Tiger Woods chokes on a major YET AGAIN

[Fenster]

It's Rory McIlroy who annoys me.

Every Major, the press build him up, he is all over the media saying how well he is going to do and how excited he is ..... and he inevitably does nothing at all, fading away without a whimper.

He has 'only' won 4 Majors, so (in tennis terms) he is the equivalent of Guillermo Vilas or Carlos Santana. Nowhere near an all time great.

The problem is that nobody at that level in any other sport could possibly be worth £140million. There is too much money in golf.

How can a 30 year old, with that much money in the bank, stay hungry for success. What would make him put in the long lonely hours of practice? How motivated can someone like McIlroy be when - after another dismal failure in a big tournament - he can get on his private jet and go home to count the millions he will still make through sponsorship etc? The press still fawn all over him, so what's the incentive to get better.

Thats why I admire the likes of Roger Federer and Tiger Woods. In the face of adulation, success and money beyond their wildest dreams they retained that hunger (love/obsession) for their sport, and that is what makes them great.

Rory is ruined by his smaller measure of success.

That's a poor-ish comparison, the strength in depth per-sport is light years apart.

Rory (he's hyped because he's a consistent top 5 world ranker) started 10/1 favourite for this tournament, after one hole he was 200/1. Tiger Woods started 25/1 (even though he's an ATG who won The Masters this year), after a couple of holes he was 250/1. Phil Mickleson (another ATG who's won events this year) started 150/1 for this event.

Tennis is dominated by a tiny handful of players, hence 20 "major" titles for old men past their best, rated 2nd favourite for Wimbledon/US Open.

[Denilson-The-Comeback]

Tiger Woods departs major early, empty-handed again - News | FOX Sports on MSN



All I can is..................


YES-S-S-S-S-S-S




Unfortunately for him... he'll never be good enough to even carry the Golden Bear's jock.

How can a person who is second in the all time list for major wins be a choker ?

I don't recall having called him a choker. In fact, he's anything but. He'll just never be the GOAT and will have to settle for 2nd place in that particular race. He's not a choker. He's just an ass.

I believe he's the best player of all time (Tiger Woods). Because Nickolaus played at time when Woods would not have been allowed to play on golf courses and from 2000-2005. He took gold to a new level

[TitoFan]

I believe he's the best player of all time (Tiger Woods). Because Nickolaus played at time when Woods would not have been allowed to play on golf courses and from 2000-2005. He took gold to a new level

Wrong. Charlie Sifford broke the color barrier in the PGA in '61 when Jack was still wet behind the ears.

Also, your perspective on who's the GOAT is severely impaired by your age. By the time you were born, Jack had already retired.

BTW..... it's Nicklaus.

[Denilson-The-Comeback]

Wrong. Charlie Sifford broke the color barrier in the PGA in '61 when Jack was still wet behind the ears.

I know this and Lee Elder too. Sifford broke the color bar ?

Where black people allowed into the all the tournaments in ? No. Where these whites own members club allowing black people in ? No. Did a black person have the same chance as being a pro golfer in 1961 as a white person ? No. Did black people have any type of muscle in the sport of golf ? No

That's breaking the color bar.

Also, your perspective on who's the GOAT is severely impaired by your age. By the time you were born, Jack had already retired.

Jack Nicklaus was a great golfer. But Woods (At his best) was better. I don't even think that's controversial. Much better. I don't need to. You just don't like him because he was banging all these white women

[TitoFan]

If you're gonna talk.... talk intelligently. Take your racial bullshit to the 1000 other threads you've destroyed.


Jack Nicklaus is not only ahead of Woods in career majors won. But here's another statistic that is sure to boggle your racist brain:

Jack finished second in 19 majors. Woods is way off in the distance with 6.

Jack played against better competition than Woods in their primes.

Jack had to contend with: Gary Player (nine majors), Tom Watson (eight), Arnold Palmer (seven), Lee Trevino (six) and Seve Ballesteros (five)..... ALL Hall of Famers. Jack finished 2nd more than 10 times to players on that list.

