Seeing Tiger in person; an experience!

[mike_malone]

 We arrived on the #6 fairway about 9:30. Immediately we heard the unmistakeable roar. He birdied #5 we guessed. We waited in the landing area, blind to the tee. Then one shot came soaring over the ridge. The other shot was 40 yards back. "Outdrove Scott McCarron by that much? He's not short off the tee is he?"

     I read the putt better than Tiger; he missed ; he is human.

   We quickly realized that you can't FOLLOW  Tiger ; you need to go forward. We didn't get it figured out until #9. From the back of the 212 yard par 3 we saw a shot to ten feet. The leave was good--straight up the hill--bird.

    Hits 3 wood on #10, but it goes left. We don't follow. But, there's that roar again! He chips in from off the green for bird.

  We are just left of the Cirba bunkers on #13. McCarron hits it near the lip and must layup. Tiger is better off. He is in the center of the bunker. At this point I was able to get some 15 feet from him. His concentration is impressive. He hits it easily with a half shot to some 15 feet.

  We go ahead to #15 landing area. This is another one that is blind back to the tee. The fairway runs out just short of a water hazard. Again, Tiger hits it at least 40 yards past Mc Carron. It looks like a wedge to the green. He hits it close (based on the crowd reaction). He makes the bird. He is on a roll now.

      He seriously shortsides himself on #16. We are across the green. The full swing popup that lands like a butterfly to 3 feet impresses us the most.


   After a huge drive on #17 we expect and get the attempt to go for it in two.  I position myself behind an evergreen and can climb up a few feet. I need to look to the left of the tree for the shot and then to the right of the tree for the flight. Tiger  can hit half shots and chipins and great up and downs and can also kill his drives and launch  a 3 wood 240 uphill; what an arsenal! ( BTW how do you get  pinesap off your leg?)


    To our amazement he pars #17 (we watch from the tent area left of #17). We go into our air conditioned tent to watch #18 on TV. Again --par.


    I couldn't stop thinking "what if". But Tiger, in an interview , says he doesn't do that because he thinks it would drive him crazy. This is another example of what separates him from the crowd.

   Thomas Bjorn shoots 63. BUT NO ONE EXPECTS IT OF HIM!

  Eveyone on that course that morning expected Tiger to perform. I hope you Tiger naysayers can appreciate how exceptional a golfer  is who can  do what he did that morning.

[PThomas]

I actually felt sorry for him at O Fields during the 03 Open...he was on the putting green all by himself, and their were probably at least 4000 eyes watching his every move....talk about living in fishbowl

I happened to be right near the gallery rope when he walked by me later.....he just looked straight ahead, lost in his own world of focus.......and what focus it must be ..I wish I had 25% of it!

I loved his swing on the second to 17 on Sunday, where he swung SO hard his club recoiled on him...as soon as he could he started walking after it, and for good reason:  shot was RIGHT AT the flag!

and while he does have his faults - pls stop the F-BOMBS Tiger! -- he does have the heart of a champion...he has no quit in him, no matter what

and then there's T Owens of the Eagles ...what a goof

[JESII]

How many of the other "top players" have the mental (and physical) strength to find themselves 15 shots out of the lead and three or four strokes outside of the cut number with about 12 holes to go in the second round and threaten to win the tournament?

I too am not a fan of his outbursts but I can't help but be awed by his performances.

[A.G._Crockett]

Virtually every player that plays with Tiger for the first time has the same reaction to the experience: they are blown away by the sheer magnitude of what is going on around Tiger, and can't believe that he can deal with it like he does.

[Ben Voelker]

I would agree with everything that is being said, he is someone that'll we'll never see the likes of again.  However, I can't make myself root for him and it's not fault of his own.

I just can't take the media reaction to him.  I don't think I've ever witnessed a sports figure that the guys that cover him on television love so much.  They literally gush, even when he's playing horribly.  The one example I can think of this week was I believe on Saturday, granted Tiger had made a bunch of birdies on the back nine, but he was still at even for the tournament going into 16.  I don't remember who it was, but one of them suggested (seriously I might add) that if Tiger could just simply go birdie-eagle-eagle he could get himself right near the lead.

While Tiger is great, and  if I was told anyone had done that, he would be the obvious guess, but to actually bring that up in a telecast as if it's even remotely likely?  Give me a break.  Further, I understand it more when they've got a no-name leaderboard and are trying to keep the drama in the telecast for the casual golf fan, but this was when we've got two of the most recognizable names (other than Tiger) in American golf battling for the lead.

