Golf Club Atlas
GolfClubAtlas.com => Golf Course Architecture Discussion Group => Topic started by: Craig Sweet on March 29, 2009, 07:56:56 PM
-
I don't think I've seen anyone putt like Tiger....simply amazing.
What planet is he from?
-
I don't think I've seen anyone putt like Tiger....simply amazing.
What planet is he from?
Not this one...
-
The Greatest Golfer of All Time
-
This guy likes to save the drama till the last minute every time, he makes golf exciting. I'm glad he is back on tour; you are always glued to your seat when Tiger is in contention. Unbelievable!
-
"The Greatest Golfer of All Time"
AND, all time to come!
-
Just stunning... and inspiring.
To answer the question posed, here: Tiger Woods :)
-
From week to week, I can't imagine a better putter.
Although the best putting performance over 18 holes I've ever seen was Goosen at the US Open at Shinny on Sunday...
-
...he may be the greatest athlete of any sport, ever.
Think how many times he has done the seemingly impossible, under the most dramatic and intense circumstances!
He's either an alien, or someone sent here on a mission.
Either way, I'm really glad I'm around to witness him.
-
It's like watching Jordan in his prime. Unfortunately, MJ ruined basketball for me, I just can't watch it anymore. I hope when Tiger hangs it up, he can pass the torch to someone 1/4 worthy of it.
-
"The Greatest Golfer of All Time"
AND, all time to come!
Oh come on, Tom. You saw wee Bobby in his hey day! ;)
-
I sat with and Sam Snead once and he told the story of he and Bobby Locke doing some kind of exhibition tour where Locke beat him badly, mostly because of putting. Said he was phenomeal and closed out Sam in one of the matches with a 100 foot putt. What killed Sam was that from 100 feet away, and over a huge ridge, he came up to check the grain by the cup and then proceeded to sink the putt!
I don't know how much of that is a Sam Snead tall tale but its possible that the greatest putter of all time may not be Tiger but someone like Locke. It would be hard to compare, too given the differences in green quality.
-
Here's a short clip of Gary Player demonstrating Bobby Locke's technique:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CYTz2Mjp2N4
... and one of Player using that technique in a tournament:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_9mokpFs_gI&NR=1
Must have been something to see Locke in action, and to try to figure out if he really put side-spin on his putts.
-
I sat with and Sam Snead once and he told the story of he and Bobby Locke doing some kind of exhibition tour where Locke beat him badly, mostly because of putting. Said he was phenomeal and closed out Sam in one of the matches with a 100 foot putt. What killed Sam was that from 100 feet away, and over a huge ridge, he came up to check the grain by the cup and then proceeded to sink the putt!
I don't know how much of that is a Sam Snead tall tale but its possible that the greatest putter of all time may not be Tiger but someone like Locke. It would be hard to compare, too given the differences in green quality.
Jeff,
In 1946 Locke played Snead in a 15 match series in South Africa and won 12 of the matches.
In 1947 Locke played a limited schedule in the US and won a bunch of times, I think he won the Detroit Open by 14 shots, the biggest margin of victory until Tiger's 15 stroke win at the 2000 US Open.
I had the privilege to play with Locke at the Durban C.C. in 1963, I thought I had seen everything then but Tiger seems his equal.
Bob
-
I think he won the Detroit Open by 14 shots, the biggest margin of victory until Tiger's 15 stroke win at the 2000 US Open.
Bob, Locke won the 1948 Chicago Victory event by 16 strokes. That is still the PGA record, I believe.
He is also credited with the saying, "you drive for show but you putt for dough." Sounds like Tiger was a case study this past week at Bay Hill.
-
"The Greatest Golfer of All Time"
AND, all time to come!
I was careful not to say that. Another golfer will come along after Tiger who hits its farther, makes more putts, and wins more tournaments. He'll be to Tiger what Nicklaus was to Jones and what Jones was to Vardon. Tiger is only the best so far.
-
Nicklaus was phenomenal. His putt at the 16th at Augusta in 1986 and the 17th at Baltusrol in 1980 come immediately to mind. But I must admit Tiger is above phenomenal. It says it all when he has a 16 foot putt and you sit there expecting him to make it and would be surprised if he didn't. Simply amazing.
-
He's certainly the best putter on tour now. He's surely the greatest putter of his generation. He may even prove to be as great a putter as Nicklaus, who made putts whenever he needed to make them, to win an event, to crush an opponent, to turn the tide in a match. Tiger is just unfathomably terrific. When I watched the play yesterday, I was again impressed by the relentlessness and the predictablity of his gut-crunching play. He needed to shoot 67 to win, so he shot 67. He needed to make birdie on the final hole, so he piped the drive, dropped a baby fade beneath the hole and sunk the putt with the confidence of a true champion.
Perhaps this isn't the best spot to mention this, but O'Hair needed to shoot 73 in order to lose. He needed to dunk the ball on 16 to bail out Tiger. He needed to hit his second shot on 18 to the fat part of the green, leaving a too-long putt that he needed to miss, in order to be a part of Tiger lore, much in the manner that Craig Ehlo and others wound up being on posters with Michael Jordan, with the ball headed for the rim and the defensive player well out of position... I feel for O'Hair, but I'm thrilled with another Tiger win.
Augusta beckons.
-
While it's probable that Tiger is the greatest of all time is it not premature to make this claim? I pose this question based on the fact that he still has not equaled or surpassed the records set by Nicklaus?
-
I am a huge Nicklaus fan and yes, Tiger needs to surpass Nicklaus in majors to 'officially' be declared the greatest of all time. That being said, having watched professional golf for 40 plus years Tiger is the best barring the unfathomable.
-
While it's probable that Tiger is the greatest of all time is it not premature to make this claim? I pose this question based on the fact that he still has not equaled or surpassed the records set by Nicklaus?
Of course, it is premature. It may be hard for people to withhold this sort of judgment when we're in the middle of witnessing his heroics, but we would all do well to remember that Tiger still has work to do in matching Jack's sterling record. There is the matter of the number of majors, which one might fairly assume Tiger will top, but more pointedly in my judgment, is the fact that Jack was a dominant player for so long, for so many decades, winning the Masters at 46 and doing well in Senior play as well. Tiger and Jack have a lot of similarities, but perhaps the most striking commonality is their unwavering confidence and concentration, the unerring ability to remain focused on the goal, shot-by-shot until the winning putt hits the bottom of the cup. I think Tiger has a chance to be as great as Jack Nicklaus. To me, that's an amazing statement, because Jack was that great. It's even more amazing to think that he may prove to be better. The mind boggles...
-
Lets put this Nicklaus stuff to rest, it is insulting to Tiger.
