or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Entertainment, Culture, and Sports › Tiger: Overrated?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Tiger: Overrated?

post #1 of 56
Thread Starter 
Not to take anything away from Tiger, because he's obviously a great golfer, but he's winning by just one, two, three strokes. I don't really know golf well, but it seems like any given day there are bunch of people who can beat him, so why are people letting him win so often? They say he's won more than 1 of 4 tournaments he plays! I keep hearing about the "intimidation factor", but come on, these guys are pros and they've had a a long time already (8 or 9 years?) to get over the awe factor. Why do they keep letting themselves get psyched out!
post #2 of 56
because he is that good. i mean the stats say it all. first to 50 wins by three years. 36-3 when he's winning after the third round. 21-0 when he's winning by 2 after the third round. i think it's the same thing that Michael Jordan had.

but on the flip side, he's human too, missing the cut at the US Open.

-Jeff
post #3 of 56
Overrated because his winning margin isn't large enough? That's a very odd way to look at it. All you need is one stroke to win.
post #4 of 56
Thread Starter 
No question he's great, I just mean, he's definitely beatable, and it seems like his degree of dominance is largely psychological. Even he says so. These guys are all pros -- why can't more of them develop that killer instinct?
post #5 of 56
If my dad just died, I don't think I would be at the top of my game either. Tiger in my mind is the best golfer of all time. He hits shots that others don't even try. Others around him crumble on the last 18 holes. If he wins by too many strokes people say the field is weak, if he wins by one or two strokes, people say he isn't playing well. I heard an announcer say Tiger still has many flaws with his swing. He has won 11 majors and his last two tournaments. How many flaws can he possible have? Not many if you ask me.
post #6 of 56
Um - youngest player ever to 50 career victories, winner of 11 majors already... Overrated? No, not at all.

Overrated because he only wins by one or two strokes? No - it just shows that the level of competition has increased as he's been on the tour but he's still better than anyone else. Look what he did in 1997 when he won his first Masters in his first full year on tour -

Quote:
In 1997 became the youngest player to win the Masters accomplishing the feat at age 21. Set the Tournament scoring record with a 270, 18-under-par total. Previous record of 17 under was held by Jack Nicklaus (1965) and Raymond Floyd (1976). Also set record for largest winning margin capturing the title by 12 strokes. In all, set 20 Tournament records and tied six others.

I'm actually appreciative of the fact that I get to watch Tiger play and have gotten to do so several times in person. It's no stretch to say he's the greatest golfer of all time and I enjoy seeing him win as often as possible.


I think this site puts it best...

Tiger Woods is God
post #7 of 56
Tiger obviously is an incredible golf talent; but his edge is between his ears. I don't recall seeing him attempt a stupid shot. Or if he has, he's so physically gifted he pulls it off. Unlike (lately) Phil the Thrill, Els, etc. He wins because of his ability to focus on the stroke he's standing over. Unless he decides to quit the game and spend his days between the sheets with that beauty he's married to, he'll surely top Nicklaus' majors.
post #8 of 56
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bradford

I think this site puts it best...

Tiger Woods is God

Wow, that site is just... disturbing. Please tell me you're not "The Pastor".
post #9 of 56
His come from behind to win match play in the U.S. Amateurs was some of the best golf I've ever seen.
Mentally, he's one of the best. I never had a chance to see Ben Hogan, but its sounds like Tigers cut from the same cloth.
post #10 of 56
One of the golf insiders was commenting somewhere that there are only a couple of players who go into a match thinking that they can beat Tiger, which certainly says something in his favor.

I still think Jack is the greatest.
post #11 of 56
His dominance is mostly psychological, but his physical talents exceed those of everyone else on tour as well. He hits the ball so far that he can play smaller, more accurate irons than his competitors in many instances.

The comparisons to Jordan are apt, and, no, he is not overrated.
post #12 of 56
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Checks
One of the golf insiders was commenting somewhere that there are only a couple of players who go into a match thinking that they can beat Tiger, which certainly says something in his favor.


Yeah, but doesn't that say more about them than Tiger? There's no excuse for that kind of defeatist attitude. These are professional athletes, come on!

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheRookie
His dominance is mostly psychological, but his physical talents exceed those of everyone else on tour as well. He hits the ball so far that he can play smaller, more accurate irons than his competitors in many instances.


So why don't more of these guys hit the gym? Look at Tubby Mickelson. Sure, he's done okay with the lard he's carrying around -- almost three majors in a row! But that's just the point -- he and so many others are so close to being regular challengers, what's the excuse for not looking for that edge?

Look at the Williams sisters in tennis, when they first came on, they were playing a new kind of game, hitting the gym and out-powering everyone and they forced everyone to change their approach to the game. So then, logically, everybody stepped it up and changed their approach, and their dominance is gone.

Now whether having a dominant player vs. a deep pool of contenders is better or worse for a sport is a different issue, but I just can't quite understand why the competitors find him such a tough nut to crack.

And I love Tiger, really -- he's the man! I just don't quite understand the whole thing from a big picture perspective.
post #13 of 56
Yeah yeah yeah, but the important question remains unanswered - why does Tiger dress so poorly? Dark baggy pleated dress pants with shiny red or green polo shirt. The occasional nike sweater vest.

post #14 of 56
NO!!!

I'm sorry, what was the question again?
post #15 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by chorse123
Yeah yeah yeah, but the important question remains unanswered - why does Tiger dress so poorly? Dark baggy pleated dress pants with shiny red or green polo shirt. The occasional nike sweater vest.


because he gets paid (insert really really large number here) dollars to do so.

-Jeff
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Entertainment, Culture, and Sports › Tiger: Overrated?