It does amaze me, I cannot believe that Tiger actually finished 4th this week, completely astounding, and I could like him and be more amazed if these guys would tone down their love affair with him just a little bit.

[JESII]

That's hilarious about the potential birdie-eagle-eagle finish. I wonder why the commentator didn't think him capable of a hole-in-one on #16.
 

[Ben Voelker]

Yeah, I understand the reason, I just wish they'd be somewhat professional and show some restraint.

[George Pazin]

They coulda said eagle - albatross - albatross.

 

It is kind of sad how pathetic the announcers can be at times. But, hey, maybe they'd say the same thing about me (pathetic, that is, not birdie-eagle-eagle!).

P.S. Pretty amazing how much longer he is than McCarron, one of the longer players on tour. Harmon used to say that Tiger had another 20% he wasn't using. Might have been a bit of a stretch, but with newer technology, it's almost true.

[grandwazo]

I found myself alone with Tiger and "Stevie" on the putting green at 6:40AM Thursday morning.  He was the only pro on the green, and he was almost two hours away from his tee time, I guess that tells you something right there.  

I watched him make about 200 4 foot putts in a row with his right hand only, keeping his stroke in between two tees placed just wide enough for his putter head to get through.  As other pros showed up they all just putted at holes, no one else was interested in doing a drill, I guess that tells you something too.
 
He does have an incredible ability to not look at anyone, he just looks right through you, I guess he has to at this point, anything else would be just too distracting.

Pretty much every other pro gets to play their round in peace, the crowd that follows him is absolutely overpowering.

All that being said, for him to start at +5, come back the next day and make that birdie to make the cut, and then be in a position to be in a playoff on the final day if not for the weather delay is truly amazing.  All credit to him, he is the best athlete of my time.

[JohnV]

Watching Tiger crush a drive reminds me of when John Daly first broke onto the scene.  I saw JD at Peter Jacobsen's tournament in Portland shortly after he won the PGA.  When he hit a ball there were three distinct gasps/cheers.  First when people saw the swing and heard the ball being hit, second when they saw it take off like no other ball they had seen and third when the people 300 yards up the fairway saw it land beyond anything they had seen that day.

When Tiger won the US Amateur at Pumpkin Ridge, he hit a drive on the 3rd hole during the practice round that amazed everyone including our head pro who was playing with him.  He flew some bunkers from the back tee that most wouldn't consider from the next tee up and was only about 75 yards from the green on a 395 yard uphill hole.  And that was with technology that pales by todays.

Casey Martin was one of the longest hitters I'd seen up to that point and when I asked him how he compared to Tiger he said he wasn't even close.

[Joel_Stewart]

He does have an incredible ability to not look at anyone, he just looks right through you, I guess he has to at this point, anything else would be just too distracting.

I've seen Tiger a number of times and I always wonder who the real Tiger is?   On TV he is well spoken but in person he isn't that freindly.   At the US Open in 1998, he stiffed the locker room attendants and never said anything to the volunteers.  

I saw him once at the Tyson-Holyfield fight in Las Vegas (where Tyson bit Holyfields ear) an there where hundreds of sports and movie stars.  We were able to get into this area where the celebs exited and Sly Stallone, JFK Jr., Charles Barkley, Jesse Jackson were all standing around with a few hundred people and here comes this huge wave of bodyguards (7 of them) escorting Tiger out of the arena and he wasn't with anybody.  He starred straight out and wouldn't look to the left or right with no expression on his face.

As for what John says about his length, he used to play early morning rounds at San Francisco GC with Casey Martin and Joel Kriebel and the members who were on the golf course would send in their caddies so they could watch them play.  Tiger would hit iron into #9 and take it up over the trees on holes like #3, 13 & 14 leaving himself with SW.

[George Pazin]

Joel -

It sounds to me like the other people you mentioned are publicity seekers, whereas maybe Tiger is just a private guy looking to be the best golfer ever and doesn't want the attention.

A few years ago I was at Mario Lemiuex's celebrity invitational here in the Burgh. I talked with a number of players, including my all time favorite football player, Dan Marino, who was extremely friendly. Mario, on the other hand, walked very close by the ropes where I was standing, and when I said, "Thanks for the great playoff run, Mario" (that was the year here came back from retirement mid season). He looked over at me and said rather uneasily, "Okay." It was clear is his someone who simply doesn't feel comfortable in the public eye.

I suspect few really know who the real Tiger is.

[mike_malone]

 When it comes to PLAYING golf at the highest level there is no one comparable to him that is playing today. I laugh at the John Daly love affair. He disrespects the game with his play too often. Tiger ,on the other hand, grinds it out. Who is a better role model for your kids?

