re: Masters takeaway: Tiger clearly the best

quote:

---

Are you a golfer? Putting is big part of the game. A huge part. Tiger's the best overall player in the game, but he wasn't the best player at the Master's this past week. In fact, he wasn't even one of the 5 best.

Maybe next year.

---

I'm not saying he SHOULD have won. I'm saying that he putted terribly and still came close. Don't think the other players don't realize this. If he had just been an average putter, he likely would have won. Anytime he's doing something below average, it's pretty much a gift to the field.

I was pulling for Perry. This has nothing to do with me wanting Tiger to win. It's just something to keep in mind.

quote:

---

We did not need the Masters to determine he is clearly the best.

---

More than anything, I just think it's amazing that some people think it's still an open debate. He is so clearly the greatest player of all time.

Yet.

quote:

---

Welcome to 2000.

---

Can we at least agree that nobody in the history of golf has played as well as Tiger did in 2000?

quote:

---

When Tiger putts good he dominates. When Tiger putts average he wins and when Tiger putts bad he does what he did last week.

---

Yep.

quote:

---

Byron Nelson may disagree with this

---

Google's getting a workout.

quote:

---

Welcome to 2000. The guys out there have known this for years. When Tiger putts good he dominates. When Tiger putts average he wins and when Tiger putts bad he does what he did last week.

---

I disagree. That would mean the majority of the time, Tiger putts badly.

I believe that the field has finally caught up to Tiger. Not because they are playing better, but because Tiger has a family and he's fighting injuries caused by practicing and playing golf. If this would have been in three or four years ago, I believe the rest of the field would have collapsed. I know he didn't win back then either. But with all of the roars coming from in front of the leaders, it usually happened. The field against Tiger has evened out finally.

quote:

---

I believe that the field has finally caught up to Tiger.

---

I will say that the game has changed in the last few year and has made it harder to dominate. Look at the Masters leader board: Cabrera, Perry, Campbell, Katayama, Mickelson, Flesch, Woods, Stricker, Mahan, O'Hair, Furyk, Villegas, Clark, Ogilvy, Hamilton.

That's the top 15 finishers and ties in the 2009 Masters. Let's look at these names from a golf swing perspective.

Except for the more unusual swings of Jim Furyk and Tim Clark, and forgetting Todd Hamilton as the "gate crasher" in the bunch, there isn't one swing in the group that is either a "One Plane" swing or "Stack and Tilt," the last two "big things" in golf instruction world.

Cabrera, Perry, Katayama, Mickelson, Woods, Stricker, Mahan, O'Hair, Villegas, and Ogilvy, all share a few common traits, and one big one—a dynamic pivot necessary to play a big course like Augusta well.

I know a couple of relatively short hitters won the last couple of Masters, but the course set-up took the advantage away from the power hitters, and guys with good "long games" like Ogilvy.

This dynamic pivot eschews the centered or left-lean of the two latest "fashionable" styles, and loads up for the kill on the backswing.


As far as swings go, you have to give credit where it is due, Butch Harmon's stuff looked better on Tiger in 2000 than Hank Haney's does now. And Phil Mickelson swung well, and hit it great at times on Sunday.

Why?

Because even though Butch has one particular set of elements he prefers, and it may or may not be ideal for either Tiger or Phil, it is certainly more athletic, and less steery than what Tiger is doing now.

Phil's swing just looked better than Tiger's did on Sunday, and he hit much better shots with it.

Even Tiger's biggest critics would say he has more physical ability than Phil.

Score one for Butch.

Aaron Baddeley—according to him—had a good week with the driver, a club that was his biggest liability with the "Stack & Tilt" pattern he has put behind him.


What does this all mean?

It means that a new generation of golfers is taking hold of the tour. The guys who grew up in college when the ball and the driver started going super-long. The guys who cut their teeth on long courses that require more than just dink and dunk.

It also means that the older guys who can compete, will be the Perry's and Cabrea's who just pound it.

I have always said that TrackMan kill the non-dynamic patterns. And although they still have a place on Tour for now—with courses that don't discourage the style of play that they produce—this Masters may be a turning point toward Athletic golf swings.

It's good for golf.