Tiger Woods (2 Viewers)

[BobbyLayne]

HUMBLE, Texas — Rory McIlroy sent a text message to Tiger Woods on Tuesday, congratulating him on winning at Bay Hill and taking over the No. 1 world ranking again.

Woods responded by telling McIlroy to get going — he put it a bit more crudely than that — and win this week’s Houston Open. A victory would put McIlroy back at No. 1, a spot he held for 32 weeks before Woods’ latest win.

For now, McIlroy is fine with Woods holding the world’s top ranking, especially with the Masters coming up in two weeks.

“I didn’t think I could go into the Masters under the radar,” McIlroy said. “I can go in a little bit underneath him. So, in a way, it’s not a bad thing.”

McIlroy skipped Bay Hill and says he had a “good week, a fun week” in Miami. He watched girlfriend Caroline Wozniacki play in the pro tennis event in Key Biscayne, Fla., then stopped by a municipal course on Saturday night to hit range balls in relative anonymity with Wozniacki and Novak Djokovic, currently the world’s No. 1 tennis player.

“People left me alone, it was fine,” McIlroy said. “It’s nice to just go, not just go about my business and no one cares, but you go about it and not be, I guess, the most talked about person in golf. It’s a nice thing.”

McIlroy won four times in 2012, including the PGA Championship that catapulted him to No. 1. He signed a Nike contract in the offseason, but has gotten off to a rough start this year, raising questions about his adjustment to his new equipment.

He missed the cut at Abu Dhabi, lost in the first round of the Match Play Championship and then walked off the course during the second round of the Honda Classic, citing frustration. He finally saw signs of progress when he shot a 65 in the final round at Doral and tied for eighth, and he’s confident that he’s ready to contend at Redstone this week.

“We’re not machines, we’re humans,” McIlroy said. “You’re going to have patches where you play great and have patches where you struggle a little bit. I guess you’ve just got to take the rough and the smooth and just try and treat those times, sort of play and be patient and know that you’re working on the right things.”

Maybe McIlroy can learn from Woods as he tries to dig out of his early-season slump. Woods has won three times in five starts this year, looking as dominant as ever after going through injuries, personal turmoil and a swing change.

“I’ve always said he’s been one of the greatest fighters on a golf course,” McIlroy said. “If things aren’t going his way, he’ll dig in and get whatever he can out of a round. He can repeat day-in, day-out, that attitude and that single-mindedness or that drive or motivation, I think that’s his most impressive aspect.”

McIlroy said he’s seeing more good shots since the last round at Doral, his lowest of the season.

“The weekend at Doral was great and the way I’ve been hitting the ball recently,” he said. “I’ve just got to keep working on it and keep working on it. I definitely feel like it’s going in the right direction.”

When he’s done in Houston, McIlroy will fly to Haiti, where he’ll meet with families affected by the 2010 earthquake there. He also made a trip to Haiti before going to the U.S. Open in 2011, and won his first major at Congressional with a record score.

McIlroy is an Ireland ambassador to UNICEF and has geared his own charity work toward children.

“The last time I went, it was a very humbling place and it was a very eye-opening experience for me,” McIlroy said. “It will be another experience to go back there and see what it’s like. It’s nice to be able to do these things and raise awareness for these causes. I feel like it’s something that has been pretty close to me since I’ve been there.”

Gotta love that kid.

 

[urbanhack]

Posted an update on Fin's facebook page.

:crickets:

 

[Ghost Rider]

He looked bad today. Finless as usual spot-on.

 

[Apple Jack]

So, he shot 73 that day in the final round of TPC to finish 8th. He then won four of his next six starts. He struggles on the Stadium Course probably more than any other on tour and that had already been well-established by 2009, so it's hard to say if Otis was serious or not. Certainly appears so, considering he shot over par.

And somebody would need to be out of their mind to make a bet that Rory will end the year #1. For starters, his US Open is going to drop off in a few months. Not to mention a ton of top 5 finishes. Tiger is already #1 and will have practically nothing drop off between now and the end of the year. He could be fatally crushed by Lindsey's thighs tonight and still end the year #1. In that scenario, Rory would have to better his 2011 season to overtake him. That's a Major, a Euro tour win, and about a hundred top 10s. With Tiger continuing to play it would be a much different story.

