Player Login
Log in with:
OR
skip nav

Forums

Tiger, isn't this getting out of hand?

Sat, Feb 13 2010 5:38 PM (130 replies)
  • cindylee
    14 Posts
    Mon, Feb 8 2010 6:58 PM

    Tiger woods will come back.

    he is still the world NO.1 golfer.

  • KatieJ
    43 Posts
    Tue, Feb 9 2010 4:27 AM

    Who cares if he comes back?? GOlf was around long before him and will be around after he dies, THe best thing that could happen to him is if he gets booed at his first tourney

  • usmra
    32 Posts
    Fri, Feb 12 2010 1:39 AM

    Snaike:
    I wonder if Eldrick would be so good with the equipment Bobby Jones had to use... or how about Harry Vardon?  What about Ol' Tom Morris?  How 'clutch' do you think E. Tont Woods would be with a "Mashie" and a "Guttie" from 180 out?

     

    Woods would be No. 1 if he was playing with a pitchfork, a hoe (no pun), and a rake.  You should also mention that the courses were much different back in those old fart days.  Admit it, he's the best the game has seen.

  • OaktheToke
    409 Posts
    Fri, Feb 12 2010 2:27 AM

    usmra:
    Woods would be No. 1 if he was playing with a pitchfork, a hoe (no pun), and a rake.  You should also mention that the courses were much different back in those old fart days.  Admit it, he's the best the game has seen.

    Not necessary and you have absolutely no clue what you're talking about.   Taking pain meds and online posting don't necessarily mix.

    One could argue that Jack has changed golf with his advances in the way attacked courses more than Tiger could ever dream of.  

    It's impossible to know if Tiger would be able to handle the inferior equipment and not-so-tightly manicured courses of years past just like its impossible to know how good Bobby Jones could be today with modern equipment.

    Who cares.  They are the best of their generation.

     

  • usmra
    32 Posts
    Fri, Feb 12 2010 3:03 AM

    OaktheToke:
    Not necessary and you have absolutely no clue what you're talking about.   Taking pain meds and online posting don't necessarily mix.

     

    There was no need for this.  This is an opinion board and that was my opinion.  Even though I quoted that line, I said nothing negative about you personally - so, why don't we just leave it at that?

  • Snaike
    3,678 Posts
    Fri, Feb 12 2010 10:28 AM

    usmra:
    Admit it, he's the best the game has seen.

    That statement is just flat wrong.  I'm sorry.

    E. Woods is the best golfer this GENERATION has seen.  That much can be a proven fact.  But until he passes Palmer in firsts and seconds (as stated elsewhere in this thread), E. Woods is not even the best golfer of the last two generations.

    It's easy to root for the home team, the current champion, the leader of the pack... they even have a name for it.. "Bandwagon Fan".

    "Bandwagon Fans" are great.  They bring new interest into the game, they bring new revenue into the game, they even bring the next big stars into the game...  Ride the current wave of new(ish) fans and watch, as I have, the inner-city kids come running to the golf course to be like "Tiger".  It's a really good thing.  Golf is moving away from the "Rich, old, fat white man's game" and moving into something everyone can embrace...

    .... thanks to E. Tont Woods.

    But, on the flip side.. "Bandwagon Fans" are horrible at history.  The new and the shiny is always the best ever.  The grunts and the greats from the beginning on are usually just yellow dog-eared pictures that really have no meaning to these new fans.  "Who cares how it got here, it's here, and we're the best at it, ever!" is the hue and cry of the newest generation.

    How many Tiger fans could tell you who Francis DeSales Oimet was?  Charles E.  Evans, Jr.?  How many could tell you where or when Golf was first played?  They don't care because the girly screams of "OMG, IT'S TIGER!" would drown out any real historical information they would need to make informed opinion statements about the best of the game.

    So, let me repeat for those of you entering this thread without reading the first dozen pages or so...

    Eldrick Tont "Tiger" Woods is a great golfer.  He is the best golfer today (well, before Thanksgiving, 2009).  He will go down as the best golfer of this generation.

    To say that he is the best ever is intellectually dishonest and false.

    Have a nice day.

  • BOFFMEN
    337 Posts
    Fri, Feb 12 2010 7:33 PM

     

     

    Let’s look at Snaike’s “intellectually dishonest” statement through a different pair of glasses.

     

    In 1988 the U.S. was celebrating the centennial of golf on our side of the pond.

     

    History and Accomplishments were center stage during that entire year.

     

    It was at the Waldorf Astoria in New York City that Golf magazine, in honor of The Centennial of Golf in the United States, would hold one of the most prestigious awards of that year.

     

    The “Player of the Century” would be awarded.

     

    The final ballot contained 4 names:  Bobby Jones, Ben Hogan, Arnold Palmer and Jack Nicklaus.

     

    “Jack Whitaker rushed back from the U.S. Open playoff at The Country Club in Brookline, Massachusetts, to emcee the festivities, and the three-tiered, 60-person dais that evening included more Hall of Famers than have ever been assembled before or since, including Ben Hogan, who made his first public appearance outside Texas in over a decade. He was joined by Byron Nelson, Sam Snead, Arnold Palmer, Jack Nicklaus, Ken Venturi, and Tom Watson. On the women’s side, there were Louise Suggs, Patty Berg, JoAnne Carner, Betsy Rawls and Nancy Lopez, along with more than a score of other players and contributors—everyone from  Chi Chi Rodriguez to Mark McCormack.” (1)

     

    That night, with a full size bronze statue being awarded to the winner, Jack “The Bear” Nicklaus would win.

