- 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: it’s crazy how short golfers primes are compared to their career length
Posted on 3/13/24 at 12:44 pm to Tiger1242
Posted on 3/13/24 at 12:44 pm to Tiger1242
quote:
I’ve always assumed that he 100% would’ve broken the record without injuries and personal issues, but doing the research I’m seeing it wasn’t the foregone conclusion I thought that it was.
He would definitely have more major wins. Not necessarily the record. There was a pocket after '08 that didn't have any dominant players. Rory and Spieth had there two years, sure. But look at the chronological list of winners by years. There's a ton of one-off winners ala Angel Cabrerra, Martink Kaymer types all the way up until Brooks started his run in 2017.
0
Posted on 3/13/24 at 12:46 pm to The Torch
quote:
Flat Bellies have an advantage
I was surprised when I learned Jack Nicklaus was not popular at all when he broke onto the scene. He almost immediately overtook Arnold Palmer as the best golfer in the world.
Arnie’s Army couldn’t stand that a pudgy kid was a better golfer than their hero.
Posted on 3/13/24 at 12:50 pm to Ghost of Colby
Jack was pereived as fat young prodigy brat when he first got on tour and the Arnie fans didn't like him at all.
Jack lost weight and eventually won everyone over because his play was just undeniable.
Jack lost weight and eventually won everyone over because his play was just undeniable.
Posted on 3/13/24 at 1:01 pm to Tiger1242
what you mean to say is that’s it’s crazy how long golfers can play and how long after their prime they can play
13 years
18 years
11 years shortened by injuries
quote:
1958-1970
13 years
quote:
1963-1980
18 years
quote:
1997-2008
11 years shortened by injuries
Posted on 3/13/24 at 1:08 pm to Tiger1242
Pro golf has gotten a lot more competitive in the last decade too.
You could argue guys like Rory, Spieth, & Koepka are all still in their primes, but it’s harder to win a major.
Other guys are just getting started:
Scheffler
Cam Smith
Rahm
Bryson
Niemann
You could argue guys like Rory, Spieth, & Koepka are all still in their primes, but it’s harder to win a major.
Other guys are just getting started:
Scheffler
Cam Smith
Rahm
Bryson
Niemann
Posted on 3/13/24 at 2:25 pm to Tiger1242
You can make a lot of money on the tour just by being decent.
Posted on 3/13/24 at 2:58 pm to FightinTigersDammit
quote:
You can make a lot of money on the tour just by being decent.
But the line between being decent on the PGA Tour and trying to grind out a living on mini-tours is razor thin.
Posted on 3/13/24 at 4:30 pm to Tiger1242
quote:
In reality his peak falls in line with most of the greats as far as length.
Tiger spent 14 months ranked #1 in the world around 2013 which is five years after his peak as you described.
Won 8 of 33 events entered from 2012-2013. No majors wins but T11 or better in 4/8 with 8 made cuts. Not sure the other greats have a resurgence post peak like that.
He was also well younger than the other greats at the end of his peak.. there’s no doubt in my mind he’d have 20+ majors without the injuries.
This post was edited on 3/13/24 at 4:33 pm
Posted on 3/13/24 at 4:42 pm to usc6158
quote:
Tiger easily would have gone strong for another 10 years if he hadn't destroyed his life and ruined his back with SEAL training.
This right here. Tiger had many personal issues, but what ultimately did him in was those SEAL workouts, destroying his back.
Tiger would have gotten to 20 majors, and 100 wins on the PGA Tour without all other stuff. He would have been the undisputed GOAT. I think Jack’s career overall was better, but I think Tiger at his peak is the best ever.
Posted on 3/13/24 at 5:21 pm to Tiger1242
Y'all've touched on most of my main thoughts, especially about Tiger. But to the OP's thread title, I agree. And I think a big part that nobody seems to talk about seems to be nerves. It took me a while to figure out--and I still don't know exactly why--but guys in their 20s and early 30s are so much better putters because that's, apparently the peak age to be able to handle your nerves. There are exceptions, sure, but look at the all-time greats, and they're winning majors in their 20s and 30s because that's when they are most able to handle their nerves and putt the best of their careers.
Page 2 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News