All the Nicklaus supporters chime in with famous putts that Nicklaus made on the last green of a PGA tournament or the back nine of a major and then the Tiger guys will put up theirs. I bet Tiger has three times as many.
-
Lets put this Nicklaus stuff to rest, it is insulting to Tiger.
All the Nicklaus supporters chime in with famous putts that Nicklaus made on the last green of a PGA tournament or the back nine of a major and then the Tiger guys will put up theirs. I bet Tiger has three times as many.
Insulting to Tiger? Even Tiger wouldn't think that! He had Nicklaus posters on his wall growing up. Tiger is phenomenal. Tiger is predominant. Tiger has a record that is obviously unmatched by anybody in his generation. And his record may one day eclipse Nicklaus' record. It probably will, if he remains healthy and continues to compete into his 50's. There's no need to rush to judgment here; Tiger is a young man and we are still in thrall of his awesome talent. To suggest that he has a ways to go to be on the same level with Jack Nicklaus is surely not an insult. It is a recognition of the absence of certain "numbers" on his golf resume and an observation that he still has a couple decades to go. For all of us golf fans, I hope he continues to play even if and when he shatters the last of Jack's records.
-
Lets put this Nicklaus stuff to rest, it is insulting to Tiger.
All the Nicklaus supporters chime in with famous putts that Nicklaus made on the last green of a PGA tournament or the back nine of a major and then the Tiger guys will put up theirs. I bet Tiger has three times as many.
Insulting to Tiger? Even Tiger wouldn't think that! He had Nicklaus posters on his wall growing up. Tiger is phenomenal. Tiger is predominant. Tiger has a record that is obviously unmatched by anybody in his generation. And his record may one day eclipse Nicklaus' record. It probably will, if he remains healthy and continues to compete into his 50's. There's no need to rush to judgment here; Tiger is a young man and we are still in thrall of his awesome talent. To suggest that he has a ways to go to be on the same level with Jack Nicklaus is surely not an insult. It is a recognition of the absence of certain "numbers" on his golf resume and an observation that he still has a couple decades to go. For all of us golf fans, I hope he continues to play even if and when he shatters the last of Jack's records.
Playing record and majors? Surely, Terry. Check my post, I am speaking of the putts. I think comparing Nicklaus' clutch putting to Tiger's is an insult to Tiger. I am curious to know, but I highly doubt if we all come up with both, Nicklaus will hold a candle to Tiger on the greens.
-
Lets put this Nicklaus stuff to rest, it is insulting to Tiger.
All the Nicklaus supporters chime in with famous putts that Nicklaus made on the last green of a PGA tournament or the back nine of a major and then the Tiger guys will put up theirs. I bet Tiger has three times as many.
Insulting to Tiger? Even Tiger wouldn't think that! He had Nicklaus posters on his wall growing up. Tiger is phenomenal. Tiger is predominant. Tiger has a record that is obviously unmatched by anybody in his generation. And his record may one day eclipse Nicklaus' record. It probably will, if he remains healthy and continues to compete into his 50's. There's no need to rush to judgment here; Tiger is a young man and we are still in thrall of his awesome talent. To suggest that he has a ways to go to be on the same level with Jack Nicklaus is surely not an insult. It is a recognition of the absence of certain "numbers" on his golf resume and an observation that he still has a couple decades to go. For all of us golf fans, I hope he continues to play even if and when he shatters the last of Jack's records.
Playing record and majors? Surely, Terry. Check my post, I am speaking of the putts. I think comparing Nicklaus' clutch putting to Tiger's is an insult to Tiger. I am curious to know, but I highly doubt if we all come up with both, Nicklaus will hold a candle to Tiger on the greens.
Fair enough, Glenn. I don't know how one could divine the answer to this query. Surely, anybody who wins as often as Jack and Tiger sinks a lot of BIG PUTTS. I watched Nicklaus a fair amount over the years and it always seemed to me that he made every putt that mattered. I have the same feeling about Tiger. We may be in "distinction without a difference" category here, or it may simply be a matter of opinion. Either way, I think they are both superlative.
-
Certainly Tiger is brilliant with the putter, and probably the best clutch putter ever. What I can't understand is what do all those spike marks around the hole do when Tiger putts, just lay down. He makes these putts on the last hole of a tournament after all the players have waded through, and not once have I ever seen a spike mark influence one of his putts, unless they directed the ball in the hole. Seems uncanny to me.
-
;D :D ??? ??? ???
Hey guys let's answer the question even if it is a little off topic. The Jack vs Tiger thread was long and inconclusive.
As to the best putter of all time, I've heard the old pro's talk about Bobby Locke with awe, similar to Tiger today. Rumor has it that some of our leading tour pros of the day made sure he couldn't get his visa to play full time on the tour , they were so annoyed by how many putts he made.
The question is probably Locke vs. Woods , as good a putter as Crenshaw was, he didn't win enough to merit consideration as the best ever.
-
Ok, Terry. That is great, I hear a lot of "I saw Nicklaus play and he made ever putt that mattered." Hell, Jacobsen was comparing the look in Tiger's eyes to Ballesteros and Floyd over the weekend. I am saying this guy is DIFFERENT and there is NO comparison, not Nicklaus, Floyd or anybody else.
Here is a start Nicklaus guys, chime in.
1975 Augusta 16th green, fabulous 40-footer, amazing putt
1986 Augusta 10th green
1980 Baltusrol 17 was a good putt, wasn't it?
1986 Augusta- You can count 15,16 and 17 if you want, but those were done more with his clubs than his putter. Although 17 was pretty damn good.
I KNOW there is more, lets hear them.
-
>:( >:( >:(
Please read above post no mas Tiger Jack please
-
OK Archie, list us Bobby Locke's 5 most important/clutch putts...then we'll vote...
-
Fine
-
Bobby Locke in the same conversation as Tiger??? Get real.
-
You could make a pretty impressive 'top 5' for Tiger just relying on last year's US Open and the past two Bay Hill events.
13 on Saturday @ Torrey
18 on Saturday @ Torrey
18 on Monday @ Torrey
18 on Sunday @ Bay Hill 08
18 on Sunday @ Bay Hill 09
EDIT - But are any of them as good as the one to break Steve Scott's heart at Pumpkin Ridge?
-
;D ;D ;D
Greg C , do you know anything at all about Bobby Locke ???
Jimmy S , can't do it even I'm too young to remember, suffice it to say that I'm sure Eldrick W is the best I've ever seen , Gentle Ben included.
