Tiger Woods Question

[dsm]

I don't play golf, but I was watching some pro golfer being interviewed who said, "Tiger is no longer as untouchable as he was back in 2000." If this is true, why? Have his opponents gotten better, or is he just not as good as he was? Or maybe a combination of the two?

Thanks

[Sykes]

combination. He's still the best who ever played though.

[RacersEdge]

It sounds like a pro trying to convince himself of what he says.

TW is still damn good - easily the best player in the world - he won his 5th tourney of the year including 2 majors so he's a lock for Player of the Year. In golf you're never "untouchable" just by the nature of the game, but he's about as close as a player can get.

[SossMan]

gimme a break...he went 1-1-2-4 in this years majors.

[hoopsie44]

[ QUOTE ]
He's still the best who ever played though.

[/ QUOTE ]

By what measure?

[JTG51]

[ QUOTE ]
gimme a break...he went 1-1-2-4 in this years majors.

[/ QUOTE ]

So you think he's as dominant now as he was in 2000?

[holeplug]

In 2000 Tiger had his "A+" game on so he went out and won the U.S Open by 15 shots then the British by 12 in route to the Tiger Slam. I don't think he will ever be quite that good again but he did pretty decent this year by finally getting used to his new swing.

[Hal 2000]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't play golf, but I was watching some pro golfer being interviewed who said, "Tiger is no longer as untouchable as he was back in 2000." If this is true, why? Have his opponents gotten better, or is he just not as good as he was? Or maybe a combination of the two?

Thanks

[/ QUOTE ]

Although he's not quite as dominant himself, some of his rivals have just started working harder to bring their games up to his level. The best example is Vijay Singh, who by all accounts is the hardest working man on the tour today.

Courses themselves have gotten more difficult too, namely in the bigger tournaments. They punish golfers who tend not to hit fairways consistently; the X factor for Tiger is that he can blast out of a terrible lie from 200 yards out and knock it stiff like no one else.

[SossMan]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
gimme a break...he went 1-1-2-4 in this years majors.

[/ QUOTE ]

So you think he's as dominant now as he was in 2000?

[/ QUOTE ]

of course he's not, and i know that while technically that's what the OP was asking, these questions nearly always spiral down to "what's wrong with Tiger" discussions.

[BadBoyBenny]

Show tiger is still significantly better than everyone else, but has given up some ground to the field. If you think courses have gotten harder in the last 5 years then that skews this stat, but it looks like everyone else is treading water and Tiger is coming back to them.

While Tiger is still known as the tour's best closer, he also hasn't closed his victories as easily or convincingly as in 2000.

Also note that 2000 was an exceptional year. His stats this year look pretty similar to every good year he's had except for 2000. (1999, 2001, and 2002)


Adjusted Scoring Average - 2000

1 Tiger Woods 67.79
2 Phil Mickelson 69.25
3 Ernie Els 69.31
4 David Duval 69.41
5 Paul Azinger 69.68
6 Nick Price 69.75
7 Stewart Cink 69.79
8 Steve Flesch 69.80
9 Tom Lehman 69.84
10 Loren Roberts 69.89

Adjusted Scoring Average - 2005

1 Tiger Woods 68.59
2 Vijay Singh 69.01
3 Phil Mickelson 69.23
4 Jim Furyk 69.24
5 Luke Donald 69.35
6 Kenny Perry 69.53
7 David Toms 69.61
8 Sergio Garcia 69.69
9 Darren Clarke 69.78
10 Scott Verplank 69.80

Actual Scoring Average - 2000

1 Tiger Woods 68.17
2 Phil Mickelson 69.35
3 Steve Flesch 69.64
4 Davis Love III 69.89
5 David Duval 69.90
5 Ernie Els 69.90
7 Kenny Perry 69.96
8 Stewart Cink 70.00
9 Paul Azinger 70.06
10 Greg Chalmers 70.11

Actual Scoring Average - 2000

1 Tiger Woods 69.22
2 Vijay Singh 69.57
3 Jim Furyk 69.78
4 Phil Mickelson 69.80
5 Richard Johnson 69.88
6 Ben Crane 69.94
7 David Toms 70.00
8 Kenny Perry 70.16
9 Billy Mayfair 70.21
10 Mathias Gronberg 70.28