Masters
- Thread starter novabball2
- Start date
as fans of the masters we are spoiled cause most of the time the final round is full of highs and lows and makes for great tv. in this case Spieth made so many putts no one could catch him. thinking about it now it was a good masters cause we saw redemption from last season and a golfing phenom fulfill a lifelong (short life but whatever) goal.
Phil and Rose both played well enough to win, Spieth was just so good all four rds. he went wire to wire and is now in the same company as Craig Wood, Palmer, Nicklaus and Floyd as the only players to win wire to wire. Floyd was the last in 1976.
its great to see young americans win majors.
Spieth won 2 US Jr Ams , played a Walker cup, a US Open where he finished 21st and was low amateur. he was all american as a freshman at Texas and #1 amateur in the world at one point. he is no underdog. he is a freak that is going to be a great player for many years. he has only been a pro for three years. its hard to say how many majors he will win but you have to think at least 3.
Phil and Rose both played well enough to win, Spieth was just so good all four rds. he went wire to wire and is now in the same company as Craig Wood, Palmer, Nicklaus and Floyd as the only players to win wire to wire. Floyd was the last in 1976.
its great to see young americans win majors.
Spieth won 2 US Jr Ams , played a Walker cup, a US Open where he finished 21st and was low amateur. he was all american as a freshman at Texas and #1 amateur in the world at one point. he is no underdog. he is a freak that is going to be a great player for many years. he has only been a pro for three years. its hard to say how many majors he will win but you have to think at least 3.
"If Bob May fires three straight 66s at Valhalla against Micheel, it's not the same thing. I have true appreciation for what he accomplished, but if it's not against Woods, it's something else.
Why aren't Micheel/Curtis "underdogs"? If Micheel outlasted Woods, would he turn into an "underdog"?"
You're making my point for me here. It is often the David vs. Goliath aspect that makes the underdog story interesting, not the colorless one hit wonder who beats another nobody or comfortably wins. Battles between heavyweights are also great, but so are the duels between a major champion and a nobody. Take the last three at Valhalla: Rory vs Lefty=yes; May vs Woods= yes; Brooks vs Perry= who cares.
Why aren't Micheel/Curtis "underdogs"? If Micheel outlasted Woods, would he turn into an "underdog"?"
You're making my point for me here. It is often the David vs. Goliath aspect that makes the underdog story interesting, not the colorless one hit wonder who beats another nobody or comfortably wins. Battles between heavyweights are also great, but so are the duels between a major champion and a nobody. Take the last three at Valhalla: Rory vs Lefty=yes; May vs Woods= yes; Brooks vs Perry= who cares.
hard to say that in the post Jack golf era there has been a Goliath other than Tiger, who else is goliath? nobody if you ask me.
The human interest story of Jordan and his caddy is fascinating, and I
would link the entire story that I just read. But I don't know how to link.
If you are interested, simply google Joe Logan, golf. I call that site
up every day; it is filled with great golf stories.
OT: Somewhere in this thread there is mention of Jack and Tiger as
the two greatest golfers of all time. I have seen Ben Hogan play about
a dozen or so rounds, and I believe he was the greatest ball striker/player
of all time.
would link the entire story that I just read. But I don't know how to link.
If you are interested, simply google Joe Logan, golf. I call that site
up every day; it is filled with great golf stories.
OT: Somewhere in this thread there is mention of Jack and Tiger as
the two greatest golfers of all time. I have seen Ben Hogan play about
a dozen or so rounds, and I believe he was the greatest ball striker/player
of all time.
i think you have to take each era for what it is. could Hogan have competed on this Augusta course? could Jack? modern equipment and the modern ball have changed golf along with modern fitness and nutrition. i would have loved to seen Ben Hogan play, but was he really the best ball striker ever? or is that nostalgia speaking?
i have a hard time believing anyone could have touched Tiger from 1999-2002 the again in 06. he finishes T3 at the masters, his father dies a month later, while grieving he misses the cut at winged foot then comes back to win the British Open and PGA in 06. and that was post the most dominant era of his time from 99-02
i have a hard time believing anyone could have touched Tiger from 1999-2002 the again in 06. he finishes T3 at the masters, his father dies a month later, while grieving he misses the cut at winged foot then comes back to win the British Open and PGA in 06. and that was post the most dominant era of his time from 99-02
whitecat - my favorite Hogan story is he never plays in the British Open, someone finally convinces him to go over and play, he does and wins to complete the career grand slam and never returns to play again. i guess it shows just how good he was.
