Tiger fact...

[Txxxxxxx]

Ofcourse you'd say Nicklaus. He is the best right now. I've read this 10 times and I can't believe what you wrote. are You saying Tiger doesn't have consistency? He's missed. 3 cuts in 11 years on tour.

206 PGA Tour Events - 48 Wins ( 23.3%) and 19 2nds

Greg Norman. 320 events - 20 wins. ( 6.25% ) and 31 2nd's and 48 missed cuts.

The numbers speak for themselves.

I'm not comparing Norman to Tiger. I said I grew up watching him, and based on Thotho's post, Norman is right behind Tiger for most weeks ranked as number 1. Your post proved my point to a tee. Pardon the pun, but as you can see, the two golfers you've listed are not close in win%, but the ranking system has Norman right behind him. This being proof that the ranking system is just about as good as the NCAA ranking system.

As for Tiger's consistancy.....Tiger himself mentions the weakness of his game is being consistant from one tournament to the next. In fact, I watched an interview with Tiger a couple months ago before the Masters and that is exactly what he said. He said and I quote..."I just can't put four good rounds together..." He's also pretty much the best player I've seen get himself out of trouble. Want to know why? BECAUSE HE'S ALWAYS IN IT! HAHA!! The guy is all over the place on the golf course. I followed him for all 18 holes for all four rounds and it was trouble shots A LOT of the tournament. Mind you, since then, he's been a lot better, but you never used to see Jack hitting out of the trees that many times a tournament. Besides, is consistancy measured on how many wins you have, or how consistant of a golfer you are in general? Take tennis for example because it's another one man sport. A tennis player might win 26% of the tournaments he's entered, but commit a ton of unforced errors. Is he a consitant tennis player? Just because he won, doesn't mean he's consistant.

[Andru]

But Tiger and Davis' 2 irons were probably more forgiving, no?

I'm not taking anything away from Jack.

TW played butterknives when he first came out on Tour. He was one of the last to go to graphite shafts? Until recently Tiger had not embraced the technology bandwagon.

The the what's in the bag section on TGC. Check out his early wins.

[Andru]

I'm not comparing Norman to Tiger. I said I grew up watching him, and based on Thotho's post, Norman is right behind Tiger for most weeks ranked as number 1. Your post proved my point to a tee. Pardon the pun, but as you can see, the two golfers you've listed are not close in win%, but the ranking system has Norman right behind him. This being proof that the ranking system is just about as good as the NCAA ranking system.

As for Tiger's consistancy.....Tiger himself mentions the weakness of his game is being consistant from one tournament to the next. In fact, I watched an interview with Tiger a couple months ago before the Masters and that is exactly what he said. He said and I quote..."I just can't put four good rounds together..." He's also pretty much the best player I've seen get himself out of trouble. Want to know why? BECAUSE HE'S ALWAYS IN IT! HAHA!! The guy is all over the place on the golf course. I followed him for all 18 holes for all four rounds and it was trouble shots A LOT of the tournament. Mind you, since then, he's been a lot better, but you never used to see Jack hitting out of the trees that many times a tournament. Besides, is consistancy measured on how many wins you have, or how consistant of a golfer you are in general? Take tennis for example because it's another one man sport. A tennis player might win 26% of the tournaments he's entered, but commit a ton of unforced errors. Is he a consitant tennis player? Just because he won, doesn't mean he's consistant.

First of all Tiger saying he's not consistent and you saying it are two different things. Tiger's expectations are hgiher than you can imagine. He'll hit a shot 4 feet form the hole If he didn't catch it flush with the exact ball flight he had in mind. He'll say he got lucky.

You're talking about semantics here. There are several ways to measure consistency. You can measure every part of your game from driving to putting. As a PGA tour member the only way to measure consistency, is your game as a WHOLE. That's all that matters. The PGA doesn't hand out cheques if you lead the tournemant in fairways hit. You get paid by how well you score compared to your competitors.