Woods had to contend with Mickelson and Els during his prime and little else. His 2nd place finishes were to one-hit wonders like: Trevor Immelman, Zach Johnson, Rich Beem, Y.E. Yang and Michael Campbell.

Come to think of it..... maybe Woods IS a choker.



The stack of reasons is long..... but I've done my job here.

Go back to school little boy.

[Denilson-The-Comeback]

If you're gonna talk.... talk intelligently. Take your racial bullshit to the 1000 other threads you've destroyed.

Once again. You are the one who started another racial thread yeah yeah "I but no no ....i didn't ...i mean I just did a post about Tiger Woods"

You can't talk about Tiger Woods without talking race and racism

Jack Nicklaus is not only ahead of Woods in career majors won. But here's another statistic that is sure to boggle your racist brain:
Jack finished second in 19 majors. Woods is way off in the distance with 6.

And that means what ? How many majors did play ?

Jack played against better competition than Woods in their primes.

Subjective

Jack had to contend with: Gary Player (nine majors), Tom Watson (eight), Arnold Palmer (seven), Lee Trevino (six) and Seve Ballesteros (five)..... ALL Hall of Famers. Jack finished 2nd more than 10 times to players on that list.

Once again. Subjective. None of them. Would do anything nowadays.

Woods had to contend with Mickelson and Els during his prime and little else. His 2nd place finishes were to one-hit wonders like: Trevor Immelman, Zach Johnson, Rich Beem, Y.E. Yang and Michael Campbell.

Look. Everyone knows Tiger (at his best) took the game to new levels. Way beyond that of Jack Nicklaus. In fact Golf back then wasn't taken as seriously.

The bottom line is. You put Jack Nicklaus (at his best) and Tiger Woods (at his best) over 18 holes.

Who would win ?

Woods wins everytime

[El Kabong]

Golf equipment has changed a great deal since the days of The Golden Bear which is a big reason I find it difficult to compare the eras.


How far would golf's legends drive the ball using modern equipment?
https://www.pga.com/golf-instruction...dern-equipment

Nicklaus cranked a 341-yard blast to win the PGA Championship’s long drive competition in 1963 with the “old ball.”

Impressive



Anyway they're all exceptional golfers. I've always been unmoved by Tiger Woods but he is certainly a talent.

[X]

It's Rory McIlroy who annoys me.

Every Major, the press build him up, he is all over the media saying how well he is going to do and how excited he is ..... and he inevitably does nothing at all, fading away without a whimper.

He has 'only' won 4 Majors, so (in tennis terms) he is the equivalent of Guillermo Vilas or Carlos Santana. Nowhere near an all time great.

The problem is that nobody at that level in any other sport could possibly be worth £140million. There is too much money in golf.

How can a 30 year old, with that much money in the bank, stay hungry for success. What would make him put in the long lonely hours of practice? How motivated can someone like McIlroy be when - after another dismal failure in a big tournament - he can get on his private jet and go home to count the millions he will still make through sponsorship etc? The press still fawn all over him, so what's the incentive to get better.

Thats why I admire the likes of Roger Federer and Tiger Woods. In the face of adulation, success and money beyond their wildest dreams they retained that hunger (love/obsession) for their sport, and that is what makes them great.

Rory is ruined by his smaller measure of success.

That's a poor-ish comparison, the strength in depth per-sport is light years apart.

Rory (he's hyped because he's a consistent top 5 world ranker) started 10/1 favourite for this tournament, after one hole he was 200/1. Tiger Woods started 25/1 (even though he's an ATG who won The Masters this year), after a couple of holes he was 250/1. Phil Mickleson (another ATG who's won events this year) started 150/1 for this event.

Tennis is dominated by a tiny handful of players, hence 20 "major" titles for old men past their best, rated 2nd favourite for Wimbledon/US Open.

Actually, that's a fair point - it is a poor comparison. Tennis has the equivalent of Jack Nicklaus, Tiger Woods and Lew Hoad all playing right now at the same time. It is dominated by three guys completely, sonthe competitiveness in golf goes much much deeper. Maybe I used the analogy because somebody else was going on about tennis earlier in the thread.

