News:

This discussion group is best enjoyed using Google Chrome, Firefox or Safari.


Phil McDade

  • Karma: +0/-0
Tiger and course set-ups for majors
« on: August 20, 2006, 11:01:31 PM »
Would the field stand a better chance against Tiger if the courses were harder?

It seems counter-intuitive; he's by far the best player out there, and it seems logical that the harder the course, the truly top-tier players will stand out.

But that hasn't necessarily been the case with Tiger. In a lot of recent majors with relatively low scoring, Tiger's won -- all three of his PGAs (even Medinah '99 had arguably low scoring; 20 players under par and -11 winning); all three of his Open Championships; the '01 Masters and arguably the '02 Masters as well.

There are exceptions, of course -- his other-worldly performance at Pebble, and Bethpage as well.

But in several recent majors with tough scoring conditions -- two US Opens at Pinehurst, US Opens at Southern Hills, Shinnecock and Winged Foot; British Opens at Muirfield, St. George's, Carnoustie and Birkdale; PGAs at Oak Hill and Baltusrol; Augusta '03 -- Tiger's either been close but not there, or played indifferently.

Would making these major courses tougher make it easier for his opponents?

JWL

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Tiger and course set-ups for majors
« Reply #1 on: August 20, 2006, 11:36:59 PM »
Not sure about the answer to your question, but I do believe that if the course setup turns into a putting contest, which I think this year's PGA definitely did, then Tiger will win going away.
He is the best putter in the world today, especially in the clutch.

Doug Siebert

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Tiger and course set-ups for majors
« Reply #2 on: August 21, 2006, 03:06:49 AM »
I don't think the courses need to get harder to beat Tiger, the conditions do.  If there's little wind he can dial in what he wants distance-wise.  If its soft he's in the same boat as everyone else but he beats them with putting.  If its firm he uses his high trajectory to his advantage to get the ball closer than most of the others.

Give him some strong winds and he's much less likely to win.  But global warming appears to have taken the wind away from major championship golf, it hasn't blown since that day Tiger shot an 82 at Muirfield.
My hovercraft is full of eels.

Jim Nugent

Re:Tiger and course set-ups for majors
« Reply #3 on: August 21, 2006, 03:39:17 AM »
Would the field stand a better chance against Tiger if the courses were harder?

It seems counter-intuitive; he's by far the best player out there, and it seems logical that the harder the course, the truly top-tier players will stand out.

But that hasn't necessarily been the case with Tiger. In a lot of recent majors with relatively low scoring, Tiger's won -- all three of his PGAs (even Medinah '99 had arguably low scoring; 20 players under par and -11 winning); all three of his Open Championships; the '01 Masters and arguably the '02 Masters as well.

There are exceptions, of course -- his other-worldly performance at Pebble, and Bethpage as well.

But in several recent majors with tough scoring conditions -- two US Opens at Pinehurst, US Opens at Southern Hills, Shinnecock and Winged Foot; British Opens at Muirfield, St. George's, Carnoustie and Birkdale; PGAs at Oak Hill and Baltusrol; Augusta '03 -- Tiger's either been close but not there, or played indifferently.

Would making these major courses tougher make it easier for his opponents?

I'm not sure the toughness or conditions have much to do with it.  Other reasons better explain nearly all of your examples.

Pinehurst: in 1999, he was still working out his swing changes.  Last year he had about the worst putting of his career there -- averaged 32 putts per round.  But still he came in second.  

At Shinnecock in 2004, he was retooling his swing.  At WFW this year he was playing for the 1st time in months, in the wake of his father's death.  At Southern Hills, he had been playing great.  But that would have made his fifth major in a row.  Is that course toughness, or the law of averages which he already had broken beyond belief finally catching up with him?

Carnoustie in 1999: near the end of his swing changes, but not quite there.  Still almost won, on a course setup that was a crap shoot.  St. George's & Birkdale: swing change period.  Same with ANGC 2003.  Muirfield: when he started to look at swing changes.

Baltusrol: he almost won despite an opening 75.  That was after winning two earlier majors that year.  Again, no one wins all the time.  Oak Hill: swing changes.  