However , my old pro buddies who are even more opinionated than me say that no one has ever putted like this guy Locke, Quick check of the stats show that he had 59 starts on the tour and won 11 times , Significantly he finished in the top three in 30 of the 59 events entered,
This being said , he is absolutely legendary for his putting ....trust me!
-
All I know is that I recall watching a British Open later in Jack's career and saw him leave a winning putt an inch short. I was shocked and said to myself his peak was over. Generally, it was, but he did come back and win the '86 Masters.
I haven't compared the two records, but surely Jack in his prime was a contender. And, from what I have heard, Locke COULD be put in that group.
-
You could make a pretty impressive 'top 5' for Tiger just relying on last year's US Open and the past two Bay Hill events.
13 on Saturday @ Torrey
18 on Saturday @ Torrey
18 on Monday @ Torrey
18 on Sunday @ Bay Hill 08
18 on Sunday @ Bay Hill 09
I still like 18 at Valhalla in 2000. Short, but monumentally important. Also, the putt in the playoff against Els in the Presidents Cup at Fancourt in 2003. Still amazing to think about and with THE PRESIDENTS CUP HANGING IN THE BALANCE!!!
The CRUCIAL putts that Tiger has to stand over are just unbelievable and he makes them!!
-
What is most incredible to me is his ability to read putts - I know execution is what is most important, but his ability to read putts is unbelievable. Johnny Miller commented a number of times about how some players had misread a putt and then along comes Tiger and he makes it. I think a critical part of being a really good putter is having confidence in your ability to read putts.
-
I'd much rather discuss which major Thomas Bjorn will win. ;D ;) ;)
-
;D ;D ;D
Greg C , do you know anything at all about Bobby Locke ???
I know the history, otherwise I wouldn't have commented...
-
;D ;D ;D
Greg C , do you know anything at all about Bobby Locke ???
Jimmy S , can't do it even I'm too young to remember, suffice it to say that I'm sure Eldrick W is the best I've ever seen , Gentle Ben included.
However , my old pro buddies who are even more opinionated than me say that no one has ever putted like this guy Locke, Quick check of the stats show that he had 59 starts on the tour and won 11 times , Significantly he finished in the top three in 30 of the 59 events entered,
This being said , he is absolutely legendary for his putting ....trust me!
Archie,
I am well aware of Locke and his exploits. He may have been a better putter than Woods, I have no idea. But, deep down, you and I both know, you, your pro friends and whoever else aren't sending Locke out there over Tiger if the putt is do or die.
Locke and Nicklaus on the greens. Mo Norman and ball-striking. They seem embellished to some degree, like a fish story. You can't embellish Tiger enough. The putts he makes, most EVERYONE in history couldn't even stand over and put a roll on, he makes nearly every one right in the middle.
-
I'd much rather discuss which major Thomas Bjorn will win. ;D ;) ;)
Yeah, that isn't looking so good. Seriously, I like the history of the game and know plenty about it, but I would like to hear more documented putts that Nicklaus made. My bet is that it is paltry compared to what this guy is doing. My guess is Nicklaus was better with his clubs.
There is not ONE person dead or alive that makes those two putts on 18 at Bay Hill in 08 and 09 with a playoff waiting with a miss. Not one.
-
;D ;D ;D
Greg C , do you know anything at all about Bobby Locke ???
Jimmy S , can't do it even I'm too young to remember, suffice it to say that I'm sure Eldrick W is the best I've ever seen , Gentle Ben included.
However , my old pro buddies who are even more opinionated than me say that no one has ever putted like this guy Locke, Quick check of the stats show that he had 59 starts on the tour and won 11 times , Significantly he finished in the top three in 30 of the 59 events entered,
This being said , he is absolutely legendary for his putting ....trust me!
Archie,
I am well aware of Locke and his exploits. He may have been a better putter than Woods, I have no idea. But, deep down, you and I both know, you, your pro friends and whoever else aren't sending Locke out there over Tiger if the putt is do or die.
Locke and Nicklaus on the greens. Mo Norman and ball-striking. They seem embellished to some degree, like a fish story. You can't embellish Tiger enough. The putts he makes, most EVERYONE in history couldn't even stand over and put a roll on, he makes nearly every one right in the middle.
I would have to seriously consider Locke over Tiger for a do or die putt. Locke’s history is not comparable to Moe Norman's legend. Locke performed with excellence in tournament golf & championship golf.
From 1946 to 1959 Locke has the following stats:
The Open - 10 starts - 4 wins, 8 top 10s
US Open - 7 starts – two 3rds, two 4ths, & one 5th.
Masters - 4 starts - (21st, 13th, 10th, 14th)
PGA Tour - 15 total wins - 11 wins in 59 starts over 2.5 year period.
We are all aware of the differences in travel and playing conditions during that time period. I will not try to list his worldwide victories, acknowledging the impossibility to compare between the PGA Tour and other tours during that time period. We also have no putting stats available from that time period.
But it is a fact that during his short time in the US Locke was a dominate player on a tour with Snead and Hogan among others. Additionally the history offers ample evidence that Locke was informally banned due to winning prize money & titles away from Americans.
But Locke should never be confused with being just a legend (i.e. Moe Norman) or being only a dominant force outside the US (e.g. DeVicenzo). Locke was a dominant force during his US visits, and in addition to his four Open wins, he has five top 5s in seven US Opens (taking into account the travel he dealt with and that most of his US visits were for limited stays).
There is no answer to who is better between Locke and Tiger.
But I can not dispute the ample evidence that Locke is one of the great putters of all time, and Locke performed with excellence at all levels of competitive golf. Locke is not a legend; Locke's greatness is real and substantiated.
-
While it's probable that Tiger is the greatest of all time is it not premature to make this claim? I pose this question based on the fact that he still has not equaled or surpassed the records set by Nicklaus?
Why do you (and the other Nicklaus supporters) place so much value on one record?
-
;D ;D ;D
Greg C , do you know anything at all about Bobby Locke ???
Jimmy S , can't do it even I'm too young to remember, suffice it to say that I'm sure Eldrick W is the best I've ever seen , Gentle Ben included.
However , my old pro buddies who are even more opinionated than me say that no one has ever putted like this guy Locke, Quick check of the stats show that he had 59 starts on the tour and won 11 times , Significantly he finished in the top three in 30 of the 59 events entered,
This being said , he is absolutely legendary for his putting ....trust me!
Archie,
I am well aware of Locke and his exploits. He may have been a better putter than Woods, I have no idea. But, deep down, you and I both know, you, your pro friends and whoever else aren't sending Locke out there over Tiger if the putt is do or die.
Locke and Nicklaus on the greens. Mo Norman and ball-striking. They seem embellished to some degree, like a fish story. You can't embellish Tiger enough. The putts he makes, most EVERYONE in history couldn't even stand over and put a roll on, he makes nearly every one right in the middle.