There are several things you need to play good golf, Driving, ball striking, scrambling, putting. Some days you have all 4 going (rare), other days you only have a few.

Tiger consistently has more of his game going than anyone else. That's why he's only missed 3 cuts in his professional career. Even though he doesn't have his Driver going. He still has the other 3 working. That's why he can still score and place higher than the majority of the players he plays against.

[Txxxxxxx]

First of all Tiger saying he's not consistent and you saying it are two different things. Tiger's expectations are hgiher than you can imagine. He'll hit a shot 4 feet form the hole If he didn't catch it flush with the exact ball flight he had in mind. He'll say he got lucky.

You're talking about semantics here. There are several ways to measure consistency. You can measure every part of your game from driving to putting. As a PGA tour member the only way to measure consistency, is your game as a WHOLE. That's all that matters. The PGA doesn't hand out cheques if you lead the tournemant in fairways hit. You get paid by how well you score compared to your competitors.

There are several things you need to play good golf, Driving, ball striking, scrambling, putting. Some days you have all 4 going (rare), other days you only have a few.

Tiger consistently has more of his game going than anyone else. That's why he's only missed 3 cuts in his professional career. Even though he doesn't have his Driver going. He still has the other 3 working. That's why he can still score and place higher than the majority of the players he plays against.

You should have a look at this link then if you think the man plays consistantly.

http://www.tigerwoods.com/events/tig...chType=results


Then this one...


http://www.tigerwoods.com/events/tig...e=6269&sid=348


In my mind, those finishes speak for themself.

[Andru]

You should have a look at this link then if you think the man plays consistantly.

http://www.tigerwoods.com/events/tig...chType=results


Then this one...


http://www.tigerwoods.com/events/tig...e=6269&sid=348


In my mind, those finishes speak for themself.

This is almost comedy. I've heard Tiger Woods called a lot of things. Inconsistent is not one of them. I don't believe you're being genuine here.

You think 13 top 10's in 21 events and 4 top 10's in 7 events is an example of inconsistent play? No offence man but what are you smoking?

[Txxxxxxx]

This is almost comedy. I've heard Tiger Woods called a lot of things. Inconsistent is not one of them. I don't believe you're being genuine here.

You think 13 top 10's in 21 events and 4 top 10's in 7 events is an example of inconsistent play? No offence man but what are you smoking?

Have a look at last year for example ok?

Win, 23rd, 53rd, Win, Missed Cut, then goes on a more consistant streak, then 40th, then Win, misses Cut.

Are you telling me that is consistant golf? No offence to you my friend, but what is so consistant about that golfing?

When someone wins a tournament then misses a cut 10 days later, that's pretty inconsistant in my books. He was up and down all year except for the stretch between The Memorial and the NEC Invitational.

This year, he is far more consistant with his placings, but he's still 148th in driving accuracy, 166th in putts per round, and 102nd in scrambling. His scoring average is 4th mind you, which is impressive given those stats.

Now, I'm totally unbiased in my comments because I happen to like the guy because he's interesting to watch. That being said, if I were some statistition who didn't watch golf, or play golf, I'd have a look at those finishes for last year and say the guy wasn't playing consistant golf. If I looked at them this year, I'd say, yeah, he's consistantly finishing in this range so he's more consistant.

[spackler]

Are you telling me that is consistant golf? No offence to you my friend, but what is so consistant about that golfing?

He finished in the top 3 in 12 of 21 tournments. The two MCs and the 40th and 53rd you cite were the only times all year that he didn't finish in the top 25.

You know who's consistent this year? Todd Hamilton. He's missed the cut in 12 of 14 events in 2006. Consistency rocks!

[Andru]

Have a look at last year for example ok?

Win, 23rd, 53rd, Win, Missed Cut, then goes on a more consistant streak, then 40th, then Win, misses Cut.

Are you telling me that is consistant golf? No offence to you my friend, but what is so consistant about that golfing?

