|
|
So, is Tiger better at what he does than ANYONE has ever been at what they do for a living?
I can't think of anyone in sports. Maybe outside? Einstein with physics, Spinoza at posting on the Pawlitics board?
I really think Woods is on this level.
And don't give me this Federer nonsense. He can't win on clay.
I wanted the Rocco to win. He would be the oldest to win the US Open and I think that would be very cool. Besides, I always cheer for the underdawg!
Yeah, Rocco's a good guy. Always been one of my favorite players.Originally Posted by TYLERTECHSAS
tiger tiger tiger tiger woods yall!
I like to see Tiger take on Chuck Norris in a cage match armed with a 5 iron.
JMHO, but some of you must have been watching a different US Open than I was. Tiger did not dominate and suddenly make a putt on the last hole to tie. Tiger played Tiger's game and made a putt on the last hole to tie. Meanwhile, Rocco missed several short putts that would have won him the tournament.
I think Michael Jordan might have been every bit as dominating, but that's not an apples to apples comparison. Jordan had to also rely on the performance of his team. Wilt Chamberlin also comes to mind, but I didn't have the chance to actually see him play. Additionally, take a look at the career of Mr. Jack Nicholas. Tiger will probably catch his number of major victories, but also look at the number of times Jack finished second and his number of top tens.
Outside of sports, some of Einstein's theories have changed the world we live in, while I don't really know if I could say that Tiger has changed the way golf is played (of course, that opens the door to an entirely different conversation that I'm surprised no one has brought up).
And finally, the Scatterload is to things between bread what Tiger is to golf.
First of all, Tiger proved today, and I believe he will tomorrow also, that he is the most mentally tough, clutch athlete EVER. He played badly today on an obviously painful knee, but like always, he made a huge shot that he HAD to make under enormous pressure. It seems like any time that his only option is to make a great shot, he does it. If he wins tomorrow, I believe this will go down as his most historic victory because of the pain that he has been in on nearly every shot. What a freak.
Oh, and the rib and cheese is better than scatterload...by far.
But the question wasn't, "is Tiger the most mentally tough, clutch athlete ever." It was, "is he the best at what he does ever." Jordan also made his fair share of huge shots under enormous pressure. One might argue that Jack also made HIS fair share.
As many times as Tiger has won, there are many more times that he didn't win. Same with Jack. However, the statistics indicate to me that when Jack didn't win, he was closer to winning than Tiger is over a long period of time. I think the major difference is the lack of another dominating household name in the Tiger era.
We do agree, "what a freak," indeed.
I like it, AG, and I kind of figured it'd come down to these two.
Is Tiger Woods better at golf than Jordan was at basketball?
Hard to say. I do think these may be the two most CLUTCH athletes of all time, though. Ali in a big fight situation is up there, as well, however.
Jordan may have the advantage in that he had the ability to make those around him so much better. Horace Grant? Pippen without MJ? BJ Armstrong?
Yet, this again isn't fair because Tiger isn't playing a team sport.
How about Babe Ruth? Talk about changing the way a game is played, he led the league in Home Runs with 11 in 1918, set a new record with 29 in 1919, and 60 in 1927 was more than any other team hit that year. In 1927, Babe Ruth's 60 home runs accounted for 14% of all home runs in the American League that year. To put that figure in modern perspective, a player would need to hit over 340 home runs in a season to account for 14% of the American League's total home run output. In 1923 he hit .393 with 41 HR and 131 RBI and was walked 170 times. He also won 94 games as a pitcher (17 shutouts) with two 20 win seasons and 2.28 career ERA.
His participation in an all-star tour of Japan in 1934 sparked the country's interest in professional baseball, and during WWII, Japanese soldiers seeking the ultimate insult for American troops would sometimes shout, "To hell with Babe Ruth!"
Jeeze, did the ball suddenly appear in the position so he could make the putt? The approach shot was incredible, particularly considering the way he played the previous 2 shots along with the pressure of it being the last hole of the U. S. Open. The putt was not the story of the 72nd hole!
you can watch the playoff live on www.usopen.com for those who are at work
But, is the reason there is no dominating household name because Tiger is that much better? Tiger is definitely the most dominating athlete of my generation. Also, no one is even mentioning the fact that Tiger hasn't even played competitively in 8 weeks. He played one round before the open. The fact that he is even in a playoff is incredible to me.
Sorry, but Federer is still the most dominant player in his sport. Especially when compared to Tiger. Since 2003, he has won 12 major titles, Tiger 13 since 1997. Federer has been ranked #1 for more than 4 years (only been playing for 5). Compare the Vegas odds for Federer vs. the field on any surface but clay, then compare that to Tiger vs. the field on any course you choose. (Besides maybe the Buick). And by the way, if his one weakness bothers you that much remember that he can beat everyone in the world except the clay specialist Nadal on clay. I could be wrong, but Federer is the ONLY player to beat Nadal on clay in the last three years.
At 26, Federer is in every conversation about the greatest tennis player to ever compete.
I love Tiger Woods, but he is not as dominant in his sport as Federer. Woods is the best golfer in history hands down, but who do you think said this: "What he has done in tennis, I think, is far greater than what I've done in golf."
Great argument/post.
But my vote would have to be for Tiger.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
