Tiger does it again.

Along with the rest of the human race, I have spent the last 12 months truly marvelling at Tiger Woods.

We all knew he was good. But he's just stepped up to reeeeeeeeally good in my estimations (that's on my official scale!). However, I have got to thinking about his domination recently.

I'm not talking about the amount of wins. As the man himself says, concentrate on winning and the rest is taken care of. I'm talking about his scores. In the Fedex Cup playoffs, his scoring average has been just over 65. That's over 12 rounds. That's fantastic scoring. Why can't anyone else replicate that? Surely, he means that if you take care of scoring, winning takes care of itself?

Whilst I recognise his achievements and hail them (I am a big Tiger fan), what I am not doing, however, is falling into the trap of thinking he is untouchable. His fellow peers seem to have resigned to the fact that, if he's in the field, they would be lucky to win.

To me, that's giving it to him before a ball is even hit.

He is a human man. Over time, he has learnt to control his emotions, control his golf swing, improve his body, get up and down from anywhere and never stop trying. Are these attributes that nobody else can learn?

No.

Is it easy to do?

No.

But, everyone can learn to do this. There is not one thing that Tiger does that cannot be learned. The only barrier to not being able to learn to do something is self-doubt. Tiger does have one perceived "advantage" over everyone. He's been geared to improve since he was 2 years old. Nobody can go back in time to start again when they were a toddler. But, if a man believes he needed to swing a club before being able to walk in order to be as good as Tiger, he has already conceded the fight.

A pushy parent may decide now that his son is going to be the next Tiger, but even then it may not work out. We'll have to wait and see. And we want a challenger now, for Tiger, not when he's done and gone home.

For a grown adult though, the hardest thing to learn or teach ones self, out of all Tigers attributes, is his brain power/mental approach/tactical brain or whatever you want to call it.

But I believe it can be done. It probably takes a long time, but if others on the PGA Tour believe that it can be done, then they can catch him. They already have the physical skills required.

I'm sure Tiger is loving the fact that he is dominating his profession. It validates his hard work. But I wonder how much he wants someone to step out of the chasing pack and challenge him regularly?

In the time of Jack Nicklaus, you had Tom Watson, Gary Player, Arnold Palmer and later, Lee Trevino.

Between them, the 4 direct competitors of Nicklaus amassed 30 Majors (majors seem to be a favoured way of measuring the elite golfers success, so we'll go with that).

Tigers peers? Well, if you include all major winners that are still playing competitively (Mickelson, Furyk, Els, Singh, Daly, Goosen, Olazabal, Beem, Cabrera, Calcavecchia, Campbell, Curtis, Hamilton, Harrington, Johnson, Lawrie, Leonard, Micheel, Love III, Toms, Ogilvy, Johnson and Weir) they have amassed 31 between them.

That's 31 between 23 players in Tigers Era, as opposed to 30 between 4 against Nicklaus.

Now, it could be argued that the standard has risen so much that more players are winning majors now than yester-year. But how do you account for Tiger Woods? And it isn't like nobody else won at least one major between 1962 and 1986 is it?

Despite all these other players winning majors today, the closest anyone can get to Tigers major haul is 3 (Els, Mickelson and Singh). The closest in Nicklaus' time? Gary Player with 9.

For the record, Watson got 8, Palmer got 7 and Trevino got 6.

For the purposes of argument, let's say that Tiger wins his last major aged 46 (the same as Nicklaus). The three major contenders (Els, Mickelson and Singh) have 15 years (60 majors) to get another 21 majors between them. That equates to any of them winning 1 or 2 majors per year for 15 straight years to give Tiger the challenge that Nicklaus had. And they're all older than Tiger. Singh is even creeping closer to the Senior Tour. So that leaves two "challengers".

Unless the top level players get their finger out soon, Tiger will be unchallengable.

Despite all the promise the younger crop have either shown, or been hyped to show, there has been nothing of note to say that Tiger should be worried in the near future. Of the exhuastive list of 23 active major winners above, the youngest is either Johnson or Weir. Of 23 active major winners, well over half of them (16) have only won one.

Even Bobby Jones collection of 13 majors was challenged in the same period by Walter Haagen's 11 and Gene Sarazen's 7.

I submit to one and all that it is not credible to state that the overall standard has improved greatly since the era of Nicklaus et al. If that were the case, more players would contend and win majors more often and we wouldn't have one man way out infront of the rest.

