That's the way I'd sum up all that I've read the last couple of days. In their own ways, both Tiger and Bryson took the golf world by storm. The difference is that, even in his youthful prime, Tiger was a classicist. Using irons with lofts from the 70s, he analyzed and played Pebble and Augusta and The Old Course just as the greats before him had -- only better (and longer). Bryson, on the other hand, is an iconoclast. The sole tour player using the conceptually new single length iron, he played WF in a way that Rory M (another classicist) found hard to wrap his head around: "it's not the way I saw this golf course being played or this tournament being played". And I think that may be the question for golf and gca moving forward, ie in the years ahead, with the new batch of young golfers, will the Classicist or the Iconoclast be the dominant model?