If ANGC in 2003 counts as a tough course, wasn't it a tough course when he won there?  Remember that in 1997, no one else broke 282 there.  In 2005, other than DiMarco no one broke 283.  

I doubt any course can be Tiger-proofed.  He will find ways to win everywhere.  Just as he has all his career.  

« Last Edit: August 21, 2006, 06:49:41 AM by Jim Nugent »

Doug Ralston

Re:Tiger and course set-ups for majors
« Reply #4 on: August 21, 2006, 07:05:44 AM »
Why would you WANT to 'Tiger-proof' a golf course?

Let me try to make an analogy: Suppose someone was dominating the game show 'Jeopardy', and that they were especially strong in science and history category questions. Should the show try to 'end the non-competitive dominance' by limiting the categorys to eliminate science and history questions? It might make the contests more competitive, but it also would absolutely punish someone whose only 'crime' was being great at what they did.

It may be, for your own satisfaction, that you can justify trying some strategy to undermine a single individual who happens to be good enough to dominate. But I doubt there can be any objective excuse.

Tiger is what he is. He earned his way there. Why should we even CONSIDER how to undermine him?

Doug

Doug Ralston

Re:Tiger and course set-ups for majors
« Reply #5 on: August 21, 2006, 07:07:50 AM »
By the way, my previous was not a statement that we should not try other courses in Majors. I am all for that. But I state strongly that undermining Tiger Woods should certainly NOT be a consideration of our course choice!

Doug

Voytek Wilczak

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Tiger and course set-ups for majors
« Reply #6 on: August 21, 2006, 07:25:26 AM »
Not sure about the answer to your question, but I do believe that if the course setup turns into a putting contest, which I think this year's PGA definitely did, then Tiger will win going away.
He is the best putter in the world today, especially in the clutch.

Bingo.

But if they make the greens tougher (faster, firmer), Tiger still wins because he can make the ball suck back, drop like goose sh!t, or go forward a few feet on the green.

I don't think any of the pretenders can do that.

Phil McDade

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Tiger and course set-ups for majors
« Reply #7 on: August 21, 2006, 10:28:17 AM »
Jim:

Some of this is a crapshoot -- largely the weather. Augusta has played tough at times, in part because of course changes and in part because of weather. I don't at all equate length with toughening -- Augusta to me has gotten easier for Tiger because of its lengthening.

I'll concede this year's US Open, obviously, because he hadn't played for so long. Tiger really wasn't close at Carnoustie -- he was never really a contender there (though that course set-up WAS a crapshoot). And Tiger was winning majors during some of the swing-change periods you mentioned -- Bethpage?

I'm just not sure Tiger's lack of success in some majors can be attributed mainly to swing changes. I do think some courses, and course set-ups, play some role in his success. I'm really looking forward to see how he handles Oakmont next year, a course he hasn't played in a major and one that, I think, is going to play differently than many other recent majors (hopefully, with a compelling course set-up).

Jim Nugent

Re:Tiger and course set-ups for majors
« Reply #8 on: August 21, 2006, 11:12:18 AM »
Quote
 And Tiger was winning majors during some of the swing-change periods you mentioned -- Bethpage?

Don't think so.  Bethpage was his last major win until the 2005 Masters.  I believe he started changing his swing, for the second time, soon after Bethpage.

Tiger's had 3 swings.  With the first he won the 1997 Masters by 12 strokes.  Revamping that swing took a little over two years.  His second swing started paying off with the 1999 PGA.  He then won 7 of the next 11 majors, through the 2002 U.S. Open.  Then he retooled again, and began winning with the 2005 Masters.    

Michael Wharton-Palmer

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Tiger and course set-ups for majors
« Reply #9 on: August 21, 2006, 11:22:12 AM »
Soory..I cannot go along with teh wind argument.
The player who has the best distance control, will still have the same distance control in adverse conditions.
Besides whenever interviewed, Tiger ALWAYS says he wants the wind to blow...I do not think there is anything you can do to make the set up anti Tiger..he is simply that good.

Whatever Dave Pelz may think..Tiger at his best is just that the BEST.

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back