ETA: That's not right, the 40 event denominator would help Rory if Tiger is fatally crushed by Lindsey's thighs tonight. In fact, I doubt Tiger would end the year as #1 in that scenario. It would be Rory or Justin Rose.

 

[Doug B]

He looked bad today. Finless as usual spot-on.

The first few pages of this thread is full of interesting nuggets. Otis' and JuniorNB's positions are basically reversed from their current ones. And Raider Nation has a bunch of posts deleted, but still quoted

 

[JuniorNB]

He looked bad today. Finless as usual spot-on.

Where's Otis The Mouth when people actually DO want to hear from him?

 

[JuniorNB]

He looked bad today. Finless as usual spot-on.

The first few pages of this thread is full of interesting nuggets. Otis' and JuniorNB's positions are basically reversed from their current ones. And Raider Nation has a bunch of posts deleted, but still quoted

My position? It's never changed. In fact, here's my very first post in this thread. Four years ago. I was spot on.....

doubt he'll ever be the dominant player he once was. The guy who would prompt bets like Tiger vs. The Field, but he hasn't won his last major. All things considered, I don't know if you can say anyone's taken his place as the world's number one golfer.

I think that the OP is right about the fear factor, though.. I think the days of Tiger being helped out on day 4 simply because his opponent got the Tiger-sh*ts are over.

 

[Apple Jack]

Somebody didn't see Ricky Fowler's second shot into 16 on Monday.

 

[Doug B]

My position? It's never changed. In fact, here's my very first post in this thread. Four years ago. I was spot on.....

doubt he'll ever be the dominant player he once was. The guy who would prompt bets like Tiger vs. The Field, but he hasn't won his last major. All things considered, I don't know if you can say anyone's taken his place as the world's number one golfer.

I think that the OP is right about the fear factor, though.. I think the days of Tiger being helped out on day 4 simply because his opponent got the Tiger-sh*ts are over.

Eh ... saying your position reversed is too strong. Granted. But it reads to me like your 2009 position was more nuanced.Do you think debate adversaries Otis and Apple Jack realize today that you wrote the part in red above four years ago? Nothing wrong with changing opinions in the face of new information -- it just seems to me that you and Otis (for example) should have way more common ground that you seem to have today.

 

[Brony]

Not sure if anyone knows this or not, but Byron Nelson won 11 tournaments in a row. Put that in your hashpipe and suck on it.

 

[Abraham]

Not sure if anyone knows this or not, but Byron Nelson won 11 tournaments in a row. Put that in your hashpipe and suck on it.

In an era with smaller fields and no cut lines. We have been through this, or at least we would have when tiger was on his streak in 2000 or 2001.

 

[Otis]

He looked bad today. Finless as usual spot-on.

Otis, how long are you going to pretend this post doesn't exist?

Oh. Oh right. Oh there's no shtick in this thread. None. It's all serious.

 

[Otis]

My position? It's never changed. In fact, here's my very first post in this thread. Four years ago. I was spot on.....

doubt he'll ever be the dominant player he once was. The guy who would prompt bets like Tiger vs. The Field, but he hasn't won his last major. All things considered, I don't know if you can say anyone's taken his place as the world's number one golfer.

I think that the OP is right about the fear factor, though.. I think the days of Tiger being helped out on day 4 simply because his opponent got the Tiger-sh*ts are over.

Eh ... saying your position reversed is too strong. Granted. But it reads to me like your 2009 position was more nuanced.Do you think debate adversaries Otis and Apple Jack realize today that you wrote the part in red above four years ago? Nothing wrong with changing opinions in the face of new information -- it just seems to me that you and Otis (for example) should have way more common ground that you seem to have today.

I still don't even know who JuniorNB is. No idea what his position is other than I thought he agreed with Fin. Fin was wrong. If JuniorNB had a different position than Fin, it's possible he wasn't wrong. Let's just keep this about Fin though.

