Tiger.......ehhh

[Dariusz J.]

Dariusz,
I get your point about great ball striking but I feel you're going a little overboard with it being the holy grail. The whole point of golf is figuring out how to get the ball in the hole and hopefully it took less swings/strokes than the next guy. Tiger is probably the best at getting it done. It takes an incredible skill set to do it that way, got to have a plethora of shots, not to mention the mental fortitude. He can score on any course. Put anyone you want against him on any course and only a fool would bet against him. To disregard Tiger's ability is ridiculous. Not to mention that he's a phenomenal iron player. Keep winning Tiger! Keep the haters hating...

But actually, it is far from being the holy grail, for God's sake. Every year less is dependent on a good ballstriking. Media and USGA/R&A have been in the process of screwing the greatest game ever invented for quite some time now and nothing will stop them into changing a game where control mattered most into a sad contest for a few who can hit long and putt well.

As regards Woods -- I appreciate his class as a golfer and as a winner. I appreciate his ability to win tournaments. One does not achieve no.2 rank in the total number of tournaments and no.2 in majors won on tour coincidentally. He is one of the best golfers (if not the best) in the history of the game, no doubt.
But he does not play my golf where mistakes are being punished and accuracy rewarded. That's why he will never be no.1 or no.2 in my book.

Let's not start the discussion again. I know I am in minority but i won't change my point of view.

Cheers

 

[mjh116]

As regards Woods -- I appreciate his class as a golfer and as a winner. I appreciate his ability to win tournaments. One does not achieve no.2 rank in the total number of tournaments and no.2 in majors won on tour coincidentally. He is one of the best golfers (if not the best) in the history of the game, no doubt.
But he does not play my golf where mistakes are being punished and accuracy rewarded. That's why he will never be no.1 or no.2 in my book.

Let's not start the discussion again. I know I am in minority but i won't change my point of view.

Cheers[/QUOTE]

Sounds good Dariusz... to each their own!

 

[AndyC]

I regret the direction the game is going when one can throw the ball everywhere and still win the tournament. Before, such Hagen was an exception, today it becomes almost a norm. Hall of Famers recruit from best winners always -- and since less and less depends on ballstriking quality from the tee -- it will be soon filling up with bombers who can putt. Sad.Cheers

I suppose your studies refute those of Broadie. http://www.columbia.edu/~mnb2/broadie/Assets/strokes_gained_pga_broadie_20110408.pdf

 

[jimmyt]

Dariusz,
I get your point about great ball striking but I feel you're going a little overboard with it being the holy grail. The whole point of golf is figuring out how to get the ball in the hole and hopefully it took less swings/strokes than the next guy. Tiger is probably the best at getting it done. It takes an incredible skill set to do it that way, got to have a plethora of shots, not to mention the mental fortitude. He can score on any course. Put anyone you want against him on any course and only a fool would bet against him. To disregard Tiger's ability is ridiculous. Not to mention that he's a phenomenal iron player. Keep winning Tiger! Keep the haters hating...

Right on.......couldn't agree more. Well said!

 

[willgolfer]

Really or r u joking?

Yea, almost seemed like he was rooting for Tiger to blow it. Paraphrasing here - "what if he hadn't recovered from the early final round blunders off the tee (Sunday)...if he were under pressure here after the two late round double bogeys and didn't have a 7 shot lead to lean on, we'd be looking at a whole new ball game."...well no shite Faldo! He tried to pull Feherty in on it...didn't work. Pure haterade.

 

[Jim Kobylinski]

But he does not play my golf where mistakes are being punished and accuracy rewarded. That's why he will never be no.1 or no.2 in my book.

Based on your history Dariusz, imo, you skew too much punishment compared to the amount of reward for accuracy. If you hit the fairway in the perfect position to have the best angle that's the "best reward" you can create. However if you miss the fairway by 10 yards you want it to be so punished they have no shot. There has to be a balance.

 

[Tball88]

I think the biggest difference now and in the 50's, 60's etc. is the perfect green conditions players have today. If you hit a putt on line,most times today it's going in. So you can miss the green/fairway, chop out, chip up and one putt. I think hitting the green in reg was way more important in the past, because greens weren't perfect, so you better hit the green, because one putts weren't likely.

With that players have adjusted, hit it as far as you want, and know that odds are you'll get up and down. Can't blame the players, it's just a slightly different game today.

 

[AndyC]

I think the biggest difference now and in the 50's, 60's etc. is the perfect green conditions players have today. If you hit a putt on line,most times today it's going in. So you can miss the green/fairway, chop out, chip up and one putt. I think hitting the green in reg was way more important in the past, because greens weren't perfect, so you better hit the green, because one putts weren't likely.

With that players have adjusted, hit it as far as you want, and know that odds are you'll get up and down. Can't blame the players, it's just a slightly different game today.

