Tiger Woods: "No Timetable for my Return to Golf..."

[Bingo1976]

Lets just say TW beat the top 30 players in the world over a full 4 day stroke play tournament event.

 

That sums it up in tidy fashion.

 

But it is incorrect. He beat 29 of the top 30 players. Unless he beat himself, or there were 31 players.

 

#pedantmode

 

I am not taking away Tiger's achievement - he was pretty close in 2 majors, which I would say are harder to win than a limited field event, regardless of the fact it was the Tour Championship.

[bscinstnct]

Lets just say TW beat the top 30 players in the world over a full 4 day stroke play tournament event.

 

That sums it up in tidy fashion.

 

But it is incorrect. He beat 29 of the top 30 players. Unless he beat himself, or there were 31 players.

 

#pedantmode

 

I am not taking away Tiger's achievement - he was pretty close in 2 majors, which I would say are harder to win than a limited field event, regardless of the fact it was the Tour Championship.

 

Bingo!

 

You sure you dont mean

 

Irregardless?

 

; )

[straightshot7]

Lets just say TW beat the top 30 players in the world over a full 4 day stroke play tournament event.

 

That sums it up in tidy fashion.

 

But it is incorrect. He beat 29 of the top 30 players. Unless he beat himself, or there were 31 players.

 

#pedantmode

 

I am not taking away Tiger's achievement - he was pretty close in 2 majors, which I would say are harder to win than a limited field event, regardless of the fact it was the Tour Championship.

 

"Limited field event"...

 

So if he won on the Asian Tour vs. a field of 175 players (none of whom are top 30 in the world) would you downplay that?

 

How about the John Deere classic, Wyndham, Puerto Rico open, Barbasol, etc.... There are literally a dozen FULL field events on the PGA with WEAK fields (top players not in attendance).

 

Give credit where it is due. If you want to act like Tiger's victory vs. the top 29 fedex cup list was lesser than normal, you have to strip everyone of their John Deere etc wins.

 

I guess The Masters, with 87 players, shouldn't count for as much as the "full field" Shriner's.

[A.Princey]

Full-field Shriner's is mega deep man, just compare the numbers, man. 87 is just not deep enough, gotta be a full-field....Wait a minute, deep means quantity right??

[imakaveli]

When I read CR i read TDO lmao

 

Yeah, some of the same stuff as we see from cr

 

But TDO had that edge, that TDO style ; )

 

I miss TDO, hopefully he is well

[dciccoritti]

 

The Players:

 

Tour Championship:

 

Pretty easy to dive into a deep pool, but Tiger....

 

[media=]

[/media]

[bladehunter]

Perfect example CR of the reason guys like me cane back to comment in this thread. He was 1 blankin stroke away from winning the Fedex cup. 1..... and the whole thing. Something that the best players on the planet have worked to win all year. And you guys call it a “ limited field event “. So no. I give no quarter when it comes to saying I told you so. We did. And it happened. Like it , or don’t. Next year will be fun. ! ?

[Ignatius Reilly]

Lets just say TW beat the top 30 players in the world over a full 4 day stroke play tournament event.

 

That sums it up in tidy fashion.

 

But it is incorrect. He beat 29 of the top 30 players. Unless he beat himself, or there were 31 players.

 

#pedantmode

 

I am not taking away Tiger's achievement - he was pretty close in 2 majors, which I would say are harder to win than a limited field event, regardless of the fact it was the Tour Championship.

 

Pretty fair (and accurate!) way of looking at it.

 

When you've got a full-field event you've increased the odds of someone having a great 4 day stretch and winning the thing. This applies to majors as well as the Safeway, just the field is a lot better at a major because there are tougher criteria to enter.

 

There's no Shaun Micheel, no Rich Beem, no Michael Campbell to come out of the woodwork and grab the win. Heck, there wasn't even a Jordan Spieth in the field.

 

It's been a great year for Tiger, a better comeback than I expected. I would have bet against a win in his first year back, much less in a big tournament like the Tour Championship. That's real buzzer-beater.

[cdnglf]

The Players:

 

Tour Championship:

 

Pretty easy to dive into a deep pool, but Tiger....

 

[media=]

[/media]

 

That guy is built like a linebacker.

[bscinstnct]

Last year, TW was getting some new hardware...bolted onto his spine

 

This year, the hardware be like ; )

 

[cdnglf]

Is the Tiger vs Phil match a major?

