hp12c
New
10 is more than 6.
ok hale irwin, he had a bit of a dry spell then won. Non since.
1974, 1979, 1990
10 is more than 6.
Gary Player said 19 times.Jack 'lost' A LOT of majors that left him with A LOT of (18 or so) second place finishes. Unfazed.
ok hale irwin, he had a bit of a dry spell then won. Non since.
1974, 1979, 1990
Never said he did not have self belief. Said Jack had more, that's all. You can rate champions by how they won. If one was a front runner in virtually every major won, and the other won more majors in every way imaginable, I think something can be said for how comfortable they are in different positions, with respect to the rest of the field, going into the back nine on Sunday.
Jack 'lost' A LOT of majors that left him with A LOT of (18 or so) second place finishes. Unfazed.
Looks like I missed him! OK, there were 2 - HI and LT. Jack had a 6 year gap and then won his last. Looks like then at BEST Woodsy has one more major in him. As I'm not a stats, stats and damned lies kinda guy, I'll be betting against Woodsy in all the majors. I'll let you know how much I make out of it!
Just curious as to how one would go about measuring such an intangible. You suggest that Nicklaus was "unfazed" by finishing second so many times. Are you then implying that Tiger is fazed? I was always a huge Jack fan but I can't recall Jack hitting as many clutch shots as Tiger has starting from his US Amateur wins to the present.
NO
But you do have to look at the make-up of a guy that is the most clutch front runner of all time. Why hasn't he strung together a bunch of clutch shots to come from behind and win a tournament on the back nine on Sunday. I am NOT saying either is fazed. I'm saying that they are very different in how they perform depending on how they stack up against the field.
One of them you chase or he chases you down. The other doesn't chase you down but if he gets ahead, you can't catch him. Differences.
You're right. Being the leader is much more difficult than being the chaser. Tiger has won 51 times after being the 54 hole leader which means he has chased and won 25 times. If you recall Tiger's US Am wins would you call that chasing or leading?
You're right. Being the leader is much more difficult than being the chaser. Tiger has won 51 times after being the 54 hole leader which means he has chased and won 25 times. If you recall Tiger's US Am wins would you call that chasing or leading?
Speak for yourself. So you would rather spot a world class player shots in the final round?
Not me! Let me have that cushion!Speak for yourself. So you would rather spot a world class player shots in the final round?
Always play to win. Make a gameplan prior to the round based on the circumstances and follow the game plan. Don't play not to lose... always play your game unless you absolutely have to chance it and hope at the end it was enough to claim victory!I truly am speaking for myself and probably 99.9% of the golfing population.
Was Greg Norman a world class player when Faldo beat him in the Masters? How about Rory when he caved on the back nine at the Masters? There is a pressure playing on the lead that isn't the same as playing from behind.
Not me! Let me have that cushion!
Always play to win. Make a gameplan prior to the round based on the circumstances and follow the game plan. Don't play not to lose... always play your game unless you absolutely have to chance it and hope at the end it was enough to claim victory!
Andy, if you were playing Tiger heads up, would you rather have a 3 shot lead or be coming from 3 back ? Good luck with the second one.
I truly am speaking for myself and probably 99.9% of the golfing population.
Was Greg Norman a world class player when Faldo beat him in the Masters? How about Rory when he caved on the back nine at the Masters? There is a pressure playing on the lead that isn't the same as playing from behind.
Well, to be fair, Rory could've re-taken the lead with the time it took for that train wreck to occur but it didn't happen. Why didn't he just free-wheel it once he fell out of first place.