will be. All three MIGHT have a career as good as Mickelson. Day's win rate is 5.5%, Spieth is 8.2% and Rory is 9.9%. Tiger is 24.2%.

 

 

And as far as TWs impact on golf.

 

You deny it?

 

No, I didn't deny it. I asked you what you were basing your comment on. Every young golfer has had heroes growing up. Tiger is nothing new in that regard.

 

Arnie, Jack, Greg, Phil, Tiger have all inspired young golfers. Next it will be Spieth, Day and McIlroy. Even Fowler inspires young golfers.

 

But where Tiger has NOT had an impact is people playing golf. And even the much publicized increases in tour prizes is highly misleading since tour prize money was increasing just as fast during Jack's days and Arnie's days.

[mwkbmw]

What do you mean, "There can't be a Tiger now"?!! There still is a Tiger now.

 

 

He is just no longer what a lot of people want him to be.

[tbowles411]

Day seems to be immensely talented, driven, willing to accept help and criticism, and a bit more family oriented and generally happy like Jack.

Moreover, Day ASKED Tiger for help and advice. He grew up dirt poor. I'm virtually positive that he doesn't lose sight of that, which keeps him grounded.

[Roadking2003]

Who just finished 1-2? A 46 year old and a 40 year old . Ten years ago when they were already 36 and 30 what was Tiger doing? Stenson is the same age as Tiger so I think both of these guys are competing. 9 or 10 or so of the top 22 in the owgr competed with prime Tiger. Almost all of them were there when Tiger won 5 times in 2013. So yeah, they are still competing.

 

My statement is still true; The guys Tiger was beating back in 1997 -2008 (Furyk, Duval, Harrington, Singh, Ogilvy, Montgomery, Mickelson, Els, etc) haven't won anything recently

 

Yes, a few are, but not most of them including Weir, Goosen, Cabrera, O'meara, Olazabal, Ogilivy, etc.

[Roadking2003]

Spieth is in his prime and already choked a major.

 

Why do you think he is in his prime? And BTW, Furyk has choked more majors than Spieth has played in.

 

From a physiological standpoint, Speith is nowhere near his prime. If he keeps the good and works out the bad over the next few years, he will be much better in his prime.

 

Obviously, we won't know for 20 years. But most tour pros peak in their thirties, not at age 22. Only time will tell.

[cdnglf]

Its funny, Stenson is the same age as Tiger but they really don't overlap that much. The first major Stenson played in was the 2005 Open - Tiger's 10th major victory. He didn't win a PGA Tour event until the 2007 match play, and while he played 15 PGA Tour events that year, he didn't do so again until 2010. No wonder he looks so much fitter and stronger than Tiger.

[bscinstnct]

 

You arent doing yourself any favors comparing Spieth, Rory or Day to TW.

 

I have NEVER compared them to Tiger. They are not even in his league and probably never will be. All three MIGHT have a career as good as Mickelson. Day's win rate is 5.5%, Spieth is 8.2% and Rory is 9.9%. Tiger is 24.2%.

 

 

And as far as TWs impact on golf.

 

You deny it?

 

No, I didn't deny it. I asked you what you were basing your comment on. Every young golfer has had heroes growing up. Tiger is nothing new in that regard.

 

Arnie, Jack, Greg, Phil, Tiger have all inspired young golfers. Next it will be Spieth, Day and McIlroy. Even Fowler inspires young golfers.

 

But where Tiger has NOT had an impact is people playing golf. And even the much publicized increases in tour prizes is highly misleading since tour prize money was increasing just as fast during Jack's days and Arnie's days.

 

 

 

You believe that one day, the next generation will say of Spieth, Day, or Rory, something like what

 

 

Spieth said about Tiger?

 

"Tiger Woods deserves a million thank you notes and a million cases of nice wine from every golfer that’s coming up and wants to play the PGA Tour as well as those that are already on the PGA Tour … He 100 percent deserves credit for doing what Arnie did in his day — Arnie and Jack. And taking it to the level it is today. He really doesn’t get the credit he deserves from us players. We all believe it."

