Writing Off Tiger
Posted: July 18th, 2010 | Filed under: Other Sports | 64 Comments »
My great good friend Michael Rosenberg wrote something last week that struck me wrong, and I could not quite figure out why. He was writing about Tiger Woods, and it began with how sick he is of reporters asking Tiger about his personal life. I agree entirely with that. But then Michael wrote this:
I have no idea how Woods will play this week. But I do believe two things:
1. The people who write him off are dead wrong.
2. Those people are doing him a favor.
Something about this just plinked off key for me … but I wasn’t quite sure why. At first, I thought my disagreement was with his No. 2 statement: That people who are writing off Tiger Woods are doing him a favor. I don’t see that at all.
Here’s why: I’ve long thought that Tiger Woods (unlike many great athletes) does not feed off of being UNDERESTIMATED but quite the opposite — he feeds off of being OVERESTIMATED. He has spent his entire golfing life building up an aura of invincibility — see his name come up on the leaderboard and cower in fear. When Woods is in the lead, golfers try too hard to pull off shots that are not in their bags because they know — they KNOW — he won’t give it up. That’s his game. Rattle them. Intimidate them. Make them fear him. I have no idea how Woods would handle being underestimated and nobody else does either, but I don’t think it fits him at all. Tiger Woods is a frontrunner, the best in the history of golf. Every major championship he has ever won — all 14 of them — he won from the lead. He is Goliath. He has never shown even the slightest inclination for becoming David or, anyway, I haven’t seen it. I don’t think he’s suited for a slingshot.
But the more I thought about it, the more I realized that it wasn’t Michael’s second point that rubbed me wrong. No. It was No. 1. He wrote: “The people who write him off are dead wrong.”
And I realized that my issue was this: As far as I can tell NOBODY is writing off Tiger Woods. And, frankly, by all the available evidence, we SHOULD be writing off Tiger Woods.
Look: Tiger Woods. by his standards, has played stunningly mediocre golf this year after taking off a few months to deal with his personal issues. He has not won a tournament — entering the British Open he was zero-for-six. This might not sound like much, but Tiger Woods only plays in the tournaments he expects to win. This year marks the first time since 1998 that he has not won one of his first six tournaments of the year.
Anyway, it wasn’t just that he didn’t win but he never came close to winning. He missed the cut in Charlotte, at one of his favorite events. He withdrew from the Players Championship with some sort of neck thing that he has barely mentioned since. He finished an uninspired 19th at Jack Nicklaus’ tournament in Columbus. He played stunningly bad and unfocused golf in finishing 46th as defending champ of the AT&T National.
Yes, people will point out that he finished fourth at both the Masters and the U.S. Open, and he did — nobody suggests that Tiger Woods will turn into a 12-handicapper. But even those fourth-place finishes said something was wrong … he was never really a Sunday threat to win either even though Augusta National and Pebble Beach are two of his favorite golf courses, places he was meant to dominate. Even two or three years ago, people pointed to 2010 as the year for a potential Tiger Woods grand slam because of those golf courses. Finishing fourth at Augusta (where he has won four times and set the course record) and Pebble Beach (where Woods won the 2000 U.S. Open by 10 shots) is hardly a sign that Tiger Woods is playing well enough.
Anyway, despite all this, he was STILL the prohibitive favorite to win the British Open. He was the betting favorite. He was the analysts favorite. Even the people who thought Tiger Woods was not going to win figured he would contend (that was my feeling), and even those who thought he would not contend (if you could find any of them) didn’t seem too sure of themselves. When I ran a poll a couple of weeks ago asking readers if Tiger Woods would break Nicklaus’ record for most majors (he still has to win FIVE MORE majors, which is more than Phil Mickelson has won in his career), barely 3% checked “Definitely not.” And I suspect that number would be even lower if people had to stake their reputations on it.
No, I don’t think there is almost anyone out there who is writing off Tiger Woods. And frankly … there’s good reason to write him off. This may sound cruel but I actually mean it as the opposite of cruel: More people SHOULD be writing off Tiger Woods.
First, he will turn 35 at the end of the year. There has been talk that this means Woods will still be in his golfing prime for the next few years, but history tells a different story. Since 1970, the average age of major championship winners is 32, and things tumble off for golfers after age 35. Fewer than a quarter of the major championship winners have been 36 or older. The only players since 1970 to win multiple majors after 35 are: Jack Nicklaus (4), Gary Player (4), Ray Floyd (2), Nick Price (2), Vijay Singh (2), Mark O’Meara (2), Angel Cabrera (2), Padraig Harrington (2).
