the biggest difference between Tiger and Scott(and everyone else) is what's upstairs and not so much the swing.
I don't agree with that.
I think Tiger is a better player and that's the big difference.
He might be mentally stronger, but it's not so difficult to be mentally stronger if you can play poorly for round but are still good enough to beat the other players.
Well, that goes without saying. The comparisons that were being made between he and Tiger 3-4 years ago were only regarding swing and physique.
But, realistically, how can you fault ANY player who tries and mold his game around the game of the best player?
if you didn't have the availability of instant replay to see the differences, they would still look very similar.
if i had the physical ability, i certainly would try to mold my swing around him also.
I don't agree with that.
I think Tiger is a better player and that's the big difference.
He might be mentally stronger, but it's not so difficult to be mentally stronger if you can play poorly for round but are still good enough to beat the other players.
and why is he a better player, sheer talent(maybe), stonger?
it's not that he's just mentally stronger, it that he has the brains to understand what he has to do to win, whether to tweek his swing or how to play that particular course and the determination to get it done.
and why is he a better player, sheer talent(maybe), stonger?
it's not that he's just mentally stronger, it that he has the brains to understand what he has to do to win, whether to tweek his swing or how to play that particular course and the determination to get it done.
If you get him to hit a 3 iron from the fairway, and any other player to do the same 10 times, Tiger will likely be closer the majority of times.
Do it with a 7 iron, and it is the same result.
He has more talent to hit the same shot consistantly. Add to that he had more shots, not meaning other players can play those other shots, just that he is really top class at a variety of shots.
In every area of the game, he is one of the best. He has the 2nd best short game, is one of the better putters, the best long iron player, probably one of the best if not the best short to mid iron player, and he hits it long as well.
If you have all that, it makes it easy. Harrington had a lead at St. Andrews and was able to coast home similar to Tiger. I think if he had Tiger's game, he would be just as mentally strong, because he can hold a lead also.
The difference is Tiger can get the lead far easier than anyone else.
If you get him to hit a 3 iron from the fairway, and any other player to do the same 10 times, Tiger will likely be closer the majority of times.
Do it with a 7 iron, and it is the same result.
He has more talent to hit the same shot consistantly. Add to that he had more shots, not meaning other players can play those other shots, just that he is really top class at a variety of shots.
In every area of the game, he is one of the best. He has the 2nd best short game, is one of the better putters, the best long iron player, probably one of the best if not the best short to mid iron player, and he hits it long as well.
If you have all that, it makes it easy. Harrington had a lead at St. Andrews and was able to coast home similar to Tiger. I think if he had Tiger's game, he would be just as mentally strong, because he can hold a lead also.
The difference is Tiger can get the lead far easier than anyone else.
The fact that he's ranked #4 doesn't necessarily mean that there are only 3 players more likely to win majors than he is. It just means that he's accumulated enough world ranking points to be #4 in the world. And world ranking points obviously emcompass events that ARE NOT majors.
Also, prediction for who will win a majors is not only based upon your world ranking; it also includes past performance at majors, how the player is performing as of late, mental toughness, etc.
October 10th, 2006, 11:19 AM
Linear Mode
Similar Threads