 

-Jordan Spieth

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Shilgy]

Who just finished 1-2? A 46 year old and a 40 year old . Ten years ago when they were already 36 and 30 what was Tiger doing? Stenson is the same age as Tiger so I think both of these guys are competing. 9 or 10 or so of the top 22 in the owgr competed with prime Tiger. Almost all of them were there when Tiger won 5 times in 2013. So yeah, they are still competing.

 

My statement is still true; The guys Tiger was beating back in 1997 -2008 (Furyk, Duval, Harrington, Singh, Ogilvy, Montgomery, Mickelson, Els, etc) haven't won anything recently

 

Yes, a few are, but not most of them including Weir, Goosen, Cabrera, O'meara, Olazabal, Ogilivy, etc.

From the top of the rankings in 2008 we still have in the top 22 today:

Stenson, Mickelson, Garcia, Scott, Rose, Furyk. Others like Zach Johnson were lower then and higher now. But going back to the begining of Tigers career (1997) you are right. Most of them are on the Senior Champions Tour now. But I did notice that 5 of the top 7 at the Open were competing with Tiger and not of the top 3 or big 3 whatever. Only McIlroy made any kind of appearance.

 

Its funny, Stenson is the same age as Tiger but they really don't overlap that much. The first major Stenson played in was the 2005 Open - Tiger's 10th major victory. He didn't win a PGA Tour event until the 2007 match play, and while he played 15 PGA Tour events that year, he didn't do so again until 2010. No wonder he looks so much fitter and stronger than Tiger.

Stenson was #4 in the world in 2009.

[cdnglf]

Its funny, Stenson is the same age as Tiger but they really don't overlap that much. The first major Stenson played in was the 2005 Open - Tiger's 10th major victory. He didn't win a PGA Tour event until the 2007 match play, and while he played 15 PGA Tour events that year, he didn't do so again until 2010. No wonder he looks so much fitter and stronger than Tiger.

Stenson was #4 in the world in 2009.

 

I didn't say they didn't overlap at all, just that they didn't overlap that much. Stenson wasn't a premier player until he turned 30, and Tiger was mostly done by his 34th birthday.

 

Contrast with Sergio and Adam Scott for example, who must have played in the same tournament close to a couple of hundred times by now. Or better yet, Phil and Ernie.

[Shilgy]

Its funny, Stenson is the same age as Tiger but they really don't overlap that much. The first major Stenson played in was the 2005 Open - Tiger's 10th major victory. He didn't win a PGA Tour event until the 2007 match play, and while he played 15 PGA Tour events that year, he didn't do so again until 2010. No wonder he looks so much fitter and stronger than Tiger.

Stenson was #4 in the world in 2009.

 

I didn't say they didn't overlap at all, just that they didn't overlap that much. Stenson wasn't a premier player until he turned 30, and Tiger was mostly done by his 34th birthday.

 

Contrast with Sergio and Adam Scott for example, who must have played in the same tournament close to a couple of hundred times by now. Or better yet, Phil and Ernie.

I agree with you and that is the funny thing about looking back at these careers. In 15 years some kid will come along and people will say how good he is. And someone will chime in with the idea that Spieth Day and McIlroy had to contend with Tiger Phil Stenson and Furyk. Roadking a few posts above made some good points but most of the guys he said Tiger beat were just from early in his career and they are on the senior circuit now. For some reason he did not include Sergio -Scott-Stenson and the like. But we are all guilty of it from time to time to support our point of view. No doubt. :)

[Dave230]

I was at a talk with Padraig Harrington tonight.

 

He said that back in the day, you would check the leaderboard, then you'd check where Tiger was. And he said that everybody did it.

 

But then he says you might check for 10 different players on the leaderboard because the standard is so high.

[Brock Savage]

One thing I don't understand is people's refusal to acknowledge the greatness that was Tiger Woods in his prime. He was a once-in-a-generation type of talent. Yes, there are so many good golfers today, even great golfers. But, none of them have even a shred of the consistency that Tiger had in his prime. You're talking about a guy who won 25% of the tournaments that he entered. At one point in his career, if he had to make a 20 foot putt to save your life, you would have felt confident and been making dinner plans for the weekend in your head. You don't feel that with any player on tour now.