[bscinstnct]

Is the Tiger vs Phil match a major?

 

No, not a major

 

But considering that one of Sam Snead's official wins was an 18-hole event and another was against 2 person field consisting of Bing Crosby and Eleanor Roosevelt

 

TW/Phil should *absolutely* count as a PGA Tour victory!

 

 

[ebrasmus21]

Is the Tiger vs Phil match a major?

 

No, not a major

 

But considering that one of Sam Snead's official wins was an 18-hole event and another was against 2 person field consisting of Bing Crosby and Eleanor Roosevelt

 

TW/Phil should *absolutely* count as a PGA Tour victory!

 

 

 

Where do I sign the petition?

[bladehunter]

Is the Tiger vs Phil match a major?

 

lol.

 

No, not a major

 

But considering that one of Sam Snead's official wins was an 18-hole event and another was against 2 person field consisting of Bing Crosby and Eleanor Roosevelt

 

TW/Phil should *absolutely* count as a PGA Tour victory!

 

 

 

lol. Wonder what handicap Eleanor played off of in those days ?

[bscinstnct]

Lol, Shout out from Paige to TW

 

[lowheel]

Lol, Shout out from Paige to TW

 

https://www.instagra...PJncHbYr/?hl=en

 

This is what it looks like when youre on minute 18...

[gatorpedsMD]

Paige is hafffffff

[Bingo1976]

Lets just say TW beat the top 30 players in the world over a full 4 day stroke play tournament event.

 

That sums it up in tidy fashion.

 

But it is incorrect. He beat 29 of the top 30 players. Unless he beat himself, or there were 31 players.

 

#pedantmode

 

I am not taking away Tiger's achievement - he was pretty close in 2 majors, which I would say are harder to win than a limited field event, regardless of the fact it was the Tour Championship.

 

"Limited field event"...

 

So if he won on the Asian Tour vs. a field of 175 players (none of whom are top 30 in the world) would you downplay that?

 

How about the John Deere classic, Wyndham, Puerto Rico open, Barbasol, etc.... There are literally a dozen FULL field events on the PGA with WEAK fields (top players not in attendance).

 

Give credit where it is due. If you want to act like Tiger's victory vs. the top 29 fedex cup list was lesser than normal, you have to strip everyone of their John Deere etc wins.

 

I guess The Masters, with 87 players, shouldn't count for as much as the "full field" Shriner's.

 

I did give credit where it's due (my bold). To reach the final and win is a hell of an achievement for anyone, especially given where TW was a year ago. My point was that I would rank his Major performances up there with this win, as they do have a deeper field than a 30 man event. I am not saying that all full field events are deeper than the playoff finals.

[straightshot7]

Lets just say TW beat the top 30 players in the world over a full 4 day stroke play tournament event.

 

That sums it up in tidy fashion.

 

But it is incorrect. He beat 29 of the top 30 players. Unless he beat himself, or there were 31 players.

 

#pedantmode

 

I am not taking away Tiger's achievement - he was pretty close in 2 majors, which I would say are harder to win than a limited field event, regardless of the fact it was the Tour Championship.

 

"Limited field event"...

 

So if he won on the Asian Tour vs. a field of 175 players (none of whom are top 30 in the world) would you downplay that?

 

How about the John Deere classic, Wyndham, Puerto Rico open, Barbasol, etc.... There are literally a dozen FULL field events on the PGA with WEAK fields (top players not in attendance).

 

Give credit where it is due. If you want to act like Tiger's victory vs. the top 29 fedex cup list was lesser than normal, you have to strip everyone of their John Deere etc wins.

 

I guess The Masters, with 87 players, shouldn't count for as much as the "full field" Shriner's.

 

I did give credit where it's due (my bold). To reach the final and win is a hell of an achievement for anyone, especially given where TW was a year ago. My point was that I would rank his Major performances up there with this win, as they do have a deeper field than a 30 man event. I am not saying that all full field events are deeper than the playoff finals.

 

I don't see how the bold is giving credit where it is due. It sounded a lot more like you were trying to diminish the accomplishment by referring to it as a "limited field event."

 

No hard feelings and I see your point but you're proving my point by comparing his win to 2nd and T4 placed finishes. And making it a point to highlight field strength or lack there of.

 

If he had won the RBC or Valero would we be seeing these comments about the field strength? Maybe. Maybe not. Definitely not to this degree.

