- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: With Tiger's win today, that gives him 7 wins in his last 22 PGA Tourneys
Posted on 3/11/13 at 4:00 pm to lsugolf1105
Posted on 3/11/13 at 4:00 pm to lsugolf1105
quote:
i'm arguing that it is more impressive because less talented players are capable of winning. a guy can miss a shot and still get away with it.
You don't realize we're in the same side of this?
0
Posted on 3/11/13 at 4:32 pm to LNCHBOX
quote:
It was the best for the time period.
I agree with this statement. However, where I think we disagree is the difference in the superior technology of a given time and the technology itself. Take football for example - would you argue that the technology in cleats, gloves, a pads have no factor in the superiority of a given athlete between two time periods? Though football may be a narrow example, consider tennis, which may be more comparable to golf. Would you argue that the makeup of the racquet, strings, clothing, shoes, etc. have no effect in the superiority of a player between two time periods?
quote:
Everyone in the field has access to the same equipment, thus the playing field is leveled for superior skill to take over.
I agree with this, only of it is talking of the same time period, with a comparison of players using that same equipment.
quote:
Now if someone was trying to compare Tiger and Jack both shooting 64 in their primes on the exact same course and layout, then equipment is a factor.
This is in direct contrast to the point you are trying to make. Equipment isn't a factor, but it is a factor? What point exactly are you trying to make?
quote:
But for the purpose of GOAT discussions, equipment is irrelevant.
This will be answered (hopefully) at the conclusion of the arguement.
Posted on 3/12/13 at 8:57 am to unbeWEAVEable
Bump
Posted on 3/12/13 at 9:26 am to unbeWEAVEable
quote:
This is in direct contrast to the point you are trying to make. Equipment isn't a factor, but it is a factor? What point exactly are you trying to make?
I was saying that is type of comparison where equipment becomes a factor. Is it really that hard to follow?
This post was edited on 3/12/13 at 9:26 am
Posted on 3/12/13 at 9:28 am to LNCHBOX
quote:
I was saying that is type of comparison where equipment becomes a factor. Is it really that hard to follow?
yes
Posted on 3/12/13 at 9:49 am to LNCHBOX
quote:
I was saying that is type of comparison where equipment becomes a factor. Is it really that hard to follow?
Umm yes. What was the other comparison you were trying to make?
And please argue the rest of the points, and not just this one.
Posted on 3/12/13 at 9:53 am to unbeWEAVEable
quote:
Bump
You aren't gonna change his mind. Posted on 3/12/13 at 10:01 am to BRgetthenet
Hey, he wanted to get in this argument, so I'm giving him a chance to rebuttal.
Not trying to change his mind...I just haven't had a logical argument in a while
Not trying to change his mind...I just haven't had a logical argument in a while
Posted on 3/12/13 at 10:12 am to unbeWEAVEable
quote:
Umm yes. What was the other comparison you were trying to make?
Some dumbass earlier in the thread was trying to say the advances in equipment somehow make what Tiger has done less impressive than Jack. And that's just stupid.
Posted on 3/12/13 at 10:14 am to unbeWEAVEable
quote:
And please argue the rest of the points, and not just this one.
What other points? My stance is that Tiger is on track to be the greatest, but obviously he hasn't done it yet. Until then, Jack is the best.
I was merely pointing out flaws in the arguments of people acting like old timers are the only ones who could possibly be the best.
Posted on 3/12/13 at 10:23 am to LNCHBOX
Equipment aside, would you agree that Tiger has some physical ability Jack never had?
I'm not talking about clubs. I'm talking about the ability to do things with the ball Jack's body just wouldn't/couldn't.
I'm not talking about clubs. I'm talking about the ability to do things with the ball Jack's body just wouldn't/couldn't.
Posted on 3/12/13 at 10:24 am to LNCHBOX
quote:
Some dumbass earlier in the thread was trying to say the advances in equipment somehow make what Tiger has done less impressive than Jack. And that's just stupid.
Well, I was one of those people (sort of). You disagreed with me on my stance on the use of equipment and how it effected different generations and their player superiority. You argued against me.
If you don't want to continue that argument, that's fine. Though I wouldn't resort to name calling, especially using "dumbass", if you are going to continue to be naive. Either argue your point or digress.
Posted on 3/12/13 at 10:27 am to unbeWEAVEable
quote:
Well, I was one of those people (sort of). You disagreed with me on my stance on the use of equipment and how it effected different generations and their player superiority. You argued against me.
Is your position that Tiger's run is diminished because of the newer tech?
Posted on 3/12/13 at 10:27 am to LNCHBOX
quote:
What other points? My stance is that Tiger is on track to be the greatest, but obviously he hasn't done it yet. Until then, Jack is the best.
Go back and read my earlier post, where I dissected specific parts of your comment.
quote:
I was merely pointing out flaws in the arguments of people acting like old timers are the only ones who could possibly be the best.
They aren't flaws if you can't disprove them. Not saying you are right or wrong, but making a statement doesn't necessarily make the statement true.