 

Nobody on tour can even remotely approach the dominance that we saw from Woods. I'm tired of seeing so much butthurt from people regarding Tiger Woods. Quite honestly, I don't understand it in the slightest.

 

 

EDIT: This was in no way an attack at OP - this is simply a rant against those who somehow find ways to sh*t on his career due to disliking him as a person.

The funny part is how many times Tiger won without his "A" game...Truly amazing. And don't forget the 40 European tour wins......THAT to me is a more impressive, playing only part-time over there.......

 

It is very impressive, but surely you're aware that most of them were majors or WGCs that were sanctioned by both the Euro and PGA tours. He won 8 Euro Tour events that were not sanctioned by the PGA.

[Brock Savage]

Jack never won the Scoring title?

 

He didn't play enough events to be considered. Which is something people lose sight of. If Jack had played a full schedule, he might have won 100 tournaments.

 

And he might have won 50. Jack himself said, many times, that he needed the time off to recharge his batteries, and that he would not play as well if he played more often. I suspect that the same was true of Tiger --- being at or near the lead as often as Jack and Tiger were is a tremendous mental strain.

 

For reasons I'll never understand, a lot of people knock Tiger for not coming from behind to win a major (even though he did it several times --- he didn't win when he was behind after exactly 54 holes, but he won when he was behind after 53 holes, or 55 holes, and in the 2008 US Open, he won when he was behind after 71 holes, which is pretty tough). But any player who's been there will tell you that sleeping on a major lead is the most nerve-wracking thing you can imagine. Even if you have a four-shot lead, you're worried about blowing it and looking like a choker --- just ask Rory.

[Roadking2003]

You arent doing yourself any favors comparing Spieth, Rory or Day to TW.

 

I have NEVER compared them to Tiger. They are not even in his league and probably never will be. All three MIGHT have a career as good as Mickelson. Day's win rate is 5.5%, Spieth is 8.2% and Rory is 9.9%. Tiger is 24.2%.

 

 

And as far as TWs impact on golf.

 

You deny it?

 

No, I didn't deny it. I asked you what you were basing your comment on. Every young golfer has had heroes growing up. Tiger is nothing new in that regard.

 

Arnie, Jack, Greg, Phil, Tiger have all inspired young golfers. Next it will be Spieth, Day and McIlroy. Even Fowler inspires young golfers.

 

But where Tiger has NOT had an impact is people playing golf. And even the much publicized increases in tour prizes is highly misleading since tour prize money was increasing just as fast during Jack's days and Arnie's days.

 

 

 

You believe that one day, the next generation will say of Spieth, Day, or Rory, something like what

 

 

Spieth said about Tiger?

 

"Tiger Woods deserves a million thank you notes and a million cases of nice wine from every golfer that's coming up and wants to play the PGA Tour as well as those that are already on the PGA Tour … He 100 percent deserves credit for doing what Arnie did in his day — Arnie and Jack. And taking it to the level it is today. He really doesn't get the credit he deserves from us players. We all believe it."

 

-Jordan Spieth

 

Maybe. It's too soon to tell with Spieth. He's only 23 years old. Ask me again in 10 years.

[MadGolfer76]

So the argument is that Tiger couldn't do today what he did 10-15 years ago because the fields are so much stronger and his fields were so much weaker? And our proof of that is the guys he beat back then are worse than the guys now however, the guys he beat back then are STILL playing and competing with the guys now but somehow they make the field stronger now but back then it made the field weaker. But it's only stronger because the guys now who are competing now are SOMETIMES beating the guys Tiger almost ALWAYS beat back then?

 

That is actually part of the point. Look at Phil Mickelson (who was the second fiddle back then) - he was majorless in 2000 and with fewer wins under his belt when he competed back then compared to now. The question for that example then becomes, is Phil a stronger competitor now with five majors and 30+ wins or in 2000, with no majors and half the wins? Yes, Vijay Singh is mostly irrelevant now, but Rory McIlroy isn't. Ernie Els is still playing very well and picked up two more majors along the way. Jim Furyk is another example of someone who is still playing very well. Add to those players, Spieth, Watson, Stenson, Day, Johnson, Z. Johnson, Scott, Dufner, etc. and you have a case for a stronger field currently.

