Tiger and the modern game

Roadking2003 · February 14, 2017

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?

If they were at their peak today, Jack would have 20 majors and Tiger would have 8.

wobgon · February 14, 2017

What a ridiculous thread.......A whole bunch of adults arguing about something that not one poster knows the answer too......So to join in, unlike all the posters who say" I have always been a Tiger fan but" I will say, i have never been a Tiger fan but, in my opinion, if Tiger came out in 2012, he would be every bit as dominant as he was way back when...If Matsuyama can dominate for a period of time against these so called young studs, I am pretty sure that an in his prime tiger just might make out OK.

bscinstnct · February 14, 2017

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?

If they were at their peak today, Jack would have 20 majors and Tiger would have 8.

Tom Watson had 8.

So, if we extrapolate your line of thinking.

Tom Watson is better than Tiger Woods. And Lee Trevino is just about as good.

Which is funny

Since they *both* said that

Tiger Woods is better than Jack/the best.

; )

Roadking2003 · February 14, 2017

What a ridiculous thread.......A whole bunch of adults arguing about something that not one poster knows the answer too......So to join in, unlike all the posters who say" I have always been a Tiger fan but" I will say, i have never been a Tiger fan but, in my opinion, if Tiger came out in 2012, he would be every bit as dominant as he was way back when...If Matsuyama can dominate for a period of time against these so called young studs, I am pretty sure that an in his prime tiger just might make out OK.

Matsuyama didn't dominate against the young studs.

But yes, Tiger would.

bladehunter · February 14, 2017

not even Speith , although him at Augusta is the closest paired with stenson in the open that we've seen in 15 years.

You have to give credit to Rory's blowout victories. Those were amazing performances.

Nah. He has one maybe two on that level. I'll say that. But that boy has a whole lot of quit in him. If he isn't on he just tanks. He won't ever be great until he learns how to make those 72-73 rounds into 68 consistently. Dominating one week then taking the next 5-6 weeks off ( either not playing or missing cuts ) isn't goat material.

I didn't say he was greatest of all-time material. I only said his blowout major victories were amazing. He is a great player though. To say he's not a great player is a pretty unfair analysis. He is already locked for the Hall of Fame with 4 majors, a FedEx Cup, multiple European and PGA Tour money list titles, etc. He is on pace to be arguably a Top 10 all-time player. He has a great chance to win the very rare career Grand Slam with so many chances to play Augusta over the next 15+ years.

In terms of ballstriking talent, Rory is the Chosen One to walk in Jack and Tiger's shoes. He can really stripe the golf ball. Unfortunately he doesn't have their putting ability, course management, or mental strength and it leads to a lot of streakiness in his game. He'll be ultra red hot one month and down in the dumps the next month. Similar to Phil Mickelson in that regard (another great player who is very streaky).

alli said was that he doesnt live up to his potential most of the time.... That is why i didnt include him with Spieth and Stenson.... they both apppear to be playing to within 90% of their potential more times than not, and when they arent they are trying to .... Tiger in his prime would chew up and spit out Rory and his A game.... In fact ill go farther and say Rory may not be able to summon his A game against Young Tiger.... many couldnt .. As for Rory getting the grand slam... ill say it here now.. Spieth gets his 1st if Rory does at all...

redfirebird08 · February 14, 2017

As for Rory getting the grand slam... ill say it here now.. Spieth gets his 1st if Rory does at all...

He has some demons at Augusta for sure. But he has a great chance to eventually win there. His driving ability and par 5 scoring ability was built for that course. Putter will always be a question mark for him, but all it takes is one good week on the greens and he'll have that career Grand Slam.

wobgon · February 14, 2017

What a ridiculous thread.......A whole bunch of adults arguing about something that not one poster knows the answer too......So to join in, unlike all the posters who say" I have always been a Tiger fan but" I will say, i have never been a Tiger fan but, in my opinion, if Tiger came out in 2012, he would be every bit as dominant as he was way back when...If Matsuyama can dominate for a period of time against these so called young studs, I am pretty sure that an in his prime tiger just might make out OK.

Matsuyama didn't dominate against the young studs.

But yes, Tiger would.

Again, all of this is opinion....I agree That Tiger would dominate, but disagree that Matuyama did not dominate against the so called young studs for a period of time.

cdnglf · February 14, 2017

not even Speith , although him at Augusta is the closest paired with stenson in the open that we've seen in 15 years.

You have to give credit to Rory's blowout victories. Those were amazing performances.

Nah. He has one maybe two on that level. I'll say that. But that boy has a whole lot of quit in him. If he isn't on he just tanks. He won't ever be great until he learns how to make those 72-73 rounds into 68 consistently. Dominating one week then taking the next 5-6 weeks off ( either not playing or missing cuts ) isn't goat material.

I didn't say he was greatest of all-time material. I only said his blowout major victories were amazing. He is a great player though. To say he's not a great player is a pretty unfair analysis. He is already locked for the Hall of Fame with 4 majors, a FedEx Cup, multiple European and PGA Tour money list titles, etc. He is on pace to be arguably a Top 10 all-time player. He has a great chance to win the very rare career Grand Slam with so many chances to play Augusta over the next 15+ years.

