Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
To some degree, I think Tiger got me into the game - he probably played some kind of role...not sure how much though since I played in a league when I was a kid years before I had ever heard of him, and I grew up basically on a golf course.
And this discussion never ends - Tiger fanboys will have no deviation from their "Tiger is the GOAT, period" narrative. I don't agree. And I don't even think he's the second greatest the sport has ever seen:
1. Bobby Jones
2. Jack Nicklaus
3. Tiger
And I could get into WHY, but I am sure wouldn't really like it.
Tiger fanboys? Now I'm done with you.
You've got something in quotes I didn't say. Nor do most people whose respect and admiration he has well-earned.
Tiger's record speaks for itself. Your comments transparently point to one and only one factor as a basis. I can only shake my head.
No...there are more than that...Jones retired in his prime (at age 30) after winning 13 (or 21) National championships/Majors. Then went on to create arguably the greatest course on the planet. Not to mention he probably has the most beautiful/perfect swing in the history of the game.
Jack...well, Jack still has several more majors than Tiger (last time I checked) and moreover, he has THREE TIMES as many runners-up finishes. No, runner-up finishes aren't wins, but they just speak to how much more consistent and better overall a player Jack was.
Nah, it ain't because Tiger's a POC...though I know you think it is.
Had very little incentive to watch. But did have it on the computer. It did get a bit interesting when Brooks started to trip a bit. But then so did DJ...
Congrats to Brooks Koepka. Like him or not, his performance over the last 24 months is pretty damn impressive. They made some comparisons and the only other people that had this type of success were Jone, Hogan, Nicklaus, and Woods. Pretty elite company to be in.
Going to Scotland with 7 others on a golf trip. Playing the castle course, Trump Int., St Andrews(new course). Travel agent says caddies only, can't believe they don't have driving carts. Anybody been there?
Going to Scotland with 7 others on a golf trip. Playing the castle course, Trump Int., St Andrews(new course). Travel agent says caddies only, can't believe they don't have driving carts. Anybody been there?
Many Scottish/Irish/English courses have a no cart rule (unless you have a medical condition) - especially these more traditional ones. Unlike the states where golf courses were designed specifically with cart paths and facilities/services - the links courses have been around centuries and are basically just golf. Walking is how the game is played there. And golf is the main activity, no other distractions like beer carts, etc.
Oh - and pace of play is serious there. 4 hours is about as slow as it gets. 3-3.5 is more the norm.
Koepka goes out and takes care of business by shooting a course record 63.
This is a monster of a course too - you know it's long when the longer hitters strip one down the fairway on a par 4 and still have >200 yards to the hole.
Koepka also won on another 'evil' course, Shinnecock (wasn't it the Masters?) and he was a couple OVER par. That's how tough the course was.
Koepka also won on another 'evil' course, Shinnecock (wasn't it the Masters?) and he was a couple OVER par. That's how tough the course was.
It was the US Open. But the US Open is also setup to be extremely hard. The USGA tries to make it so par is a good score. Thus, a winning score of par or over isn't uncommon. The winning score a Winged Foot one year was 7 over par. And thus, it was dubbed "The Massacre at Winged Foot".
The key is what the winner's score is relative to the rest of the field. Koepka had such a lead after two rounds, it was pretty much a given he was going to win (albeit he did come back to the field). To put it in perspective, one of the most dominating performances is the 2000 US Open. Most consider that as one of the best performances at a golf tournament. Tiger won that at 12 under. And the next closest competitor ended up 15 shots behind at 3 over.
It was the US Open. But the US Open is also setup to be extremely hard. The USGA tries to make it so par is a good score. Thus, a winning score of par or over isn't uncommon. The winning score a Winged Foot one year was 7 over par. And thus, it was dubbed "The Massacre at Winged Foot".
The key is what the winner's score is relative to the rest of the field. Koepka had such a lead after two rounds, it was pretty much a given he was going to win (albeit he did come back to the field). To put it in perspective, one of the most dominating performances is the 2000 US Open. Most consider that as one of the best performances at a golf tournament. Tiger won that at 12 under. And the next closest competitor ended up 15 shots behind at 3 over.
Thanks for the correction.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