 

[JuniorNB]

My position? It's never changed. In fact, here's my very first post in this thread. Four years ago. I was spot on.....

doubt he'll ever be the dominant player he once was. The guy who would prompt bets like Tiger vs. The Field, but he hasn't won his last major. All things considered, I don't know if you can say anyone's taken his place as the world's number one golfer.

I think that the OP is right about the fear factor, though.. I think the days of Tiger being helped out on day 4 simply because his opponent got the Tiger-sh*ts are over.

Eh ... saying your position reversed is too strong. Granted. But it reads to me like your 2009 position was more nuanced.Do you think debate adversaries Otis and Apple Jack realize today that you wrote the part in red above four years ago? Nothing wrong with changing opinions in the face of new information -- it just seems to me that you and Otis (for example) should have way more common ground that you seem to have today.

Not sure. I also said on page 59 of this thread that Tiger will win a major this season. Something else I still believe will happen. My main fun now is just watching the Otis's and Apple Jack's get all creamy everytime he wins a tournament. As if Finless ever claimed he wouldn't. They want to totally remove the majors-thing out of the equation. When, in reality, they are like the four Super Bowls of golf. BEing ranked #1 is like being ranked #1 by teh BCS all during the college football regular season. It's nice and all, but no one really remembers the #1 golfer in years past. Or who won the Arnold Palmer 15 years ago. They remember who won the majors.

 

[JuniorNB]

He looked bad today. Finless as usual spot-on.

Otis, how long are you going to pretend this post doesn't exist?

Oh. Oh right. Oh there's no shtick in this thread. None. It's all serious.

Ahhhhhh. Gotcha. LOL

 

[Apple Jack]

Not sure if anyone knows this or not, but Byron Nelson won 11 tournaments in a row. Put that in your hashpipe and suck on it.

In an era with smaller fields and no cut lines. We have been through this, or at least we would have when tiger was on his streak in 2000 or 2001.

Otoh, Mr. Snead wasn't traveling in a G4 and sleeping in 1000 thread count sheets on wicked awesome mattresses. He was driving around in a Model T and sleeping under the stars with one eye open fending off coyotes.For the record, when I say he was barely more than a year removed from arguably the best stretch of golf ever played, I'm not referring to '99 - '08, I'm referring to '06 - '08.

 

[Otis]

Has Finless ever been right about anything? Honest question. He's a group schtick alias. His whole existence is predicated on saying things that are likely wrong.

 

[Otis]

Zoo nation : 200 American dollars says Tiger finishes higher than Rory at the end of this year.

 

[urbanhack]

Has Finless ever been right about anything? Honest question. He's a group schtick alias. His whole existence is predicated on saying things that are likely wrong.

Not true. He's in Denver fixing roofs right now.

 

[Doug B]

Being ranked #1 is like being ranked #1 by teh BCS all during the college football regular season in October. It's nice and all, but no one really remembers the #1 golfer in years past.

Fixed it for you.You make a solid point, I think. Favorite whipping boy Greg Norman, for example, was #1 in the world for over six years in aggregate. Yet because he won only two majors and came in second in seven others, his career is considered one of the great "coulda beens". So Norman -- unquestionably a HOF golfer -- still had a "disappointing" career in some senses.

Guys who hang around the #1 position in golf for so long are judged fairly or unfairly (by the peanut gallery, granted) first, second, and third by majors won. I'd submit that in Tiger's own head -- that I cannot possibly have seen inside, but no matter -- if he wins 20 non-majors a year for the rest of his career, but doesn't sniff another major win ... he'll consider the back half of his career a gigantic disappointment.

 

[Otis]

Did Fin also start that thread saying he Miami Heat were going to have problems winning games?

 

[TobiasFunke]

Being ranked #1 is like being ranked #1 by teh BCS all during the college football regular season in October. It's nice and all, but no one really remembers the #1 golfer in years past.

Fixed it for you.You make a solid point, I think. Favorite whipping boy Greg Norman, for example, was #1 in the world for over six years in aggregate. Yet because he won only two majors and came in second in severn others, his career is considered one of the great "coulda beens". So Norman -- unquestionably a HOF golfer -- still had a "disappointing" career in some senses.

