Tiger is the best golfer we've ever seen, but it's still impossible to compare this generation with past generations....especially in golf. The technology today and even the courses today are night and day. When Jack and Arnie and Gary Player were at their peak the average course they played was about 6,600 yards...now it's 7.300
0
Tiger is the best golfer we've ever seen, but it's still impossible to compare this generation with past generations....especially in golf. The technology today and even the courses today are night and day. When Jack and Arnie and Gary Player were at their peak the average course they played was about 6,600 yards...now it's 7.300
Tiger is the best golfer we've ever seen, but it's still impossible to compare this generation with past generations....especially in golf. The technology today and even the courses today are night and day. When Jack and Arnie and Gary Player were at their peak the average course they played was about 6,600 yards...now it's 7.300
It is 7300 because of the golf clubs and balls now. 6600 with the technology then and 7300 with technology now is the same. I cant stand Woods but I wouldn't argue he is best in last 25-30 years but for anyone to say Jack wouldn't have won as many majors in this day is absurd. Agree comparing generations cant be done.
Lieh Nole
0
Quote Originally Posted by CMJohnson1:
Tiger is the best golfer we've ever seen, but it's still impossible to compare this generation with past generations....especially in golf. The technology today and even the courses today are night and day. When Jack and Arnie and Gary Player were at their peak the average course they played was about 6,600 yards...now it's 7.300
It is 7300 because of the golf clubs and balls now. 6600 with the technology then and 7300 with technology now is the same. I cant stand Woods but I wouldn't argue he is best in last 25-30 years but for anyone to say Jack wouldn't have won as many majors in this day is absurd. Agree comparing generations cant be done.
By some of the comments i guess reid is the best golfer in the world..... Everyone else that hasnt won this year is all done.. Tigers Best is BY FAR better than everyone elses best still. And as long as thats the case he is the favorite to win every tourney he enters. Like Feherty said when tiger plays well nobody else can win. I actually think tiger snags a major this year and if thats the case look out, the floodgates could open. At this stage of tigers career his next major will b like his 1st. He gotta get that monkey of his back. even tho tiger has had injuries, with todays technology and fitness and diet programs tiger will play and at a high level til mid 40s minimum. I think he will be right around jacks record. Even if he falls short he is still the greatest most dominant golfer ever. With todays talent and the fields being so deep its absolutely insane what he has accomplished. He won 5 times last yr and people say hes all done lolol. Everyone knows if jack was in this era he wouldnt even b close to 18 majors. Back then u worried about a handful of golfers and that was it. Now in every major theres about 60 guys that can win
This is one of the most ludicrous statements I've ever read on Covers.com... And that's really saying something.
I'm a huge Tiger fan. Always have been and always will be. However, the competition that he so easily demolished in his prime is not even close to the competition that Jack had. Arnold Palmer, Johhny Miller, Tom Watson, Ray Floyd, Tom Wieskopf, Billy Casper, Lee Trevino, Gary Player... And that's just off the top of my head, I'm sure I'm forgetting a couple. On the other hand, here's the full and complete list of Tiger's competition over the years; Phil Mickelson, Ernie Els. Short list, huh?
0
Quote Originally Posted by KobezKing:
By some of the comments i guess reid is the best golfer in the world..... Everyone else that hasnt won this year is all done.. Tigers Best is BY FAR better than everyone elses best still. And as long as thats the case he is the favorite to win every tourney he enters. Like Feherty said when tiger plays well nobody else can win. I actually think tiger snags a major this year and if thats the case look out, the floodgates could open. At this stage of tigers career his next major will b like his 1st. He gotta get that monkey of his back. even tho tiger has had injuries, with todays technology and fitness and diet programs tiger will play and at a high level til mid 40s minimum. I think he will be right around jacks record. Even if he falls short he is still the greatest most dominant golfer ever. With todays talent and the fields being so deep its absolutely insane what he has accomplished. He won 5 times last yr and people say hes all done lolol. Everyone knows if jack was in this era he wouldnt even b close to 18 majors. Back then u worried about a handful of golfers and that was it. Now in every major theres about 60 guys that can win
This is one of the most ludicrous statements I've ever read on Covers.com... And that's really saying something.
I'm a huge Tiger fan. Always have been and always will be. However, the competition that he so easily demolished in his prime is not even close to the competition that Jack had. Arnold Palmer, Johhny Miller, Tom Watson, Ray Floyd, Tom Wieskopf, Billy Casper, Lee Trevino, Gary Player... And that's just off the top of my head, I'm sure I'm forgetting a couple. On the other hand, here's the full and complete list of Tiger's competition over the years; Phil Mickelson, Ernie Els. Short list, huh?
