I have news for you. Anyone who uses 82 wins in a Jack vs tiger argument is losing the argument
Literally everyone will be using that as part of the argument.
Lol man. I guess I can look forward to waking up Monday morning and tiger jumping jack in everyone’s mind because he won something called the zozo. You realize how ridiculous that sounds right?
anyone who knows golf and golf history won’t use that number because they realize it has no substance.
I have news for you. Anyone who uses 82 wins in a Jack vs tiger argument is losing the argument
Literally everyone will be using that as part of the argument.
Lol man. I guess I can look forward to waking up Monday morning and tiger jumping jack in everyone’s mind because he won something called the zozo. You realize how ridiculous that sounds right?
Once he has the record he will, for the rest of his life, be introduced as “15 time major winner (or however many he ends up with) and golf’’s all time wins leader, Tiger Woods.”
Literally makes no difference where win 82, 31 , 6 or 10 happened. It’s all apart of the argument in his favor. Makes it easier.
Never said it doesn’t sound good. Just said it doesn’t mean anything in a tiger/jack comparison or do anything for his legacy. That was in stone after East lake and especially Augusta.
Have you seen the leader board? The Houston Open had zero players in the Top 30. This tournament has a lot of big names. It is just in the fall season. Matsuyama, Woodland, Schauffle, Wolfe, McIlroy, Spieth, Day, etc... He's winning because he is playing outstanding golf. This is a tough tournament to win.
Majors are important but not everything when it comes to greatness. Is a two major win career better than a 20 win career with no majors?
I know Tiger is old now but glad that he is playing nine more holes this round. He is playing well today. Keep the three shot lead through the next nine and cruise tomorrow. That 18th hole feels like a bogey though. And he bogeyed #1 today.
0
Options
The Juggler
Behind that bush over there. Posts: 47,279
Have you seen the leader board? The Houston Open had zero players in the Top 30. This tournament has a lot of big names. It is just in the fall season. Matsuyama, Woodland, Schauffle, Wolfe, McIlroy, Spieth, Day, etc... He's winning because he is playing outstanding golf. This is a tough tournament to win.
Majors are important but not everything when it comes to greatness. Is a two major win career better than a 20 win career with no majors?
Have you seen the leader board? The Houston Open had zero players in the Top 30. This tournament has a lot of big names. It is just in the fall season. Matsuyama, Woodland, Schauffle, Wolfe, McIlroy, Spieth, Day, etc... He's winning because he is playing outstanding golf. This is a tough tournament to win.
Majors are important but not everything when it comes to greatness. Is a two major win career better than a 20 win career with no majors?
I did say the field was good.
The 2 and 20 thing is one thing. Tiger winning a random tournament changes nothing. Can you honestly say you will have any different view of his career if he wins this thing? Winning the zozo changes and increases your opinion of his career?
The 2 or 29 thing is interesting. JT alway talks about how majors are most important and he doesn’t think about money or play for the money because of he plays the way he should, money will take care of its self. Pretty standard answer for a top player in the world.
Joel Dahmen just said recently he doesn’t care about majors and would take the FedEx cup money over a major win 10 times out of 10. Said the top players can think about their legacy but the $15 mil would change his grandkids lives.
Like seeing the different views. Dahmen is becoming a favorite
But Sam Snead isn't even in the conversation, so what does breaking some record of his from the 40s and 50s matter?
Not that they will sit and watch, but every word that will be written will have Jack and Tiger as 1 and 2, one way or the other. I think the 25% number is much more powerful and at this point I just don't see what winning some random dumb tournament matters anymore. The Masters cemented him to me as the best golfer ever, winning the John Deere is completely irrelevant.
It's just a numbers game. Everyone knows Tiger is a better golfer than Sam Sneed. But if you think Tiger doesn't care, even a little bit, about finishing second to him you're crazy.