Guys who hang around the #1 position in golf for so long are judged fairly or unfairly (by the peanut gallery, granted) first, second, and third by majors won. I'd submit that in Tiger's own head -- that I cannot possibly have seen inside, but no matter -- if he wins 20 non-majors a year for the rest of his career, but doesn't sniff another major win ... he'll consider the back half of his career a gigantic disappointment.

That's fair when the sample size is large enough- and ultimately, when the rest of Tiger's career after the #### hit the fan is the relevant sample size, it'll be fair. I agree with that.But for now, the sample size of post fan-####ing majors when he's been back on his game is pretty small. Maybe 4, maybe less. Other than maybe in 2000-2001, he's never really had more than what, maybe a 25-35% chance of winning a given major? So I'm not sure you can say that something that's unlikely to happen on any one try not happening once in four tries (or even eight or ten tries) is evidence of anything other than dumb luck.

It's OK to judge entire careers on majors to some degree because if you're good enough to have a semi-decent shot at winning over 10 or 15 or 20 years, eventually you assume it's gonna happen a couple times. That's not the case when you're looking at 1 or 2 years.

 

[BobbyLayne]

[*]14/59 career major record

[*]7/11 from '99 PGA to '02 US Open

[*]6/14 from '05 Masters to '08 US Open

[*]0/13 with 5 starts missed due to injury since his last major

 

[Doug B]

in Tiger's own head [/COLOR]-- that I cannot possibly have seen inside, but no matter -- if he wins 20 non-majors a year for the rest of his career, but doesn't sniff another major win ... he'll consider the back half of his career a gigantic disappointment.

That's fair when the sample size is large enough- and ultimately, when the rest of Tiger's career after the #### hit the fan is the relevant sample size, it'll be fair. I agree with that.

I'm only speaking speculatively of a possible future outcome. Never meant to address anything short term.

 

[JuniorNB]

[*]14/59 career major record

[*]7/11 from '99 PGA to '02 US Open

[*]6/14 from '05 Masters to '08 US Open

[*]0/13 with 5 starts missed due to injury since his last major

This says it all.

 

[BobbyLayne]

[*]14/59 career major record

[*]7/11 from '99 PGA to '02 US Open

[*]6/14 from '05 Masters to '08 US Open

[*]0/13 with 5 starts missed due to injury since his last major

This says it all.

<> all that will be said.

 

[Apple Jack]

[*]14/59 career major record

[*]7/11 from '99 PGA to '02 US Open

[*]6/14 from '05 Masters to '08 US Open

[*]0/13 with 5 starts missed due to injury since his last major

This says it all.

<> all that will be said.

It doesn't say what some people seem to think it does. Talk about a misleading stat.

 

[TobiasFunke]

in Tiger's own head [/COLOR]-- that I cannot possibly have seen inside, but no matter -- if he wins 20 non-majors a year for the rest of his career, but doesn't sniff another major win ... he'll consider the back half of his career a gigantic disappointment.

That's fair when the sample size is large enough- and ultimately, when the rest of Tiger's career after the #### hit the fan is the relevant sample size, it'll be fair. I agree with that.

I'm only speaking speculatively of a possible future outcome. Never meant to address anything short term.

Yeah we're in agreement.Don't understand people thinking the 0/13 answers some question that people are still asking. Nobody thinks he was as good during the period between the injury and now as he was before. That's not really something worth talking about. The only question is whether he's close to as good now or in recently as he was before. Somewhere between zero and four of those 13 post-injury majors are relevant to that conversation, depending on the exact question.

 

[JuniorNB]

[*]14/59 career major record

[*]7/11 from '99 PGA to '02 US Open

[*]6/14 from '05 Masters to '08 US Open

[*]0/13 with 5 starts missed due to injury since his last major

This says it all.

<> all that will be said.

Absolutely. He may end up winning two or three this year and be back on his 6/14 pace from '05-'08. Then, even the most ardent Tiger-bashers would have to concede that he is, indeed, back to his pre-NostraFinless domination.

 

[dhockster]

[*]14/59 career major record

[*]7/11 from '99 PGA to '02 US Open

[*]6/14 from '05 Masters to '08 US Open

[*]0/13 with 5 starts missed due to injury since his last major

You missed 0/10 from '02 British Open to '04 PGA. It is not a linear progressive as you indicate.And if he goes 5/52 from now until his last major at age 49, he will be considered the GOAT. Just saying.

