Tiger Woods 2000

Brazil World Cup qualifying matches in 1969 against Venezuela, Paraguay and Columbia

Played 6, Won 6, GD 23:2

At the World Cup 1970 qualifying round against England, Czechoslovakia and Romania

Played 3, Won 3, GD 8:3

QF vs Peru 4:2 - 90 mins
SF vs Uruguay 3:1 - 90 mins
Final vs Italy 4:1 - 90 mins

The best football team/squad I have ever seen.

Over those 12 games: Played 12, Won 12, GD 42:9
An average of 3.5 goals per game - 90 mins all games.

England did very well to concede only one goal - G. Banks had something to do with that, I believe.
For the other 11 games it was an average of just over 3.7 goals per game.

(EDIT: Some arithmetical errors in the above have been corrected)
 
Last edited:
No sport is completely comparable but if we’re talking sorting dominance then Bradman blows all others out of the water. He averages basically 100 with the bat and the nearest rival is just over 60. He’s not that far away from being twice as good as the 2nd best of all time. Can you find anything comparable in any other sport? I can’t but would love to see an example!

Taking the measurements of greatness of other sports:

That’s like someone coming having a 3-dart average of 150
Or running the 100m in 6.5 seconds
Or long jumping 14 metres
Or winning 30+ majors.
Or 40+ tennis majors
Or … it goes on.
 
Couple of motorsport examples but I realise they can be a special case as it's only really a level playing field against your teammate.

Nigel Mansell in 1992
14 wins (plus one second) from 16 starts
9/16 pole positions.
8/16 fastest laps.

Sebastien Ogier in 2013, 2014 and 2015
25 wins (and 6 second places) from 39 starts
Max Verstappen, 2023:

19 wins out of 22 races
 
One thing that should be discussed more is Tiger changed to a 3 piece urethane covered ball in 2000.

I was at the US Open at Pebble where he absolutely destroyed the field. He would have won either way but the technological advantage he had when other players were still playing wound golf balls wasn't an insignificant factor.

 
I was only 13-14 and not watching golf in those days, but that 2000 US Open must have been a weird one to watch. If someone dominated like that now everyone would say it was a boring non-event I suppose. But there had to be an element of awe there at the greatness you were witnessing. Someone just playing a totally different game to those around him, transcending.
 
I was only 13-14 and not watching golf in those days, but that 2000 US Open must have been a weird one to watch. If someone dominated like that now everyone would say it was a boring non-event I suppose. But there had to be an element of awe there at the greatness you were witnessing. Someone just playing a totally different game to those around him, transcending.
I don't know.

If a player had finished last night's US Open on -14, and everyone else as they were (second place around +1), then I think we'd all be in awe of the guy who won. Finishing -14 on that course, in those conditions, would have been incredible.
 
Top