If tiger ties the record by winning something called the zozo championship (albeit against some good players), in an 80 person field, played in Japan, in the middle of the night, during the silly season, with one of the rounds being played in front of no one and a 140 yard par 4 for at least one of the rounds, do you really anyone cares about the record? I can’t think of a less meaningful win. The zozo would be soooooooo much better for my argument that the John Deere
C'mon Cliffy, it all matters. If the Yankees had some record breaking season where they win, say, 140 games, nobody is going to say, but 40 of those were against teams that were 50 games under 500. I haven't looked at all of Snead's wins, but I'm sure a bunch were meaningless tournaments, no?
Yessir it matters. If it doesn’t, then let’s go ahead and breakdown all of Sam Sneads wins.
Tiger!!
More ammo for my point. Someone broke down that sneads wins include 15 person fields, 6 person fields a tie that everyone was awarded a win, etc. listen, I like tiger too but this is just a number for fanboys to beat off too. It means zero.
Hey guys, just jumping in here uninvited...and I'm not super knowledgeable about the history of golf. So keep that in mind when beating me up here.
However, if Snead only had to play in fields of 15 or 6, wouldn't those victories carry even less value than a win at Zozo? Imagine how many victories Tiger would have if he got to only play in fields of 15 or less. Not to mention, if he ever lost in a playoff round that would have just been counted as a win after 18. Besides, the Zozo has a lot of the games best talent competing in it this weekend.
I would agree that #82 coming during the "offseason" will take away some of the thunder. But if he won #36 at Zozo and #82 would have come at Medinah this year, nobody would say squat about #82 not being legit because he won #36 at Zozo. And maybe, just maybe, #82 at Zozo opens the door for #83 at Augusta?
"A smart monkey doesn't monkey around with another monkey's monkey" - Darwin's Theory
But Sam Snead isn't even in the conversation, so what does breaking some record of his from the 40s and 50s matter?
Not that they will sit and watch, but every word that will be written will have Jack and Tiger as 1 and 2, one way or the other. I think the 25% number is much more powerful and at this point I just don't see what winning some random dumb tournament matters anymore. The Masters cemented him to me as the best golfer ever, winning the John Deere is completely irrelevant.
It's just a numbers game. Everyone knows Tiger is a better golfer than Sam Sneed. But if you think Tiger doesn't care, even a little bit, about finishing second to him you're crazy.
If tiger ties the record by winning something called the zozo championship (albeit against some good players), in an 80 person field, played in Japan, in the middle of the night, during the silly season, with one of the rounds being played in front of no one and a 140 yard par 4 for at least one of the rounds, do you really anyone cares about the record? I can’t think of a less meaningful win. The zozo would be soooooooo much better for my argument that the John Deere
C'mon Cliffy, it all matters. If the Yankees had some record breaking season where they win, say, 140 games, nobody is going to say, but 40 of those were against teams that were 50 games under 500. I haven't looked at all of Snead's wins, but I'm sure a bunch were meaningless tournaments, no?
Yessir it matters. If it doesn’t, then let’s go ahead and breakdown all of Sam Sneads wins.
Tiger!!
More ammo for my point. Someone broke down that sneads wins include 15 person fields, 6 person fields a tie that everyone was awarded a win, etc. listen, I like tiger too but this is just a number for fanboys to beat off too. It means zero.
Hey guys, just jumping in here uninvited...and I'm not super knowledgeable about the history of golf. So keep that in mind when beating me up here.
However, if Snead only had to play in fields of 15 or 6, wouldn't those victories carry even less value than a win at Zozo? Imagine how many victories Tiger would have if he got to only play in fields of 15 or less. Not to mention, if he ever lost in a playoff round that would have just been counted as a win after 18. Besides, the Zozo has a lot of the games best talent competing in it this weekend.
I would agree that #82 coming during the "offseason" will take away some of the thunder. But if he won #36 at Zozo and #82 would have come at Medinah this year, nobody would say squat about #82 not being legit because he won #36 at Zozo. And maybe, just maybe, #82 at Zozo opens the door for #83 at Augusta?
I think you make good points. The number is pretty pointless in general because if the Hero Challenge counted the same way it would have counted for Snead, Tiger would already be there. It is a random number that doesn't have much meaning. I am not downplaying the number of wins, I am downplaying that one more win at a random tournament in Japan means anything. It doesn't.