Here are the top 10 winners in PGA history. All of them were long hitters and not all of them GIR guys:

1 Sam Snead 82
2 Tiger Woods 75
3 Jack Nicklaus 73
4 Ben Hogan 64
5 Arnold Palmer 62
6 Byron Nelson 52
7 Billy Casper 51
8 Walter Hagen 45
9 Phil Mickelson 40
Cary Middlecoff 40

Also a quote from Walter Hagen's Hall of Fame page:

Hagen is generally considered the greatest match player of all time. He once won 22 straight 36-hole matches in the PGA and, between the first round in 1921 and the fourth round of 1928, 32 out 33. With a long game often made erratic by the pronounced sway in his swing, but with an incredible ability to scramble and putt, Hagen lived by the principle that "three of those and one of them still count four." After he defeated Bob Jones, 12 and 11, in a 72-hole challenge match in 1926-which temporarily decided which of them was the greatest golfer of the day-even the gentlemanly Jones couldn't contain his frustration. "When a man misses his drive, and then misses his second shot, and then wins the hole with a birdie," said Jones, "it gets my goat."

The game hasn't changed nearly as much as people claim. Distance certainly helps and chipping and putting certainly helps. It always did.

 

[Tball88]

Looking at that list, it's shows a lot of different styles, long and accurate, average and accurate, long and inaccurate, but great short game.

You'd think there would be a common link, wonder if it's course management, which is something we can't measure. Did the guys on that list just play smarter and more to their individual skill sets than other players.

 

[jimmyt]

Here are the top 10 winners in PGA history. All of them were long hitters and not all of them GIR guys:

1 Sam Snead 82
2 Tiger Woods 75
3 Jack Nicklaus 73
4 Ben Hogan 64
5 Arnold Palmer 62
6 Byron Nelson 52
7 Billy Casper 51
8 Walter Hagen 45
9 Phil Mickelson 40
Cary Middlecoff 40

Also a quote from Walter Hagen's Hall of Fame page:

Hagen is generally considered the greatest match player of all time. He once won 22 straight 36-hole matches in the PGA and, between the first round in 1921 and the fourth round of 1928, 32 out 33. With a long game often made erratic by the pronounced sway in his swing, but with an incredible ability to scramble and putt, Hagen lived by the principle that "three of those and one of them still count four." After he defeated Bob Jones, 12 and 11, in a 72-hole challenge match in 1926-which temporarily decided which of them was the greatest golfer of the day-even the gentlemanly Jones couldn't contain his frustration. "When a man misses his drive, and then misses his second shot, and then wins the hole with a birdie," said Jones, "it gets my goat."

The game hasn't changed nearly as much as people claim. Distance certainly helps and chipping and putting certainly helps. It always did.

Quite an impressive list of current and stars of years gone by.........more than half the guys on that list were not the straightest drivers of the golf ball, but many of those had some pretty great recovery skills.......simply the game has changed and we need to leave the past in the past.

All sports have progressed and moved forward embracing technolgy to better ones performance.

 

[jimmyt]

Looking at that list, it's shows a lot of different styles, long and accurate, average and accurate, long and inaccurate, but great short game.

You'd think there would be a common link, wonder if it's course management, which is something we can't measure. Did the guys on that list just play smarter and more to their individual skill sets than other players.

You were posting as I was posting.......wish I had seen it before I posted.

I guess I second your thoughts.

 

[Dariusz J.]

I suppose your studies refute those of Broadie. http://www.columbia.edu/~mnb2/broadie/Assets/strokes_gained_pga_broadie_20110408.pdf

I did not run any studies in the topic. No studies are necessary to know that best ballstrikers of yesteryear had much better GIR and FIR ratio. The answer is -- because they had to otherwise they wouldn't have won at all.

Based on your history Dariusz, imo, you skew too much punishment compared to the amount of reward for accuracy. If you hit the fairway in the perfect position to have the best angle that's the "best reward" you can create. However if you miss the fairway by 10 yards you want it to be so punished they have no shot. There has to be a balance.

Well, Jim, I agree that I often exaggerate and sometimes my examples aren't of best choice. But I always voted for a gradual punishment, i.e. if Woods ens his drive 5 meters away from fairway he should meet a fairly decent place with an option to attack the green if his capabilities allow. However, if he is 15 meters from fairway he should meet such a place that the best option for an average tour player is to pitch the ball out to the fairway. This would be fair.
OTOH, I often see players lying 30 meters from fairway on a grass similar to my home fairway with, eventually, one tree to omit. This is ridiculous and abusing for these players.

Here are the top 10 winners in PGA history. All of them were long hitters and not all of them GIR guys:

1 Sam Snead 82
2 Tiger Woods 75
3 Jack Nicklaus 73
4 Ben Hogan 64
5 Arnold Palmer 62
6 Byron Nelson 52
7 Billy Casper 51
8 Walter Hagen 45
9 Phil Mickelson 40
Cary Middlecoff 40

Long hitting certainly helps a lot but would you call Nelson, Casper and Hagen long hitters ? Hogan in his post-accident times wasn't very long, too.
A much more telling is to ask how many poor putters are listed there. All guys from the 50-ies (Hogan, Snead, Middlecoff) were poor putters, especially Hogan after accident. It is not possible to win a single tournament with poor putting today.