 

It is a misconception that a 30 player field is a weakish field. Most people aren't aware that there are very few tournaments on Tour where you have 30 of the best players in the world in attendance.

 

If you value quality over quantity, it is not even a remotely limited field.

[Golfjack]

I don't think it really matters, as it's a win, and not a major. It's a step along the way. And he's made that step. I don't think anyone will say the tour championship was an easy tournament to win. It's 4 weeks of grinding, and all against the top players. Tiger finished second to Rose overall, and won the last tournament. I would say he did real well.

[straightshot7]

I don't think it really matters, as it's a win, and not a major. It's a step along the way. And he's made that step. I don't think anyone will say the tour championship was an easy tournament to win. It's 4 weeks of grinding, and all against the top players. Tiger finished second to Rose overall, and won the last tournament. I would say he did real well.

 

That's a good point in that the guy who many said was too old and injury prone, managed to win at the end of the most strenuous part of the season. And almost win the year long points race. One shot away from the Fedex championship is not bad for a washed up, broken man.

[Bingo1976]

Lets just say TW beat the top 30 players in the world over a full 4 day stroke play tournament event.

 

That sums it up in tidy fashion.

 

But it is incorrect. He beat 29 of the top 30 players. Unless he beat himself, or there were 31 players.

 

#pedantmode

 

I am not taking away Tiger's achievement - he was pretty close in 2 majors, which I would say are harder to win than a limited field event, regardless of the fact it was the Tour Championship.

 

"Limited field event"...

 

So if he won on the Asian Tour vs. a field of 175 players (none of whom are top 30 in the world) would you downplay that?

 

How about the John Deere classic, Wyndham, Puerto Rico open, Barbasol, etc.... There are literally a dozen FULL field events on the PGA with WEAK fields (top players not in attendance).

 

Give credit where it is due. If you want to act like Tiger's victory vs. the top 29 fedex cup list was lesser than normal, you have to strip everyone of their John Deere etc wins.

 

I guess The Masters, with 87 players, shouldn't count for as much as the "full field" Shriner's.

 

I did give credit where it's due (my bold). To reach the final and win is a hell of an achievement for anyone, especially given where TW was a year ago. My point was that I would rank his Major performances up there with this win, as they do have a deeper field than a 30 man event. I am not saying that all full field events are deeper than the playoff finals.

 

I don't see how the bold is giving credit where it is due. It sounded a lot more like you were trying to diminish the accomplishment by referring to it as a "limited field event."

 

No hard feelings and I see your point but you're proving my point by comparing his win to 2nd and T4 placed finishes. And making it a point to highlight field strength or lack there of.

 

If he had won the RBC or Valero would we be seeing these comments about the field strength? Maybe. Maybe not. Definitely not to this degree.

 

It is a misconception that a 30 player field is a weakish field. Most people aren't aware that there are very few tournaments on Tour where you have 30 of the best players in the world in attendance.

 

If you value quality over quantity, it is not even a remotely limited field.

 

I said it was a shallower field than a Major. I qualified the statement. You can keep trying to read that I was saying the Tour Championship is not as significant as the Valero Open, but that was not what was written, and also not a statement I would agree with in any case.

[straightshot7]

I said it was a shallower field than a Major. I qualified the statement. You can keep trying to read that I was saying the Tour Championship is not as significant as the Valero Open, but that was not what was written, and also not a statement I would agree with in any case.

 

1. You never said it was a "shallower field than a Major". You called it a "limited field event", and I think you clearly feel it's a below average field. That's all I was trying to get you to own. Otherwise why say it's equal to 2nd place and T4 finishes and start the statement with "I am not taking away Tiger's achievement"...that's like "No offense, but..." : )

2. I never read or said that you said the Tour Championship "is not as significant as the Valero Open".

3. I probably looked way too deeply into your statements and for that I apologize.

[Bingo1976]

I said it was a shallower field than a Major. I qualified the statement. You can keep trying to read that I was saying the Tour Championship is not as significant as the Valero Open, but that was not what was written, and also not a statement I would agree with in any case.

