Comments on: Streaks: Tiger Woods Can’t Have it Both Ways

By: Aaron

Aaron — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 11:26:02 +0000

Aha - just read the rest of what you typed..so, Byron Nelson’s four-ball shouldn’t count, but the rest of them should? Tiger playing with 16 of the best players in the world shouldn’t count, but Byron playing with 30 of some of the worst players left SHOULD count?

I mean, I agree the Target World Challenge shouldn’t count, but your statements are riddled with contradictions. Left-and-right. It is clear where your intentions lay: and that is in undermining the achievements of the already Greatest Golfer in History. Tiger Wood’s could stop right now and his accomplishments would still be more impressive than what Jack Nicklaus has done considering field depth, and increased player skill.

Do you really need examples? Because if you doubt that the players nowadays are much much better than they were 30 years ago, I can’t help you. Hell, Phil Mickelson is a better golfer than Jack Nicklaus was. It’s just the way it is. Now, I am not saying that if Jack Nicklaus played during this era, that that would be the case. I am just saying, in comparison to how good Jack was, there are actually a few players now a days who are better than he was. It just has to do with increased practice hours, increased knowledge on the games mechanics, increased physical fitness, increased psychological training, etc. etc.. Players today have advantages that golfers back then did not. However, they also work a lot harder and longer than golfers did back then…but thats because they HAVE to to keep up. Thats why they are better. That doesn’t mean they have more talent, it just means they have more ability because of the era in which they grew up.

Tiger is the best so far in history, by far. However, one day, someone will come along and be better than Tiger. Does that mean he will have more talent? Not necessarily. Will he be more dominant? Almost certainly not. However, he will probably have more ability considering the way the game is moving. He will probably be in better physical shape, might practice more, have the benefit of advanced knowledge concerning golf mechanics, etc.. So, technically, he will be better. But only because of when he grew up.

So, the question should never be, who is better? It should always be, who was more dominant! That is the only question in which you have a chance in undermining Tiger Woods, which you seem to want to do. And, you will only have that chance for a little while longer, unless Tiger breaks a couple legs..and a couple arms…and..his neck! (from a lynching perhaps! LOL)

By: Aaron

Aaron — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 11:13:38 +0000

Uh, Tiger doesn’t want it both ways. Tiger started very clearly, so clearly that he did not believe he had a streak going because he lost the HSBC Match play..So, Tiger has ALWAYS counted them all. It WAS the medea who acted like the other events didn’t matter…and in fact, they were right…They don’t count as far as the record books go..So, don’t say Tiger Woods can’t have it both ways, because he doesn’t want it both ways. It’s the media who can’t have it both ways you halfwit.

Give the man some credit. When Byron Nelson got his 12 straight, he had the Miami four-ball, and played in events where a the field was reduced drastically in size, and most of his main competitors were fighting in WWII…Tiger’s streak of 7 in a row is far superior to that 12 in a row record, considering the circumstances. It just won’t go down in the books that way.

By: Phil

Phil — Tue, 25 Mar 2008 16:17:15 +0000

BD, thanks for your observations. There are so many factions ready to set the standards. The PGA Tour, the worldwide records camp (this opens a big can of worms), and media created records all are competing to be heard by their advocates, creating confusion among fans. Golf has so many issues with its records, which is one of many reasons why I like to emphasize a player’s record in the majors. The same four events each year, offering a player about 60-80 chances in their prime to carve out their place in history.

By: BD

BD — Tue, 25 Mar 2008 14:55:25 +0000

Rather than debate what events count toward “THE” streak, I think the better way to look at this is to say Tiger had two streaks going, both of which ended with his 5th place finish at the WGC-CA. One was consecutite PGA Tour wins and the other was consecutive all-purpose wins. As long as it’s clear what streak is being discussed, there’s no harm in noting the existence of multiple streaks. As for comparisons to Byron Nelson, it’s moot because Tiger never got to 11 or 10 anyway.