There hasn't, you are correct. What will be interesting is we're starting to see the Tiger generation turning pro. Players who were kids when Tiger won the masters in 97 and got into golf because of Tiger. Golf, in general is more competitive then its ever been because of those who learned from Tiger. We may never see a 'Goliath' like Tiger again for quite some time because of the imprint he's left on golf...the training, the aurora, the competitive fire, he took it to a level that had not been seen on tour.
NickleDimer
Post 'Til Your Fingers Bleed
Whitecat's Ball Striking Power Rankings:
1. Hogan
2. Ed Furgol
3. John Crotty
4. Faldo
5. Paul Azinger
1. Hogan
2. Ed Furgol
3. John Crotty
4. Faldo
5. Paul Azinger
When Nelson won eleven tourneys in a row one year and nineteen
total for the season, there might have been a dozen or two other players
capable of winning. In the Arnie, Lee, and Jack era there might have been
dozens upon dozens of players capable of winning. In today's game there might a thousand.
I have posted this before; the top dozen players in Jack's era were better players then
the top dozen today. I read this somewhere when Tiger was in his prime, Jack said that
Hogan was a better player then Tiger.
total for the season, there might have been a dozen or two other players
capable of winning. In the Arnie, Lee, and Jack era there might have been
dozens upon dozens of players capable of winning. In today's game there might a thousand.
I have posted this before; the top dozen players in Jack's era were better players then
the top dozen today. I read this somewhere when Tiger was in his prime, Jack said that
Hogan was a better player then Tiger.
Hogan was a hero to Jack so thats why Jack said it. Nobody ever was better than Tiger from 99-2002 nobody. he changed the game, Augusta was changed because what tiger did to it. he demolished that course in 97 and the membership did not want to see this kid shoot 15-18 under yearly so they made it much longer. no big deal, he went back to back in 01, 02 and won again in 05.
If you paired Trevino, Player, Arnold, Nelson, Hogan, Hagan and all the greats less Jack who was crazy long, with Bubba and Dustin Johnson , those yesteryear players would be 80-100 yds behind those two on every tee shot, they'd be so in awe they wouldnt be able to keep up.
its a different game. these guys today are athletes. the players from the 40s-80s were just golfers. until Norman and Faldo came along the older guys drank , ate and smoked, there was no fitness or nutrition. totally different game and I think todays players ranked 10-30 in the world would smoke the greats from any era (less Jack).
If you paired Trevino, Player, Arnold, Nelson, Hogan, Hagan and all the greats less Jack who was crazy long, with Bubba and Dustin Johnson , those yesteryear players would be 80-100 yds behind those two on every tee shot, they'd be so in awe they wouldnt be able to keep up.
its a different game. these guys today are athletes. the players from the 40s-80s were just golfers. until Norman and Faldo came along the older guys drank , ate and smoked, there was no fitness or nutrition. totally different game and I think todays players ranked 10-30 in the world would smoke the greats from any era (less Jack).
Good thing they changed it so no one shoots 15-18 under any more.
Are they all using the same technology? If so, then your statement is absurd.
No argument that fields today are much, much deeper. But Kevin Na (#21) or Chris Kirk (#24) smoking Ben Hogan using their same equipment? Get real.
Comparing generations in golf is extremely difficult. Not only is the equipment different but the course are different and longer.
Picked out a course which has had a number of tournaments played at it since the Bobby Jones era, Winged Foot. Winged foot in 1929 was 6786 yds, in 1974 it was 6961 yds, and in 2006 it was 7264. 500 yds doesn't sound like alot but its a significant amount of distance for a course, particularly added in the right spot.
I think many people sell today's generation short because they play with superior equipment. What i think people fail to realize is how athletic and how fine tuned these guys are at hitting a golf ball. All of the guys could still kill it with an old set of blades, couple that with some of the shorter distances and their overall conditioning, they'd put alot, no all, of these past generation golfers to shame. I mean even Palmer was punching putting to victory, which is just absurd to think about using such an inconsistent method of putting in today's game
Augusta had the perfect storm of weather events which lead to the low scoring. Tigers 97 > Jordan's 15
Picked out a course which has had a number of tournaments played at it since the Bobby Jones era, Winged Foot. Winged foot in 1929 was 6786 yds, in 1974 it was 6961 yds, and in 2006 it was 7264. 500 yds doesn't sound like alot but its a significant amount of distance for a course, particularly added in the right spot.
