Tiger at 10

vtbub · 07-17-2005, 03:40 PM

Any doubt about Tiger being back now?

Last time I saw that look was 2000. He seems to be back in that zone where he wills his way around a course and makes other players melt.

Dr. Sak · 07-17-2005, 07:31 PM

It be a lot more fun to watch if some of these other golfers had the nuts to stand up to Tiger like Watson, Player, and Palmer (etc) did to Jack.

KWhit · 07-17-2005, 08:16 PM

He was so close at the US Open too. We easily could be talking about a grand slam right now.

vtbub · 07-17-2005, 10:54 PM

I think, in time, that Sergio will push Tiger. I don't see the drive in Phil, never have.

Samdari · 07-18-2005, 07:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vtbub

I think, in time, that Sergio will push Tiger. I don't see the drive in Phil, never have.

I don't see the game in Sergio.

KWhit · 07-18-2005, 07:54 AM

No way Sergio gets close being a rival to Tiger. The only possibilty I see right now is Vijay, but we may have already seen him at his best.

rkmsuf · 07-18-2005, 07:57 AM

none of the exisitng players have it. it will take a new young gun to provide the theatre with Tiger.

wade moore · 07-18-2005, 08:02 AM

Michelle Wie?

Wolfpack · 07-18-2005, 03:03 PM

I don't get the feeling this is like Tiger in 2000. The Tiger of 2000 was practically other-worldly and likely will never be seen again. True, Tiger has won two majors of the three offered this year, but you don't feel like he's going to just bury the opposition given the chance like he did back then. Tiger 2000 would have just blown the tournament open on Saturday and just made a victory lap on Sunday (which was what he did then). Tiger 2k5 is still groping a bit right now. He benefitted equally from others failing to catch him yesterday as much as his own ability to take control. His lead had been reduced to one at one point in the round before everyone started folding up behind him.

rkmsuf · 07-18-2005, 03:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wolfpack

I don't get the feeling this is like Tiger in 2000. The Tiger of 2000 was practically other-worldly and likely will never be seen again. True, Tiger has won two majors of the three offered this year, but you don't feel like he's going to just bury the opposition given the chance like he did back then. Tiger 2000 would have just blown the tournament open on Saturday and just made a victory lap on Sunday (which was what he did then). Tiger 2k5 is still groping a bit right now. He benefitted equally from others failing to catch him yesterday as much as his own ability to take control. His lead had been reduced to one at one point in the round before everyone started folding up behind him.

so?

no offense but this thinking drives me crazy. he has 2 majors this year.

he shot what -14...anyone else do that?

Blackadar · 07-18-2005, 03:18 PM

Tiger's just now becoming comfortable with his new swing. He's the best because he continually works on improving, even if it requires a step back to take two forward. His discipline to working out, practice and mental toughness is probably second-to-none.

I don't see any of the old guard really being in Tiger's class beyond Nicklaus. Player, Trevino, Watson, Palmer - all legends but are they really that much tougher than Els, Singh and Mickelson? The game is more competitve now anyway. Tiger would have dominated those guys like he does this current group. His focus, combined with talent, sets him apart. Nicklaus never made 142 straight cuts - his best was 105.

Singh, Lefty, Els, etc. raised their games after the Tiger Slam. They worked out harder. They practiced more. The elevated their games - and now Tiger has elevated his out of that group again.

I love Jack Nicklaus - he was incredible. Watching the '86 Masters is still one of my great sporting thrills, ranking up there with the US Hockey Team of '80 and the Red Sox winning the series. But in a Nicklaus vs. Woods match, I'd put my money on Woods.

Wolfpack · 07-18-2005, 03:21 PM

I don't mean to sound like I'm disparaging. It's still a phenominal accomplishment, but it's something like Marvin the Martian..."Where's the ka-boom? There was supposed to be an earth-shattering ka-boom!" In some respects, it's unfair because he's being measured against what he did in 2000 when he just made it look easy. I think people (myself included, it would seem) expect him to not just win, but to dominate. You also would at least consider the possibility that 2000 Tiger would not have had such a rotten finish at Pinehurst and would have won it (though I would think it tough to run away with it like he did at Pebble Beach...the greens are just too tough for that).

Even so, it is remarkable what he's doing.

Wolfpack · 07-18-2005, 03:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blackadar

But in a Nicklaus vs. Woods match, I'd put my money on Woods.

Dola...

Funny you mention this. There's been a new table-top golf game put out (to good reviews) that features just about every great golfer in history in their best year and it includes 72 Jack and 2000 Tiger. I've kicked around the idea of getting it and setting up some kind of match-play tournament or fantasy golf league, but it's not a cheap game, so I haven't pulled the trigger to get it. So, you could play Jack and Tiger (as defined by the creator, of course) and see whether you are right or not.

moriarty · 07-18-2005, 03:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wolfpack

Dola...