When someone wins a tournament then misses a cut 10 days later, that's pretty inconsistant in my books. He was up and down all year except for the stretch between The Memorial and the NEC Invitational.

This year, he is far more consistant with his placings, but he's still 148th in driving accuracy, 166th in putts per round, and 102nd in scrambling. His scoring average is 4th mind you, which is impressive given those stats.

Now, I'm totally unbiased in my comments because I happen to like the guy because he's interesting to watch. That being said, if I were some statistition who didn't watch golf, or play golf, I'd have a look at those finishes for last year and say the guy wasn't playing consistant golf. If I looked at them this year, I'd say, yeah, he's consistantly finishing in this range so he's more consistant.

You sound like a statistician who doesn't play or watch golf.

This is tournament golf. He's not going to finish top 10 everytime. it's not like a sprinter where he runs the same distance every race.

They're playing different tournaments and different fields. The variables are different. You can only apply the standards set for that particular sport.

Is he mathematically consistent? No. But in terms of professional touring golf. If you finish in the top 10 half the time you play. There isn't a person (other than you) that wouldn't call a pga tour player consistent.

["Richard"]

You are basing tigers consit. on 5 rounds of golf over a decade long career?

[Txxxxxxx]

There isn't a person (other than you) that wouldn't call a pga tour player consistent.

No? Funny how Arnold Palmer called him inconsistant and cocky.....He mentioned that in an interview after Tiger thought the TV stations should give him luxuries because the people on tune in to see him. Palmer also mentioned how he hopes Tiger knows the game made him, he didn't make the game. I must be going mad. LOL!!

Anyway, there are plenty of people, golf professionals, and analysts that will agree with me. It doesn't bother me that you don't.

[Txxxxxxx]

You are basing tigers consit. on 5 rounds of golf over a decade long career?

Umm, no, he's had more than 5 rounds like that in his decade long career.

["Richard"]

I don't know man, the longest cuts made streak seems pretty consistent to me. To be #1 for 393 weeks is pretty consistent as well.

[Txxxxxxx]

I don't know man, the longest cuts made streak seems pretty consistent to me. To be #1 for 393 weeks is pretty consistent as well.

That's why I think the ranking system is a joke. Is Norman the number two golfer of all time then because his stats show he's right behind Tiger? Someone else clearly pointed out that his win % is not even close, but Norman has almost double the second place finishes as Tiger, perhaps making up for the wins?

Anyway, I have a feeling it's a matter of opinion rather than something we can come to a decision on. Many people say he is inconsistant, many say he is. I guess we can agree to disagree.

["Richard"]

of couse but its always good to try to see the other persons point of view. Obviously based on stats right now you would have to say jack is the best golfer ever. More wins, more second place finnishes and more majors but the reason I say you can't use stats is because tiger has played so little golf compred to jack but is already 1/2. The only thing tiger wont reach is jacks 2nd place finishes, i think we can all agree on that.

[Txxxxxxx]

of couse but its always good to try to see the other persons point of view. Obviously based on stats right now you would have to say jack is the best golfer ever. More wins, more second place finnishes and more majors but the reason I say you can't use stats is because tiger has played so little golf compred to jack but is already 1/2. The only thing tiger wont reach is jacks 2nd place finishes, i think we can all agree on that.

Agreed 100%, but I don't think Tiger will catch him in Major wins either.

["Richard"]

and that is where we will agree to disagree! All I can say is that if I had started golf at the same age tiger did.. I would already have more majors than jack

[Txxxxxxx]

and that is where we will agree to disagree! All I can say is that if I had started golf at the same age tiger did.. I would already have more majors than jack

BAHAHAHA! Okay.

[LBH]

Well, I'd have to say Jack Nicklaus if I had to pick.
Here are his stats...
PGA Tour Victories- 71
2nd Place finishes- 58
Worldwide Victories- 100
Masters- 6
PGA Championships- 5
US Open - 4
British Open - 3
US Amateur - 2
18 holes in one!
...

Let's compare those to Tiger's achievements to date...