More to the point, Woods has been dominant for a dozen years — which is a long time to dominate in golf. The greatest golfers have had a fairly short window of time when they dominate, and when that window closes they stop winning major championships.
– Ben Hogan won all his majors from 1946-1953 and though he contended for years (finishing second four times in the next three years), he never won another one.
– Arnold Palmer won all his majors from from 1958-1964.
– Tom Watson (more on him in a minute) won all his majors from 1975-83.
– Sam Snead won all his majors from 1946-1954.
– Nick Faldo won all his majors from 1987-1996.
– Bobby Jones won all his majors from 1923-1930.
And so on. There are two notable exceptions — they are the two best old golfers of the last 50 years. Gary Player spread out his major championship victories over two decades — 1959-78. His endurance is a marvel, what makes him one of the greatest who ever lived. The other, of course, is Nicklaus who won his first major in 1962 and his last at Augusta in 1986 when he was 46 years old. Nicklaus’ ability to overcome disappointment — from 1976-83 he finished second a staggering SEVEN times — and continue to maintain his will and enthusiasm for winning is part of what makes him one of the great sportsmen of the 20th Century.
Is Tiger like Nicklaus or Player? Maybe. But we don’t know. And I don’t know why we would just ASSUME that he is like Nicklaus or Player. Tom Watson seems a better comparison to me. Before Woods, the last guy to utterly dominate the PGA Tour was Watson. He was PGA Tour player of the Year six out of eight years from 1977-84. He won seven majors and a total of 35 events in those years — his high might not be quite as high as Woods, but it’s plenty high. Watson was a wonder to behold. Nobody on earth hit the ball with the same authority (most people would rank Watson as one of the three best wind players in the history of golf) and nobody on earth had the same imagination and touch around the greens. He had (and still has) a great sense of golf history and his place in it. He was only 33 years old when he won his last major championship. After 1984, he barely won at all.
So what happened? Well, there are the familiar golf reasons. His putting went south — he stopped making the 5 and 6 footers that win and lose championships. His desire faded. Younger golfers emerged. Numerous other things. I’ve talked with Tom at some length about these things.
But there’s something else Tom talks about, and that something else is that maybe it just stopped being his time. The difference between good and great is a whisper — Watson still had obvious greatness in him. He will often say that he hit the ball better as an old man than he ever did as a young man. He finished second at two majors in 1984, finished in the Top 10 at the Masters nine out of 10 years from 1982-91. Heck, as you know, he was a putt away from winning the British Open last year. But he did not win any of those, and Tom’s overpowering line is: “I had my time.” How long can anyone expect to be the best in the whole world? Joe Louis faded. Willie Mays faded. Steffi Graf faded. Michael Jordan faded. Roger Federer fades. Time always wins.
Tiger Woods is showing obvious signs of age. His putting, for the first time in his career, is shaky — he used two different putters at this British Open and missed a lot of putts. He missed a lot of putts at the U.S. Open too. Woods’s greatness unfolds in many forms, but in the end, perhaps, his most fundamental genius has been his steely nerve over the 10 foot putts he HAD to make. If he stops making those putts more than the mere mortals around him, well, he becomes one of those mere mortals. That’s just how it works.
It’s more than just putting. There have been his often-discussed swing issues. He has had numerous and major injuries. And, sure, he has also been dragged through a very public media flogging. All of it figures to take its toll.
Also, time goes on, and numerous younger and uniquely talented golfers emerge on the scene — golfers raised on Tiger Woods. We have no idea if this British Open winner — 27-year-old Louis Oosthuizen — will become a great golfer or if this is a once-in-a-life moment, but we do know that when asked to name his golfing hero, the man from South Africa who learned the game in the spirit of Ernie Els said: “Tiger Woods.”
The fact that so many people — a virtual consensus of people, really — believe that Tiger Woods will come through all of this, return to himself, win a whole bunch more majors, still be the golfer he was in 2000 or 2002 or 2007 shows the huge impact he has made on the sports world and our imaginations. There’s no realistic reason to believe it — we simply cannot imagine an aging Tiger Woods. There was no real reason to think he had any chance to win this British Open. But people did expect it, and that’s why his 23rd place finish feels like a disappointment. You can bet when the PGA Championship comes around, he will be a favorite again.
That’s why I say more people SHOULD write off Tiger Woods … because if he actually comes back, wins five or eight or 10 more major championships, plays at anywhere near the level he was playing in the past, it really would be something like a sports miracle.