 

1. You never said it was a "shallower field than a Major". You called it a "limited field event", and I think you clearly feel it's a below average field. That's all I was trying to get you to own. Otherwise why say it's equal to 2nd place and T4 finishes and start the statement with "I am not taking away Tiger's achievement"...that's like "No offense, but..." : )

2. I never read or said that you said the Tour Championship "is not as significant as the Valero Open".

3. I probably looked way too deeply into your statements and for that I apologize.

 

1. I am not saying that at all, which is why I clearly compared it to his performance in 2 Majors. Winning a Major vs The Tour Championship is harder. Getting to the Tour Championship is arguably tougher...

2. That wasn't how I read it, but it's not what I said, so on that we align

3. No problem, it's all good!

 

And lastly, I am neither a hater or a fanboi of TW. What he has done so far in terms of recovery is pretty spectacular. It will be interesting to see how he carries this momentum forward into 2019. I'd say he must be 50:50 to win a major - I'll pick Pebble Beach in 2019 as his likely win.

[Cool Runnings]

Shilgy

"So you think Els and company were actually "afraid" of Tiger? Versus Rahm is just a fan? Lol."

 

Just think a little deeper about your opening line above… Rahm was a child who likely had idolising pictures of Tiger on his wall when growing up. Els in comparison was slightly older than Tiger and viewed Tiger as a direct competitor and threat - so completely different. I can safely say Els didn't have any fan/idolising posters of Tiger on his wall. Els perception of Tiger were also formed through multiple direct experiences of being beaten by him which would naturally leave some form of competitive scar tissue. Also, there are many many older pros from the Els/Tiger era who've openly stated they were often 'fearful' of a prowling Tiger. Today we hear the exact OPPOSITE from these fearless young guns, they have ZERO years of competitive scar tissue compared to Els & Co from the previous era and todays young guns openly want to play with and beat Tiger at his very best, and many of them have this season and recent years.

 

The dynamics between how both Rahm & Els grew up viewing Tiger then/today are worlds apart for the reasons and dynamics outlined. I do agree both Rahm & Els likely hold a common 'respect' for Tiger the golfer and his achievements, which is normal and natural.

 

Cmon, you should know this stuff.

this is like looking at a penny and saying you see heads and I see tails. Ernie and Company as you said were beat down(your phrase competitive scar tissue) by him for years and became intimidated. Intimidated, fearful, idolized, they all result in the same thing on the golf course. Belief that if they acknowledge the issue tiger will beat them.

 

"this is like looking at a penny and saying you see heads and I see tails".… what I detailed above is the historical reality of how Rahm & Els have come to gain their perspectives on Tiger with one common link of respect for his playing record.

 

What isn't debatable (if one has even a primitive understanding of psychology) is the RESULT & manner that Rahm BEAT Tiger. Not only this undeniable FACT but doing so in a such an impressive manner oozing confidence in an Alpha-dog tone. Rahm's on the "golf course" performance was the exact OPPOSITE of a player "fearful" of his playing competitor. RESULTS & FACTS don't lie my friend.

 

Here's another layer of evidence further disproving your clearly biased theory.

 

Jon Rahm - Interview post Ryder Cup singles match after beating Tiger.

–––––––

"I played arguably the best golf of my life, particularly the last hole. I hit a perfect drive, wedge shot and then to make that putt, to be honest I didn't see the ball go in, I just knew it was going in."

–––––––

 

Again, is that the evidence of play & mindset of someone "fearful" of Tiger? As I said above, if one has even a primitive understanding of psychology the answer is OF COURSE NOT.

 

But please carry on ignoring these facts if it makes you sleep better at night ;)

 

Disagree completely. Alpha dogs don't make this statement " I told myself not to watch his shots , not to look him in the eye , just head down play my game ".

 

That's what a guy does to try to bandaid his mind to face an alpha dog. You've got it backwards.

 

Rahm soothed his fear and beat tiger. Sure. A 42 year old snaggle toothed Cat. Could he have kept the pee from running down his leg vs the 22 year old version ? Lol. We both know the answer. Rahm isnt dumb. Hedidwhat hadtobe done to win. But it's similar to holding your nose to swim or closing your eyes in a horror flick. He didn't look so as to not trigger his flight reflex.

Once again, if you know anything about psychology (and this is my field of expertise), when a person/player who openly admits to being a boyhood fan of another person/player (as Jon did with Tiger), his comments you highlight are that of a professional explaining his STRATEGY to WIN (and a widely used strategy in case you didn’t know) of keeping Jon focused on HIS game (which includes minimising the openly admitted FAN part of Jon) so to NOT get caught up in Tiger’s game.