I still do think McIlroy is overhyped, over rewarded and much less hungry than he was though.

[TitoFan]

If you're gonna talk.... talk intelligently. Take your racial bullshit to the 1000 other threads you've destroyed.

Once again. You are the one who started another racial thread yeah yeah "I but no no ....i didn't ...i mean I just did a post about Tiger Woods"

You can't talk about Tiger Woods without talking race and racism


Bullshit. YOU can't talk about Tiger Woods without talking race and racism. You can't even take a shit without talking race and racism.

Jack Nicklaus is not only ahead of Woods in career majors won. But here's another statistic that is sure to boggle your racist brain:
Jack finished second in 19 majors. Woods is way off in the distance with 6.

And that means what ? How many majors did play ?

If you can't tell the difference between 19 and 6 I'm afraid I can't help you. Just like 18 (wins) is better than 15..... and Tiger won't get there either.

Jack played against better competition than Woods in their primes.

Subjective

More bullshit. See your weak-ass expanded answer below.

Jack had to contend with: Gary Player (nine majors), Tom Watson (eight), Arnold Palmer (seven), Lee Trevino (six) and Seve Ballesteros (five)..... ALL Hall of Famers. Jack finished 2nd more than 10 times to players on that list.

Once again. Subjective. None of them. Would do anything nowadays.


This is beyond weak. It's pathetic. I give you names and numbers..... you give me useless, idiotic rhetoric. Stick to topics you know something about, like...... well....... um.......

Woods had to contend with Mickelson and Els during his prime and little else. His 2nd place finishes were to one-hit wonders like: Trevor Immelman, Zach Johnson, Rich Beem, Y.E. Yang and Michael Campbell.

Look. Everyone knows Tiger (at his best) took the game to new levels. Way beyond that of Jack Nicklaus. In fact Golf back then wasn't taken as seriously.

Another gem for my collection..... thank you. "Golf back then wasn't taken as seriously." HAHAHAHA!!! I don't have to argue with you. You do a pretty good job yourself of looking like a moron.

The bottom line is. You put Jack Nicklaus (at his best) and Tiger Woods (at his best) over 18 holes.

Who would win ?

Woods wins everytime

Tiger himself has been quoted as saying "He's the greatest champion that's ever lived" when talking about Jack Nicklaus.

I'll throw you some scraps and tell you I'm not saying Tiger is shit. He's very likely the 2nd best player in history. Just not good enough to be the GOAT. That spot is taken.

[TitoFan]

It's Rory McIlroy who annoys me.

Every Major, the press build him up, he is all over the media saying how well he is going to do and how excited he is ..... and he inevitably does nothing at all, fading away without a whimper.

He has 'only' won 4 Majors, so (in tennis terms) he is the equivalent of Guillermo Vilas or Carlos Santana. Nowhere near an all time great.

The problem is that nobody at that level in any other sport could possibly be worth £140million. There is too much money in golf.

How can a 30 year old, with that much money in the bank, stay hungry for success. What would make him put in the long lonely hours of practice? How motivated can someone like McIlroy be when - after another dismal failure in a big tournament - he can get on his private jet and go home to count the millions he will still make through sponsorship etc? The press still fawn all over him, so what's the incentive to get better.

Thats why I admire the likes of Roger Federer and Tiger Woods. In the face of adulation, success and money beyond their wildest dreams they retained that hunger (love/obsession) for their sport, and that is what makes them great.

Rory is ruined by his smaller measure of success.

That's a poor-ish comparison, the strength in depth per-sport is light years apart.

Rory (he's hyped because he's a consistent top 5 world ranker) started 10/1 favourite for this tournament, after one hole he was 200/1. Tiger Woods started 25/1 (even though he's an ATG who won The Masters this year), after a couple of holes he was 250/1. Phil Mickleson (another ATG who's won events this year) started 150/1 for this event.

Tennis is dominated by a tiny handful of players, hence 20 "major" titles for old men past their best, rated 2nd favourite for Wimbledon/US Open.

