Tiger Woods - The marmite poll!

[Herbie]

But it is the sheer volume of coverage that gets into the eyes and ears of people that determines perceptions, favour and popularity, if a billion people get the info, there is potential for a billion supporters and so a bigger market for the experts to ply their trade and promote their products, if there is only one person hearing about it then that wouldnt get a note in the local newspaper.

 

[freddielong]

Anyone who enters anything but yes is dumb

Thank you for telling us all how we should think. Does your wisdom reach to other subjects?

To compare today's media to that of the 80s or even 90s is pointless. Sport as an industry piggy-backed on the global financial high and consequently, the media invested more money in its coverage etc. Golf was no different. Woods just happened to be at the right time. The coverage of Woods had he been around in the 80s would be massively different compared to now.

Not least of all because he wouldn't have won anywhere near as much with the other players of the time around and the equipment he would have had to use. In those days you couldn't club a course to death and rely on incredible spin from the rough...

Yes I do just ask me I have an opinion on most things

Again you are wrong modern equipment has enabled other players to keep up with him if it was not for modern equipment players like Perry would have given up

 

[medwayjon]

Sorry but that is pony about the modern equipment thing.

They are using identical equipment so by rights, if Tigger is as wonderful as you say, he should still be miles ahead rather than people keeping up with him because of the equipment at his disposal.

 

[freddielong]

Again I disagree modern equipment has made the need to be a good ball striker less important because the sweetspots on moden clubs ae easier to hit - Tiger would be further ahead because he is the best ball striker

 

[medwayjon]

Which again means, if Tigger is that much superior, he would be hitting better shots than everyone else and being more dominant.

Also your claim regarding equipment, if it is so forgiving why cant Tiger drive anywhere near as well as many of his rivals? They arent using a 460cc against tiger with an old slazenger persimmon driver are they?

 

[freddielong]

It doesn't because modern equipment requires less skill to hit so it narrows the gap between tiger and his rivals -

 

[medwayjon]

Yup and if tiger is so vastly superior in terms of skill, he would be the best driver on tour, get the most GIR's and so on as with equal equipment, surely the man with the most skill would be best?

If you stick me in a racing car against the stig, the stig will win, just because I have equal equipment doesnt therefore make me as good as someone else does it?

It is the same with any analogy, if all other variables are equal surely a man so infinately superior would still be so.

 

[freddielong]

If you both drive out and out racing cars the stig will beat you by a greater time or distance than if you both drove cars with anti lock brakes power steering etc

 

[medwayjon]

He wouldnt though would he, he would beat me by a greater time/distance as he would have even more control over the vehicle due to the driver aids and would be able to push the limits even further.

With the best equipment, equipment that makes it easier, the best competitor will make much less mistakes than his rivals, meaning that he should be much further ahead.

They may have the same forgiving equipment but skill is the only variable and if Tiger is that much better, it will be exaggerated even further by equipment it is harder to cock up with.

Again, if Tiger is so infinately better why cant he make the top 25 for driving stats with equal equipment?

 

[freddielong]

no you are so wrong im not sure if you are just trying to wind me up

The easier you make something the less skill is needed - the less skill that is needed the less someone with skill will stand out and the smaller the difference between the worst and the best

 

[medwayjon]

Ricardo Patrese & Nigel Mansell,

In the older car with no active suspension and traction control, Patrese could hold his own.

In the newer car, with more driver aids, i.e easier to drive, mansell destroyed patrese.

Not trying to wind you up, I just see it totally differently to you.

 

[DCB]

Right then, I'm going to throw my tuppenceworth into the ring.

Firstly as a golfer I think Tiger Woods is one of the all time greats. His feats have been absolutely amazing over the past 10 years or so. Professional Golf has moved on in leaps and bounds since he arrived. The money and sponsorship being pumped into the sport has been incredible. The guys playing at the top of the game at the moment have a lot to be thankfull about. the Tiger Factor is certainly a big part of this.

However, as a person I'm not so gushing in my praise of him. There are things that I don't particularly like about his manners and general demeanour when being interviewed. Granted, no-one likes to be asked how their day had gone when they've had an absolute stinker that day. that goes for us mortals at work and for the elite golf professionals. However, as Tiger is one of the leading lights he has accept that this is part of the merrygoround that is attached to any elite sport nowadays.

Away from golf, he has done well to keep himnself out of the spotlight and to try and have a "normal" family life. I respect him for that. He is entitled to that privacy, out of the public glare.

When he is in the spotlight he has to remember who he is speaking to in any interview. My daughter has been able to recognise Tiger since before she could go to school (note to self :- too much golf on telly) most of her class when trying golf at school recently named Tiger as their favourite golfer.

Tigers legacy as a player will be an incredible one when he does eventually retire. I hope he looks in on the Forum and sees this and thinks what his legacy as a person could and should be.

 

[freddielong]

Golf is different - It takes a certain amount of skill to hit a great shot if you then make the great shot easier to hit by increasing the sweet spot etc the initial shot does not get better but it is easier for less skilled players to replecate

 

[Deleted member 1740]

He's the greatest golfer i've ever seen and on his golf i love him. As a person i'm not too sure about him 'cause i've never really heard any interviews with him where i think he's a top fella.

 

[Smiffy]

I feel the same way about Tiger Woods as I do Colin Montgomery.
If either of them are playing well, showing that they enjoy it and smiling now and again they are both a joy to watch.
If they start getting titty lips and scowling then they can both sling their hooks as far as I am concerned.

 

[Herbie]

Golf is different - It takes a certain amount of skill to hit a great shot if you then make the great shot easier to hit by increasing the sweet spot etc the initial shot does not get better but it is easier for less skilled players to replecate

There could be some mileage debate here.
It is known that bladed clubs offer the skilled golfer more control, finess and shot shaping, so if thats the case then the golfers who use clubs with larger sweet spot will not have that degree of control.
If the bladed club is hit sweetly and a non bladed club hit sweetly the advantage is with the blade. Otherwise it would be a bit of a silly objective to have.

Shots easier to hit with bigger sweet spot?
I dont feel that is exactly true, they may be more forgiving with a poor strike, but a poor strike is a poor strike even with a blade.

We are talking about professional golfers here and I feel that if you made all the tour pros use bladed (many do)you would see little difference in form and results other than with a very small group.

The only advantage wide sweet spot offers is a better strike when it is badly hit, if we measured golfers skill by all the bad strikes and results of bad strikes then maybe this argument may have some standing.

 

[HomerJSimpson]

I have to say I'm with MWJ here. Most top players use similar equipment. All are fitted to an individuals requirements (i.e. C/F'd) so to a degree it is a level playing field in that each top pro has the best equipment for their game. If TW was that much better than everyone else then it follows that he would be able to utilise the performance of his customised clubs the best and would therefore be a better driver in particular.

He is the best golfer of the modern generation but there will be others in years to come who although they may not win as many majors will still captivate the watching public and be triumphed by the media worldwide.

At the end of the day I believe there are better ball strikers than TW but what really separates him from the others is his ability to scramble and putt. That needs more than equipment alone and is a talent I really think you are born with. Some like Woods and Seve have/had it and others like Faldo, Westwood etc didn't/don't and so are forced to grind out their short games.

 

[Herbie]

The point aboput Top players kit being more unique is a very valid point, I wish I had thought of that one Homer.

If Tigers putting had been on top form we may have seen a 4 way play off.

 

[OldWindy]

Don't like the bloke but as a golfer, well...

 

[Cernunnos]

Tiger or Marmite...

Well I like Marmite.