 

[sho nuff]

Hilarious that it would take 2-3 this year to amke fin wrong.

 

[JuniorNB]

Hilarious that it would take 2-3 this year to amke fin wrong.

Are you suggesting that if he wins one, making him 1/17 since the thread started, he would be as dominant as his 7/11 and 6/14 runs? I think winning 2 would be the START of him returning to that dominance.

 

[BobbyLayne]

[*]14/59 career major record

[*]7/11 from '99 PGA to '02 US Open

[*]6/14 from '05 Masters to '08 US Open

[*]0/13 with 5 starts missed due to injury since his last major

You missed 0/10 from '02 British Open to '04 PGA. It is not a linear progressive as you indicate.And if he goes 5/52 from now until his last major at age 49, he will be considered the GOAT. Just saying.

I have no idea where you are going with this. At what point did I make a statement his career was linear? Makes no sense.

Oh, and you missed the 0-fer-10 from #1 and #2.

 

[Apple Jack]

Again, there are more than four golf tournaments a year.

 

[sho nuff]

Hilarious that it would take 2-3 this year to amke fin wrong.

Are you suggesting that if he wins one, making him 1/17 since the thread started, he would be as dominant as his 7/11 and 6/14 runs? I think winning 2 would be the START of him returning to that dominance.

Im suggesting that winning one this year shows him back to form based on all the evidence and its not shocking that it wouldn't be enough for people like you.

 

[sho nuff]

Again, there are more than four golf tournaments a year.

Shhh...tiger made the majors his focus and goal a while ago....so now the detractors only have that to go on....and nothing else matters.

 

[BobbyLayne]

Again, for the last time there are more than four golf tournaments a year.

fixored

 

[JuniorNB]

Hilarious that it would take 2-3 this year to amke fin wrong.

Are you suggesting that if he wins one, making him 1/17 since the thread started, he would be as dominant as his 7/11 and 6/14 runs? I think winning 2 would be the START of him returning to that dominance.

Im suggesting that winning one this year shows him back to form based on all the evidence and its not shocking that it wouldn't be enough for people like you.

That would mean three other guys also won at least one.

 

[TobiasFunke]

Hilarious that it would take 2-3 this year to amke fin wrong.

Are you suggesting that if he wins one, making him 1/17 since the thread started, he would be as dominant as his 7/11 and 6/14 runs? I think winning 2 would be the START of him returning to that dominance.

Im suggesting that winning one this year shows him back to form based on all the evidence and its not shocking that it wouldn't be enough for people like you.

Yeah, this argument from the anti-Tiger people is pretty stupid. They are taking the 0-13 data- most or all of that from a period in which everyone agrees he wasn't the same guy he was before- and trying to draw conclusions about his "pace" and current level of play based on that. If he wins one major this year he'll on about the same pace he was on majors-wise for his entire career. That plus his performance in non-majors is more than enough for any reasonable person to conclude he's back on top and close to or at his usual performance level.

 

[JuniorNB]

Again, there are more than four golf tournaments a year.

Oh yeah. Those. Good one.

 

[TobiasFunke]

Hilarious that it would take 2-3 this year to amke fin wrong.

Are you suggesting that if he wins one, making him 1/17 since the thread started, he would be as dominant as his 7/11 and 6/14 runs? I think winning 2 would be the START of him returning to that dominance.

Im suggesting that winning one this year shows him back to form based on all the evidence and its not shocking that it wouldn't be enough for people like you.

That would mean three other guys also won at least one.

Math is hard.

 

[JuniorNB]

Hilarious that it would take 2-3 this year to amke fin wrong.

Are you suggesting that if he wins one, making him 1/17 since the thread started, he would be as dominant as his 7/11 and 6/14 runs? I think winning 2 would be the START of him returning to that dominance.

Im suggesting that winning one this year shows him back to form based on all the evidence and its not shocking that it wouldn't be enough for people like you.

That would mean three other guys also won at least one.

Math is hard.