As I then went on to explain (and I’ll repeat here again)… take this verbal strategy of Jon’s and apply with the other verbal comments when Jon explained (immediately post round) how he was thinking/feeling in the HEAT OF BATTLE. Jon’s mindset, thoughts and internal dialogue were those of a player INSPIRED not restricted by “fear” .

This INSPIRED performance from Jon can be corroborated not just by his words, thoughts, internal dialogue revealed in the heat of battle, but also his PHYSIOLOGY in the heat of battle and also the tone & calibre of PERFORMANCE and also the RESULT.

All these facts & results clearly demonstrate Jon was INSPIRED by being paired with Tiger which fyi are the OPPOSITE traits of being fearful. To try and spin these self explanatory FACTS & RESULTS it any other way only demonstrates a clear lack of knowledge in even the basics of human & sporting psychology… and/or an unhealthy bias towards Tiger so facts & results then don’t matter.

[Cool Runnings]

Shilgy

"So you think Els and company were actually "afraid" of Tiger? Versus Rahm is just a fan? Lol."

 

Just think a little deeper about your opening line above… Rahm was a child who likely had idolising pictures of Tiger on his wall when growing up. Els in comparison was slightly older than Tiger and viewed Tiger as a direct competitor and threat - so completely different. I can safely say Els didn't have any fan/idolising posters of Tiger on his wall. Els perception of Tiger were also formed through multiple direct experiences of being beaten by him which would naturally leave some form of competitive scar tissue. Also, there are many many older pros from the Els/Tiger era who've openly stated they were often 'fearful' of a prowling Tiger. Today we hear the exact OPPOSITE from these fearless young guns, they have ZERO years of competitive scar tissue compared to Els & Co from the previous era and todays young guns openly want to play with and beat Tiger at his very best, and many of them have this season and recent years.

 

The dynamics between how both Rahm & Els grew up viewing Tiger then/today are worlds apart for the reasons and dynamics outlined. I do agree both Rahm & Els likely hold a common 'respect' for Tiger the golfer and his achievements, which is normal and natural.

 

Cmon, you should know this stuff.

this is like looking at a penny and saying you see heads and I see tails. Ernie and Company as you said were beat down(your phrase competitive scar tissue) by him for years and became intimidated. Intimidated, fearful, idolized, they all result in the same thing on the golf course. Belief that if they acknowledge the issue tiger will beat them.

 

"this is like looking at a penny and saying you see heads and I see tails".… what I detailed above is the historical reality of how Rahm & Els have come to gain their perspectives on Tiger with one common link of respect for his playing record.

 

What isn't debatable (if one has even a primitive understanding of psychology) is the RESULT & manner that Rahm BEAT Tiger. Not only this undeniable FACT but doing so in a such an impressive manner oozing confidence in an Alpha-dog tone. Rahm's on the "golf course" performance was the exact OPPOSITE of a player "fearful" of his playing competitor. RESULTS & FACTS don't lie my friend.

 

Here's another layer of evidence further disproving your clearly biased theory.

 

Jon Rahm - Interview post Ryder Cup singles match after beating Tiger.

–––––––

"I played arguably the best golf of my life, particularly the last hole. I hit a perfect drive, wedge shot and then to make that putt, to be honest I didn't see the ball go in, I just knew it was going in."

–––––––

 

Again, is that the evidence of play & mindset of someone "fearful" of Tiger? As I said above, if one has even a primitive understanding of psychology the answer is OF COURSE NOT.

 

But please carry on ignoring these facts if it makes you sleep better at night ;)

Do the fact that a top 10 professional played well against Woods process he was not fearful, intimidated, awestruck? Okey dokey then.

Keep on trucking cr.

Please read my response above to bladehunter.

[Cool Runnings]

Shilgy

"So you think Els and company were actually "afraid" of Tiger? Versus Rahm is just a fan? Lol."

 

Just think a little deeper about your opening line above… Rahm was a child who likely had idolising pictures of Tiger on his wall when growing up. Els in comparison was slightly older than Tiger and viewed Tiger as a direct competitor and threat - so completely different. I can safely say Els didn't have any fan/idolising posters of Tiger on his wall. Els perception of Tiger were also formed through multiple direct experiences of being beaten by him which would naturally leave some form of competitive scar tissue. Also, there are many many older pros from the Els/Tiger era who've openly stated they were often 'fearful' of a prowling Tiger. Today we hear the exact OPPOSITE from these fearless young guns, they have ZERO years of competitive scar tissue compared to Els & Co from the previous era and todays young guns openly want to play with and beat Tiger at his very best, and many of them have this season and recent years.