Posted on 3/12/13 at 10:30 am to unbeWEAVEable
quote:
They aren't flaws if you can't disprove them. Not saying you are right or wrong, but making a statement doesn't necessarily make the statement true.
Explain to me how Jack using the same tech as his competition somehow makes Tiger's run less impressive?
If anything, the newer tech means more people have a shot at winning compared to Jack's era, which would make Tiger's run more impressive. I dint see how you could logically argue against that.
Posted on 3/12/13 at 10:32 am to LNCHBOX
quote:
If anything, the newer tech means more people have a shot at winning compared to Jack's era, which would make Tiger's run more impressive
this is correct.
Posted on 3/12/13 at 10:49 am to LNCHBOX
quote:
Is your position that Tiger's run is diminished because of the newer tech?
That wasn't the comment I was arguing. Below is. But, to answer your question, no I don't think Tiger's run is diminished because of the newer tech. Now read below.
quote:
Now if someone was trying to compare Tiger and Jack both shooting 64 in their primes on the exact same course and layout, then equipment is a factor. But for the purpose of GOAT discussions, equipment is irrelevant.
To which I responded...
quote:
I see that as obtuse, but we all have our opinions
To which you stated...
quote:
Feel free to disprove my logic.
To which I specifically asked...
quote:
Do you legitimately not see how ignorant that is? I'm not going to explain myself if you aren't serious.
Which led to you backtracking the argument to our first point, which was (in reference to the second quote in this post)...
quote:
Refute this. I don't think you can.
Which led to me doing so here...
Second post on the page (after yours which is the first, and my first post on the page
Which then led to you firing this comment out of the blue...
quote:
I was saying that is type of comparison where equipment becomes a factor. Is it really that hard to follow?
To which two people replied - yes. (BeaverPro and I)...This led to again going back to the first part of the argument, starting the cycle over twice.
This has led to you throwing out the original argument and asking more questions which erroneously don't prove your first argument. Your next question was...
quote:
Explain to me how Jack using the same tech as his competition somehow makes Tiger's run less impressive?
Which goes back to an earlier point in the argument (again), to which I stated that it doesn't make Tiger's run less impressive.
Then you stated...
quote:
If anything, the newer tech means more people have a shot at winning compared to Jack's era, which would make Tiger's run more impressive. I dint see how you could logically argue against that.
Which is in direct contrast to your early statement saying this about advances in equipment -
quote:
It was the best for the time period. Everyone in the field has access to the same equipment, thus the playing field is leveled for superior skill to take over.
Which now goes back to the beginning of our original argument.
Are you intentionally trying to waste my time? And more importantly, does that answer your question?
Posted on 3/12/13 at 11:06 am to unbeWEAVEable
quote:
But, to answer your question, no I don't think Tiger's run is diminished because of the newer tech
Good, because that would be silly.
quote:
quote:
Is your position that Tiger's run is diminished because of the newer tech?
That wasn't the comment I was arguing. Below is. But, to answer your question, no I don't think Tiger's run is diminished because of the newer tech. Now read below.
quote:
Now if someone was trying to compare Tiger and Jack both shooting 64 in their primes on the exact same course and layout, then equipment is a factor. But for the purpose of GOAT discussions, equipment is irrelevant.
To which I responded...
quote:
I see that as obtuse, but we all have our opinions
To which you stated...
quote:
Feel free to disprove my logic.
To which I specifically asked...
quote:
Do you legitimately not see how ignorant that is? I'm not going to explain myself if you aren't serious.
Explain to me how the technology gives Tiger an advantage in GOAT discussions compared to Jack. Keep in mind Jack never had to play "Tiger-proofed" courses, nor did he have to deal with less skilled players in contention each week.
quote:
direct contrast to your early statement saying this about advances in equipment -
Explain how this contrasts my view on equipment?
quote:
Are you intentionally trying to waste my time? And more importantly, does that answer your question?
I think you just can't follow a conversation very well. Everything I have posted about my opinions lines up logically and doesn't contradict itself.
Posted on 3/12/13 at 11:06 am to unbeWEAVEable
Posted on 3/12/13 at 11:14 am to LNCHBOX
quote:
Good, because that would be silly.
Again, I'll point out that some kind of logical proof needs to be shared to prove to the best of its abilities your statements. You keep assuming that your right and anyone that disagrees with you is wrong. Down South we like to call that "liberal logic"
quote:
Explain to me how the technology gives Tiger an advantage in GOAT discussions compared to Jack. Keep in mind Jack never had to play "Tiger-proofed" courses, nor did he have to deal with less skilled players in contention each week.
Review my posts on Page 11 an the beginning of Page 12. I stated clearly my views. I used multiple comparisons to widen its scope.
quote:
Explain how this contrasts my view on equipment?
I did, immediately after the post you quoted.
quote:
I think you just can't follow a conversation very well. Everything I have posted about my opinions lines up logically and doesn't contradict itself.
If you can't understand that you have been posting in circles for a day, which I just proved (with empirical evidence, mind you) in the post above this one I am responding to, you sir are the one that
quote:
can't follow a conversation very well.
Page 13 of 22
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News