I watched many, many hours of the golf coverage this week — so many hours I expect to get invited to the wedding of that guy in the Scottrade commercials — and it seems to me that the hero of the weekend was Curtis Strange. That’s an odd thing for me to say because Curtis was always absurdly grumpy when I had to deal with him as a golfer. Still … when Tiger Woods shot an opening round 67 in preposterously easy conditions (Woods himself said it was like playing in a dome), the announcers were falling over each other to be the loudest to say “Tiger Woods is back!” It was ridiculous — basically EVERYBODY shot 67 with the wind down on Thursday. But you know that in today’s sports media frenzy we fall into the bad habit of picking the story line first and then build our reporting on that line … we all do it. The story line was that this Open Championship could be the return of Tiger Woods, and an opening round 67 fed the beast.
Only, there was Curtis Strange. And he said (not exact words): “I know everybody was impressed but you know what? I didn’t think Tiger was all that good. I thought he hit some errant shots and his putting was only OK.” It turned out to be prophetic — Woods shot two over par the rest of the way. But even if Strange’s words had not proven so right, it was STILL a refreshing thing to hear. Tiger Woods is not a machine. Tiger Woods is not a story. Tiger Woods is not a movie, and he’s not a fairy tale. Tiger Woods is not even the young man who played golf at a higher level than any man in the history of the sport. No. Tiger Woods is a balding 34-year-old man fighting his swing, his putter, his confidence, his past and his history. So many of us expect him to return to his previous dominance.
But I wonder if that really says more about us than it does him.
Loading ...
Circle me, gloom and doom.
Who’s Tiger?
Jack sleeping better these days.
How could Rosenberg have believed that the people writing Tiger off were “dead wrong,” if he had “no idea how Tiger [would] play”? He must have thought he had some idea, if he could say how Tiger **wasn’t** going to play. Own your opinion, man!
I want to agree, but it seems like I read the same articles in 1998 and again in 2004. Maybe it’s just something that happens every 6 years.
As a golfer and a golf fan, I am now left pondering whether I enjoy watching golf more when Tiger dominates, or the times when unknowns win majors all the time. I am torn.
Phil Mickelson has won three majors since turning 35 — the PGA in ’05 and the Masters twice. But the point that no one has won more than four is a great one.
Hogan and Palmer both lost 18-hole playoffs at the U.S. Open at Olympic Club, 11 years apart, and neither won another major after those disappointments.
Watson finished second in the ’87 U.S. Open there and also never won another major (although he was damned close last year).
It’s back there in 2012 so we’ll see if Tiger fits into that somehow.
My misread: You said after 35, meaning after 36th birthday, and Phil won two of those three at age 35. Tiger has five more majors till he turns 36.
Reason number one why Tiger is done: As Joe points out, he has never come back to win a major when trailing after three days.
So, if he cant even come back on day four, how is he going to come back from this?
Tiger , the kid, is gone. He was inspirational. A singular progressive figure in the world of sports. He’s Gone. (like Micky Harts cat
Now he’s a disgraced horndog. His wife is leaving him. If he has any humanity in him at all it should bother him more that he will not watch his kids grow up. That should eat at him far more than any golf issues.
Plus, life after 35 is not easy. On the one hand , you’re not old, on the other hand you’re not young. First, your hairline starts to move back like your forehead said something to piss it off. Next, are the little gray hairs in your beard that you wonder — where the hell did they come from?? The first one is kinda cute. The second one is adorable. Then one night you go to sleep , they have an orgy, and you wake up with 20 of them. Thats the exact moment in time when the fun stops.
I am on record , and I wish I could find appropriate odds , stating I am one of the Definitely Not voters. No chance. If he ever wins ONE more , it would do battle for the sports story of the year.
The only chance Tiger has is to re-invent his image. He should embrace his new bad boy porn star loving persona. Like Hulk Hogan did at the end of his career.
Reading your post, Joe, it got me to thinking about someone else who used intimidation and aura to craft a legendary career. Writers were calling him the greatest of all time … a force of nature … unstoppable. But, like Tiger, he also had away-from-the-sport troubles and, when he came back, everyone assumed he would simply pick back up where he left off and dominate … only he never did. Once the invincible aura was pierced, he was never the same and everyone was left thinking what Mike Tyson might have been.
I noticed the same thing about his putting. He used to have such faith in himself. It is gone now.
I think this year is toast because of everything outside golf he is having to deal with. I also think Woods really misses a coach, a sounding board, or just somebody who has the knowledge and the personality that can both help him and push him at the same time.
Tom Watson is that man.