Actually, that's a fair point - it is a poor comparison. Tennis has the equivalent of Jack Nicklaus, Tiger Woods and Lew Hoad all playing right now at the same time. It is dominated by three guys completely, sonthe competitiveness in golf goes much much deeper. Maybe I used the analogy because somebody else was going on about tennis earlier in the thread.

I still do think McIlroy is overhyped, over rewarded and much less hungry than he was though.

Nicklaus, Woods, and............................................. Hoad?

Wasn't Hoad a tennis player back in the 50's and 60's? Interesting choice nonetheless.

[X]

I am clearly a complete twat.

tennis fixated

Walter Hagen, not Lew Hoad. I haven't a fucking clue why I wrote Hoad, apart from sheer stupidity

[Denilson-The-Comeback]

If you're gonna talk.... talk intelligently. Take your racial bullshit to the 1000 other threads you've destroyed.

Once again. You are the one who started another racial thread yeah yeah "I but no no ....i didn't ...i mean I just did a post about Tiger Woods"

You can't talk about Tiger Woods without talking race and racism


Bullshit. YOU can't talk about Tiger Woods without talking race and racism. You can't even take a shit without talking race and racism.

Jack Nicklaus is not only ahead of Woods in career majors won. But here's another statistic that is sure to boggle your racist brain:
Jack finished second in 19 majors. Woods is way off in the distance with 6.

And that means what ? How many majors did play ?

If you can't tell the difference between 19 and 6 I'm afraid I can't help you. Just like 18 (wins) is better than 15..... and Tiger won't get there either.

Jack played against better competition than Woods in their primes.

Subjective

More bullshit. See your weak-ass expanded answer below.

Jack had to contend with: Gary Player (nine majors), Tom Watson (eight), Arnold Palmer (seven), Lee Trevino (six) and Seve Ballesteros (five)..... ALL Hall of Famers. Jack finished 2nd more than 10 times to players on that list.

Once again. Subjective. None of them. Would do anything nowadays.


This is beyond weak. It's pathetic. I give you names and numbers..... you give me useless, idiotic rhetoric. Stick to topics you know something about, like...... well....... um.......

Woods had to contend with Mickelson and Els during his prime and little else. His 2nd place finishes were to one-hit wonders like: Trevor Immelman, Zach Johnson, Rich Beem, Y.E. Yang and Michael Campbell.

Look. Everyone knows Tiger (at his best) took the game to new levels. Way beyond that of Jack Nicklaus. In fact Golf back then wasn't taken as seriously.

Another gem for my collection..... thank you. "Golf back then wasn't taken as seriously." HAHAHAHA!!! I don't have to argue with you. You do a pretty good job yourself of looking like a moron.

The bottom line is. You put Jack Nicklaus (at his best) and Tiger Woods (at his best) over 18 holes.

Who would win ?

Woods wins everytime

Tiger himself has been quoted as saying "He's the greatest champion that's ever lived" when talking about Jack Nicklaus.

I'll throw you some scraps and tell you I'm not saying Tiger is shit. He's very likely the 2nd best player in history. Just not good enough to be the GOAT. That spot is taken.

[TitoFan]

I am clearly a complete twat.

tennis fixated

Walter Hagen, not Lew Hoad. I haven't a fucking clue why I wrote Hoad, apart from sheer stupidity

Hoad just didn't ring a bell for me.... and I tend to recognize most of the names of previous golf greats.

Hey...... at least you didn't give me the double-handed salute.

[TitoFan]

If you're gonna talk.... talk intelligently. Take your racial bullshit to the 1000 other threads you've destroyed.

Once again. You are the one who started another racial thread yeah yeah "I but no no ....i didn't ...i mean I just did a post about Tiger Woods"

You can't talk about Tiger Woods without talking race and racism


Bullshit. YOU can't talk about Tiger Woods without talking race and racism. You can't even take a shit without talking race and racism.

Jack Nicklaus is not only ahead of Woods in career majors won. But here's another statistic that is sure to boggle your racist brain:
Jack finished second in 19 majors. Woods is way off in the distance with 6.

And that means what ? How many majors did play ?

If you can't tell the difference between 19 and 6 I'm afraid I can't help you. Just like 18 (wins) is better than 15..... and Tiger won't get there either.