 

You can't have it both ways dude...In 1999-2002 the other guys who won majors were: Els (he won his 3rd in 2002), Payne Stewart (He won his 3rd in 1999), Goosen (first in 2001), Vijay (won his 2nd), Olazabal (won his 2nd), then Lawrie, Toms, and Duval.

 

So while Tiger was CRUSHING the golf world, there were 5 other players capable of winning multiple majors, just in that 3 year window...and then when we get to 2004, when Tiger was still dominating...Phil reeled off 3 in 2 years, so yes, I'd say the Phil of Tiger's era who won 3 majors in 2 years is better than the one who has won 2 majors in the following decade.

 

Mcilroy, Spieth, Jonson, and Watson have multiple majors right now, the rest of those guys have 1 or ZERO. If you think they are more talented, then more power to you, but I'd venture to say that not one single player in that grouping is a more talented golfer than Phil (also evidenced by the fact that he has more majors and still competes for them), and Tiger consistently beat Phil down in his 20's.

 

In a hypothetical conversation, you can have it any way you would like, which kind of highlights the foolishness of what this discussion has turned into. And "dude," implies a certain familiarity that isn't really appropriate here - kind of like an inexperienced attempt at being condescending. Also, when I see someone using all caps to try to make a point, I view it as someone trying too hard, so if you want to keep discussing this with me, you need to take it easy.

 

Yes, I think that fields are better now. Speaking of trying to have it both ways, how could you have a player like Tiger Woods do what he did and then not be able to acknowledge better resulting competition as a result? There are a bunch of young players now who have distinguished themselves with major wins in their early twenties. Five years from now they will have only added to that. There are also veteran players like Phil who continue to compete, and I feel they are better players now due to their experience. The piece that you haven't yet been able to infer, is that the reality of stronger fields applies to everyone - it is harder to win majors now than 15 or more years ago. It makes what McIlroy and others have done all the more impressive.

 

So to sum it up, you aren't going to change my mind any more than anyone else here who is similarly motivated. If you want to keep beating on that door, I'll always have a response for you.

[playa]

 

That is actually part of the point. Look at Phil Mickelson (who was the second fiddle back then) - he was majorless in 2000 and with fewer wins under his belt when he competed back then compared to now.

 

Compared to NOW????? He hasn't won for THREE YEARS.

Be careful rk, the haters will say Phil not winning is proof of stronger fields now. Despite him being 10 years past his prime.

[Tcann32]

Spieth is in his prime and already choked a major.

 

Why do you think he is in his prime? And BTW, Furyk has choked more majors than Spieth has played in.

 

From a physiological standpoint, Speith is nowhere near his prime. If he keeps the good and works out the bad over the next few years, he will be much better in his prime.

If. I am not sure why but I do not see it with Spieth. I think he is too tightly wound in the head. I could be wildly off base but I think last year was his zenith. If he had a career arc like Ralph Guldahl I would not be surprised. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ralph_Guldahl

 

Obviously none of us have a crystal ball so who the heck knows. Feel free to bookmark this page and remind me every time Spieth wins a major. :)

 

Ohh its a big IF in my statement hahaha. To me, he's just the closest I can think of to having a game that's complete enough to be dominant.

 

He's not going to be as long as some of the big hitters.. But his putting makes up for it, and then some.

 

He surprisingly stumbles in an area that I don't notice other people struggling with as often, and that's his irons.

 

He does need to get out of his head, but tiger was pretty deep in there too.. The only person who swears at themselves more than Tiger is Jordan. Jordan has a great attitude in general though, and has aspects outside of golf that are great.

 

I think the last couple seasons wore him out, now this season he's trying to change things about his game, without good reason IMO. He got excited about winning all the time and went around and won everywhere and it's almost like he hasn't recovered.

 

But again, he may get the numbers up there, but it'll never be with the same awe that tiger had. Rory has that awe IMO. When he turns it on, it's just stupid to watch, but he has to count on too many things coming together at once. I hope he gets it all back some day, he's a blast to watch. But still not the artist on the course that tiger was.