^^^I get it. I think to some it will matter. Those who simply refute he is the best ever because # of Majors won or based on the total number of wins. Some people cast their GOAT votes based strictly on those metrics (i.e. Jordan vs. Kobe vs. Lebron ---- no matter what, Jordan is, and will continue to be the GOAT, end of story! ).
That all said, I'm a Tiger bro, but I'm aware enough that I don't have enough golf knowledge to get into any real debates or anything. I do root for Rickie as well. I'd like to root for Rory, but he seems too uppity. The biggest drawback to golf is the pretentious attitudes of so many golfers.
"A smart monkey doesn't monkey around with another monkey's monkey" - Darwin's Theory
Have you seen the leader board? The Houston Open had zero players in the Top 30. This tournament has a lot of big names. It is just in the fall season. Matsuyama, Woodland, Schauffle, Wolfe, McIlroy, Spieth, Day, etc... He's winning because he is playing outstanding golf. This is a tough tournament to win.
Majors are important but not everything when it comes to greatness. Is a two major win career better than a 20 win career with no majors?
I did say the field was good.
The 2 and 20 thing is one thing. Tiger winning a random tournament changes nothing. Can you honestly say you will have any different view of his career if he wins this thing? Winning the zozo changes and increases your opinion of his career?
Tiger is already the greatest of all time. But this adds another datapoint. People point to Jack as the all time most majors winner. Why shouldn’t the all time WINS record holder also be a big deal?
The more wins he can have against the current crop of competition helps too.
I agree. The more wins the better and it’s fun seeing tiger win. I just don’t think regular season wins mean anything to his legacy at this point. If he never wins another major but wins 3 more times, nothing changes. Literally nothing changes.
All time wins leader doesn’t mean anything because the number is stupid and he already passed Jack
Tiger is the best ever because he won 25% of his starts for a decade, because of the insane cut streak, because of the hello world masters, because he won at Torrey on a broken leg, because he went through the most embarrassing sports scandal ever, multiple back surgeries, a fusion, a dui, rehab, the yips, a decade major drought and came out on the other side to win the masters at over 40. Whether he wins 81, 82 or 83 makes no difference to the above unless they are a major. If tiger played a normal schedule in the 2000s he’d have 100 wins. He is the best ever because he is the most dominant ever. End of story. Using 81 or 82 is irrelevant.
Well, the GolfChannel and media are playing it up because that is what the media does. But most wins is always going to be a part of the greatest ever discussion. One datapoint of many. I do believe non-major wins are still important though and add to his legacy because they will show that he can win against the best of many generations throughout a long career. After all sorts of injuries, and other issues, he came back against the best competition there has been all time and was able to win.
Step back and think about it. 82 wins. That is nuts. So he is three major wins shy of Nicklaus. 82 wins is enough to make up for three major victories.
If he stays healthy I think he can win at least 2 more Masters. And I think he can post a win at The Open or PGA depending on the venue. US Open will be tough but not impossible. If he stays healthy, he's far from done.
Edit: I know no one is saying he's done, but his career doesn't end with this win if he gets it.
Well, the GolfChannel and media are playing it up because that is what the media does. But most wins is always going to be a part of the greatest ever discussion. One datapoint of many. I do believe non-major wins are still important though and add to his legacy because they will show that he can win against the best of many generations throughout a long career. After all sorts of injuries, and other issues, he came back against the best competition there has been all time and was able to win.
Step back and think about it. 82 wins. That is nuts. So he is three major wins shy of Nicklaus. 82 wins is enough to make up for three major victories.
Exactly. It just adds to his argument.
If regular wins didn’t matter to anyone, then why do the networks always bring up JT and Speith’s numbers before turning 25 or however old they are? Of course becoming the all time wins leader means something. Does it mean everything or as much as the majors title? Of course not. But to pretend it means nothing is foolish.
Excited to be able to see it tonight and thankful for the rain because I was away at a wedding the last few days and wouldn’t have been able to see the final round otherwise.
Just when I thought I was out, they pull me back in.
I am not saying all regular season wins are irrelevant, but at this point in his career, especially something called the zozo, is irrelevant. 79, 81, 82, 84...they're all the same at this point.