Back in the day, it appears there were 4 men that displayed the determination and drive to continue winning majors. Ok, Nicklaus outstripped the next best by 9 majors, but I doubt very much whether any one of the other three competitors in todays game can win another 6, unless they get the afore mentioned finger out of their proverbials before the Masters in April. Even then, it would still mean that there are another 54 majors in which Tiger can collate a massive record, without ever being severly tested by anyone other than himself.

If it is possible for one human man to have a season scoring average of 67.79 from 16 events (the next best is 69.42 in 21 events with Mickelson), then another man can. This A N Other just needs to find what it is between the ears that separates consistent winners from also rans and apply it, not be scared of applying it, not be scared of coming up short. If he comes up short, he must change something inside of himself so that he doesn't come up short. This is Tigers regimen. This has to be someone elses.

It also appears that a golfer does not have to play lots of events to score this well. 16 events in 2007 for Tiger? That's not that many. Go ask Charles Howell III with 22 events and an average of 70.63.

After all that, I am by no means stating that nobody is trying. All of the guys on Tour are trying their hearts out physically and mentally. The problem is they are trying the wrong things for themselves. They must be. If they were doing the right things, they'd challenge Tiger.

If and when they find the right thing, they will look at Tiger in a different light. They'll think he can be challenged. I think Rory Sabbatini had a good verbal attitude to Tiger recently. He openly stated that he thought Tiger could be beat. Then Tiger went out and crushed him and everyone else at Firestone. Maybe that verbal suggestion was the beginning of Mr Sabbatini trying to believe that Tiger is beatable. If so, he could be on the right track, but it takes more than saying it in a press conference, and it takes more than trying to believe it. Simply saying it to yourself is not enough. It needs to be said with club in hand, and the word "try" must be removed from the vocabulary. Other players need to believe it enough, all the time. If any player can do that, he will challenge Tiger.

If you take care of scoring, winning takes care of itself.

__________________
Luke: I don't believe it!
Yoda: That is why you fail.

You bring up some excellent point, Neil.

And I will stand here and tell you (and everybody else) that Tiger is certainly the greatest golfer of all time to date. Yes, better than Hogan. Yes, better than Jones. Yes, better than Nicklaus. Yes, better than Miller. Yes, better than Palmer. Yes, better than Player. Yes, better than Snead.

Why do I say this? How can I compare across eras? I do not believe, for a second, that the guys on Tour are worse than the aforementioned. There are plenty that say that there's no-one to challenge Tiger, while the others had to contend with others to do what they did. I purport that perhaps to make the comparison equal, Tiger needs to be removed. Then you discuss Els, Singh, Mickelson, perhaps Sabbatini and Goosen. You discuss how Lefty has done well, and perhaps would have won more if it weren't for <fill in the blank>. IMO, this is a more accurate comparison.

I say given the same variables but simply change the competition, and Tiger Woods beats the living daylights out of fields with Palmer, Nicklaus, Hogan et al. I say Tiger still wins a little more than one out of every four tournaments he enters (fast approaching one out of every three).

I'm suggesting that Tiger is head and shoulders above the field - not that the field is weak. Zach Johnson almost joined Al Geigerberger this weekend, for pete's sake. (He shot a 60). There's tremendous talent on the PGA Tour. But Tiger is far above it.

__________________
True Length Technology Fitter - www.truelengthtechnology.com
It's live! - www.ShipShapeClubs.com
PCS Class 'A' Clubfitter

A new highlight: Golfing the home course on Christmas Day.

I say it too often: If it's golf club shaped, you can play with it.

For the record, I'm a club doctor, not a swing doctor.

An interesting way of looking at it Lowpost.

I submit to you another way to look at it. In the 60's, you had 4 players that were head and shoulders above the rest.

Why have we only got one now?

Touché.

While it would seem that every era has a hero and their antagonist (Jones/Hagen, Palmer/Nicklaus, Hogan/Snead, even Old Tom Morris and sadly I don't remember his rival).

Lets allow, for a second that perhaps in the 60's we did have 4 that soared above the rest - although I'm sure we could boil it down to two - Palmer and Nicklaus (based on the total of #1 and #2 finishes between them) but lets go with a dominant 4. At any given time, and one of them could win. While this 'A lists' them, their stats are going to be skewed as they're pretty evenly matched against one another.

My 'lets take away Tiger' gives us the same modern day scenario, but does not explain why no one can touch Tiger.