   I don't think we have any idea what life is like for these phenoms. But, I do know that he delivers on what thousands expect of him on the course. That is really all that counts.


BTW I also found it interesting how the group ahead of him and behind gave him space. It was as if they wanted to get out of earshot of the roars.

[Evan Fleisher]

When it comes to PLAYING golf at the highest level there is no one comparable to him that is playing today. I laugh at the John Daly love affair. He disrespects the game with his play too often. Tiger ,on the other hand, grinds it out. Who is a better role model for your kids?

   I don't think we have any idea what life is like for these phenoms. But, I do know that he delivers on what thousands expect of him on the course. That is really all that counts.


BTW I also found it interesting how the group ahead of him and behind gave him space. It was as if they wanted to get out of earshot of the roars.

Interesting comment Mayday!  Did you see Daly's "putter incident" this past weekend?  How'd you like to be playing a MAJOR and putting with your wedge.  Not too good in my book.

[Rick Shefchik]

When the media lays it on too thick with Tiger (which is most of the time), keep reminding yourself that not only does he make money for them, but their journalistic instincts (correctly) tell them that he is the story of their lifetime, and if they're going to err, they're going to err on the side of giving you too much Tiger, not too little.

Think of Hogan, and how little we really know of him and how little footage remains of him. The same is actually true of Bobby Jones, despite the relative saturation coverage he was given during his time. Even the footage we have left of Nicklaus -- as evidenced by the same grainy clips they kept showing of his two Open wins at Baltusrol -- is comparatively skimpy. Don't you wish the media had done more with those guys -- respectfully and non-intrusively, of course -- rather than less?

Give today's media credit for this much: Now that they have the technology to get as close to Tiger as he will allow them to get, they are not going to let this opportunity to chronicle history pass them by.

[mike_malone]

I think to some extent the media has come to expect him to do the magical thing----and he does---so they continue to return to the well.

  Evan,

   That incident with Daly is part of why I said what I did. Then on Sunday he flails away from the rough on #17 . He doesn't really care what he shoots when he is not in contention.

[Ben Voelker]

For me personally, it's not the television coverage that bothers me.  It is fun to watch Tiger, even if he is way back, because you never know what you're going to see happen.  I agree and understand completely that they need to show every shot that he hits, or most, because you don't ever know when he'll hit a shot that will one day be historic.

That being said, I can't stand the media, especially the CBS crews, that blatantly root for Tiger regardless of the situation.  That's not necessary at all to make sure his career is well documented.  When they show highlights of his greatest moments 30 years from now, none of them will be Jim Nantz gushing about Tiger, they'll be Tiger doing what we have now seem him do for almost ten years.

When watching the Monday coverage of the PGA, at which point Tiger didn't really have a shot anymore, we watched Elkington putt out on 18 to finish at -3.  My dad and I both immediately wondered how long it would take for Nantz to mention that Tiger was eliminated.  Literally a single second later, Nantz mentions that that eliminates Tiger.

I'm certainly not faulting Tiger for this, but it just becomes unbearable at times.

[stevencollins]

For me personally, it's not the television coverage that bothers me.  It is fun to watch Tiger, even if he is way back, because you never know what you're going to see happen.  I agree and understand completely that they need to show every shot that he hits, or most, because you don't ever know when he'll hit a shot that will one day be historic.

That being said, I can't stand the media, especially the CBS crews, that blatantly root for Tiger regardless of the situation.  That's not necessary at all to make sure his career is well documented.  When they show highlights of his greatest moments 30 years from now, none of them will be Jim Nantz gushing about Tiger, they'll be Tiger doing what we have now seem him do for almost ten years.

When watching the Monday coverage of the PGA, at which point Tiger didn't really have a shot anymore, we watched Elkington putt out on 18 to finish at -3.  My dad and I both immediately wondered how long it would take for Nantz to mention that Tiger was eliminated.  Literally a single second later, Nantz mentions that that eliminates Tiger.

I'm certainly not faulting Tiger for this, but it just becomes unbearable at times.

I'll personally say that I find Nantz and CBS to be the most maudlin and schmaltzy of the whole bunch.  I think that Augusta National has gotten to their heads about every thing else.  The whole, "Last Shot at Glory" BS at the PGA just made me wince.  Can you imagine what golf TV would have been like if these guys had covered, say, Hogan at Cherry Hills in 1960?  Or the 1975 Masters?  These guys would be so gooed with sentiment that the television would have started oozing like something out of Ghostbusters.  Please.  The sport has enough emotion by itself.  We don't need Nantz to come up with some new punny rip off of 1980 Al Michaels for a golfcast.

steve

[David Sneddon]

I'll personally say that I find Nantz and CBS to be the most maudlin and schmaltzy of the whole bunch.  