 

The dynamics between how both Rahm & Els grew up viewing Tiger then/today are worlds apart for the reasons and dynamics outlined. I do agree both Rahm & Els likely hold a common 'respect' for Tiger the golfer and his achievements, which is normal and natural.

 

Cmon, you should know this stuff.

this is like looking at a penny and saying you see heads and I see tails. Ernie and Company as you said were beat down(your phrase competitive scar tissue) by him for years and became intimidated. Intimidated, fearful, idolized, they all result in the same thing on the golf course. Belief that if they acknowledge the issue tiger will beat them.

 

"this is like looking at a penny and saying you see heads and I see tails".… what I detailed above is the historical reality of how Rahm & Els have come to gain their perspectives on Tiger with one common link of respect for his playing record.

 

What isn't debatable (if one has even a primitive understanding of psychology) is the RESULT & manner that Rahm BEAT Tiger. Not only this undeniable FACT but doing so in a such an impressive manner oozing confidence in an Alpha-dog tone. Rahm's on the "golf course" performance was the exact OPPOSITE of a player "fearful" of his playing competitor. RESULTS & FACTS don't lie my friend.

 

Here's another layer of evidence further disproving your clearly biased theory.

 

Jon Rahm - Interview post Ryder Cup singles match after beating Tiger.

–––––––

"I played arguably the best golf of my life, particularly the last hole. I hit a perfect drive, wedge shot and then to make that putt, to be honest I didn't see the ball go in, I just knew it was going in."

–––––––

 

Again, is that the evidence of play & mindset of someone "fearful" of Tiger? As I said above, if one has even a primitive understanding of psychology the answer is OF COURSE NOT.

 

But please carry on ignoring these facts if it makes you sleep better at night ;)

 

Disagree completely. Alpha dogs don't make this statement " I told myself not to watch his shots , not to look him in the eye , just head down play my game ".

 

That's what a guy does to try to bandaid his mind to face an alpha dog. You've got it backwards.

 

Rahm soothed his fear and beat tiger. Sure. A 42 year old snaggle toothed Cat. Could he have kept the pee from running down his leg vs the 22 year old version ? Lol. We both know the answer. Rahm isnt dumb. Hedidwhat hadtobe done to win. But it's similar to holding your nose to swim or closing your eyes in a horror flick. He didn't look so as to not trigger his flight reflex.

 

Lol, if Rahm was afraid to look at a 42 year old, back fused, 2 year layoff, TW for 17 holes now

 

Imagine what he would do if he played this guy? He wouldn't even come out of the clubhouse ; )

 

Again, as the facts & results demonstrate and prove, Rahm was INSPIRED not “afraid” of playing with Tiger. For more insight please read my response above to bladehunter.

The lengths / lies / delusions many of you fanboys concoct for Tiger makes me laugh ;)

[cdnglf]

I said it was a shallower field than a Major. I qualified the statement. You can keep trying to read that I was saying the Tour Championship is not as significant as the Valero Open, but that was not what was written, and also not a statement I would agree with in any case.

 

1. You never said it was a "shallower field than a Major". You called it a "limited field event", and I think you clearly feel it's a below average field. That's all I was trying to get you to own. Otherwise why say it's equal to 2nd place and T4 finishes and start the statement with "I am not taking away Tiger's achievement"...that's like "No offense, but..." : )

 

WGCs, CIMB, CJ, etc are "limited field events". The TC field is less than half the size, and thus deserves its own term. How about "school bus event", because that's all you need to transport the entire field?

[Cool Runnings]

lol..exactly my point ... Tiger just won the tour championship at maybe 70% of his peak ability... He beat this 'deep field" of young guns for a whole season long marathon save for 1 man as well... as a 8 years away from champions tour eligibility guy, coming off back fusion... Yea.. the fields are deep.... in deep do-do for the short term future

 

A 30-man field is the exact opposite of "deep".

 

Not according to Cool Runnings. That field was more than deep enough to manhandle a broken down, mentally weak, old Tiger Woods. You know, due to todays knowledge and training.

 

However the only true FACT is that they didn't....and Tiger won. And in FACT, Tiger beat most of the top players all year while missing a boatload of fairways.