To me, it's like trying to figure out why Michael Jordan was so good. I mean yes, you can beat him one on one, you can beat his team, but if you play him 100 times, he'll beat you more often. They both share incredible traits (Jordan and Woods) - intense focus, bodies that are built to perform, and an incredible drive that's self-motivated. I'm sure that the guys on Tour are really good at focusing, have bodies that perform, and are pretty motivated. However, guys like Jordan and Woods have this ethereal 'next level' that, frankly, I don't think very many of us (humans, that is) know how to tap. The 'extra, extra gear', so to speak. Jordan and Woods have figured it out. I've often read references to it 'being in the zone' (and we've all been there), but these guys find a way to get out of their own way more often than the other humans on the planet.

So if we allow that Tiger is exemplary in the same vein as Woods, or perhaps even Mohammed Ali (who shared the same traits) then it certainly explains his dominance and why no-one else seems close. He's just owning the game, a once-in-a-lifetime kind of player. The thing is, he's doing it to golf like Jordan did it to basketball, like Ali did it to boxing.

__________________
True Length Technology Fitter - www.truelengthtechnology.com
It's live! - www.ShipShapeClubs.com
PCS Class 'A' Clubfitter

A new highlight: Golfing the home course on Christmas Day.

I say it too often: If it's golf club shaped, you can play with it.

For the record, I'm a club doctor, not a swing doctor.

And you have outlined marvelously my whole point (although my point was rather long-winded!).

These greats figure out a way to do it time and time again.

We're both conceding that Tiger is incredible and has traits that no other Tour player has right now. But, it is possible to find and learn these traits. If a man can do it, another man can. You yourself, Lowpost, have outlined two other men in other sporting fields that can and have. I hope that the other players do not have even the slightest doubt that he is catchable. If they do doubt it, even for a milli-second, they will not challenge.

It's finding what "it" is that's the problem!

I write the article as a sort of indirect question, I suppose. Are those who are trying to catch up to Tiger going about it the right way?

Are we on the verge of seeing someone step out of the shadow and take him on? Will his nemesis learn to do it the Tiger way, or his own way?

We shall hopefully see in time. And it will be a great day for golf, if and when it happens.

As for now, COME ON TIGER! KEEP IT UP SON!

PS - how did you get the acute accent on your touche???!!!!

__________________
Luke: I don't believe it!
Yoda: That is why you fail.

I hate to say it, but I think if Tiger is to have a nemesis, said individual will have to do it the 'Tiger way' - outfocus, outwit, outplay...

As for the é, it's ALT+130. Another beauty is à, for both à la and voilà: ALT+133. Finally is ° ALT+0176. Please note, these must be done on the numeric keypad.

Wow!

You can learn all kindsa sh!t on this forum!

Do a yahoo or google extended ascii chart.

It'll really open your eyes.

I really believe that it is more the child then a parent. I have seen video of bot Tiger and Phil when they were 4 swinging the golf club. They both appeared happy just hitting golf balls. My son who is now 4 will swing maybe 1 time and is on to something else. Now cars and planes (which I have little interest in) totally fascinate him.


I think that Tiger has more options then the other players. He can work the ball better then any other player. (Phil is a close second) When it looks like he is totally dead he still can Cut the ball or draw the ball to get the ball on the green. He also has the power to get through the deepest rough. SO he is making pars when the other players are figuring out ways to make bogeys. I do not think that most tour pro's make a lot of mental mistakes.


But, you also have the fact that Tigers is just half over. Between 1997-2007 Tiger has won 13 majors, Jack beteen 1962 (his first major win and 1972 won 11 times. A slight diference but not huge. Jack after 30 when some golfers take off slowed down and only won 7 more times. I personally believe that Phil is a better golfer then anyone Jack had to deal with If he just would have got the monkey off his back earlier with his first victory. But when it is all said a done Phil, Ernie are probably going to get a few more could be wrong but you need to be careful comparing Jacks opponents during a 20 year period v. Tigers in a 10 of course they will not look as good.


Tigers first 11 year (1997-07) are only a little better then Jacks 1962-72 13-11. I am willing to bet that Tiger sustains his pace better then Jack did.



But for arguements sake, Palmer won 6 of his 7 either in 1962 or before. Only had 1 after Jack got rolling. Watson won his from 1975-83 so to put it in Tigers perspective he would be a challenger who would come on to the scene in about 2-3 years.