The more wins he can have against the current crop of competition helps too.
I agree. The more wins the better and it’s fun seeing tiger win. I just don’t think regular season wins mean anything to his legacy at this point. If he never wins another major but wins 3 more times, nothing changes. Literally nothing changes.
All time wins leader doesn’t mean anything because the number is stupid and he already passed Jack
Tiger is the best ever because he won 25% of his starts for a decade, because of the insane cut streak, because of the hello world masters, because he won at Torrey on a broken leg, because he went through the most embarrassing sports scandal ever, multiple back surgeries, a fusion, a dui, rehab, the yips, a decade major drought and came out on the other side to win the masters at over 40. Whether he wins 81, 82 or 83 makes no difference to the above unless they are a major. If tiger played a normal schedule in the 2000s he’d have 100 wins. He is the best ever because he is the most dominant ever. End of story. Using 81 or 82 is irrelevant.
Gotta have high hopes for Tiger this season. His body is still going to let him down but to come out and dominate after a long layoff sends a message. I am not a betting man but would be surprised if he is not favored to win Bay Hill right now.
Comments
anyone who knows golf and golf history won’t use that number because they realize it has no substance.
Have you seen the leader board? The Houston Open had zero players in the Top 30. This tournament has a lot of big names. It is just in the fall season. Matsuyama, Woodland, Schauffle, Wolfe, McIlroy, Spieth, Day, etc... He's winning because he is playing outstanding golf. This is a tough tournament to win.
Majors are important but not everything when it comes to greatness. Is a two major win career better than a 20 win career with no majors?
Joel Dahmen just said recently he doesn’t care about majors and would take the FedEx cup money over a major win 10 times out of 10. Said the top players can think about their legacy but the $15 mil would change his grandkids lives.
Like seeing the different views. Dahmen is becoming a favorite
However, if Snead only had to play in fields of 15 or 6, wouldn't those victories carry even less value than a win at Zozo? Imagine how many victories Tiger would have if he got to only play in fields of 15 or less. Not to mention, if he ever lost in a playoff round that would have just been counted as a win after 18. Besides, the Zozo has a lot of the games best talent competing in it this weekend.
I would agree that #82 coming during the "offseason" will take away some of the thunder. But if he won #36 at Zozo and #82 would have come at Medinah this year, nobody would say squat about #82 not being legit because he won #36 at Zozo. And maybe, just maybe, #82 at Zozo opens the door for #83 at Augusta?
That all said, I'm a Tiger bro, but I'm aware enough that I don't have enough golf knowledge to get into any real debates or anything. I do root for Rickie as well. I'd like to root for Rory, but he seems too uppity. The biggest drawback to golf is the pretentious attitudes of so many golfers.
Tiger is the best ever because he won 25% of his starts for a decade, because of the insane cut streak, because of the hello world masters, because he won at Torrey on a broken leg, because he went through the most embarrassing sports scandal ever, multiple back surgeries, a fusion, a dui, rehab, the yips, a decade major drought and came out on the other side to win the masters at over 40. Whether he wins 81, 82 or 83 makes no difference to the above unless they are a major. If tiger played a normal schedule in the 2000s he’d have 100 wins. He is the best ever because he is the most dominant ever. End of story. Using 81 or 82 is irrelevant.
Well, the GolfChannel and media are playing it up because that is what the media does. But most wins is always going to be a part of the greatest ever discussion. One datapoint of many. I do believe non-major wins are still important though and add to his legacy because they will show that he can win against the best of many generations throughout a long career. After all sorts of injuries, and other issues, he came back against the best competition there has been all time and was able to win.
Step back and think about it. 82 wins. That is nuts. So he is three major wins shy of Nicklaus. 82 wins is enough to make up for three major victories.
Edit: I know no one is saying he's done, but his career doesn't end with this win if he gets it.
I am not saying all regular season wins are irrelevant, but at this point in his career, especially something called the zozo, is irrelevant. 79, 81, 82, 84...they're all the same at this point.
This is a good sign, especially with the grind needed because of the weather