Of course it won’t happen. But Watson is what Woods needs. I don’t think Woods can figure it out on his own anymore.
I’ll just note that the post is called “Writing off Tiger,” and Joe says any number of times that people should write off Tiger, but he never actually says, “I’m writing him off.”
As for me, I’m with Mac who says that he read the same story in 1998 and 2004. One of the most amazing things about Tiger’s greatness is that he has already gone through two dry spells corresponding with two periods where he went through major swing changes. I’ll agree that what he is going through now looks like it is more consequential than what he had to overcome in ’98 and ’04, but that history of resilience makes it impossible for me to write him off.
when has Tiger EVER been underestimated?
you’re right Joe, Strange is an a-hole.
Your analysis of Woods’ current game is right on and I would agree that if he finds a way to win five more majors at this point in his career it would be unprecedented. BUT. Everything he’s done to this point in his career has been unprecedented. NOBODY in the history of the game has won tournaments as frequently as he has (or is really close) or has won majors as often as he has. The reason we expect him to continue to do the unprecedented is because he has so often shown us he can do just that.
I don’t know whether he’ll get to 19 or not and the beauty of sport is that the debate over whether he will or not is academic. He’ll either do it or he won’t and I’m going to enjoy the hell out of watching him try.
I will admit I never, ever, EVER watch golf and never, ever, ever will unless my future child is a prodigy in it, but I enjoyed this article because of the overall subject content. I find fascinating how all-time greats handle the fading of greatness and also how the media handles it. I think, in a way, the media reflects how the player/person (golfers aren’t players since golf isn’t a sport) handles it.
If they handle it with grace, the media adores and glorifies the exit. Tom Watson is a wonderful example. Everybody loves him, even now. Nobody talks about him in anything but reverential tones, including my Dad. If they don’t, (Brett Favre is best example) the media splinters into camps of for and against and the player does serious harm to his legacy.
I am interested to see how Tiger Woods goes out and the media reaction, even if I have no interest in the boring hobby he partakes in.
I tend to agree with Joe, for all the reasons he enumerates.
But although I’m not one to get too much into people’s personal lives, I think we shouldn’t underestimate the impact of the dissolution of his marriage is having. Seriously, a divorce (especially one involving children) has to be one of the single biggest stresses in life – and that stress is usually incurred by people who don’t have the intimate details of their breakup making tabloid headlines.
I think it might me *more* accurate to say that even in a perfect world (one which includes Tiger Woods as doting and loyal husband and father), his dominance was likely near its end anyway. But this last year, when he might be expected to still be taking advantage of the last dregs of his dominance, he has instead had his mind and focus entirely elsewhere. In short, this major distraction is costing him valuable time…time, which Joe points out, he will not expect to get back.
“Drive for show, putt for dough” is one of the oldest and most-true statements in sport.
Tiger Woods is the greatest, by a margin, putter who ever played the game. That he is also a wonderful, and inventive, driver of the ball as well as having a great short game tended to disguise his genius on the greens. On long putts, especially, it was Tiger first, daylight second.
He also tended to be a lucky player. If his drive hit a tree, it would bounce onto the fairway. That sort of thing dried up at last year’s PGA.
If his putting slips, he’ll have trouble holding off the young guns.
Steve Williams was quoted, going into the British, as saying Woods’ putting wasn’t up to scratch. Also he changed putters this year for the first time in more than a decade . . . not a good sign.
Just an additional note on Woods changing his putter. Apparently he’d used the same blade since he first joined the tour . . . but there were rumours that over the years he’d been trying out others on the quiet.
So long as Tiger doesn’t step on the golf course in flat-brimmed monstrosities like Rickie Fowler he can bang as many cocktail waitresses as he wants.
My reputation isn’t worth much, but I voted “definitely not”, and I’ll stand by it.
Why do we presume to know whether he feeds off of being underestimated, overestimated, or off of goat’s blood, or whatever else?
If the past year has taught us nothing it is that we know far less than we think we know about Tiger.
Didn’t hear Strange say that but good for him is right
Example of picking the story line first and then the analysis: when the talking heads are discussing a series they’ve already made a prediction for and say something to the effect of, “well I picked the Jazz to win in seven so I’ll stick with that…”
I’ve said it to my friends a bunch of times but the missed tap-in at #14 the last day at Augusta this year when he still had a shot to win was a huge wake-up call to me. The old Tiger doesn’t miss that putt.
Oh and the opening 67, he rolled it great. He looked like the old Tiger, hitting putts and walking after them before they even dropped. . . .for 16 holes. Then he missed a couple 4-6 footers on the last 2 holes and turned a 65 into a 67 and never really got it going after that.