I also think that currently the diference between a regular tour event and a major in the course setup are almost playing a diferent style of play. If you can hit the ball long and somewhat straight you can make a lot of money in the regular tour. It seems that a lot of young players are patterning their games toward that style. But when the rough is high and you need to work the ball both ways the field thins. Back in Jacks day I think that with the equipment you had to work the ball and I do not think the rough was much diferent from the other events (could be wrong) Tiger gears his game and schedule around the Majors.

I also find it discouraging that when someone actually BELIEVES they can compete with Tiger and says it out loud, the critics make them a laughing stock, ie.Woody Austin, after the PGA. The first step in doing is believing.

Tiger will be declared the best ever when he gets his records. There is NO QUESTION that the field has better golfers now than in previous eras. Some of the swings of the biggest winners of yesteryear would have a tough go of it on today’s tour. In their defense, the previous era of golfers were playing a different game and they were geared for that game. Some, I’m sure, could have adapted, but a lot of the players were relying a lot on straight natural ability, which nowadays is just not enough. Same in any modern sport

Were they better competitors, tougher players, better "winners"? Maybe, as I think mental toughness and creatively and will to win went a lot further back then. Because the skills and techniques overall were not required to be so perfectly refined, more players had the minimum skills required to compete at the top level. Nowadays, you can be fiercest competitor ever, but if you can’t drive the ball 280 plus, and can only hit a fade, your competitive fire will not be burning Tiger Woods week in and week out.

kbp, I have no quarrel with someone who actually believes that they can stick with Tiger. The issue is those that say it, then subsequently get waxed (read: Just about any Sabbatini quote). Perhaps it's better to wait until you finish ahead of Tiger and say that he was beatable.

Tiger is awesome!!!

Watch out Tiger, this guy is coming to get you. :-)

ESPN - Highest of lows: Colorado assistant pro shoots 56 - Golf

That's quite the round of golf! Even off the junior tees!

There is no doubting Tigers greatness in the golf arena but It is a close run thing between him and Bobby Jones for me. Two different golfers in different eras but Bobby was also a true great and an amateur golfer.

Snip <>

Though he played the game almost three quarters of a century ago, Bobby Jones will be forever woven into the very fabric of golf. The mere mention of his name immediately conjures up scenes that take their place among the most memorable in the history of the game: the rhythmic, perfectly balanced swing; the boyish face; the articulate, southern drawl; Augusta National; The Masters; the Grand Slam. Individually, his legacies left on the game are some of the most significant of all time. Together, they tell the wonderful story of one of the greatest the game of golf has ever seen.

Bobby Jones' accomplishments as a player are unmistakable. From 1923 to 1930 he won thirteen major championships and remains the only player ever to win all four majors in the same year-all before retiring from competitive golf when he was just 28 years old. His playing record alone is the stuff of legends, but the real story of Bobby Jones is so much more. Jones was a great player, a scholar, a family man, a competitor, a writer, a teacher, a golf course designer, and-in all things-a gentleman.

Those who knew him were astounded by his talent and touched by his humility. The great sportswriter Grantland Rice once said, "Bobby Jones is not one in a million persons…I should say he is one in ten million-or perhaps one in fifty million." Indeed, one of the most fascinating and timeless stories in all of sports is the legend of Bobby Jones.

From 1923 to 1930 Bobby Jones captured an amazing 62 percent of the national championships he entered, winning 13 of 21 tournaments. He won five of eight U.S. Amateur Championships, and finished second in another. He won one of the two British Amateurs he played in. In eleven of the last twelve open championships he entered, he finished no worse than second, winning seven times. In 1926, Jones became the first player ever to capture the "Double," winning the U.S. and British Open Championships in the same year. In 1930, he accomplished the Grand Slam, winning the British Amateur, British Open, U.S. Open, and U.S. Amateur all in the same year.

Snip<>

__________________
Best Regards
Brian

________________________________
Funny o'l game!

I have not read all of the post's,some one mentioned that he is the greatest golfer of all time..In all due respect a golfer can only be judged on his /her record.At this moment in time on record,,Jack is the greatest golfer of all time.
There are a lot of factor's involved in todays golf,when comparing past champions to the present ones.Equipment of course,but how many people know that most of the top pro's have 20-20 vision due to todays advancement in eye surgery?...Kite,Singh, are but a few that have no need for glasses anymore.
Tiger is a great golfer and a great role model to todays youth,lets hope nothing crazy happens out there for him,I read he gets 50 death threats a week.