This is one of the most ludicrous statements I've ever read on Covers.com... And that's really saying something.
I'm a huge Tiger fan. Always have been and always will be. However, the competition that he so easily demolished in his prime is not even close to the competition that Jack had. Arnold Palmer, Johhny Miller, Tom Watson, Ray Floyd, Tom Wieskopf, Billy Casper, Lee Trevino, Gary Player... And that's just off the top of my head, I'm sure I'm forgetting a couple. On the other hand, here's the full and complete list of Tiger's competition over the years; Phil Mickelson, Ernie Els. Short list, huh?
The reason thats all you have off the top of your head is because thats about it for competition in Jack's era... May be hard to compare era's as far as golfers go but in NO WAY were Jack's field as deep in talent as are todays fields... NOT even close.. In Jack's era the fields may have been more top heavy but from top to bottom not EVEN CLOSE ... Golf has become an International sport today not just Gary Player and a handful of foreign golfers.. In Jacks day golf was still a rich man's game for the most part played by the elite and their kids.. Not today not even close.. LOL in Arnies day if you made the cut you made 300 dollars for finishing last.. Jack was right after that.. Sooooooooo much more talent out on the tour today not even an arguement for those in the know... Johhny Miller claims there is ten fold the talent on tour now then when he played.. He should know have been there done that.. Of course you have better understanding of the situation then Johhny because you shoot 90 at your local muni... I understand....
0
Quote Originally Posted by FadeOnly:
This is one of the most ludicrous statements I've ever read on Covers.com... And that's really saying something.
I'm a huge Tiger fan. Always have been and always will be. However, the competition that he so easily demolished in his prime is not even close to the competition that Jack had. Arnold Palmer, Johhny Miller, Tom Watson, Ray Floyd, Tom Wieskopf, Billy Casper, Lee Trevino, Gary Player... And that's just off the top of my head, I'm sure I'm forgetting a couple. On the other hand, here's the full and complete list of Tiger's competition over the years; Phil Mickelson, Ernie Els. Short list, huh?
The reason thats all you have off the top of your head is because thats about it for competition in Jack's era... May be hard to compare era's as far as golfers go but in NO WAY were Jack's field as deep in talent as are todays fields... NOT even close.. In Jack's era the fields may have been more top heavy but from top to bottom not EVEN CLOSE ... Golf has become an International sport today not just Gary Player and a handful of foreign golfers.. In Jacks day golf was still a rich man's game for the most part played by the elite and their kids.. Not today not even close.. LOL in Arnies day if you made the cut you made 300 dollars for finishing last.. Jack was right after that.. Sooooooooo much more talent out on the tour today not even an arguement for those in the know... Johhny Miller claims there is ten fold the talent on tour now then when he played.. He should know have been there done that.. Of course you have better understanding of the situation then Johhny because you shoot 90 at your local muni... I understand....
The reason thats all you have off the top of your head is because thats about it for competition in Jack's era... May be hard to compare era's as far as golfers go but in NO WAY were Jack's field as deep in talent as are todays fields... NOT even close.. In Jack's era the fields may have been more top heavy but from top to bottom not EVEN CLOSE ... Golf has become an International sport today not just Gary Player and a handful of foreign golfers.. In Jacks day golf was still a rich man's game for the most part played by the elite and their kids.. Not today not even close.. LOL in Arnies day if you made the cut you made 300 dollars for finishing last.. Jack was right after that.. Sooooooooo much more talent out on the tour today not even an arguement for those in the know... Johhny Miller claims there is ten fold the talent on tour now then when he played.. He should know have been there done that.. Of course you have better understanding of the situation then Johhny because you shoot 90 at your local muni... I understand....
You truly believe that Patrick Reed is in the top 5 golfers in the world, don't you? He said so himself, it must be true.
Are you also insinuating that recent winners Steven Bowditch, Chesson Hadley, Matt Every, and John Senden are of the same caliber as Tiger Woods?