[MadGolfer76]

That is actually part of the point. Look at Phil Mickelson (who was the second fiddle back then) - he was majorless in 2000 and with fewer wins under his belt when he competed back then compared to now.

 

Compared to NOW????? He hasn't won for THREE YEARS.

 

Neither has TIger Woods. Any other stupid questions, or was that as good as it is going to get?

[MadGolfer76]

That is actually part of the point. Look at Phil Mickelson (who was the second fiddle back then) - he was majorless in 2000 and with fewer wins under his belt when he competed back then compared to now.

 

Compared to NOW????? He hasn't won for THREE YEARS.

Be careful rk, the haters will say Phil not winning is proof of stronger fields now. Despite him being 10 years past his prime.

 

Already done, but I'm not a hater.

[crazy8golfer]

I love golf even more today now that Tiger is in the past.

 

Can someone recap the 2016 Masters for the op???

 

Sincerely,

Jordan Spieth

 

And how many times has DJ faltered?

 

Pipe dream. A healthy Tiger could win now just like a number of other guys.

Keep Drinking the Kool-Aid

 

You're like the weirdest dude on this board, and your Tiger obsession is super creepy. He's one of the two best players who ever lived.

That's for the compliment.

[Bomber_11]

Tiger bashing is something I've never understood to be quite honest.

 

Does today’s golf have dozens of brilliant young stars? Absolutely. The likes of Spieth, McIlroy, Fowler, DJ, Jason Day, Bubba, Koepka, Adam Scott, and Patrick Reed are all in the running seemingly every Sunday. One would believe this is more “newsworthy” than Tiger’s latest 9-iron swing on his home simulator; but it’s not. A golfer who hasn't played since 2015 still drives the needle for golf.

 

Could Tiger disappear into the shadows to enjoy his millions, enjoy his kids, and run his restaurant/golf courses? He could, but for golf’s sake I hope he doesn’t. Today’s tournament purses, sponsorship opportunities, and new ‘athlete’ view of golf – all came directly from Tiger Woods. Even the greats like Phil Mickelson acknowledge that Tiger has turned golf into what it is today. Nike's new golf slogan, “We’ll stop chasing perfection when our athletes do.” is just another recognition that Tiger made modern day golf an athlete's game.

 

It’s difficult to imagine any facet of the modern game that wasn’t influenced by Tiger. Huge sponsorship deals, lengthening courses to ‘Tiger-proof’ them, etc. all came from Mr. Woods. Though he provided so many incredible memories and headlines, he’s always left many of us wanting more. Should he never fully recover from his back problems, we were raised as part of a generation that witnessed the greatest golf ever played.

 

Some want him to stick around for the attendance, monetary gains, or ratings. I simply want to see Tiger blister a drive, swipe his tee out of the ground, and stroll down the center of a fairway in “Sunday Red”, challenging every young gun out there to a duel.

 

And one more fist pump.

[Roadking2003]

Tiger bashing is something I've never understood to be quite honest.

 

Me too. I also don't understand Tiger worship.

 

 

Today’s tournament purses, sponsorship opportunities, and new ‘athlete’ view of golf – all came directly from Tiger Woods. Even the greats like Phil Mickelson acknowledge that Tiger has turned golf into what it is today. Nike's new golf slogan, “We’ll stop chasing perfection when our athletes do.” is just another recognition that Tiger made modern day golf an athlete's game.

 

Actually, Gary Player and Greg Norman made golf athletic long before Tiger. And PGA tour purses were increasing faster before Tiger arrived. Do the research and you will see huge purse increases in the 1950s, 1960s and 1980s. You have lapped up the media hype.

 

Here are some examples;

 

For the decade ending in 1959, the PGA Championship purse increased 136%

 

For the decade ending in 1969, The PGA Championship purse increased 218%

 

For the decade ending in 1989, the PGA Championship purse increased 233%

 

But for the decade ending in 2009, it only increased 50%.

 

It’s difficult to imagine any facet of the modern game that wasn’t influenced by Tiger. Huge sponsorship deals, lengthening courses to ‘Tiger-proof’ them, etc. all came from Mr. Woods.

