Define "a while"...

This is his first full season where he was heathly most of the prior year and done with his swing changes. You don't GOAT like he did without being able to practice all facets a **** ton.

He was a few good breaks from winning a major or two along with his 4 regular tour wins.

Coulda, woulda, shoulda, but you know that's how golf works and he was right there.

The difference in narrative based on 3 majors this year is hilarious.

But but but but. Defend him lok!!

I probably am being a bit harsh but he should have bagged at least 1 of the 3 Majors this year.

The entire "major" thing is a stupid obsession created by golf commentators who need something to talk about. To be fair, Woods and Nickalaus feed the hype but given they are one and two in this category it's not surprising.

There is nothing statistically different about many majors when compared to many other events. The field this week is as difficult as any major and the course as hard.

Anyone who views the entire game of golf, or an entire career, through only the lens of majors in simply a sucker for hype.

People act like a major is worth 10 regular events when in fact a case could maybe be made they are worth 1.5 regular events and even then I'm not convinced.

Golf is a lot like poker and its strange that people don't realize that here in regards to Tiger. There is a lot of variance and you have to just keep playing well and eventually trust that the results will come (Masters flag etc...). Tiger winning all 4 majors in a row really screwed up most peoples version of reality for him.

Tiger's season (10 Tourneys)
Finish:
1 - Farmers
T37 - Match Play
T33 - Honda
1 - WGC
1 - Arnold Palmer
T4 - Masters
1 - Players
T65 - Memorial
T32 - US Open
T6 - Open
(1 - Bridgestone)**

Insane, hes going to win a major

but you are forgetting about the magical fairy dust that is sprinkled over majors thereby eliminating them from the laws of mathematical probability and variance. pssh. rookie mistake! There will be no place for you on the Golf Channel.

guys

guys

guys


GUYS. I'm pretty sure he's insecure about getting caught having an affair with 17 different women and not winning a major in 5 years. If I had to guess.

But we all know Tiger is the best player in the world right now. That is pretty clear. Whether you want to believe it or not it is all about Majors for him from here on out, lets not kid ourselves that it isn't. He is going to win 2+ tournaments every year anyway. The Major drought will be what drives him on which is good for us golf fans because I think deep down everyone wants to see him challenge Jacks record. The more often he gets in contention but doesn't close it out the more the pressure intensifies. If he gets one I can see him going on a complete tear and passing Jack in no time.

Just because Tiger has bought into the majors hype doesn't make it any more real. Until someone shows me numbers that prove there is something special about majors I will remain confident in the knowledge it's a largely invented distinction.

Yeah, there's probably nothing special with the four most respected golf tournaments in the world.

Yawn

Show me numbers and I'll instantly agree.

Ya, I hate evidence based arguments. Say hi to god for me.

This. x100000000. The majors are held on historic courses, have a lot of media hype, and are tied in to a historic concept. That's all that separates them from regular tournaments. The media has pumped them up obsessively to the point where people stupidly think that they're the only thing that matters.

They don't have the best fields. The Players, The Barclays, and the Deutsche Bank all have equal or better fields. This week's tournament has the same quality of top players, just a smaller field. Same is true for the 70-player BMW and a couple of WGC events. You want to say majors are way more significant than the Reno-Tahoe or the Mayakoba, that's cool, they are - those fields aren't good. But you are playing equal or better players in some of the aforemetioned tournaments as you are the big four.

People forget that the Masters is a 95-100 player field, 10-15 of whom are elderly past champions or amateurs who clearly can't compete to win.
The Open Championship often has a number of international players or British qualifiers that are horrible and stink the place up.
20/156 players in the PGA Championship field clearly cannot compete at that level and show it each and every time by shooting 81-83 and going home. If you're a pro, you've beaten 1/8 of the field just by stepping onto the first tee.

If someone thinks Woods' about-to-be-5 wins this year are <<<< winning one major, show me all the average or bad players who have won 5+ events in one season. Doubt the likes of Michael Campbell, YE Yang, Todd Hamilton or Shaun Micheel will show up on the list.

That's exactly what makes them speciel - the history, the courses, the number of spectators, the glory. I don't think there are anyone that only considers majors when they judge who is the best golfer.

Sure there is. Every Jack goater...

Nobody argues the majors are played on great courses with fascinating history and I love them as much as the next golf fan. I've obsessively read books about all the great courses. My issue comes when people mistake subjective history with objective reality about the difficulty in winning those events.

I might be persuaded that winning a major is psychologically more difficult because many of the players have also bought into the hype but I just don't think there is a statistical case to be made when comparing field, slope, stimpmeter and length of majors and several non-majors.

There are a bunch of people in this very thread who constantly assert that they're the only measuring stick. And as someone just said above, everyone who loves Jack as the GOAT does the same.

That's before we even get to the media, who often cover golf in the same fashion - ignoring regular events, shipping all the glory to winners of the big four.

The what is criticism and blame. He can't take any, not regarding his personal life, not regarding his golf game. I'm not a psychologist but I would guess it's lingering daddy issues from that way he was raised that will be with him for his whole life. Even in the Haney years when he was winning majors, if he hits a bad wedge it's always the wind or the lie or the number Stevie gave him, his reaction is always to externalize blame whereas Phil will admit he hit a bad shot or made a bad decision.

The difference being golf shots are things that you have control over while cards are things that happen to you. It's a pretty huge difference. Consistently missing putts on Sunday that you make on Friday isn't the same thing as getting a cold deck

And the players themselves. Tiger doesn't go to the Bridgestone two weeks in advance to practice and scout the course. Phil and Adam Scott don't design their practice and playing schedule in an effort to peak at the WGCs. They mean more because the history, and also the players try harder to win them.

Awesome post 2outsnoprob.

Yesterday he missed 2 makable putts over the last 4 holes. After the round he said he pushed the first one and didn't trust his read on the second one. In other words, he made a bad shot and a bad decision.

Get your actual evidence out of this thread. Talk more about who he slept with or that he uses swear words.

If you are winning multiple majors it's pretty damn likely you are winning regular tour events as well so I don't think people are ignoring those events.

He did, but he also refused to acknowledge nerves played any part when they clearly did.

It's pretty laughable to say that nerves have not played a factor in TigerGOATs major slump.

At least it proves he's not a cyborg