0
Quote Originally Posted by ArtSchlichterJr:
The reason thats all you have off the top of your head is because thats about it for competition in Jack's era... May be hard to compare era's as far as golfers go but in NO WAY were Jack's field as deep in talent as are todays fields... NOT even close.. In Jack's era the fields may have been more top heavy but from top to bottom not EVEN CLOSE ... Golf has become an International sport today not just Gary Player and a handful of foreign golfers.. In Jacks day golf was still a rich man's game for the most part played by the elite and their kids.. Not today not even close.. LOL in Arnies day if you made the cut you made 300 dollars for finishing last.. Jack was right after that.. Sooooooooo much more talent out on the tour today not even an arguement for those in the know... Johhny Miller claims there is ten fold the talent on tour now then when he played.. He should know have been there done that.. Of course you have better understanding of the situation then Johhny because you shoot 90 at your local muni... I understand....
You truly believe that Patrick Reed is in the top 5 golfers in the world, don't you? He said so himself, it must be true.
Are you also insinuating that recent winners Steven Bowditch, Chesson Hadley, Matt Every, and John Senden are of the same caliber as Tiger Woods?
The bottom line is as i mentioned in another thread a Major without Tiger or any golf tournament for that matter just doesn't seem like much of a golf tournament not a fan of his but as far as i am concerned this Masters will suck without Tiger there lurking as always. If Phil the thrill or Tiger are not in golf tournaments anymore i usually don't watch them. PLAIN AND SIMPLE.
0
The bottom line is as i mentioned in another thread a Major without Tiger or any golf tournament for that matter just doesn't seem like much of a golf tournament not a fan of his but as far as i am concerned this Masters will suck without Tiger there lurking as always. If Phil the thrill or Tiger are not in golf tournaments anymore i usually don't watch them. PLAIN AND SIMPLE.
Tiger is the best golfer we've ever seen, but it's still impossible to compare this generation with past generations....especially in golf. The technology today and even the courses today are night and day. When Jack and Arnie and Gary Player were at their peak the average course they played was about 6,600 yards...now it's 7.300
They hit the new drivers 320-340 yards compared to the wood/persimmon hitting it 265-285. That uses up a lot of that yardage on 14 holes given 4 par 3's per course. Fourteen holes times 60 yards in driving = 840 yds so basically the same course.
0
Quote Originally Posted by CMJohnson1:
Tiger is the best golfer we've ever seen, but it's still impossible to compare this generation with past generations....especially in golf. The technology today and even the courses today are night and day. When Jack and Arnie and Gary Player were at their peak the average course they played was about 6,600 yards...now it's 7.300
They hit the new drivers 320-340 yards compared to the wood/persimmon hitting it 265-285. That uses up a lot of that yardage on 14 holes given 4 par 3's per course. Fourteen holes times 60 yards in driving = 840 yds so basically the same course.
I guess Tiger really is done!!! He can't stay healthy enough to compete. He just had back surgery and he has injuries left and right. Doesn't matter if he has fine tuned his swing or his putting, he can't compete if he's always injured.
0
I guess Tiger really is done!!! He can't stay healthy enough to compete. He just had back surgery and he has injuries left and right. Doesn't matter if he has fine tuned his swing or his putting, he can't compete if he's always injured.
There are 5 active golfers that have won 2+ majors other than Tiger Woods.
In Jack Nicklaus' "prime" (1960-1977..17 years being the same length as Tiger has played now) there were 10 golfers that won 2+ majors.
Numbers never lie. There might be more players out there that have a chance to win...but some would argue that means the Tour isn't as strong right now that there aren't clear cut favorites.
0
There are 5 active golfers that have won 2+ majors other than Tiger Woods.
In Jack Nicklaus' "prime" (1960-1977..17 years being the same length as Tiger has played now) there were 10 golfers that won 2+ majors.
Numbers never lie. There might be more players out there that have a chance to win...but some would argue that means the Tour isn't as strong right now that there aren't clear cut favorites.