In terms of ballstriking talent, Rory is the Chosen One to walk in Jack and Tiger's shoes. He can really stripe the golf ball. Unfortunately he doesn't have their putting ability, course management, or mental strength and it leads to a lot of streakiness in his game. He'll be ultra red hot one month and down in the dumps the next month. Similar to Phil Mickelson in that regard (another great player who is very streaky).

alli said was that he doesnt live up to his potential most of the time.... That is why i didnt include him with Spieth and Stenson.... they both apppear to be playing to within 90% of their potential more times than not, and when they arent they are trying to .... Tiger in his prime would chew up and spit out Rory and his A game.... In fact ill go farther and say Rory may not be able to summon his A game against Young Tiger.... many couldnt .. As for Rory getting the grand slam... ill say it here now.. Spieth gets his 1st if Rory does at all...

And yet, Rory (who isn't yet 30) is by far the most accomplished player under 40.

Roadking2003 · February 15, 2017

And yet, Rory (who isn't yet 30) is by far the most accomplished player under 40.

This is true. But I think some of us are questioning his commitment to staying on that track.

Roadking2003 · February 15, 2017

Again, all of this is opinion....I agree That Tiger would dominate, but disagree that Matuyama did not dominate against the so called young studs for a period of time.

OK, technically you are correct. That period of time has been very short. Using that standard, Justin Thomas dominated for a period of time.

bladehunter · February 15, 2017

And yet, Rory (who isn't yet 30) is by far the most accomplished player under 40.

This is true. But I think some of us are questioning his commitment to staying on that track.

exactly... depends on what metric you use.... and how long you go back.... Im sure you will only think majors ...so for that ill give.... BUT ill say that if Rory doesnt get his head on straight and learn to putt he wont keep that title long.... Spieth will eclipse 4 majors sooner than later... then what will the crutch be ?

Jwin323 · February 15, 2017

Nicklaus is the G.O.A.T. Most of the Tiger fans on here never saw Jack play in his prime because his every breath wasn't shown live on TV by the Golf Channel. Nicklaus beat better players, with lesser equipment or worse conditioned courses. Tiger is the one player of today who would have been great with the old equipment.

If Tiger started today he no doubt would win the lion's share of majors but probably not 14. The current bunch of player in their primes are better than what Tiger faced 15-20 years ago because he basically created the prototype Tour pro we have today. And we don't know who's coming down the pipe in the next 10-15 years. It's too hard to compare eras in golf with the game evolving so much each generation.

bladehunter · February 15, 2017

Nicklaus is the G.O.A.T. Most of the Tiger fans on here never saw Jack play in his prime because his every breath wasn't shown live on TV by the Golf Channel. Nicklaus beat better players, with lesser equipment or worse conditioned courses. Tiger is the one player of today who would have been great with the old equipment.

If Tiger started today he no doubt would win the lion's share of majors but probably not 14. The current bunch of player in their primes are better than what Tiger faced 15-20 years ago because he basically created the prototype Tour pro we have today. And we don't know who's coming down the pipe in the next 10-15 years. It's too hard to compare eras in golf with the game evolving so much each generation.

The one thing that bothers me about Jack ...... is his self admitted mediocre to terrible short game.... I just dont know if head to head , prime to prime he could beat tiger more times than not

BillyZ2 · February 15, 2017

Nicklaus is the G.O.A.T. Most of the Tiger fans on here never saw Jack play in his prime because his every breath wasn't shown live on TV by the Golf Channel. Nicklaus beat better players, with lesser equipment or worse conditioned courses. Tiger is the one player of today who would have been great with the old equipment.

If Tiger started today he no doubt would win the lion's share of majors but probably not 14. The current bunch of player in their primes are better than what Tiger faced 15-20 years ago because he basically created the prototype Tour pro we have today. And we don't know who's coming down the pipe in the next 10-15 years. It's too hard to compare eras in golf with the game evolving so much each generation.
I just dont know if head to head , prime to prime he could beat tiger more times than not

nor does anybody else.

tigers9iron · February 15, 2017

If anything he would dominate even more today. These kids are incredibly inconsistent and have zero intimidation factor. None of todays players are day in day out dominant like tiger was. He'd mop up this generation, i think he'd win even more.

jslane57 · February 15, 2017

If you didn't see Tiger in person toward the beginning of his career, you missed out on amazing. His swing just looked/sounded different. Faster. He putted better than anyone. Ever. And every single person at the tournament knew he would win. The things he was great at would not be lessened by modern equipment. Remember when DJ hit those two amazing shots on the 72nd hole at Chambers Bay? Now imagine that he and everyone in the world just knew he would make the putt (not 3 putt). That was Tiger. And Tiger always made the putt!

deadsolid...shank · February 15, 2017

I think he'd be almost as dominant today. And I think Jack would be the same.

Great, once in a lifetime players are going to be that way any place or time.

endurancechiro · February 15, 2017

Honestly, I think he would have still been pretty dominant. Tiger revolutionized the approach to the game. These players that are beating up golf courses now are doing it because they watched how tiger did it. Before tiger, fitness, diet, etc were abnormalities. Now every top player has a complete rehab team, nutritionist, personal trainers, mental coaches, etc.

I think the shift towards a power game would have just happened later. This isn't even mentioning the equipment changes that have been made in that time, could you imagine if tiger had grown up with 460 drivers and premium graphite shafts?