I would have to seriously consider Locke over Tiger for a do or die putt. Locke’s history is not comparable to Moe Norman's legend. Locke performed with excellence in tournament golf & championship golf.
From 1946 to 1959 Locke has the following stats:
The Open - 10 starts - 4 wins, 8 top 10s
US Open - 7 starts – two 3rds, two 4ths, & one 5th.
Masters - 4 starts - (21st, 13th, 10th, 14th)
PGA Tour - 15 total wins - 11 wins in 59 starts over 2.5 year period.
We are all aware of the differences in travel and playing conditions during that time period. I will not try to list his worldwide victories, acknowledging the impossibility to compare between the PGA Tour and other tours during that time period. We also have no putting stats available from that time period.
But it is a fact that during his short time in the US Locke was a dominate player on a tour with Snead and Hogan among others. Additionally the history offers ample evidence that Locke was informally banned due to winning prize money & titles away from Americans.
But Locke should never be confused with being just a legend (i.e. Moe Norman) or being only a dominant force outside the US (e.g. DeVicenzo). Locke was a dominant force during his US visits, and in addition to his four Open wins, he has five top 5s in seven US Opens (taking into account the travel he dealt with and that most of his US visits were for limited stays).
There is no answer to who is better between Locke and Tiger.
But I can not dispute the ample evidence that Locke is one of the great putters of all time, and Locke performed with excellence at all levels of competitive golf. Locke is not a legend; Locke's greatness is real and substantiated.
Thank you, Bill. Very interesting. Norman really is in his own category, I was certainly wrong to have placed Locke anywhere near Norman. Locke certainly had an incredible run. Does it matter at all that he won 4 Opens and no US majors on your list? I don't usually equate the Open with a putting contest.
So, is Locke comparable to Faxon and Crenshaw then? Great putters all week? Sounds good, but doesn't seem like nearly enough to send him out there over Tiger.
-
Thank you, Bill. Very interesting. Norman really is in his own category, I was certainly wrong to have placed Locke anywhere near Norman. Locke certainly had an incredible run. Does it matter at all that he won 4 Opens and no US majors on your list? I don't usually equate the Open with a putting contest.
So, is Locke comparable to Faxon and Crenshaw then? Great putters all week? Sounds good, but doesn't seem like nearly enough to send him out there over Tiger.
Glenn,
Thank you for you own thoughts in this matter. Let me try to clarify my statements per Bobby Locke.
I agree that with no US Open wins, Locke does not reach the career level of Hogan, Snead, Nelson and Palmer. I also acknowledge that his Open Championship wins lacked most of the top US golfers.
However, Locke had excellent results during 2.5 years in the US. In addition, he has a total of 15 PGA Tour wins. But, other than those 2.5 years, his other US visits were short term visits. Having to make long trans-ocean voyages (most likely by boat) for short visits in the US to then compete in one of the hardest tournaments in the world against a field of pros playing in their home country and on courses they may already be familiar with, is destined to be a long-shot. Yet under these conditions he obtained five top-5s, a 14th, and one missed cut. That is very impressive.
Granted Bobby Jones, Ben Hogan, and Walter Hagen found success in other countries, but that is one of the things that makes those golfers so very special.
Again, for my thinking that leaves Locke a notch below Hogan, Snead & Nelson; but it raises him above DeVicenzo, Kel Nagel and Peter Thomson when trying to compare the dominant non-US based golfers of that time period with the US based golfers.
In my own mind I place Locke above a Crenshaw. Locke has many more tournament wins and could dominate fields better than could Crenshaw. Perhaps Locke is at a level of Hale Irwin, and excellent golfer, tough competitor, not scared by anyone, but never at that #1 level.
Locke's capabilities as a champion golfer can not be too easily dismissed. It is unfortunate that he could not compete more in the US as I think it is very possible that our US Open and Masters histories may have then included some incredible Bobby Locke tales.
My main point is that Locke's reputation as one of the great putters of all time should not be viewed as part of just a legendary character that has little real results to show. Locke is an accomplished championship golfer, and as such his putting feats should be taken seriously.
-
My main point is that Locke's reputation as one of the great putters of all time should not be viewed as part of just a legendary character that has little real results to show. Locke is an accomplished championship golfer, and as such his putting feats should be taken seriously.
Bill,
I absolutely agree with you and I thank you for showing me the light. I share your opinion that fine showings on short trips with long travel do show Locke in a flattering manner. Locke sounds like an interesting fellow and I need to do some more reading on him. Maybe then, he will be my guy in a do or die situation. ;D
One last question and you may be right to want Locke, but OVER TIGER? Tiger has never REALLY missed on 18.
Oakmont 07 wasn't even reasonable and he gave that somewhat of a chance. Those putts at Hazeltine to try and get involved. It just goes on and on.
-
;D ;D ;D
Bill great stuff on Bobby Locke . We're not talking Geroge Low here , but a great champion !
Having been lucky enough to hang around , caddy for and even on rare occasions share a few pints with some of the games greatest players from that era , I can emphatically tell you all that they talked of Bobby Locke 's putting like the talk about Tiger today. He was a freak when it came to putting . Just like young Mr. Woods.
As we recanted to you, it is a widely known local legend that many of the best players on the planet were secretly happy to see him leave the American Tour when they banned him for lack of participation or the like.
Not only was he a great champion as his record surely speaks , it was accomplished without the consummate ball striking skills of the other champions of his era. He played a series of 12 matches with Sam Snead in his prime and won 10 of them.....10-2 against Sam Snead ! He was an unbelievable putter, the likes of which has not been seen until Mr Woods said "hello world" .
ps .....I didn't say he was better than Tiger, I said he is the only one who could possibly compare with the flat stick
-
Thanks, Archie!!
-
;D ;D ;D
Bill great stuff on Bobby Locke . We're not talking Geroge Low here , but a great champion !
Having been lucky enough to hang around , caddy for and even on rare occasions share a few pints with some of the games greatest players from that era , I can emphatically tell you all that they talked of Bobby Locke 's putting like the talk about Tiger today. He was a freak when it came to putting . Just like young Mr. Woods.
As we recanted to you, it is a widely known local legend that many of the best players on the planet were secretly happy to see him leave the American Tour when they banned him for lack of participation or the like.