 

Cool Runnings can argue until he's blue in the face but when an argument is unable to somewhat predict future outcomes, then at some point he will have to admit that his argument is flawed. Or as Cool Runnings would say....FLAWED :-)

 

Cool Runnings: "You know, you can't make pizza with those ingredients while using that oven"

Us: "Well we just did and it tastes amazing"

Cool Runnings: "Ya well uh...you'll see"

Us: (Looking confused with tomato sauce dripping from the side of our mouth)

Actually (and to correct you again), when I’ve spoken about “deep” / depth of fields it’s been about the quality of not just the “top 20” but the other 120 players in a full field that have and can win virtually any event.

For example:

• Patton Kizzire was ranked 236th prior to his first of 2 wins last year.

• Gary Woodland was ranked 53rd before his great win last year.

• Satoshi Kodaira was ranked 46th before his first win last year.

• Webb Simpson was ranked 41st before his amazing win last year.

• Bryson DeChambeau was ranked 38th before his run of 3 brilliant wins last year.

• Francesco Molinari was ranked 33rd before his run of 3 stunning wins last year.

See what I mean…

[Cool Runnings]

"There are plenty of specific shots and instances" but I have to go searching for them? And how exactly do you correlate these shots to his "mental issues" exactly? And not, for example, a mechanical problem with his swing? You make these claims but you can't give us 1 specific example and provide some support for your claim? Stop making it then. It's worthless.

 

Yeah, of course Tiger had to overcome mental challenges. Especially after sitting out for 2 years, coming off a spinal fusion, new swing, etc. My point is that's to be expected and totally normal. When you spoke of Tiger's "mental issues" you made it sound like an ongoing, abnormal problem that they he may or may not be able to overcome. My contention is that he still one of the more mentally strong on Tour. 7 top 10s and 12 top 25s in 18 tournaments (with a win at Tour Champ., 2nd at PGA Championship, T6 at The Open) seems decent for his first year back, no?

 

You make it sound like he's struggling to keep his card.

 

Many players actually perform better on the course than the range? I'm going to have to question your golf literacy if you actually believe this. It's two totally different animals, and an apples to oranges comparison. But just in terms of general ball striking, no above average Tour pro struggles on the range. I promise you they'd all love to carry the care free mentality they have on the range, to the course. I think Trevino once said that if he could bring his range swing to the course he'd be #1.

 

Frankly I don't think your Tiger range to Tiger course comparison is all that accurate either. Did you watch all of his range sessions? How? And we saw Tiger hit plenty of fairways off the first tee this year.

 

Again, you've presented no concrete evidence that Tiger had mental issues that were "holding him back in key pressure moments". At least not beyond what every golfer faces.

 

Not one piece of empirical evidence. You just keep repeating the same "theories" over and over and over and over [and over] with no support.

 

Stop being so lazy… the media and reporting on his on course problems being “mental” are fairly common place. Tip: Research Jamie Diaz highlighting Tiger’s mental issues stating Tiger is “struggling between the ears”.

 

Oh if the "media" says it, it must be true! Jamie Diaz said it? Why didn't you say so earlier...that's iron clad proof right there.

 

This is what your argument has come to...citing Jamie Diaz' opinion as evidence for Tiger's "mental issues".

 

If I ever claimed that any player had "mental issues" preventing them from winning, I would at least be able to articulate a decent explanation and provide some evidence for my statement. I definitely wouldn't double down after that player WON. LOL.

 

Lazy? Telling me to go find support for your argument is lazy. Comical really.

 

You've got nothing Cool Runnings. I rest my case. :D

Actually… (and correctly) I say you’re “lazy” because I’ve ALREADY documented and highlighted MULTIPLE examples of Tiger’s mental frailties throughout the year. Again, don’t be so lazy, I’ve done the work already so I’m not repeating it, especially for someone that is so biased to their own insecure story that they’re too lazy to challenge what I’ve already highlighted.

And when I quote Jamie Diaz with his supporting comments on Tiger’s “mental issues” I do so because he’s one of the most respected golf journalists today while he’s also a known big Tiger fan. At least I’m able to bring in an outside opinion of someone that is well informed, highly respected and (the most important distinction, ready) and who’s far more CREDIBLE even with a rational bias for Tiger as opposed to your clearly irrational bias.

Mic drop.