This math isn't:•14/59 career major record•7/11 from '99 PGA to '02 US Open•6/14 from '05 Masters to '08 US Open•0/13 with 5 starts missed due to injury since his last major

 

[sho nuff]

Hilarious that it would take 2-3 this year to amke fin wrong.

Are you suggesting that if he wins one, making him 1/17 since the thread started, he would be as dominant as his 7/11 and 6/14 runs? I think winning 2 would be the START of him returning to that dominance.

Im suggesting that winning one this year shows him back to form based on all the evidence and its not shocking that it wouldn't be enough for people like you.

That would mean three other guys also won at least one.

Congrats on finally learning grade school mathematics. Your parents must be so proud.

 

[sho nuff]

Hilarious that it would take 2-3 this year to amke fin wrong.

Are you suggesting that if he wins one, making him 1/17 since the thread started, he would be as dominant as his 7/11 and 6/14 runs? I think winning 2 would be the START of him returning to that dominance.

Im suggesting that winning one this year shows him back to form based on all the evidence and its not shocking that it wouldn't be enough for people like you.

That would mean three other guys also won at least one.

Math is hard.

This math isn't:•14/59 career major record•7/11 from '99 PGA to '02 US Open•6/14 from '05 Masters to '08 US Open•0/13 with 5 starts missed due to injury since his last major

And winning one now...given his play recently, the swing, the control with irons, and the putting pretty much would have nothing to do with the years before this where he was struggling, hurt, and changing his swing (plus going through all the personal crap).Looking at his game right now...if he wins a major...the premise of this thread would be dismissed by anybody except complete morons...or those taking the contrarian view just to fish for responses and keep up ridiculous arguments (like you).

 

[TobiasFunke]

Hilarious that it would take 2-3 this year to amke fin wrong.

Are you suggesting that if he wins one, making him 1/17 since the thread started, he would be as dominant as his 7/11 and 6/14 runs? I think winning 2 would be the START of him returning to that dominance.

Im suggesting that winning one this year shows him back to form based on all the evidence and its not shocking that it wouldn't be enough for people like you.

That would mean three other guys also won at least one.

Math is hard.

This math isn't:•14/59 career major record

•7/11 from '99 PGA to '02 US Open

•6/14 from '05 Masters to '08 US Open

•0/13 with 5 starts missed due to injury since his last major

But apparently the bolded math is.What you said is wrong. If Tiger wins one, it doesn't mean three other guys win at least one. Here's how it works, genius. If Tiger wins one major, than either (1) three others guys win exactly one major, or (2) at least one and as many as three guys win "at least one." For example, maybe Phil wins the other three, in which case three other guys didn't win at least one, despite what you say.

Given your inability to comprehend math and logic on this very basic level, I suppose its not surprising that you don't grasp more advanced concepts like defining the appropriate sample size to answer a given question.

 

[sho nuff]

I gave him too much credit on the math.

 

[JuniorNB]

Hilarious that it would take 2-3 this year to amke fin wrong.

Are you suggesting that if he wins one, making him 1/17 since the thread started, he would be as dominant as his 7/11 and 6/14 runs? I think winning 2 would be the START of him returning to that dominance.

Im suggesting that winning one this year shows him back to form based on all the evidence and its not shocking that it wouldn't be enough for people like you.

That would mean three other guys also won at least one.

Math is hard.

This math isn't:•14/59 career major record

•7/11 from '99 PGA to '02 US Open

•6/14 from '05 Masters to '08 US Open

•0/13 with 5 starts missed due to injury since his last major

But apparently the bolded math is.What you said is wrong. If Tiger wins one, it doesn't mean three other guys win at least one. Here's how it works, genius. If Tiger wins one major, than either (1) three others guys win exactly one major, or (2) at least one and as many as three guys win "at least one." For example, maybe Phil wins the other three, in which case three other guys didn't win at least one, despite what you say.

Given your inability to comprehend math and logic on this very basic level, I suppose its not surprising that you don't grasp more advanced concepts like defining the appropriate sample size to answer a given question.

Haha. Good one/ You're right. If Tiger wins one and another player wins two or more, then three other players will not have won a major. I concede you the point. However, if that's the case and someone else wins multiple majors this year, then Tiger surely isn't the undisputed dominant player in the game and you still will have looked like a fool all this time.