Jack played against better competition than Woods in their primes.

Subjective

More bullshit. See your weak-ass expanded answer below.

Jack had to contend with: Gary Player (nine majors), Tom Watson (eight), Arnold Palmer (seven), Lee Trevino (six) and Seve Ballesteros (five)..... ALL Hall of Famers. Jack finished 2nd more than 10 times to players on that list.

Once again. Subjective. None of them. Would do anything nowadays.


This is beyond weak. It's pathetic. I give you names and numbers..... you give me useless, idiotic rhetoric. Stick to topics you know something about, like...... well....... um.......

Woods had to contend with Mickelson and Els during his prime and little else. His 2nd place finishes were to one-hit wonders like: Trevor Immelman, Zach Johnson, Rich Beem, Y.E. Yang and Michael Campbell.

Look. Everyone knows Tiger (at his best) took the game to new levels. Way beyond that of Jack Nicklaus. In fact Golf back then wasn't taken as seriously.

Another gem for my collection..... thank you. "Golf back then wasn't taken as seriously." HAHAHAHA!!! I don't have to argue with you. You do a pretty good job yourself of looking like a moron.

The bottom line is. You put Jack Nicklaus (at his best) and Tiger Woods (at his best) over 18 holes.

Who would win ?

Woods wins everytime

Tiger himself has been quoted as saying "He's the greatest champion that's ever lived" when talking about Jack Nicklaus.

I'll throw you some scraps and tell you I'm not saying Tiger is shit. He's very likely the 2nd best player in history. Just not good enough to be the GOAT. That spot is taken.

I hate to be nit picky or anything but........................ shouldn't those hands be black?

[Beanz]

If you're gonna talk.... talk intelligently. Take your racial bullshit to the 1000 other threads you've destroyed.

Once again. You are the one who started another racial thread yeah yeah "I but no no ....i didn't ...i mean I just did a post about Tiger Woods"

You can't talk about Tiger Woods without talking race and racism


Bullshit. YOU can't talk about Tiger Woods without talking race and racism. You can't even take a shit without talking race and racism.

Jack Nicklaus is not only ahead of Woods in career majors won. But here's another statistic that is sure to boggle your racist brain:
Jack finished second in 19 majors. Woods is way off in the distance with 6.

And that means what ? How many majors did play ?

If you can't tell the difference between 19 and 6 I'm afraid I can't help you. Just like 18 (wins) is better than 15..... and Tiger won't get there either.

Jack played against better competition than Woods in their primes.

Subjective

More bullshit. See your weak-ass expanded answer below.

Jack had to contend with: Gary Player (nine majors), Tom Watson (eight), Arnold Palmer (seven), Lee Trevino (six) and Seve Ballesteros (five)..... ALL Hall of Famers. Jack finished 2nd more than 10 times to players on that list.

Once again. Subjective. None of them. Would do anything nowadays.


This is beyond weak. It's pathetic. I give you names and numbers..... you give me useless, idiotic rhetoric. Stick to topics you know something about, like...... well....... um.......

Woods had to contend with Mickelson and Els during his prime and little else. His 2nd place finishes were to one-hit wonders like: Trevor Immelman, Zach Johnson, Rich Beem, Y.E. Yang and Michael Campbell.

Look. Everyone knows Tiger (at his best) took the game to new levels. Way beyond that of Jack Nicklaus. In fact Golf back then wasn't taken as seriously.

Another gem for my collection..... thank you. "Golf back then wasn't taken as seriously." HAHAHAHA!!! I don't have to argue with you. You do a pretty good job yourself of looking like a moron.

The bottom line is. You put Jack Nicklaus (at his best) and Tiger Woods (at his best) over 18 holes.

Who would win ?

Woods wins everytime

Tiger himself has been quoted as saying "He's the greatest champion that's ever lived" when talking about Jack Nicklaus.

I'll throw you some scraps and tell you I'm not saying Tiger is shit. He's very likely the 2nd best player in history. Just not good enough to be the GOAT. That spot is taken.

I hate to be nit picky or anything but........................ shouldn't those hands be black?