tiger is ahead of jacks pace even after two years of barely playing and playing poorly when he did play, so up to this point in his career, he is the best thats ever lived any way you look at it....alot of ppl in here have no clue what they are talking about.
"he lost his putting stroke?" "he cant make putts" your stupid if you think those cant be overcome. nobody can take over golf besides tiger, its been proven
"he lost his putting stroke?" "he cant make putts" your stupid if you think those cant be overcome. nobody can take over golf besides tiger, its been proven
Actually their are other ways to look at it and some of us do have a clue with what we are talking about. Tiger has never come from behind in a major after 54 holes and won. Until he does that, you can't put him ahead of Jack. Jack was competing with more HOF golfers to while we are at it......I believe Jack even finished 2nd in major 18 times. Tiger isn't making the putts the way he use too. If he starts making clutch putts again, then he has overcome it, but he hasn't yet.
Jack played with more HOFmers because they are all old enough to be in the HOF. Jack didn't win Majors by double digits and have the designers change Augusta National because of 1 guy..Just saying... In the year 2000, only 1 player was able to shoot under par at the tuff, windy U.S. Open course at Pebble Beach, and he beat the course by 12 shots. The next best player was at +3. How do you beat that many Pros by 15 shots....Unreal..!! Just Sayin....
first of all, you arent one of the ppl i'm saying dont know what they are talking about. although we bump heads some, you, gosooners and a few others seem pretty sharp on golf stuff. i'm pretty sure you can read thru the thread and see which ones are clueless.
now, i'm not sue what to say when you say tiger hasnt come from behind to win, does it mean he isnt as good because he was leading and then won the major 14 times (which is more than jack at this point) or what?.......i guess i'm missing your point there. as far as more HOFers, golf wasnt nearly as deep, it was basically played in US and Europe then, its worldwide now, and its exposed to any kid in the world now. back in the day, there wasnt that many playing, there werent that many that were good. golf has evolved as much, if not more, than any other sport. swing coaches, schools, practice, putting coaches, hell golfers are athletes nowadays.
i heard feherty say something that made alot of sense today, "when he plays well, he wins."
tell me any time tiger has played well, and not won the tournament. i can remember times he has played badly, or what we consider bad golf when referring to tiger, and still won. but i cant think of a time tiger woods played well, and didnt win. he is just a step ahead of the pack when he plays well. there are other players that when they play well, they sometimes win, finish top 10, some top 20, but when tiger plays well, he wins every single time.
also, fwiw, feherty who is one of very few media guys tiger has a good relationship with predicted today that tiger would win one of these next two tourn. he said he has never seen him this motivated and he also said he knows for a fact his shortgame has been getting plenty of practice.......was it said for tv? who knows, i'm not sure i believe it, but being tiger it wouldnt suprise me. just throwing it out there.
That 43 homer 137 RBI .333 season Jason Giambi had back in 2000 for Oakland was one for the ages, now he comes off the bench for the Rockies, what's your point.
Like Giambi, Tiger is on the down side of a brilliant career.
You Tiger lovers amuse me, you think he can just show up after that lay off, and poof, shoot 67's.