Not only was he a great champion as his record surely speaks , it was accomplished without the consummate ball striking skills of the other champions of his era. He played a series of 12 matches with Sam Snead in his prime and won 10 of them.....10-2 against Sam Snead ! He was an unbelievable putter, the likes of which has not been seen until Mr Woods said "hello world" .
ps .....I didn't say he was better than Tiger, I said he is the only one who could possibly compare with the flat stick
Archie,
I feel that Locke was an absolute genius on the greens and a superb player. His swing was not that of a classicist but a bit of a round house heave with a pronounced draw. In his matches against Snead in South Africa he did have a definite advantage, Snead had never seen grain like he met down there.
Bob
-
Quick point of clarification. Locke's four British Open wins are now counted as PGA wins. At the time they were not.
Even without that, 11 out of 59 is a fantastic record. Sad he got blackballed from the PGA Tour. His U.S. Open record was outstanding. Easy to see him winning that event, if he had played it more often.
Did he swing with an extremely bent left arm? I seem to remember something like that from some old golf books I saw as a kid.
-
I'm getting on in years these days and one of the benefits of that is to remember the things you heard so long ago from some of the best. Sort of through my father who knew so many of the top players from over a half century ago I remember some of those who knew Locke well and competed against him talk about him. I'm talking about guys I heard it from like Tommy Armour.
I always got the impression that Locke was pretty good period but the only thing they really talked about him for was that everyone in those days considered him to be the best putter anyone had ever heard of.
I might be mistaken in thinking this was Locke but I believe they said he actually hooked his putts more than anyone had ever seen before.
However, with Woods, we've seen him on tour for around thirteen years now and I would also include those notable three dramatic US Amateur wins in a row. Throughout those years (about fifteen years or so) it's not just that Woods has been a very good putter but that when those times come when it looks like it's pretty much do or die the amount of times he's done the improbable, sometimes even the almost unimaginable with mostly his flat-stick at those semi-do or die times seems to be about ten times more than the career highlight putts of all the great champions COMBINED in their entire careers.
And we have to remember that Woods is probably not even remotely close to being done yet. He might be somewhere between half way to two thirds of the way into it at this point.
By the way, I think they mentioned it briefly yesterday that Woods' winning percentage is 29% and maybe 30% after yesterday. I have no way of finding out but at the tournament caliber level he's played at in his career I can't imagine anyone else has come anywhere near that phenomenal statistic.
-
Overall, Tiger is definitely NOT the best putter. The first 63 holes of a tournament, he's likely upper quartile. However, that pesky last 9 holes with him anywhere in the hunt....now that's where you need to look out.
Not one of us thought that he had a better chance of missing on 18 than making. None of us. Pretty good for a 20 footer. Take Phil, the 2nd best player in the world and an excellent short game to boot and we would've been sweating out a 4 footer in the same circumstances.
-
I cant speak for prior era's but in watching golf over the past 20 years - Tiger is clearly streaks ahead on everyone else in his ability to hold "important" putts. 14 Majors aren't won without a "great" flatstick.
Clint - I disagree - it's not just those on the B9 on Sunday.....it's the par savers throughout the tournament as well. His ability to read the lines and hit the right pace are amazing. Be they short or long putts he rarely finishes too far past or too far short of the hole.
-
I cant speak for prior era's but in watching golf over the past 20 years - Tiger is clearly streaks ahead on everyone else in his ability to hold "important" putts. 14 Majors aren't won without a "great" flatstick.
Clint - I disagree - it's not just those on the B9 on Sunday.....it's the par savers throughout the tournament as well. His ability to read the lines and hit the right pace are amazing. Be they short or long putts he rarely finishes too far past or too far short of the hole.
Oh, I agree....he grinds all tournament long. So do others, I'll take Loren Roberts when it's not mid afternoon on a Sunday too. It's just that his range gets SO much longer on Sunday.
-
I don't want to argue for either Nicklaus, Woods or Locke for that matter.
But, two shots that I remember to this day that show the fighting quality of both players.
Nicklaus, Turnberry, 72nd hole, Watson in the fairway, Jack in a bush. Jack hacks it out unbelievably to 30 feet or so from the hole. Watson hits it to 2 feet. Game over? Nicklaus holes the putt, and Watson JUST gets his in. Watson wins, but the battle was epic, and had gone on and on and on. Perhaps the greatest 72 holes strokeplay/matchplay event ever held. I wonder where Watson ranks this victory in his memoires.
Tiger at a World Cup around 2000. Arrives at the last hole and has to hole a chip shot on 18 (for eagle I think) for the USA to make a play-off. He does, and USA go on to win. I can't remember who paired Woods that year. I can't remember who lost.
James B
-
"Not one of us thought that he had a better chance of missing on 18 than making. None of us. Pretty good for a 20 footer."
Obviously, you're either kidding or trying to be ironical! It was a must make 20 footer to win a golf tournament for Christ's Sake!!
-
G'day Craig:
It's a great topic, for it can never be solved. We hone in on Tiger's uncanny ability to hole important putts when it counts; it's fresh in our minds and he blows us away with his sense of back-nine theatrics. Pay-TV allows us to see all the shots—at every tournament—so his wizardry seems more vivid. What Tiger does seems hitherto unimaginable. And yet, before this era of non-stop golf telecasts, Billy Casper, George Archer, Dave Stockton, and Bob Charles all performed the same flat-stick stunts. But we were at work, and tournament telecasts were less frequent. Plus, apart from Casper with 50+ wins, these guys weren't as prolific winners, so the impact of their awesome putting wasn't as intense as Woods'.
I'm sure many old-timers would give you even money on either Casper and Charles against Woods in a putting contest for any purse you'd care to name. One hundred years ago, Walter Travis used to bury the top amateurs with putting that was thought to be without peer.
-
Peter Thomson used to think Kel Nagle was absolutely top-draw on the greens
-
While I tend to agree with the point that the exposure received by Woods and his modern counterparts sheds more light on their brilliance, or lack thereof, it seems to me that Mr. Woods's ability to make putts for par, or even bogey (16 and 18 on Saturday) borders on the absurd. In any event, this is surely a fun point to argue about -- one which defies a definitive response.
-
James Bennett -
I think Tiger's partner at the World Cup in Japan that year was David Duval.
Just as impressive as the putt Tiger made for birdie on #18 on Sunday was the longer putt he made on #18 to save bogie on Saturday.
DT
-
Another great Tiger finishing putt: the last one in the playoff for the Presidents Cup, where he was going head to head against Ernie Els.
-
If we're talking Tiger putts on 18, Dubai Desert Classic last year, when he came back from a bunch behind on the back 9 to beat Els (I think it was something like 5 back with 9 to play).
On 18 he was long in two and needed to get up and down to post a score. He actually fluffed his pitch from an awkward lie, leaving him a 40 odd footer down the hill which never looked anywhere else but dead centre.
Ernie hit it in the water on 18, which you could have predicted, and it was another ridiculous comeback win.