I think many people sell today's generation short because they play with superior equipment. What i think people fail to realize is how athletic and how fine tuned these guys are at hitting a golf ball. All of the guys could still kill it with an old set of blades, couple that with some of the shorter distances and their overall conditioning, they'd put alot, no all, of these past generation golfers to shame. I mean even Palmer was punching putting to victory, which is just absurd to think about using such an inconsistent method of putting in today's game
Augusta had the perfect storm of weather events which lead to the low scoring. Tigers 97 > Jordan's 15
Disagree. Almost everyone acknowledges that today's generation is much, much better than past generations. The 250th ranked player in the world today is better than the 15th ranked player 50 years ago.
And so I understand your point----you are claiming that if you take ANY PGA tour pro today and made him play with Hogan's or Nicklaus' or Trevino's equipment on the courses that they played, they would put them to shame? Do I have that correct?
novabball2,
Since both Arnie and Jack are in favor of all tour players
playing a ball that goes only 275, I would be in favor of this match
from different eras with the same ball.
I marvel at the recovery shots that Tiger and Phil play from spots
that Ben and company never had to hit because they were so
straight. On the sixth at Carnoustie (Sp.) there was an alley between
an OB stake and some deep bunkers. The alley was only 10 yards wide.
Ben hit it in the alley and I have read that it was never attempted previously.
Since both Arnie and Jack are in favor of all tour players
playing a ball that goes only 275, I would be in favor of this match
from different eras with the same ball.
I marvel at the recovery shots that Tiger and Phil play from spots
that Ben and company never had to hit because they were so
straight. On the sixth at Carnoustie (Sp.) there was an alley between
an OB stake and some deep bunkers. The alley was only 10 yards wide.
Ben hit it in the alley and I have read that it was never attempted previously.
C'mon now, I'm not the guy who scolds you for crappy threads. To be accurate, I agree with you here. We watch sports to see the best athletes do amazing things. No one cares about Bob May. That was a Tiger Woods story not a Bob May story.
white cat - i agree the ball is the difference but so is club head speed.
In todays game thats what is needed for the casual golfer to play better and have an interest in the game, a long and soft ball like the pro v1 and forgiving equipment. no one wants to play with the crappy sticks Hogan Palmer and Nicklaus used. people want long and mishits corrected.
youd be surprised how a weekend warrior can shoot 90 without ever hitting the club face. off the toe, bottom or top of the club still gets you a playable shot with the way the irons are made today. 50 years ago that is a shank waiting to happen.
In todays game thats what is needed for the casual golfer to play better and have an interest in the game, a long and soft ball like the pro v1 and forgiving equipment. no one wants to play with the crappy sticks Hogan Palmer and Nicklaus used. people want long and mishits corrected.
youd be surprised how a weekend warrior can shoot 90 without ever hitting the club face. off the toe, bottom or top of the club still gets you a playable shot with the way the irons are made today. 50 years ago that is a shank waiting to happen.
NickleDimer
Post 'Til Your Fingers Bleed
I'm not a golf equipment expert, but aren't most of those types of benefits what get a crappy golfer to a passable level, not what makes pros significantly better?
yes but it also helps the pros who hit the ball square on the club face everytime. the new equipment gives them distance they cant get with the older clubs. plus they spec them out perfectly to fit their swing, spin, etc. guys are hitting 9 iron to the 16th at Augusta. in 1986 Jack hit 4 iron on that Sunday to make birdie and Jack was the longest hitter on tour.
it have been really cool to see. the "era" talk is always interesting.
guys id like to see in todays game in their primes
Jack
Arnold
Johnny Miller
Hogan
Jones
Trevino
Player
some other notables
Weiskopf
Floyd
Norman - missed the equipment boom by a decade.
Faldo - same
guys id like to see in todays game in their primes
Jack
Arnold
Johnny Miller
Hogan
Jones
Trevino
Player
some other notables
Weiskopf
Floyd
Norman - missed the equipment boom by a decade.
Faldo - same
The old timers would be every bit as good as today's crop if they had the benefit of better course conditions, better equipment and better training techniques that the modern golfers enjoy. It's basically hand-eye coordination and for the very top end golfers the grit and will to win. It's not like the physiques of the modern golfers are across the board tremendous, and it's not like the old timers wouldn't also do whatever it would take to be great today if you could time machine them to the modern era. Nicklaus would be every bit as good and dominant as he was then, if he started his pro career today.
