tiger
- Thread starter komanin
- Start date
- Status
Why is it that if someone is a good putter, especially a proven one like Tiger, people chalk it up to luck? Or that people say ludicrous stuff like "Where would he be without his putter?" It's as though putting is not part of the "real game" of golf.
It seems often that we revere those players who have mastered the seemingly more difficult part of the game: ball-striking. Hogan is discussed ad nauseum, Moe Norman is a legend despite never winning a major, and everyone loves debating what Tiger's changing in his swing this month. No one ever discusses the putting prowess of Tiger or Nicklaus at length. But the fact remains: their ability to be able to make all the important putts, as well as a LOT of others, is a large part of what makes them great players. Yet someone unfamiliar with the game would think Nicklaus won 18 majors with his long irons, based on the way he is discussed on all the forums. Or that Hogan hit every fairway and green, every day, and could simply "tap-in" a few birdies a round.
So I ask (rhetorically): Where would Tiger be without his ball-striking? Hogan? Nicklaus?
These questions never get asked for the same reason Billy Casper is never discussed by anyone, on the forums or otherwise.
It seems often that we revere those players who have mastered the seemingly more difficult part of the game: ball-striking. Hogan is discussed ad nauseum, Moe Norman is a legend despite never winning a major, and everyone loves debating what Tiger's changing in his swing this month. No one ever discusses the putting prowess of Tiger or Nicklaus at length. But the fact remains: their ability to be able to make all the important putts, as well as a LOT of others, is a large part of what makes them great players. Yet someone unfamiliar with the game would think Nicklaus won 18 majors with his long irons, based on the way he is discussed on all the forums. Or that Hogan hit every fairway and green, every day, and could simply "tap-in" a few birdies a round.
So I ask (rhetorically): Where would Tiger be without his ball-striking? Hogan? Nicklaus?
These questions never get asked for the same reason Billy Casper is never discussed by anyone, on the forums or otherwise.
birdie_man
New
No. Not "pure luck." He is very skilled. But it was against the odds. Very simply.
Any of y'all can continue to think what you want though of course.
Damon Lucas
Super Moderator
Paul,
What were the odds of Tiger hitting the 17th in two? Or the odds any time that he hits it to two feet?
Yes, if you base your assessment on what typically happens then anytime Tiger performs better, luck might have played a part, but so what? It is a pointless tangent to discuss.
What is it that separates Tiger from other golfers with regard putting skills?
I think his belief, focus, calmness, and mental controls are superior to anyone.
I think that his green reading, visual acuity, ability to start the ball on line, control of his speed, and understanding of his stroke mechanics are better than almost all tour players.
I am very interested in discussions in any of these areas, or any other areas of his putting game, but I think that it is a ludicrous discussion to discuss luck.
What were the odds of Tiger hitting the 17th in two? Or the odds any time that he hits it to two feet?
Yes, if you base your assessment on what typically happens then anytime Tiger performs better, luck might have played a part, but so what? It is a pointless tangent to discuss.
What is it that separates Tiger from other golfers with regard putting skills?
I think his belief, focus, calmness, and mental controls are superior to anyone.
I think that his green reading, visual acuity, ability to start the ball on line, control of his speed, and understanding of his stroke mechanics are better than almost all tour players.
I am very interested in discussions in any of these areas, or any other areas of his putting game, but I think that it is a ludicrous discussion to discuss luck.
Great post.
birdie_man
New
Maybe not THE point to discuss. I don't see how it can't be A point though.
This IS much more important than the "luck" discussion.
Presently true for sure.
Probably.
I'll say I don't think it needs to be discussed much more than we already have. I know what I think anyway tho Damon. Certainly not "PURE luck." (that would be ludicrous and wouldn't give him anywhere near enough credit as a player)
But I stand by what I've said:
His odds are better than anyone to pull off what he did against JB.....but the odds were still against him. To his credit he pulled it off against the odds. We should figure out how he does it. Or maybe more importantly how we can do it better.
You guys are all hopeless.
All in good fun.
Last edited:
Kevin Shields
Super Moderator
I don't want to rile up anybody if they have a favorite but, boy, I'd have a tough time believing anybody has played the game as well as he is after watching today. Swing looks great.
birdie_man
New
Blah blah blah blah x 1000. (no offense)
Not end.
I know I have an argument.....y'all can keep fightin your own fight though by all means.
Agree to disagree?
Now end.
-PAUL (CAPITAL LETTERS)
P.S. no offense...all in good fun...
Not end.
I know I have an argument.....y'all can keep fightin your own fight though by all means.
Agree to disagree?
Now end.
-PAUL (CAPITAL LETTERS)
P.S. no offense...all in good fun...
Last edited:
- Status