-
I am pretty sure Willie Park was the greatest putter of all time. Definitely in the 19th century.
Maybe we should add some qualifications?
Tiger is the greatest SO FAR in the 21st century?
-
If there's been one better than Tiger I haven't seen him and I watched Nicklaus closely throughout his prime.
How about George Low. I read his book on putting a long time ago and have recently reverted back to his grip with favorable results. Was he a great putter?
-
I don't want to argue for either Nicklaus, Woods or Locke for that matter.
But, two shots that I remember to this day that show the fighting quality of both players.
Nicklaus, Turnberry, 72nd hole, Watson in the fairway, Jack in a bush. Jack hacks it out unbelievably to 30 feet or so from the hole. Watson hits it to 2 feet. Game over? Nicklaus holes the putt, and Watson JUST gets his in. Watson wins, but the battle was epic, and had gone on and on and on. Perhaps the greatest 72 holes strokeplay/matchplay event ever held. I wonder where Watson ranks this victory in his memoires.
that Turnberry Open may very well the best golf tournament of all time...those two paired head to head for the last 36, shooting 65, 65, 65, 66....lapping the field by 10 or so shots/pushing themselves to greater and greater heights...in the Open...Watson miraculoulsy holing from way off the green to tie thing sup.....
and yes what a perfect finish: if Jack had missed that long putt Watson could simply have had to 2 putt...but incredibly Jack ran it in , which meant both birdied the last
here's how special that was: some of their fellow pros got out of the locker room and went out on the course to follow them!
-
Just got to this topic belatedly. Great thread. Pulled out Herb Wind’s The Story of American Golf to get his contemporary views of Nicklaus and Locke. Quoting Locke on cautious play:
Didn’t he go for birdies? he was asked. Of course he went for birdies, Bobby replied, but not foolhardily from the tee when there was sizable chance that he would lose his par as well as his birdie if the difficult shot failed to come off. “And suppose I had cleared the trap and my ball had ended up seven or ten feet from the pin, what advantage, really, would I have gained? My shot, my safe shot as you call it, left me no more than twenty or twenty-five feet from the hole. If I am putting I figure to make the twenty-five-foot putts as regularly as I would make the eight-foot putts. One put is not more difficult than the other. The only difference, old boy, is that one putt is longer than the other.”
Sounds like a confident putter to me.
As for Nicklaus, Wind points out that Jack did not take the tour by storm from the start. It took several years, and during this time JN lost his share with three-putts that we tend to forget about in light of his great clutch putting later in his career (including some short putts under three feet that Woods never misses).
I was a kid back in those days and didn’t give a hoot about golf. About the only thing I remember about Jack’s putting (besides making some huge ones) is that he seemed to have a different putter in use from week to week, year to year. Maybe it was simply to sell more putters or a tactic to improve, but in this Woods seems more confident of his tools. Perhaps another perspective on Nicklaus’ putting skills is found in the consensus opinion that he was no match for Tiger in his short game chipping and sand play. By his own admission, he really didn’t start working on improving his short game until he was 40 because his wedge and iron play was so good he was always on the greens. So, to win as much as he did with an average chipping and sand game, he must have been an outstanding putter.
The impression I get is that there was nobody hotter for a decade than Locke, much of it in Europe. Nobody better over an entire career than Nicklaus (so far). And nobody better from the start of his career onwards than Woods. Add in Woods’ total short game (off topic) and I think he’s the all-time champion.
-
I don't want to argue for either Nicklaus, Woods or Locke for that matter.
But, two shots that I remember to this day that show the fighting quality of both players.
Nicklaus, Turnberry, 72nd hole, Watson in the fairway, Jack in a bush. Jack hacks it out unbelievably to 30 feet or so from the hole. Watson hits it to 2 feet. Game over? Nicklaus holes the putt, and Watson JUST gets his in. Watson wins, but the battle was epic, and had gone on and on and on. Perhaps the greatest 72 holes strokeplay/matchplay event ever held. I wonder where Watson ranks this victory in his memoires.
that Turnberry Open may very well the best golf tournament of all time...those two paired head to head for the last 36, shooting 65, 65, 65, 66....lapping the field by 10 or so shots/pushing themselves to greater and greater heights...in the Open...Watson miraculoulsy holing from way off the green to tie thing sup.....
and yes what a perfect finish: if Jack had missed that long putt Watson could simply have had to 2 putt...but incredibly Jack ran it in , which meant both birdied the last
here's how special that was: some of their fellow pros got out of the locker room and went out on the course to follow them!
Paul Thomas
I was under the impression that Watson and Nicklaus also played the first 36 holes together, so they played all 72 holes together. I am right there?
David Tepper
Japan and David Duval. Thanks, I can't remember that although your prompt rings a few bells.
James B
-
Gary Player, October 2002, Golf Digest:
"Tiger or Jack, one six-foot putt, for my life? I'll take Bobby Locke. I've seen them all, and there was never a putter like him. In the 100 or competitive rounds I played with him, I saw him three-putt just once. He was equally good on Bermuda, bent or bare dirt, and the length of the putt was almost irrelevant. You had to see it to believe it."
Of course, having seen seven more years of Tiger, he might today say the same thing about Tiger.
One more good line from the interview, if I may:
"Golf is a puzzle without an answer."
-
“And suppose I had cleared the trap and my ball had ended up seven or ten feet from the pin, what advantage, really, would I have gained? My shot, my safe shot as you call it, left me no more than twenty or twenty-five feet from the hole. If I am putting I figure to make the twenty-five-foot putts as regularly as I would make the eight-foot putts. One put is not more difficult than the other. The only difference, old boy, is that one putt is longer than the other.”
Dave,
Terrific quote. Dave Pelz would shake his head, but as you say, it points to Locke's supreme confidence. Ben Hogan wrote in 1948 that Locke was the greatest he'd ever seen, and was awed by Locke's "uncanny ability" to read greens.
Dan,
Gary Player was so impressed by Locke's putting that he tried adopting much of Locke's peculiar putting technique - see my post on page one of this thread for a short video link.
-
Dan,
Gary Player was so impressed by Locke's putting that he tried adopting much of Locke's peculiar putting technique - see my post on page one of this thread for a short video link.
Thanks. As usual lately, I'd just skimmed the thread and missed that link.
The wonders of YouTube....
-
Tiger will only claim the putting title from Nicklaus when he has holed as many crucial putts as Jack did to win as many majors as Jack did. I wouldn't bet against him.
Gary Player's comments about Bobby Locke bear listening to. The overspin that Locke put on the ball with his hook swing got the ball rolling sooner and kept it on line longer. Crenshaw, in his prime, did much the same thing more subtly. You need really great hands to perfect the technique, but the ball clearly does roll better.