     

    Do you think anyone at this prestigious event thought it was “intellectually dishonest” to give Mr. Nicklaus the honor?

     

    Not me...or believe it or not "The Bear" himself.  (2)

     

    That is why if/when “Tiger” Woods surpasses the achievements of “The Bear” he will be, in many intellectuals mind, the greatest golfer ever.

     

    (1)  George Peper's Lost Treasure

    (2)  Scroll to the third from the bottom question of this Q&A.

     

     

  • Snaike
    3,678 Posts
    Fri, Feb 12 2010 9:05 PM

    Ah well... So a bunch of golf greats awarded Nicklaus the best golfer between 1900-1988?

    Fantastic, well done, congratulations!! What a great reason to have a party in New York.

    However, and excuse me for getting all rational and stuff.... as much as I like Nicklaus, Palmer, Player, Trevino et al... The award was for the Golfer of the Century, no? Held in 1988?

    Let's see.. 1900-1988. That's 88 years. Long time for someone to live.

    But less than 10% of the time the game of "Golf" has been around. "Golf" dates back to the 12th Century my friend.

    BOFFMEN:
    That is why if/when “Tiger” Woods surpasses the achievements of “The Bear” he will be, in many intellectuals mind, the greatest golfer ever.

    Wow, so even you admit that Woods has to beat Nicklaus' achievements... firsts AND seconds in Majors?  Wonderful.  Simply because under those criteria, Woods will never be the 'greatest'.

    Which goes straight back to the "Bandwagon Fan" reference.  It's always great to root for the new and shiny.  Enjoy your ride.

  • Snaike
    3,678 Posts
    Sat, Feb 13 2010 9:40 AM

    .....

    After a few hours beyond posting the above response, it occured to me that I have been trying to make the same argument in this thread for weeks.  And, well, judging by the responses, have not been making any significant headway.

    Sooner or later, someone or another who comes along and thinks E. Tont Woods invented the game of golf will pop in and grace us with that opinion.  That's fine.  Wrong, but fine.

    But I think I have fond a way to compare apples to apples in this discussion.

    I think we have all heard of the movie "Avatar"?  Right?  Made a lot of money... and still does.  Making more and more everyday.  Pretty impressive, no?  Let's take a look at just how much money it has made in the US. 

    "Avatar" is currently the All Time Domestic Gross Box Office leader with $637M.  As a matter of fact, it just past the previous leader "Titanic" with $600M.  Third on that list is a little movie called "The Dark Knight" with $533M.  ("The Dark Knight" still holds "Opening Weekend" lead with almost $160M.)

    By this list, you would think that as far as revenue goes, "Avatar" is the GOAT (Greatest of All Time).  I mean it's right here in black and white, "Avatar" has made more money domestically than any other film in history.  Hands down winner, no?

    No.

    Due to the miracle of modern economics, we can compare revenue of today with revenue of the past getting a clean competition, head to head, and apples to apples.  If we were to take all the biggest domestic earners of all time and adjust for inflation, the list of top earners looks much, much different.

    As a matter of fact, when adjusted for inflation, currently "Avatar" squeaks in at number 20.  The highest domestic grossing movie of all time (adjusted for inflation) equals the top 3 unadjusted ("Avatar", "Titanic", and "The Dark Knight") COMBINED.

    Here is the list, should you wish to see for yourself.  The name of the all time domestic gross earnings leader....  "Gone With the Wind" of course, with an adjusted domestic gross of $1.537BILLION.

    It is interesting to note that "The Sound of Music" made almost twice as much as "Avatar".  Even "The Graduate" holds a sizeable lead.

    All of this is only to point out that even though something may be great today, you have to have a sense of history to put it in it's proper perspective.  There's no way to compare the '69 Jets with the '85 Bears to the '10 Saints, there's no way to say that Shaq could have stopped Wilt when he wanted to score 100 points, and no way to know if Tim Lincicum could have shut out Ted Williams.

    Everything in it's time and a time for everything.  There are very, very few things that can be said to be the "Greatest of all time".  And there are no sports figures who can.  (With the possible exception of boxers... that sport hasn't changed much.  But that's for another day.)

    And, let me state for the record again, before the next "ur just a h8er" post pops up.   I, personally, feel that Tiger is the very best golfer of our time, this current generation, and with today's technology there are none better.  And, should he surpass J. Nicklaus in wins and  2nds, I will entertain the argument that he is the best golfer of the last 2 generations, but not "Ever".

    I hope you get the point now.

    Have a nice day.  =)

  • donsprintr
    2,060 Posts
    Sat, Feb 13 2010 10:35 AM

    And until such a time when the definition of what constitutes "the greatest golfer" is universally agreed upon , then all the ink spilled on the subject classifies as opinion ... give me the criteria for determining what is and what isn't and then maybe the subject can, once and for all, be laid to rest ....

RSS