 

[Apple Jack]

The ridiculous thing about this 0/13 business is that if they would pay any attention at all that the truth of the matter is that it's remarkable that he played as well as he did in the Majors through that stretch. You're talking about somebody who in that time had reconstructive ACL surgery, which is not a, y'know, insignificant area for somebody who swings as hard as he does. Who then blew up his personal life amidst arguably the most humiliating high profile scandal of this generation, and obviously lost focus for a while. Then decided to break and rebuild his entire game, from full swing to putting stroke. Then he ruptured his achilles. Then he sprained his MCL. Then he re-aggravated his achilles. All of these things inhibiting his ability to practice like Tiger Woods has to practice to be Tiger Woods. It's not like the guy was just going along and forgot how to compete. With all that going on he still managed to have the best aggregate performance through all those Majors for any non-winner. Even his calamitous slumps are impressive.

 

[Village Idiot]

Hilarious that it would take 2-3 this year to amke fin wrong.

Are you suggesting that if he wins one, making him 1/17 since the thread started, he would be as dominant as his 7/11 and 6/14 runs? I think winning 2 would be the START of him returning to that dominance.

Im suggesting that winning one this year shows him back to form based on all the evidence and its not shocking that it wouldn't be enough for people like you.

That would mean three other guys also won at least one.

Math is hard.

This math isn't:•14/59 career major record•7/11 from '99 PGA to '02 US Open•6/14 from '05 Masters to '08 US Open•0/13 with 5 starts missed due to injury since his last major

So there is a gap between '02 and '05 where he didn't win a major and he isn't allowed to have another gap then win more majors?If he wins 1 this year to start another run where he is on a similar career major win% what will you say?His career percentage is 23.72%.If he wins 1 this year that's 25%.I guess math is hard.

 

[TobiasFunke]

Hilarious that it would take 2-3 this year to amke fin wrong.

Are you suggesting that if he wins one, making him 1/17 since the thread started, he would be as dominant as his 7/11 and 6/14 runs? I think winning 2 would be the START of him returning to that dominance.

Im suggesting that winning one this year shows him back to form based on all the evidence and its not shocking that it wouldn't be enough for people like you.

That would mean three other guys also won at least one.

Math is hard.

This math isn't:•14/59 career major record

•7/11 from '99 PGA to '02 US Open

•6/14 from '05 Masters to '08 US Open

•0/13 with 5 starts missed due to injury since his last major

But apparently the bolded math is.What you said is wrong. If Tiger wins one, it doesn't mean three other guys win at least one. Here's how it works, genius. If Tiger wins one major, than either (1) three others guys win exactly one major, or (2) at least one and as many as three guys win "at least one." For example, maybe Phil wins the other three, in which case three other guys didn't win at least one, despite what you say.

Given your inability to comprehend math and logic on this very basic level, I suppose its not surprising that you don't grasp more advanced concepts like defining the appropriate sample size to answer a given question.

Haha. Good one/ You're right. If Tiger wins one and another player wins two or more, then three other players will not have won a major. I concede you the point. However, if that's the case and someone else wins multiple majors this year, then Tiger surely isn't the undisputed dominant player in the game and you still will have looked like a fool all this time.

That's also not really true, at least if you limit "undisputed" to people who understand the sport and are better at math and logic than you are. Again, you don't seem to understand the concepts of probability and variance and small sample sizes. The person currently ranked #50 in the world could conceivably win two majors and nothing else and miss a bunch of cuts in the process, while Tiger wins a pile of WGC events and the Players and the FedEx Cup and the money title and is ranked #1 all year. If that happened, everyone but you and your logic-challenged friends would call Tiger the dominant player in golf. In a sport with this much week-to-week variance in performance, it's not impossible that someone who is merely good would end up being great/lucky twice out of four times. And something kind of like that actually happened in 1998. Mark O'Meara won two majors, but if you'd asked people to pick who would win a tournament in January of 1999, very few if any would have taken him over a handful of other guys.Keep it up, though. I enjoy watching you make as much of a fool of yourself right now as you think I might eventually look like later.