-
I was a kid back in those days and didn’t give a hoot about golf. About the only thing I remember about Jack’s putting (besides making some huge ones) is that he seemed to have a different putter in use from week to week, year to year. Maybe it was simply to sell more putters or a tactic to improve, but in this Woods seems more confident of his tools.
I don't recall Nicklaus switching putters often, but I do remember that he used a new putter for the '86 Masters that he credited with helping him regain some of old putting magic. My dad and probably a million other people went out and bought that putter or a clone in the next month or two. I don't remember the model, but it had a larger head that was common at the time. Of course compared to the bizarro putters many use now, it was positively traditionalist by comparison :)
-
I don't recall Nicklaus switching putters often, but I do remember that he used a new putter for the '86 Masters that he credited with helping him regain some of old putting magic. My dad and probably a million other people went out and bought that putter or a clone in the next month or two. I don't remember the model, but it had a larger head that was common at the time. Of course compared to the bizarro putters many use now, it was positively traditionalist by comparison :)
It was the MacGregor Response ZT. See http://www.augusta.com/stories/040606/mas_76264.shtml (http://www.augusta.com/stories/040606/mas_76264.shtml)
-
Tiger will only claim the putting title from Nicklaus when he has holed as many crucial putts as Jack did to win as many majors as Jack did.
Why is this the only stat that matters to you? I'm not being mean, just curious.
-
George - At their level of clutch putting, I can't imagine any other criteria having meaning to them. I'd sure like to ask them, though.
-
Tiger will only claim the putting title from Nicklaus when he has holed as many crucial putts as Jack did to win as many majors as Jack did.
Do you mean Tiger must first win as many majors as Jack did, and he must make as many crucial putts to win them? i.e. both must be true?
-
Yup. That's the level I suspect these guys deal in. I'll share one personal vignette with Nicklaus that illustrates his way of thinking. During the '86 Open at Shinny, Jack was watching his son, Jackie finish up a round at NGLA late in the afternoon. He was sitting in a cart, and I went up and introduced myself and we started chatting. His son had recently been put out in the first round of the British Amateur by the eventual winner. My comment to Jack, Sr. was to the effect that at least his son lost to the winner - at which point Nicklaus stared me down and said, with great clarity - "You don't ever want to lose."
This showed me a ferocity of competitiveness way beyond any I'd encountered as a good college athlete. He just flat stared right through me and set me straight. So yes, I suspect Nicklaus would demand that Tiger sink as many clutch putts to win as many majors and that Tiger would agree on those criteria.
-
Who's keeping score on clutch putts?
-
I would suspect that both Jack and Tiger are keeping score.
-
jkinney,
I think that might be the most nuanced logic I have heard in a debate full of nuance...
How could Tiger have the first clue how many clutch putts Jack holed in his major career?
12 footers for par on the 13th hole are every bit as "clutch" as the winning putts in their minds because they put equal effort into them...
-
Jim - I suspect that Nicklaus and Woods remember every clutch putt they made in every major they won. Of course a putt made on the 13th hole counts equally to one made on the 18th. I never said they don't. How this is nuance is beyond me.
-
Jim - Also, Tiger of course doesn't know every clutch putt Jacl made in Jack's major wins. But Nicklaus does. And I suspect Jack will admit it if and when Tiger passes him in that category.
No one was a more gracious second place finisher than Jack, the many times he found himself in that spot.
-
jkinney,
thanks for that...yes, I agree that they have a good idea in their minds as to their own successes, but I really doubt Tiger has any way to measure his current standing in the "clutch" putt tally...or that Jack has taken the time to review each putt Tiger makes and measure its "clutchness"...but you may be right.
One thing there is no question about is the degree of long-term focus these two have/had or their competitive nature.
-
Jim - One of the reasons that I have my above stated theories is that Nicklaus once said that he remembered every competitive round he played in the Masters in great detail. So it follows that he'd remember the clutch putts he made in the majors he won. IMO, it also follows that he's been tracking Tiger's wins in majors very carefully. One can also suppose that Tiger knows his own clutch putts. As to how many of Jack's clutch putts Tiger knows, I suspect it's a lot of them. After all, he's been dreaming about besting Jack's records since he was a kid. So he must have studied Jack's major wins in detail, with his Dad as mentor.
-
Jim - I suspect that Nicklaus and Woods remember every clutch putt they made in every major they won. Of course a putt made on the 13th hole counts equally to one made on the 18th. I never said they don't. How this is nuance is beyond me.
Putts to stay alive or win on 18 are in a different category than ones that take place on 13. If you don't think so, then you aren't human and even though all evidence is to the contrary, Tiger is human.
13= Must, want, need, have to have
18= Lose or Playoff
-
Glenn,
To a certain degree, you are obviously correct, but golf tournaments are about momentum more than anything else. How often do we hear Tiger talk about how important a par or even bogey (54th hole at Bay Hill) putt is to maintaining position and putting your mind back in the proper focus?
I think the clarity of a do or die 18th hole putt can often make it easier to understand, while a 15 footer on #13 can have an impact not only on you, but on your competition as well.
-
I think Jim's point is well taken. Do we think that Sean O'Hair happened to see Tiger's bogey putts on 16 and 18 on Saturday that night on Golf Central or Sports Center? If either one of those putts doesn't go in (some 45'+ in total distance I would bet), Tiger is not playing in the last group with Sean -- which clearly must reduce the pressure he would have felt on Sunday.
-
This showed me a ferocity of competitiveness way beyond any I'd encountered as a good college athlete. He just flat stared right through me and set me straight. So yes, I suspect Nicklaus would demand that Tiger sink as many clutch putts to win as many majors and that Tiger would agree on those criteria.
Again, not trying to be rude, but how many college athletes have you interacted with? I've only interacted with a few, and ALL of them were this competitive. The difference is, Jack (and Tiger) actually did it; everyone talks the talk, few walk the walk. But I've never met a big time successful athlete that just coasted by on talent. I think they are the exception rather than the rule; the coasters get weeded out early on.
Tiger has already broken most of Jack's (or anyone else's) records; the total majors one is one of the least significant to me personally, and instituting a caveat judging clutch putts is way too subjective for me personally.
-
Greg Norman's comments on Tiger's clutch putting:
http://sports.yahoo.com/golf/pga/news?slug=ap-normancouples&prov=ap&type=lgns
-
George,
Obviously majors are what Tiger thinks are important, it wasn't Ryder cup championships that he had hanging on his wall growing up. Jack, Tiger and most of the top tier players gear their whole seasons around the Majors.