PGA Tour Victories - 48
2nd place finishes - 19
Wordwide victories (including PGA Tour)- 67
Masters - 4
PGA Championships -2
US Open - 2
British Open - 2
US Amateur - 3
According to an interview he gave once, he has 19 holes in one

Not bad considering Tiger is only 30 years old.

[Andru]

Anyway, I have a feeling it's a matter of opinion rather than something we can come to a decision on. Many people say he is inconsistant, many say he is. I guess we can agree to disagree.

It's no opinion here sorry to say. There's numbers to support this and you're not correct here. Other than his driving I've never heard anyone call him inconsistent. Please elaborate on which experts and who are "many people" You're the first one I've ever heard say this.

The world golf rankings is a perfect way to to measure consistency. it's based on WR points earned per tournament played. The higher you finish in your starts the higher your ranking. Tiger has been number 1 and Norman for the same reason. Everytime they teed it up they consistently finished high. The did so more than anyone they were competing against at the time.

Example VJ Singh has more World Ranking points overall than Phil Mickelson. But VJ plays more events. Yes his total is higher but his performance PER start is not as efficient.

if you want to measure consistent play here's the test. You have 100 bucks to put on Tiger. you have 2 choices. He'll finish in the top 10 or he'll miss the cut. Which are you taking? Even money on both. The choice is easy isn't it?

[Txxxxxxx]

It's no opinion here sorry to say. There's numbers to support this and you're not correct here. Other than his driving I've never heard anyone call him inconsistent. Please elaborate on which experts and who are "many people" You're the first one I've ever heard say this.

The world golf rankings is a perfect way to to measure consistency. it's based on WR points earned per tournament played. The higher you finish in your starts the higher your ranking. Tiger has been number 1 and Norman for the same reason. Everytime they teed it up they consistently finished high. The did so more than anyone they were competing against at the time.

Example VJ Singh has more World Ranking points overall than Phil Mickelson. But VJ plays more events. Yes his total is higher but his performance PER start is not as efficient.

if you want to measure consistent play here's the test. You have 100 bucks to put on Tiger. you have 2 choices. He'll finish in the top 10 or he'll miss the cut. Which are you taking? Even money on both. The choice is easy isn't it?

I wish I had a link to that Palmer interview, because you'd bite your tongue I think if you heard what he had to say about him. I watch pretty much every PGA Tour tournament because I have a PVR and US stations which allows me to get all the coverage. I've heard many a time, the analysts echoing exactly what I've said. Do you think I just pulled his inconsistancy out of my ass? I happen to agree with the people who say this, you don't.

As for your $100 wager example. It makes no sense. Consistancy is not measured whether he makes the cut or finishes top 10. You do know that the cut could be 50 or more golfers don't you? If the guy wins a tournament, then the next one he plays he finishes 48th, that's inconsistant. I don't know if you noticed the stats or not, but there are more inconsistancies than the mans driving.

Like I said before, I don't really give a rats ass what you think or if you think I'm wrong, because people who actually get paid to analyze the sport, and one of the world's all-time best golfers have agreed with each other. Your opinion is just that, an opinion.

If you want to use the golf rankings and say that Norman is second best ever in the PGA, and Tiger is number one, then that's up to you. Your world rankings are like the BCCS. Players in the rankings move up even if they don't play a tournment sometimes, just because the guy above them didn't place well. How does that make sense? It's not completely accurate, and that's why we can take them for what they are. I'll have my opinion, you can have yours. I might think you're a complete idiot, others might like you. Get my point?

Agree to disagree.

Mods, please close this thread because it's going nowhere now. I think there have been enough 'OPINIONS' posted here.

Thanks

[Andru]

I wish I had a link to that Palmer interview, because you'd bite your tongue I think if you heard what he had to say about him. I watch pretty much every PGA Tour tournament because I have a PVR and US stations which allows me to get all the coverage. I've heard many a time, the analysts echoing exactly what I've said. Do you think I just pulled his inconsistancy out of my ass? I happen to agree with the people who say this, you don't.

