The best OF HIS time

[Sandpiper3]

There is a reason why he is going to be the best golfer of all time and doing it when the competition is at its toughest.

This quote is from demon in the greatest swing thread.

You cant really say the competition is tougher now then back then, for two reasons

1- Back then, the top 10 or so players, were each "the best" playeR in the world, anyone of them could be the dominant player at any given time. All top names up and down the board. Not taking anything away from the talent today's players have.

2- Tiger is dominating, and the stats show NOBODY EXCEPT DIMARCO can take him on. Look them up if you dont believe me, those are them. No doubt at all these feilds and these players are all amazing, but thats how much better Mr. Tiger Woods is.

The argument agaisnt this is that any player on tour can win on any given day, which is quite true. The talent is so deep that they are all capable, but the thing is, they may be capable, but just dont seem to get it done... HMMMMM?

[Sandpiper3]

This thread is in no way means to take away from Tiger's talent to be able to wipe competition off the face of the earth at his whim, just to voice my opinion that you can't justifiably call him "The best golfer ever".

[demon]

Originally Posted by Sandpiper3

This thread is in no way means to take away from Tiger's talent to be able to wipe competition off the face of the earth at his whim, just to voice my opinion that you can't justifiably call him "The best golfer ever".

I never said he was "The best golfer ever" I said "he is going to be the best golfer of all time". He hasnt became the best golfer of all time, but he will be at his current pace.

here is why, at 30 years old he is:

#5 on the list of all time wins.
#2 on the list of professional major wins.
#1 on the list of lowest scoring average at 68.41 in 2003.
7 time player of the year in 9 years.

**************************************
3 US Amateur champion in a row.
3 US jr. Amateur champion in a row.
** and these were done in a six year time period**

Most of the Tour Players and some of the older guys including Jack, Arnold, and Gary Player all have stated that he will become the greatest player the sport has ever seen.

Another fact, the stock market climbs the day after Tiger wins on Sunday.

In my opinion if you lead the historical stats you are considered the best golfer of all time. Right now its up in the air since no one player dominates the fields, but one person will dominate most of them before he retires.

[demon]

Originally Posted by Sandpiper3

1- Back then, the top 10 or so players, were each "the best" playeR in the world, anyone of them could be the dominant player at any given time. All top names up and down the board. Not taking anything away from the talent today's players have.

This is another reason why he is that good, he is the dominate force on tour not because everyone else sucks, its just that he is that good and everyone knows this. This is the reason why they fall apart and do absolutely nothing on Sunday when he is in the lead.

2- Tiger is dominating, and the stats show NOBODY EXCEPT DIMARCO can take him on. Look them up if you dont believe me, those are them. No doubt at all these feilds and these players are all amazing, but thats how much better Mr. Tiger Woods is.

You are just proving my point even more with these statements.

The argument agaisnt this is that any player on tour can win on any given day, which is quite true. The talent is so deep that they are all capable, but the thing is, they may be capable, but just dont seem to get it done... HMMMMM?

It is called intimidation! When you get beat down over and over by the school bully, you get kind of scared of him and if 54 wins in a 10 year time period that is simply intimidation and domination.

Look at the 2006 stats, there are a lot of great players out there right now, but none are as consistent as Tiger, Furyk is coming close.

[emc]

People have stopped playing their best against Tiger because they now from past experiences that Tiger will win anyway. That just frightens them so much that they've stopped trying to play their 100% best against Tiger when they know they'll lose.

The old saying about Jack is true here "He knew he was going to win, you knew he was going to win, and he knew that you knew he was going to win"

[VtDivot]

This is a little different than the other thread. The other was talking about the best swing. I agree with most people's comments about who the best players are/were

[JEFF4i]

Piper, think outside the box.

Perhaps Tiger is playing against just as good, if not better golfers, except he is just so dominating that regardless of competition, he will win.

I think that's the idea behind it. Not that the competition has changed, only #1.

[Sandpiper3]

Im not saying he isnt one of the best, because obv he's showing us all that he is. But the thing about it is that there is no way of showing (other then statistics) if he is better then Jack was, or Byron, or Hogan. No doubt in my mind he is ONE OF the best, because he is dominant its bordering rediculous.

But im not going to give him the crown "The Best" of all time.

[demon]

Originally Posted by Sandpiper3

Im not saying he isnt one of the best, because obv he's showing us all that he is. But the thing about it is that there is no way of showing (other then statistics) if he is better then Jack was, or Byron, or Hogan. No doubt in my mind he is ONE OF the best, because he is dominant its bordering rediculous.

But im not going to give him the crown "The Best" of all time.

That is your opinion and my opinion is that He will be the best. If he tops 82 wins you kind of have to give it to him.

[JEFF4i]

What demon said.

Our only guage for the most dominating figure in golf is wins.

Right now, he's on that path.

[emc]

When/If he beats 82 wins and 18 Majors he'll be best of all time.

[demon]

Originally Posted by emc

When/If he beats 82 wins and 18 Majors he'll be best of all time.

I agree, he is averaging 5 wins a year on tour. That is just crazy and it equates to 33% roughly in his chances of wining. Everyone on tour is streaky, they have a good year every once in a while but he does it yearly.

Does anyone know how many tournaments in a year Jack and Arnold used to play?

[BigJim13]

Originally Posted by demon

Does anyone know how many tournaments in a year Jack and Arnold used to play?

I am not certain but think they played more tournaments a year. Not by much though, cuz if you think about it Jay Haas just set the record for cuts made in a career at like 580 or something and that was more TOURNAMENTS than Jack ever played in his career...

[Bravo]

Part of the arguments people are making about him being the best of all time are predicated on the assumption that he will continue to play for another ten years, maybe fifteen.

I have no reason to believe he will not. He has every intention of blowing away every record - total wins, Majors, etc. and I believe he will.

Now comes the hypothetical question.

What if something happens to him so that he cannot continue? He dies or is injured so severely (somehow) that he is unable to continue playing golf.

Would you consider him the greatest of all time based on what he did in his first ten years on tour?

I would say yes. He played a decade and his winning percentage based on tournaments he entered is much higher than Nicklaus'.

It's just a hypothetical and the likelihood that it will occur is quite low...but if something did happen to him - I'd call him the Greatest right now - regardless.

[uteinnm]

Jack is still the greatest in my book for the simple fact of you take the top 8 players he competed against versus what Tiger is going against its no contest.Els Mickelson Singh is not exactly the same as Player Trevino Watson Palmer and others now is it.Not to mention the fact that equipment back then was pretty much the same and you had to be a real shot maker instead of the 300yrd bomb followed by the hack out of the rough on to the green thats played now.