I think the old “5 wins and 1 major a year” Tiger is gone. He’s too good to pull a Watson and just flat stop winning but I think he’s become more of a 1 win a year guy now. His results so far this year are just unprecedented for him – you cannot find another stretch of 5 starts with results this poor for him. Ever. Even in 1998 and 2004 when he didn’t win as much, he was right there very week.
I see Tiger as the kind of golfer who could have a renaissance in his 40′s. But I think it’s going to take some time for him. His world has been rocked. If he somehow manages three more before 40 I think he could have a couple more 40-45. But I hope not. He has enough money. He’s tasted glory. Let someone else have a shot.
Joe, I know that Tom Watson is a hometown boy, and a great guy and golfer. I certainly love him.
But you’re not taking into account the gifts Tiger Woods has. Tiger Woods is not Tom Watson. Tiger Woods has played the best golf anyone ever has. He does not have the most majors, but he has played the best golf. And you don’t lose those things at age 34. I’m not exactly sure how you can say Tiger’s putting is a result of his age. With age, you certainly lose distance, you eventually lose accuracy. Your putting is last to go. You’ve drawn comparisons like Tiger is just another great golfer of his time. That is not the case. Tiger is the greatest ever.
Nobody has ever won 5 majors after 35, sure. But, the Bear has won 4. And no disrespect, but even the Bear did not have the game Tiger has. This is simply a guy who’s had to take a little too much time away from golf – not just the physical act, but thoughts centered in golf. That, I feel, has taken a toll. But Tiger will be back, and it will not be a miracle if and when he ends up with more than 20 majors.
I think the post-Douglas Tyson is an interesting example I hadn’t considered before.
I have long found Tiger to be a compelling athlete, but I must admit from the “I knew he would make that putt” posting until now, I have found Joe’s fascination with Tiger even more interesting than Tiger himself.
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Wealthy Writer, Freelancing Job. Freelancing Job said: Joe Posnanski » Blog Archive » Writing Off Tiger http://bit.ly/cfst9U [...]
Joe, love everything you write, but I have to disagree with this. Admittedly, I am a huge Tiger fan, but I am also a single digit handicap that has played a lot of golf and caddied my buddy to the 2008 US Am. I am no expert, but I have a general idea of how to play the game. Now, I really believe that Tiger’s personal life really screwed him up in a few different ways. First, I get the sense that during his time off Tiger was not playing a whole lot of golf. Obviously I don’t know this for sure, but I remember all of the reports that came out when he was first seen at a range again, and I assume that this means he took some time off. Now, people will argue that he took time off for injuries before and never stopped winning, but those breaks are very different than this most recent one. When Tiger missed time due to his knees he was very open about spending hours on end chipping and putting. As you know, you can get around with nothing but a hot short game, but if the flatstick is off you have no hope. Secondly, I think that missing the Florida tournaments in particular really hurt his confidence. He had won an event (either Doral or Bay Hill) every year from 2001-2009 except for 2004. Golf is a sport built on confidence, and even the worlds best fight demons regularly. Crash Davis all taught us the lesson about streaks and superstitions, and I think it has some play in this situation. I want to agree with a previous commenter that this year might just end up being a wash. Obviously this is not what he wants, but it may not be the worst thing to happen to him. He hasn’t had a full offseason to prepare in a few years now, and with a relaxed November and December filled with golf I’d be willing to bet that a strong 2011 will follow. It also is important to note that he was not comfortable on the greens at either Pebble or St Andrews. He openly expressed his distaste for the Poa greens at the US Open and then the speed, or lack there of, at the Open. He has dominated at these courses before, but the setups have changed and maybe greenskeepers have finally found ways to “Tiger proof” their courses by making subtle changes to the greens. I have no idea what will happen, but I do not think writing him off would be wise. I’d wait until this time next year to make any decisions like that.
Tiger had a huge advantage as he was taking Performance Enhancing Drugs.
Remember, his drug doctor was busted recently?
So, these drugs helped him win and at the same time these drugs are known to vastly increase sex drive. Huge increases in Testosterone you know?
Now, Tiger is probably (who knows for sure?) off the PED’s for now. He looks old and haggard, interesting isn’t it?
He’s balding too, do steroids contribute to balding? Duhhhhhh!!!!!!!!!
[...] See the original post here: Joe Posnanski » Blog Archive » Writing Off Tiger [...]