The difference back then is there was really only a handful of players that were capable of winning the tournament. Today there is literally realistically 70 guys that are capable of winning. Back then it was like they rotated majors. If jack didnt win it was arnie if arnie didnt it was player if player didnt it was watson cuz those were the only giys thay could win. Unlike today where the fields are soooo deep and the talent is off the charts. Just like in every sport the athletes are better today. Like bill russel or jerry west, if they played in todays nba they would get owned. Could u imagine jerry west goin up against lebron???? Bill russel played center at 6"8. Now we have wing players that dribble like guards at 7 ft. Athletes have evolved and are so much better than 30-40 yrs ago in every sport
0
The difference back then is there was really only a handful of players that were capable of winning the tournament. Today there is literally realistically 70 guys that are capable of winning. Back then it was like they rotated majors. If jack didnt win it was arnie if arnie didnt it was player if player didnt it was watson cuz those were the only giys thay could win. Unlike today where the fields are soooo deep and the talent is off the charts. Just like in every sport the athletes are better today. Like bill russel or jerry west, if they played in todays nba they would get owned. Could u imagine jerry west goin up against lebron???? Bill russel played center at 6"8. Now we have wing players that dribble like guards at 7 ft. Athletes have evolved and are so much better than 30-40 yrs ago in every sport
The difference back then is there was really only a handful of players that were capable of winning the tournament. Today there is literally realistically 70 guys that are capable of winning. Back then it was like they rotated majors. If jack didnt win it was arnie if arnie didnt it was player if player didnt it was watson cuz those were the only giys thay could win. Unlike today where the fields are soooo deep and the talent is off the charts.
Arnold Palmer won his first major in 1958. Jack Nicklaus won his last major in 1986. Let's look at that 28 year span. That's 112 majors (not sure if any of them were cancelled). During that span, there were 29 different major winners who grabbed their only major win. There were also a small handful of others that won 2 or 3 majors in that span. Charles Coody, Tony Lema, Bill Rogers, Jay Hebert... Chances are you've never heard of most of these guys. Just a few one time major winners on the same list as todays' one time major winners.
0
Quote Originally Posted by KobezKing:
The difference back then is there was really only a handful of players that were capable of winning the tournament. Today there is literally realistically 70 guys that are capable of winning. Back then it was like they rotated majors. If jack didnt win it was arnie if arnie didnt it was player if player didnt it was watson cuz those were the only giys thay could win. Unlike today where the fields are soooo deep and the talent is off the charts.
Arnold Palmer won his first major in 1958. Jack Nicklaus won his last major in 1986. Let's look at that 28 year span. That's 112 majors (not sure if any of them were cancelled). During that span, there were 29 different major winners who grabbed their only major win. There were also a small handful of others that won 2 or 3 majors in that span. Charles Coody, Tony Lema, Bill Rogers, Jay Hebert... Chances are you've never heard of most of these guys. Just a few one time major winners on the same list as todays' one time major winners.
The reason thats all you have off the top of your head is because thats about it for competition in Jack's era... May be hard to compare era's as far as golfers go but in NO WAY were Jack's field as deep in talent as are todays fields... NOT even close.. In Jack's era the fields may have been more top heavy but from top to bottom not EVEN CLOSE ... Golf has become an International sport today not just Gary Player and a handful of foreign golfers.. In Jacks day golf was still a rich man's game for the most part played by the elite and their kids.. Not today not even close.. LOL in Arnies day if you made the cut you made 300 dollars for finishing last.. Jack was right after that.. Sooooooooo much more talent out on the tour today not even an arguement for those in the know... Johhny Miller claims there is ten fold the talent on tour now then when he played.. He should know have been there done that.. Of course you have better understanding of the situation then Johhny because you shoot 90 at your local muni... I understand....
This from the same guy whose prediction of the superbowl was so lame. How was that again...something about a stop and go route? What an idiot clown you are. And you dare to compare golfers of the past to today...you cannot even compare lunch meat with that tiny brain of yours.
0
Quote Originally Posted by ArtSchlichterJr:
The reason thats all you have off the top of your head is because thats about it for competition in Jack's era... May be hard to compare era's as far as golfers go but in NO WAY were Jack's field as deep in talent as are todays fields... NOT even close.. In Jack's era the fields may have been more top heavy but from top to bottom not EVEN CLOSE ... Golf has become an International sport today not just Gary Player and a handful of foreign golfers.. In Jacks day golf was still a rich man's game for the most part played by the elite and their kids.. Not today not even close.. LOL in Arnies day if you made the cut you made 300 dollars for finishing last.. Jack was right after that.. Sooooooooo much more talent out on the tour today not even an arguement for those in the know... Johhny Miller claims there is ten fold the talent on tour now then when he played.. He should know have been there done that.. Of course you have better understanding of the situation then Johhny because you shoot 90 at your local muni... I understand....
This from the same guy whose prediction of the superbowl was so lame. How was that again...something about a stop and go route? What an idiot clown you are. And you dare to compare golfers of the past to today...you cannot even compare lunch meat with that tiny brain of yours.