In 1990 the best player in the world, nick Faldo, had a driving average of 249 yds
the big boom in technology started in 1991 (big Bertha technology)
by 1992 his average was over 260
It stayed in the 260's until 2003 when it jumped over 270
i think his most recent season he was up close to 290
its stupid what technology has done to the professional game. And so much of it is real minute physics issues that are identified by swing simulators that maximize launch angle, etc, that's its almost like tweaking a race car and those without access to the technology can't really compete.
I dont have have a solution, but it has become like watching a baseball game where they can use metal bats maxed out in technology. It's not that fun watched guys hit 3 woods 300 yds as a lay up tee shot.
The difference in my opinion is that there is more competition now. The top players like Nicklaus would still be awesome, but the guys ranked 50 today are much better than the guys ranked 50 back in the golden era, and the guys ranked 200 today can compete much closer in terms of contending against the top guys in any given tourney than back in the day.
Sort ft of like Bill Russell or john wooden not being likely to replicate their records against today's competition not because they would be good but because of the presence of more contenders.
Agree with Liz on this stuff.
It's not that these guys are awe inspiring athletes. They just have technology that maximizes their launch angle and swung speed
When Tom Watson had that great run at turnberry in 2009 he was driving he ball 300 yds on so,e holes. That yr his driving average was almost 290. I don't think Watson started using steroids or was in better shape in 2009 as opposed to 1980.
i like what technology has done to the game. watching players score is more fun than watching them make pars all day.
if you want more "they play like us" golf, watch the ladies, they hit as far as what the 5-10 handicapper hits it, they have more accuracy and are better around the greens. its fun to watch and the champions tour if you want to see guys hit 5 iron 180 instead of PW 180 like on tour.
if you want more "they play like us" golf, watch the ladies, they hit as far as what the 5-10 handicapper hits it, they have more accuracy and are better around the greens. its fun to watch and the champions tour if you want to see guys hit 5 iron 180 instead of PW 180 like on tour.
I like watching players go low in the right events. And it's not about needing to see them play like me.
The distances off the tees and the length of the holes just seem skewed and I have trouble grasping the perspective of the distance and the hole.
Also, I'm not against the long ball. I think 1991 crooked stick was one of the signature sporting events of my lifetime. I loved when tiger bust on the scene mashing it. But those events were attributable to amazing skill, as opposed to the new distance which is more attributable to some guy have a sick swing simulator that is able to calculate his swing speed and launch angle and help him identify that if they change the torque and flex point of his shaft by a nanometer and use a certain compression ball he can add 6 yds to his average shot.
The distances off the tees and the length of the holes just seem skewed and I have trouble grasping the perspective of the distance and the hole.
Also, I'm not against the long ball. I think 1991 crooked stick was one of the signature sporting events of my lifetime. I loved when tiger bust on the scene mashing it. But those events were attributable to amazing skill, as opposed to the new distance which is more attributable to some guy have a sick swing simulator that is able to calculate his swing speed and launch angle and help him identify that if they change the torque and flex point of his shaft by a nanometer and use a certain compression ball he can add 6 yds to his average shot.
Spieth shot 62 today after a 74 yesterday.
i like seeing them go low at Augusta and shoot over par at the US Open. two totally different set ups and both great events. no Johnny Miller and Peter Jacobson this year makes it better. but lets see if Fox decides to tweak its coverage with a glowing ball or something like they tried in hockey back in the 90s. also Im curios to see how Norman does as a commentator.
i like seeing them go low at Augusta and shoot over par at the US Open. two totally different set ups and both great events. no Johnny Miller and Peter Jacobson this year makes it better. but lets see if Fox decides to tweak its coverage with a glowing ball or something like they tried in hockey back in the 90s. also Im curios to see how Norman does as a commentator.
I have loved this thread, and we all know that comparing
players from different eras really is difficult if not impossible.
Two names that have not appeared in any post are Billy Casper
and Julius Boros . Those guys could really play. I saw them both
on numerous occasions.
players from different eras really is difficult if not impossible.
Two names that have not appeared in any post are Billy Casper
and Julius Boros . Those guys could really play. I saw them both
on numerous occasions.
whitecat - do you think the women will ever get to play Augusta? Paula Creamer is pushing for it on twitter.