@11&27–Tyson is the perfect parallel here…and you’re both right, he was supposed to be invincible and after the Douglas fight he was never the same. I remember me and my buddies saying Lennox Lewis was going to kill him…Lewis wasn’t even a knockout boxer, but we were scared for the formerly baddest man on the planet.
As far as Tiger, scandal or not, we all get old. Will he get the major record? Not so sure, but he might be the last person ever with a chance to catch Nicklaus.
Great article as always Joe. Some comments:
1) I believe Tiger won the 2000 US Open by 15 shots (he was -12, next was +3)
2) Why is no one asking Tiger about PEDs (as #30 mentioned)? You’ve got a doctor charged with bringing them into the US illegally. Who was receiving them? Probably a bigger worry for Tiger than his marriage, since he’s been able to seek comfort with female companionship. Does the media still conside Tiger a sacred cow?
3) A better comparison to Tiger may be Wayne Gretzky. Thoroughly dominant until injuries and Mario Lemieux overtook him for best hockey player. Became ‘just aonther center’, which makes me sad typing it. Never won a Stanley Cup after leaving Edmonton.
4) Mentioned this last Tiger post, but Tiger may realize he could quit now and have more people regard him as the greatest ever (including me) than if he presses on and has more seasons like this one.
5) Will he put in the effort a la Vijay Singh to remain on top? Does he love golf as much as Tom Watson? I find myself saying no, which I would not have say 5 years ago.
Losing father, losing wife, losing kids most of the time, losing his coach, losing face, probably having to move, and then add serious injuries, lack of quality play/practice time, and the cumulative level of stress eventually catches up to you–his Perfect Storm.
That being said, none of the golfers preceding him put the time, energy, or discipline into conditioning themselves as he has, so I believe that once he gets this year behind him and returns to a more normal routine–for him, we will see Tiger dominate for another 8-10 years.
Personally, I don’t care much for the guy–he clearly is not in the Jack/Gary/Arnold/Tom class as a human being, but having been a pro tennis player who had to switch to golf due to injury, I have appreciated his talent and accomplishments, and expect we will get to see more.
“… he was never really a Sunday threat to win either …” Joe, thank you for this. While this seemed so blindingly obvious to me in watching the first two Majors of the year, you’re the first person in any sort of media I’ve seen say this publicly. I suppose when we see yesterdays final round TV ratings this morning, the reason it doesn’t come up on the broadcast’s will be obvious, but it doesn’t really excuse the analytical oversight on other platforms.
The reason I think folks should be writing off Tiger is the knee. I just think it’s unlikely to allow him to perform at the level he’d have to perform over the period of time he’d have to perform that well to win five more majors after two surgeries.
[...] to capture even a semblance of his former dominance appears fleeting at this point – and Joe Posnanski wrote a great piece about it last night – he is still playing. And he still looks the same, even if we all can see that his game is [...]
Two responses:
1) Less than two years ago, Tiger Woods underwent major surgery on his left knee. While he’s played good golf since then, two years is a short time for such a major surgery, especially with his additional time off due to personal troubles. Let’s give the man a good 10 or 20 tournaments before we write off the guy with an absurd winning percentage in golf. Even if he wins at less than half the rate he used to (say 10%), he’ll still take the all-time lead in victories and have a great chance to pass Jack.
2) I wouldn’t put a lot of stock in age trends in 2010 and beyond. Tiger is going to turn 35, but with his conditioning and fitness and modern treatments, he could play like he’s 30 for another 10 years.
If at the end of 2011, he still hasn’t won a major, let’s revisit this discussion then. Until then, this discussion is premature.
[...] to capture even a semblance of his former dominance appears fleeting at this point – and Joe Posnanski wrote a great piece about it last night – he is still playing. And he still looks the same, even if we all can see that his game is [...]
Shawn wrote:
I’m not exactly sure how you can say Tiger’s putting is a result of his age. With age, you certainly lose distance, you eventually lose accuracy. Your putting is last to go
***************************
I’m not much of a golfer, but I’ve watched it for close to 40 years. Over that time, it seems that putting — nerves, touch and feel — is the *first* to go. At least in some way that ends up mattering.
Tiger needs to win 5 more to pass Jack. As of now he’s won 4 in the last five years (or 6 in the last five years+4 months). IOW, in a period that still should have been his prime, he barely won to the extent that he needs to do now that he’s exiting his prime.
The thing that sets apart the greats is often how well they age. Sure, we see a hot young hitter in baseball like Ken Griffey Jr, and think he has a shot to pass Hank Aaron. But then as Griffey gets into his 30s you look back at Aaron’s numbers and realize he hit 201 homers from his age 36 season to the end of his career.