Funny you mention this. There's been a new table-top golf game put out (to good reviews) that features just about every great golfer in history in their best year and it includes 72 Jack and 2000 Tiger. I've kicked around the idea of getting it and setting up some kind of match-play tournament or fantasy golf league, but it's not a cheap game, so I haven't pulled the trigger to get it. So, you could play Jack and Tiger (as defined by the creator, of course) and see whether you are right or not.

Link please.

Wolfpack · 07-18-2005, 03:47 PM

Tee Time Golf

It's supposed to be full-blown shot-by-shot, rather than hole-by-hole or round-by-round, so playing a round will take a bit of time.

moriarty · 07-18-2005, 03:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wolfpack

Tee Time Golf

It's supposed to be full-blown shot-by-shot, rather than hole-by-hole or round-by-round, so playing a round will take a bit of time.

Thanks. It doesn't give a lot of info. there, but I'd be curious to hear your impressions if you end up getting it.

07-17-2005, 10:54 PM	#4
vtbub College Starter Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Burlington, VT USA	I think, in time, that Sergio will push Tiger. I don't see the drive in Phil, never have. __________________

07-18-2005, 07:57 AM	#7
rkmsuf Head Coach Join Date: Dec 2001	none of the exisitng players have it. it will take a new young gun to provide the theatre with Tiger. __________________ "Don't you have homes?" -- Judge Smales

07-17-2005, 07:31 PM	#2
Dr. Sak Grizzled Veteran Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Stuck in Yinzerville, PA	It be a lot more fun to watch if some of these other golfers had the nuts to stand up to Tiger like Watson, Player, and Palmer (etc) did to Jack.

07-17-2005, 08:16 PM	#3
KWhit Coordinator Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Conyers GA	He was so close at the US Open too. We easily could be talking about a grand slam right now.

07-18-2005, 07:54 AM	#6
KWhit Coordinator Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Conyers GA	No way Sergio gets close being a rival to Tiger. The only possibilty I see right now is Vijay, but we may have already seen him at his best.

07-18-2005, 03:03 PM	#9
Wolfpack Pro Rookie Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Raleigh, NC	I don't get the feeling this is like Tiger in 2000. The Tiger of 2000 was practically other-worldly and likely will never be seen again. True, Tiger has won two majors of the three offered this year, but you don't feel like he's going to just bury the opposition given the chance like he did back then. Tiger 2000 would have just blown the tournament open on Saturday and just made a victory lap on Sunday (which was what he did then). Tiger 2k5 is still groping a bit right now. He benefitted equally from others failing to catch him yesterday as much as his own ability to take control. His lead had been reduced to one at one point in the round before everyone started folding up behind him.

07-18-2005, 03:18 PM	#11
Blackadar Retired Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Fantasyland	Tiger's just now becoming comfortable with his new swing. He's the best because he continually works on improving, even if it requires a step back to take two forward. His discipline to working out, practice and mental toughness is probably second-to-none. I don't see any of the old guard really being in Tiger's class beyond Nicklaus. Player, Trevino, Watson, Palmer - all legends but are they really that much tougher than Els, Singh and Mickelson? The game is more competitve now anyway. Tiger would have dominated those guys like he does this current group. His focus, combined with talent, sets him apart. Nicklaus never made 142 straight cuts - his best was 105. Singh, Lefty, Els, etc. raised their games after the Tiger Slam. They worked out harder. They practiced more. The elevated their games - and now Tiger has elevated his out of that group again. I love Jack Nicklaus - he was incredible. Watching the '86 Masters is still one of my great sporting thrills, ranking up there with the US Hockey Team of '80 and the Red Sox winning the series. But in a Nicklaus vs. Woods match, I'd put my money on Woods.

07-18-2005, 03:21 PM	#12
Wolfpack Pro Rookie Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Raleigh, NC	I don't mean to sound like I'm disparaging. It's still a phenominal accomplishment, but it's something like Marvin the Martian..."Where's the ka-boom? There was supposed to be an earth-shattering ka-boom!" In some respects, it's unfair because he's being measured against what he did in 2000 when he just made it look easy. I think people (myself included, it would seem) expect him to not just win, but to dominate. You also would at least consider the possibility that 2000 Tiger would not have had such a rotten finish at Pinehurst and would have won it (though I would think it tough to run away with it like he did at Pebble Beach...the greens are just too tough for that). Even so, it is remarkable what he's doing.

07-18-2005, 03:47 PM	#15
Wolfpack Pro Rookie Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Raleigh, NC	Tee Time Golf It's supposed to be full-blown shot-by-shot, rather than hole-by-hole or round-by-round, so playing a round will take a bit of time.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)