This from the same guy whose prediction of the superbowl was so lame. How was that again...something about a stop and go route? What an idiot clown you are. And you dare to compare golfers of the past to today...you cannot even compare lunch meat with that tiny brain of yours.
your life must really suck to have to come in a golf forum and talk smack it must suck to be you
0
Quote Originally Posted by lancer89074:
This from the same guy whose prediction of the superbowl was so lame. How was that again...something about a stop and go route? What an idiot clown you are. And you dare to compare golfers of the past to today...you cannot even compare lunch meat with that tiny brain of yours.
your life must really suck to have to come in a golf forum and talk smack it must suck to be you
I have always been a huge Tiger fan.... *and I would think he finds a way to win another major or two..
BUT......
It's about time we BEGAN thinking of Tiger as (most of us) do other athletes that appeared 'superhuman'... *also (was) a huge Lance Armstrong fan
His huge increase in muscle mass > association with convicted cheaters > associated numerous soft tissue injuries > personality typical of testosterone / PED therapy = a likely cheater
Tiger has a classic ectomorphic frame (like mine)...which is very slow to increase in mass and strength....definition /endurance yes *in 1996 he was 6-2 / 158 with a 29 inch waist...by 2007 (after a few years of training with low weight / high repetition )....he was 185 lbs with a 31 inch waist....meaning he added 30 lbs of MUSCLE while not training with heavy weights .....and could bench press between 315 -350 or so.....OKEY DOKEY
note: he admitted to not liking the bench press ...and seldom trained hard in that area......he benched 315 for a Nike press release and has reported to bench 375 or so ..
Bringing in the Canadian doctor (Galea) who specializes in HGH therapy .....to his home in Florida to help him recover from surgery is especially shaky.....plenty of US physicians also do the blood spinning technique
NOTE: the PGA started their anti-doping on July 1, 2008 at the AT&T National...Tiger (after playing with the bad knee since July 2007) .....conveniently chose that weekend to have his surgery....giving him ample time to get the drugs out of his system and recover 'naturally'....all the while (since 2006 or so) in full support of this policy... *The PGA cannot afford to have Tiger... or any other player... fail a drug test ...so of course all 'support' a stringent drug policy... so the fact he supports this is meaningless
The key benefit is using PED's to a golfer is the ability to train harder and recover faster...which also fits in with his remarkable consistency at that time...and the reported 12 hour days he put in every day of the week....lifting 5-6 days / week...which no golfer does nor do most professional weight lifters...
The impediment to action advances action - what stands in the way becomes the way.
0
I have always been a huge Tiger fan.... *and I would think he finds a way to win another major or two..
BUT......
It's about time we BEGAN thinking of Tiger as (most of us) do other athletes that appeared 'superhuman'... *also (was) a huge Lance Armstrong fan
His huge increase in muscle mass > association with convicted cheaters > associated numerous soft tissue injuries > personality typical of testosterone / PED therapy = a likely cheater
Tiger has a classic ectomorphic frame (like mine)...which is very slow to increase in mass and strength....definition /endurance yes *in 1996 he was 6-2 / 158 with a 29 inch waist...by 2007 (after a few years of training with low weight / high repetition )....he was 185 lbs with a 31 inch waist....meaning he added 30 lbs of MUSCLE while not training with heavy weights .....and could bench press between 315 -350 or so.....OKEY DOKEY
note: he admitted to not liking the bench press ...and seldom trained hard in that area......he benched 315 for a Nike press release and has reported to bench 375 or so ..
Bringing in the Canadian doctor (Galea) who specializes in HGH therapy .....to his home in Florida to help him recover from surgery is especially shaky.....plenty of US physicians also do the blood spinning technique
NOTE: the PGA started their anti-doping on July 1, 2008 at the AT&T National...Tiger (after playing with the bad knee since July 2007) .....conveniently chose that weekend to have his surgery....giving him ample time to get the drugs out of his system and recover 'naturally'....all the while (since 2006 or so) in full support of this policy... *The PGA cannot afford to have Tiger... or any other player... fail a drug test ...so of course all 'support' a stringent drug policy... so the fact he supports this is meaningless
The key benefit is using PED's to a golfer is the ability to train harder and recover faster...which also fits in with his remarkable consistency at that time...and the reported 12 hour days he put in every day of the week....lifting 5-6 days / week...which no golfer does nor do most professional weight lifters...
If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on
this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so.It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly.Covers does not provide
any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in
your relevant locality.Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it.As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner
of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.
Hot Forum Topics