Bobby Clampett seems to be the most effusive of that syrupy lot.  I read a post on another board which I think describes his commentary to a tee. (pun intended)

"Clampett has his head so far up Tiger's butt, that when he speaks, Tiger's lips move."

[TEPaul]

It's always amazed me that some fans get so upset over the ultra cocentration by the media on Tiger Woods at golf tournaments and otherwise. I realize it's virtual anathema for some fans, particularly older ones, to put Tiger Woods in perspective with the icons of the past. To do so accurately seems to make them feel their old icons such as Jones, Hogan, Palmer and Nicklaus are being slighted or minimized somehow.

In my opinion, nothing of the kind. Woods has been and is the most electrifiying thing golf has ever seen and probably be a country mile.

The posts on here are excellent from those who've seen him in person. All us golf fans should learn something from those posts---eg watch him and learn how he deals with it. When he's plying his trade he doesn't get into all that's going on around him and he doesn't let it bother him either. Hogan and Nicklaus weren't much different that way---the two other ultra champions who were probably closest to Woods in total strength of mind and concentration.

Regarding the madding world that always seems to go on around Woods when he's in public, I like this one from his agent Mark Steinberg;

Steinberg related that when Woods switched managers to him about eight years ago, Steinberg first got together with him in public in NYC during some media event. When they came out of the restaurant Woods was totally lionized by fans and the media and Steinberg said he sort of freaked out and started yelling and waving his arms to protect Woods from the on-slaugth. When they got into the limosine Woods asked Steinberg what the hell he thought he was doing. Steinberg said he was trying to protect him from the onslaugth which prompted Woods to roar with laughter and say to Steinberg;

"Forget it Mark, welcome to my world."

Rick Shefchik:

Excellent post.

[Craig Sweet]

Through it all, the fact is, during the Nicklaus era, pretty much every major was won by either Player, Palmer,Watson, or Nicklaus...That level of competition is amazing..You can not say that about the Woods era.

[Shane Gurnett]

Through it all, the fact is, during the Nicklaus era, pretty much every major was won by either Player, Palmer,Watson, or Nicklaus...That level of competition is amazing..You can not say that about the Woods era.

Criag, that is just a ridiculous statement which the facts just do not support.

[Craig Sweet]

Shane, Player won 9 majors, Palmer won 5 majors, Watson won 8 majors, and oh yeah, Trevino won 6 majors.

For Nicklaus to win 18 majors and finish second 19 times is testament to the level of competition he faced.

How many repeat major winners has there been in the 10 years Tiger has competed?

[Craig Van Egmond]

Don't forget a couple of 2nd Tier guys like Ray Floyd and Hale Irwin won 7 majors between themselves.

Tiger era: Els has 3 (1 pre Tiger though), Singh (3), Goosen (2) and now Phil (2).  Somehow just not the same, although I think these guys can eak out some more.

[A.G._Crockett]

Shane, Player won 9 majors, Palmer won 5 majors, Watson won 8 majors, and oh yeah, Trevino won 6 majors.

For Nicklaus to win 18 majors and finish second 19 times is testament to the level of competition he faced.

How many repeat major winners has there been in the 10 years Tiger has competed?

Craig,
In no way do I want to detract from the achievements of the guys you have named; Arnie is one of my heroes, and I love Trevino as well.  

HOWEVER, I would submit that one very large reason that those guys won so many majors was a lack of depth to the game as compared to now.  There are so many more good players now that it is much harder to win if you aren't really on.  I'm 53, so this isn't my generation that I'm praising; it's just reality.  The game has grown a lot.  Another way to make the comparison is the number of guys in a full field event today that have at least one major; I would venture to say it is much higher than in Jack's day.  For instance, 5 players who had won majors missed the cut at the PGA; that says something about the depth now.  If you go all the way back to Nelson's day, there were NO cuts!

Also, remember that you are giving career TOTALS for those guys, as compared to the mid to early career stats for the current players.  Yeah, Mickelson has "only" won two, but where will he be by the time he is done?  You're giving the names from the entire run of Nicklaus' 25 yr. plus run at the top, Tiger has been there well less than half of that.  It is entirely possible that 15 years from now, the Tiger list of fellow competitors will look significantly different.