Cheers

 

[AndyC]

I did not run any studies in the topic. No studies are necessary to know that best ballstrikers of yesteryear had much better GIR and FIR ratio. The answer is -- because they had to otherwise they wouldn't have won at all.

I guess it's amazing that Hagen won at all.

Long hitting certainly helps a lot but would you call Nelson, Casper and Hagen long hitters ? Hogan in his post-accident times wasn't very long, too. A much more telling is to ask how many poor putters are listed there. All guys from the 50-ies (Hogan, Snead, Middlecoff) were poor putters, especially Hogan after accident. It is not possible to win a single tournament with poor putting today.Cheers

Yes Nelson, Casper and Hagen were all long hitters relative to their competitors. Hogan certainly wasn't a poor putter his entire career and I doubt that too many tournaments were ever won with poor putting. Many so-called poor putters are streaky putters who can putt the lights out one week and miss everything the next.

Clearly you didn't read the findings of Broadie's study. He concluded that ball-striking has more to do with winning and good scoring than people realize and he is able to quantify it. Tiger isn't the poor ball striker that you make him out to be.

If a player hitting a drive 320 yards starts a ball on the exact same line as a player who only hits it 250, he will have a far greater chance of missing the fairway than the shorter hitter. So FIR can be misleading.

 

[mjh116]

Looking at that list, it's shows a lot of different styles, long and accurate, average and accurate, long and inaccurate, but great short game.

¶•¶You'd think there would be a common link, wonder if it's course management, which is something we can't measure. Did the guys on that list just play smarter and more to their individual skill sets than other players.

¶•¶

Now you're talking! Imo these guys think outside the box. The common link to me is they find a way to get the ball in the hole in fewer strokes than the people around them a higher % of the time regardless of the amount of pressure their under! As was once said"your next shot is the most important shot." They absolutely play to their strengths; otherwise how would they win so often?!!!

 

[Dariusz J.]

I guess it's amazing that Hagen won at all.

Yes it is. Read once more your own quote about Jones's anger. What Hagen was doing was exceptional and unique, it can be read between verses easily.

Yes Nelson, Casper and Hagen were all long hitters relative to their competitors. Hogan certainly wasn't a poor putter his entire career and I doubt that too many tournaments were ever won with poor putting. Many so-called poor putters are streaky putters who can putt the lights out one week and miss everything the next.

No, they weren't long even comparing to their friends. E.g. Nelson's big drives were about 250 yards.

Clearly you didn't read the findings of Broadie's study. He concluded that ball-striking has more to do with winning and good scoring than people realize and he is able to quantify it. Tiger isn't the poor ball striker that you make him out to be.

You're entitled to have your own opinion as well as to believe your own sources.

If a player hitting a drive 320 yards starts a ball on the exact same line as a player who only hits it 250, he will have a far greater chance of missing the fairway than the shorter hitter. So FIR can be misleading.

Really ? See, I wouldn't know it without you...

Noone here deals with cosmetic missing yardages. I am against punishing huge missing yardages, as often happen to a great ballstriker Tiger Woods.

Enough of me in this subject.

Cheers

 

[Lindsey Newman]

If you really wanna know how much better the older players hit it, go getcha a persimmon and balata ball....don't forget a box of tissues.

The new drivers starting in the mid nineties are so much easier to hit its an absolute joke.

 

[magicmarker]

... Tiger isn't the poor ball striker that you make him out to be...

Tiger is a far better ball striker than Dariusz will lead anyone to believe. He actually has had to punch out many times from his bad drives too. Sometimes he can still save par. Dariusz, why do you not feel the game is better with the ability to recover from a bad shot. It sounds like you want the game to be even more punishing which should bring the pace of play up to about a 6 hour round. I personally like seeing a players recovery skills and decision making when they get out of position. This is golf, not bowling.

 

[AndyC]

If you really wanna know how much better the older players hit it, go getcha a persimmon and balata ball....don't forget a box of tissues.

The new drivers starting in the mid nineties are so much easier to hit its an absolute joke.

If that were true, Golf would be the only sport where players didn't improve over prior generations. It is a fact that today's players are bigger, stronger, faster and more athletic than prior generations. There are also far more golfers today who are better trained physically and in swing mechanics than ever before. So while it is nice to get nostalgic about golf history it doesn't make logical sense that they were better players.

 

[Kevin Shields]

The older players didn't hit it better, period. If you put this same crop of tour players back with old equipment from the start, you'd have the same thing as then. Several superior to the rest, but more depth than there was back then. They'd figure the equipment out in no time.

 

[Lindsey Newman]

If that were true, Golf would be the only sport where players didn't improve over prior generations. It is a fact that today's players are bigger, stronger, faster and more athletic than prior generations. There are also far more golfers today who are better trained physically and in swing mechanics than ever before. So while it is nice to get nostalgic about golf history it doesn't make logical sense that they were better players.

I said nothing of them being better players. I said I believe they hit it better ie more controlled with different angles of attack. I don't believe they were as athletically gifted at all or superior "golfers" for that matter. If the new driver isn't easier to hit then why are we hitting hit?