And now with Tiger we are also reminded that Jack got to 18 majors not just because he was a fine young golfer, but he also was a pretty darn good old golfer.
I thought it was quite refreshing to see headlines that read “Oosthuizen Wins” instead of “Tiger Loses.”
Appears the press — if even slowly — is starting to realize that Woods is not always the entire story any longer.
What does “writing off” Tiger mean, anyway?
Even Tiger’s (relatively) few detractors are NOT saying Tiger is completely washed up and ought to pack it in! NOBODY is saying, “Tiger stinks, and will never win another tournament.”
Rather, the people accused of “writing off” Tiger are suggesting that, while he’s still very good, probably STILL the best single player in the world when healthy, he’s no longer the player who used to intimidate the rest of the field.
There’s no reason he can’t win more tournaments- indeed, I EXPECT him to. There’s no reason he can’t win more majors- I EXPECT him to. And nobody is saying he CAN”T still pass Jack Nicklaus’ record for career majors- but very few of us are SURE he will, any more. Two years ago, I was absoluely certain Tiger would not only eclipse Nicklaus’ record but SHATTER it. Now? I think he’ll need a little luck even to TIE the record.
That’s not “writing him off.” That’s saying Tiger is still damn good, but he’s no longer uniquely good.
That was Joe’s point. Joe said that people have thusfar only said that Tiger has lost the intimidation factor, but what they should be doing is writing him off completely.
“Michael Jordan faded.”
H’m. Not so sure about this. MJ faded? More like got stupid and came to play for the team he owned. When he hit the shot to put away the Jazz, he was still the best player in the game, the greatest ever.
Robert- maybe that WAS Joe’s point, but my point was simply that precious few people are writing him off even to the small degree that I did!
In most sports blogs and chat sites I’ve seen, almost EVERYBODY expects Tiger not just to persist for several more years at a fairly high level (my take), but to return to utter dominance. Michael Rosenberg doesn’t spell out EXACTLY what he expects, but I infer he’s one of those who still expects Tiger to mount another charge, to win a bunch of big tournaments, and shut up those of us who doubt he’ll ever again be the Tiger of old.
Now, is he playing horribly? Only by his own standards. Obviously, if it were, oh, Justin Leonard who’d finished 4th at two majors and 23rd at the British Open, most of us would be saying that Justin was “quietly having a great season.”
Even so, there are FAR too many people saying silly things like, “Tiger is fine- if he just starts putting well again, he’ll be back on top.” They say that as if it’s a SMALL thing! In reality, putting is HUGE!
Poster #26 is just one example of the peopl who think this way. He figures, as MANY casual fans do, that putting skills are the last thing that should diminish as a golfer ages. That SOUNDS so logical. You’d THINK that, as a golfer ages, his drives would get weaker, but his short game would remain strong. But that’s NOT how it works. The short game is typically the first thing to go.
I know, it’s completely counterintuitive. But guys who can still hit long drives at 50 find that they can’t sink relatively easy putts consistently. Go figure.
So, saying “Tiger will be fine once he starts sinking his putts again” is a lot like saying “That aging pitcher will be just fine once he gets his velocity back.”
I don’t know much about this but I wonder…???
What part of Tiger’s excellence on the golf course was aided or disrupted by his extreme
off the course sex/party life?
Did his off-hours behavior give him the self-confidence to some degree that he needs when standing over a 12 footer for par? (I don’t know – just wondering…)
Or, is he back to his old off-hours habits now that Elin and the 2 kids are totally gone? I rather doubt it but there will always be more women waiting for their 15 minutes of fame if Tiger is willing to go that route.
Anyway – How does this all fit into Tiger’s golf game? It surely must to some degree…
I second Steve C at #15. Tiger’s C.V. is basically a list of unprecedented accomplishments. We’ll see what happens, but “it’s never been done before” is not the most compelling argument vis-a-vis Tiger.
Major takeaway from this article:
The only one out there who can keep Tiger from tying or beating Jack’s record is Woods himself.
Joe,
When it comes to Tiger Woods, it always has been more about us than about him.
Woods didn’t build up the image of golf hero, husband and father…we did it for him. His error was letting us do that knowing what the inevitable outcome had to be.
Now, as the gift begins to fade and the downside of a fabulous career begins, WE refuse to let go of the once in a lifetime golfer named Tiger. And he, not learning from his mistake in the past, continues to allow us to do it.