-
I understand that, and Tiger can certainly use whatever he chooses to drive him to greater and greater heights. I just can't exclude literally everything else when evaluating the two players. There seems to be a general consensus that the only record that will definitively establish Tiger as "better" is the total majors record, and I just don't understand that line of thinking (even that will likely be rejected by Jack's fans as having been established against inferior competition - I don't recall anyone saying that about Jack when he passed Hogan, Jones, etc.).
-
My buddy, the golf coach at Brown, was at the tournament held at Pasatiempo last weekend. He was sitting next to Casey Martin in a large group watching the end of the round at Bay Hill. When the last putt went in, the crowd erupted. Martin stood up and commented, "I don't know why you guys are so surprised he made that putt. The only surprise would have been if he had missed."
I do not believe that there have been many players in history for whom that type of comment would or could be made.
-
This showed me a ferocity of competitiveness way beyond any I'd encountered as a good college athlete. He just flat stared right through me and set me straight. So yes, I suspect Nicklaus would demand that Tiger sink as many clutch putts to win as many majors and that Tiger would agree on those criteria.
Again, not trying to be rude, but how many college athletes have you interacted with? I've only interacted with a few, and ALL of them were this competitive. The difference is, Jack (and Tiger) actually did it; everyone talks the talk, few walk the walk. But I've never met a big time successful athlete that just coasted by on talent. I think they are the exception rather than the rule; the coasters get weeded out early on.
Tiger has already broken most of Jack's (or anyone else's) records; the total majors one is one of the least significant to me personally, and instituting a caveat judging clutch putts is way too subjective for me personally.
George - I've interacted with a great number of college athletes, having played both football and hockey at the intercollegiate level. Of course we were all highly competitive. Of course no one skated by on talent for any length of time. Therefore, I'm perfectly entitled to say that Nicklaus' stare was at a whole different level, much higher than any I'd played against, including future profesional athletes who made it big. The stare was ferocious - not menacing - just riveting in its intensity.
And watch Tiger when he makes a clutch putt. The intensity of emotion is much higher than with any great shot tee to green. That shows me the importance Tiger attaches to holing these putts. And as to Jack's and Tiger's ability to remember them, I can't imagine a better way to set oneself up mentally for an important putt than to recall those I'd holed before.
-
I was a kid back in those days and didn’t give a hoot about golf. About the only thing I remember about Jack’s putting (besides making some huge ones) is that he seemed to have a different putter in use from week to week, year to year. Maybe it was simply to sell more putters or a tactic to improve, but in this Woods seems more confident of his tools.
I don't recall Nicklaus switching putters often, but I do remember that he used a new putter for the '86 Masters that he credited with helping him regain some of old putting magic. My dad and probably a million other people went out and bought that putter or a clone in the next month or two. I don't remember the model, but it had a larger head that was common at the time. Of course compared to the bizarro putters many use now, it was positively traditionalist by comparison :)
yea, as far as i know Jack used the George Low model for almost every major except the 86 Masters and the 67 US Open (he used "White Fang" there)
course maybe Dave is a young man and when he was a kid Jack was past his prime/ the 80's and 90s and then started using different putters!
-
I don't want to argue for either Nicklaus, Woods or Locke for that matter.
But, two shots that I remember to this day that show the fighting quality of both players.
Nicklaus, Turnberry, 72nd hole, Watson in the fairway, Jack in a bush. Jack hacks it out unbelievably to 30 feet or so from the hole. Watson hits it to 2 feet. Game over? Nicklaus holes the putt, and Watson JUST gets his in. Watson wins, but the battle was epic, and had gone on and on and on. Perhaps the greatest 72 holes strokeplay/matchplay event ever held. I wonder where Watson ranks this victory in his memoires.
that Turnberry Open may very well the best golf tournament of all time...those two paired head to head for the last 36, shooting 65, 65, 65, 66....lapping the field by 10 or so shots/pushing themselves to greater and greater heights...in the Open...Watson miraculoulsy holing from way off the green to tie thing sup.....
and yes what a perfect finish: if Jack had missed that long putt Watson could simply have had to 2 putt...but incredibly Jack ran it in , which meant both birdied the last
here's how special that was: some of their fellow pros got out of the locker room and went out on the course to follow them!
Paul Thomas
I was under the impression that Watson and Nicklaus also played the first 36 holes together, so they played all 72 holes together. I am right there?
James B
James , they definitely did not play together the first two rounds...
a trivia question: in 1 of his major wins Jack did play with someone all 4 rounds...who and which major?
-
I don't want to argue for either Nicklaus, Woods or Locke for that matter.
But, two shots that I remember to this day that show the fighting quality of both players.
Nicklaus, Turnberry, 72nd hole, Watson in the fairway, Jack in a bush. Jack hacks it out unbelievably to 30 feet or so from the hole. Watson hits it to 2 feet. Game over? Nicklaus holes the putt, and Watson JUST gets his in. Watson wins, but the battle was epic, and had gone on and on and on. Perhaps the greatest 72 holes strokeplay/matchplay event ever held. I wonder where Watson ranks this victory in his memoires.
that Turnberry Open may very well the best golf tournament of all time...those two paired head to head for the last 36, shooting 65, 65, 65, 66....lapping the field by 10 or so shots/pushing themselves to greater and greater heights...in the Open...Watson miraculoulsy holing from way off the green to tie thing sup.....
and yes what a perfect finish: if Jack had missed that long putt Watson could simply have had to 2 putt...but incredibly Jack ran it in , which meant both birdied the last
here's how special that was: some of their fellow pros got out of the locker room and went out on the course to follow them!
Paul Thomas
I was under the impression that Watson and Nicklaus also played the first 36 holes together, so they played all 72 holes together. I am right there?
James B
James , they definitely did not play together the first two rounds...
a trivia question: in 1 of his major wins Jack did play with someone all 4 rounds...who and which major?
Did the scoreboard at 18 read JACK IS BACK.
(Not really a question, a clue actually to any one who does not know the answer.)
-
The Japanese fellow who held his bullseye butter at address with the toe in the air. It was '80 at Baltusrol.
-
The Japanese fellow who held his bullseye butter at address with the toe in the air. It was '80 at Baltusrol.
well done...Isao Aoki, who i believe broke the scoring record for the US Open during the tournament...of course Jack did too!
-
Thank you for remembering Aoki's name for me. His battle with Nicklaus lasted all four rounds, and Aoki took Jack all the way to the 72nd hole before Jack, in a supreme effort, holed birdie putts on both the 71st and 72nd holes to claim the title. What a match-up that was, about on par with the Watson/Nicklaus brawl at Turnberry.