As for your $100 wager example. It makes no sense. Consistancy is not measured whether he makes the cut or finishes top 10. You do know that the cut could be 50 or more golfers don't you? If the guy wins a tournament, then the next one he plays he finishes 48th, that's inconsistant. I don't know if you noticed the stats or not, but there are more inconsistancies than the mans driving.

Like I said before, I don't really give a rats ass what you think or if you think I'm wrong, because people who actually get paid to analyze the sport, and one of the world's all-time best golfers have agreed with each other. Your opinion is just that, an opinion.

If you want to use the golf rankings and say that Norman is second best ever in the PGA, and Tiger is number one, then that's up to you. Your world rankings are like the BCCS. Players in the rankings move up even if they don't play a tournment sometimes, just because the guy above them didn't place well. How does that make sense? It's not completely accurate, and that's why we can take them for what they are. I'll have my opinion, you can have yours. I might think you're a complete idiot, others might like you. Get my point?

Agree to disagree.

Mods, please close this thread because it's going nowhere now. I think there have been enough 'OPINIONS' posted here.

Thanks

Since this is closing let's end with this.

Just and FYI the Hypothetical bet demonstrates ones ability to predict the outcome of an event. Like Tiger entering a tournament. Given the choice most smart people would take Tiger finishing in the top 10. Why? Because he does it so often. He's CONSISTENT in his finishes. If you predict he's going to finish in the top 10 you'll be right half the time. Compared to a robot welding steel no he's not consistent. Compared to the rest of the professional golf world, the real world. He's consistent.

[Andru]

EdmontonGolfer

I just realized we're talking about 2 totally different things that's why we're miles apart. We're talking about consistency yes, but from 2 totally different angles.

[B Nation]

Well, I'd have to say Jack Nicklaus if I had to pick.

Here are his stats...

PGA Tour Victories- 71

2nd Place finishes- 58

Worldwide Victories- 100

Masters- 6

PGA Championships- 5

US Open - 4

British Open - 3

US Amateur - 2

#1 in lowest scoring 8 times.

I don't think this is true. Anyways Tiger has done it 6 times before he even turned 30.

Here is a link.

http://golf.about.com/cs/historyofgo...rdontrophy.htm

[Txxxxxxx]

I don't think this is true. Anyways Tiger has done it 6 times before he even turned 30.

Here is a link.

http://golf.about.com/cs/historyofgo...rdontrophy.htm

Nicklaus lists it in his yardage books for the courses he designs. That's where that stat comes from. Are you saying he's lying?

[Txxxxxxx]

Just thought I'd add something since Vijay was mentioned. He's number one in top ten finishes this year with 7 out of 12 tournaments. Mickelson is third with 6 out of 11, and Tiger is ninth with 4 out of 7.

["Richard"]

Hello, this is a bit mis leading since those rankings are based on TOTAL top 10 finnishes.

7/12 - 58.3% (great but no wins)
4/7 - 57.1% (2 wins)
6/11 - 54.5% (2 wins)

Just thought I'd add something since Vijay was mentioned. He's number one in top ten finishes this year with 7 out of 12 tournaments. Mickelson is third with 6 out of 11, and Tiger is ninth with 4 out of 7.

[3Jack]

Anyone else noticing that people are consistently spelling consistent consistant when the mean to spell consistent? Constantly! lol...

[Andru]

Anyone else noticing that people are consistently spelling consistent consistant when the mean to spell consistent? Constantly! lol...

Whew. checked and I'm good.

[Andru]

Nicklaus lists it in his yardage books for the courses he designs. That's where that stat comes from. Are you saying he's lying?

No The stat he lists may not represent the Lowest Avg Scorer for the year on the PGG tour. It may mean something else. The list for the Vardon Trophy demonstrates The person who had the lowest avg score per round on the PGA tour for a specific year.

["Richard"]

why close my thread EG? no one is getting out of hand, just good old fun debating!