He is always “almost there” and “need to get more consistent”. The greens are too bumpy, too slow or whatever suits the scribes scribbling to fill the newsprint, web sites and the Golf Channel.
The great ones, except for Koufax, only learn it’s over long after everyone else knows.
Will Woods win again? Probably. The Tiger we knew, however, has left the clubhouse.
Time ain’t gonna cure you
Honey, time don’t give a sh!t.
I don’t think we should write Tiger off. I won’t write him off when he’s the same age Tom Watson was last year, because the man is just so talented that you never say he can’t do something on a golf course.
He probably is past his prime, though. I doubt he’ll ever play like he did a few years ago, never do crazy stuff like win four majors in a row, again. He’ll still have his moments of greatness and he’ll probably contend for the No. 1 spot in the world rankings for the next 10 years, because his pride will motivate him to do so.
It’s going to be close on the majors, though. I’m sure he’ll win another, but I don’t know if he’ll win five more. Maybe he gets to 18, and then has his Tom Watson moment well into his 50s, and by that time we’ve all forgiven his transgressions and pull for him to win just one more.
You could have said the same thing about Andre Agassi. Tiger may be struggling right now, but he’s still better than everyone else.
Great. Until the ultra-redundant-cliche last line.
Could you think about just telling the story and let people NOT confront the scary Aesop Joe?
[...] 4) Tiger is not underestimated. He’s overestimated. [...]
Hard to shoot a slingshot when you’re wrist-deep in escorts.
@55 JerBear50…are we talking literally or figuratively?
Beyond even his amazing golf talents, Tiger’s greatest asset was his mental strength. His resolve and confidence were impeccable. He was an unstoppable force.
He could stare down anybody. And did.
Now, the invicibility has been compromised, and I don’t think it has as much to do with his age as it does with his loss of mental control and the ability to intimidate. Because of the public humiliation he brought upon himself, he has lost the ability to look someone down. His aura of invincibilty is broken, most likely for good. For the first time in his career, Tiger knows what doubts are. That must suck for him.
Really enjoyed the Watson reminiscing. As a very young sports fan in the late 70s/early 80s, I vividly remember the impression that Watson was THE best golfer and Nicklaus was the guy he had surpassed, kind of like Borg and McEnroe had surpassed Connors at the time. Sometimes, seeing the later legacy of Nicklaus so much greater than Watson, I’ve wondered if my impression at the time was just off. I see now that it wasn’t.
Great article Joe!
Tiger has indeed fallen from his “god” status. And he does look merely mortal now on the golf course.
Thanks for making this crystal clear with your article! I wouldn’t have seen it otherwise.
As a fellow buckeye, who was born in Cleveland (St. Lukes Hospital) and also lived in this area growing up (Lakewood), I’d like to see Jack keep his “title” of 18 majors.
[...] After the British Open, can we finally stop talking about Tiger? One popular columnist thinks it’s safe to move on. (Joe Posnanski) [...]
@EBH #30:
I thought “Tiger had a huge advantage as he was taking Performance Enhancing Drugs” was probably the stupidest thing I ever read on this blog. What POSSIBLE evidence do you have of that? Among other things to the contrary, Tiger has repeatedly called for, if not demanded, drug testing on the PGA Tour.
Then I read this:
“So, these drugs helped him win and at the same time these drugs are known to vastly increase sex drive.”
And at that point your first sentence was no longer the stupidest thing I ever read; this sentence is.
PEDs do NOT enhance your sex life in any way. In actual fact, one of the more common side effects is shrunken testicles (not to mention things like gynecomastia). Furthermore, the standard drug regimen after taking PEDs includes large amounts of testosterone because the PEDs have greatly reduced the amount in the body.
In other words, PEDs greatly REDUCE one’s sex drive — which, given Tiger’s apparently insatiable sexual appetite would indicate that he was not doing them.
Try sticking to actual facts next time.
The evidence is that Tiger’s doctor has been charged with providing steroids (Winstrol, HGH) to numerous athletes. For some reason Tiger cannot find a doctor in the U.S. as this one is from Canada.
Let’s face it, Tiger’s been caught cheating. Cheating on his wife and cheating the fans.
Steroids vastly increase the amount of testosterone in a man’s body, therefore the increased sex drive, muscle etc. The reason why the testes shrink is they’re no longer being used by the body to produce testosterone.
“Balding”? That’s a low blow, Joe. True, but still a low blow.
[...] the same guy, and he’s getting to an age where he’s likely to lose some of his game, as Joe P wrote a few weeks back. I’m not saying he’ll never win another one, but his odds at each event are [...]