 

Once again, you are lapping up the media hype. PGA tour driving distances were increasing long before Tiger arrived. "Tiger proofing" is a media term that matched the Tiger hysteria and fit nicely with his wonderful golf game. Tiger NEVER ONCE was the longest driver on tour. In fact, in most years he was more than 10 yards behind the leader.

 

Tiger was sensational, but the media gave him credit for a lot of things that were already happening.

[redfirebird08]

Daly was a freak and about 20 years ahead of his time, but Tiger was averaging about 8-9 yards more off the tee than Davis Love III...one of the longest hitters in modern golf. The average guy on Tour was a lot shorter than DL3, so in general Tiger had a massive advantage over the field. Difference between Woods and Daly was mental strength and course management. JD never embarrassed Augusta National the way Woods did in 1997.

[bscinstnct]

Tiger bashing is something I've never understood to be quite honest.

 

Me too. I also don't understand Tiger worship.

 

 

Today’s tournament purses, sponsorship opportunities, and new ‘athlete’ view of golf – all came directly from Tiger Woods. Even the greats like Phil Mickelson acknowledge that Tiger has turned golf into what it is today. Nike's new golf slogan, “We’ll stop chasing perfection when our athletes do.” is just another recognition that Tiger made modern day golf an athlete's game.

 

Actually, Gary Player and Greg Norman made golf athletic long before Tiger. And PGA tour purses were increasing faster before Tiger arrived. Do the research and you will see huge purse increases in the 1950s, 1960s and 1980s. You have lapped up the media hype.

 

Here are some examples;

 

For the decade ending in 1959, the PGA Championship purse increased 136%

 

For the decade ending in 1969, The PGA Championship purse increased 218%

 

For the decade ending in 1989, the PGA Championship purse increased 233%

 

But for the decade ending in 2009, it only increased 50%.

 

It’s difficult to imagine any facet of the modern game that wasn’t influenced by Tiger. Huge sponsorship deals, lengthening courses to ‘Tiger-proof’ them, etc. all came from Mr. Woods.

 

Once again, you are lapping up the media hype. PGA tour driving distances were increasing long before Tiger arrived. "Tiger proofing" is a media term that matched the Tiger hysteria and fit nicely with his wonderful golf game. Tiger NEVER ONCE was the longest driver on tour. In fact, in most years he was more than 10 yards behind the leader.

 

Tiger was sensational, but the media gave him credit for a lot of things that were already happening.

 

Some people give TW more credit than you seem to.

 

Is this the "worship" you say you do not understand>

 

 

 

 

“Tiger Woods deserves a million thank you notes and a million cases of nice wine from every golfer that’s coming up and wants to play the PGA Tour as well as those that are already on the PGA Tour … He 100 percent deserves credit for doing what Arnie did in his day — Arnie and Jack. And taking it to the level it is today. He really doesn’t get the credit he deserves from us players. We all believe it. I don’t think we stress it enough to other people."

 

-Jordan Spieth

 

 

 

"It gives me so much confidence that a person like that would believe in me. He’s been a big influence in my life ever since I was a kid.

 

“I was idolising him ever since I was a kid and watching him in '97 win the Masters"

 

-Jason Day

 

 

 

"I'll never be able to do for golf what Tiger did," McIlroy told BBC Sport from Wentworth, where he will go for his third global win in four weeks. "He was a phenomenon, he brought so many more people into the game because of his background and how he started on tour."

 

-Rory Mcilroy

 

 

 

Is that "media hype"?

 

; )

[Roadking2003]

Daly was a freak and about 20 years ahead of his time, but Tiger was averaging about 8-9 yards more off the tee than Davis Love III...one of the longest hitters in modern golf. The average guy on Tour was a lot shorter than DL3, so in general Tiger had a massive advantage over the field. Difference between Woods and Daly was mental strength and course management. JD never embarrassed Augusta National the way Woods did in 1997.

 

2001: Tiger and Love tied for 3rd.

 

2002: Tiger was sixth

 

2003: Tiger was 11th.

 

2004: Tiger was 9th

 

So no Tiger was not the longest at any time in his career.