golfrewind.com

And just who the heck do you think you are MR.TIGEROVERJACK? Im sure thats what some have been asking since i started posting here Well anyways i just wanted to point out something that maybe many of you know or a few of you do not know. Im reading Byron Nelson's book The most remarkable year in the history of golf and in the end where it shows his entire season results i see his first win on his way to 11 was a two man team win. It was the Miami-Fourball where he teamed with McSapden to win the matchplay event. Now 11 has been accepted and i dont imagine that i will change this but i cannot seriously personally recognize this as part of a streak when he played with another golfer and beat other teams. Say Woods were to continue his streak up until say 9 or 10 and he and Furyk won the two man World Cup there is no way the fans or media would recognize this as an official win during the streak. I bought the book today and have been reading about this great golf season but i had to come on here and point out that it was 10 in a row as an individual and the first win of the streak was with a playing partner. Id love to hear your thoughts on this. Not much difference between 10 and 11 they are both big numbers but still no way i can recognize that first event the Miami-Fourball. Ill end with i have no ideal how the tour or fans or media would recognize in all fairness this first event with a matchplay team format? Thoughts please.

If that team event were considered as a win for Tiger if they won.
Then if they lost, it should be considered a loss for Tiger.

Wouldn't it be ironic if he won alot of events, had his streak broken by a team event, and then started another run.

In my opinion, the team event shouldn't mean anything to Tiger's streak whether they lose or win.

If the event were considered an official tournament at that time, then it should count. You have to think about the state of the Tour back then. VERY different. You cannot change records retrospectively based on your opinion that has been shaped by the Tour you now watch.
....if you want to look at a record that should be changed, look at Tigers consecutive cut streak. How many of those events DIDN'T EVEN HAVE A CUT? Ammending Tigers cut streak should happen way before Nelsons win streak...

It wouldnt matter to me if the tour had 4 people on it and they played a two man team event. Its just that a team event and should never be considered a win for an individual in a streak. Just my honest opinion.......in terms of the cut streak here is something to chew on regarding Nelson. I would say both Woods and Nelson if the tour wanted too could cut down on both streaks....Stats guru Sal Johnson claims that Lord Byron’s record is suspect.

“The PGA Tour of the 1940s was vastly different from the organization of today,” Sal says. “There is no complete record of PGA tournaments played during the l940s. A good guess would be that only 30 percent had 36-hole cuts. The fields tended to be small. Everybody who entered played 72 holes. So how can you compare Nelson to Nicklaus or Woods in terms of cuts made?”

Johnson went on to say that there was so little money available back then, and so few quality players, that prize money was commonly awarded only to the top 20 finishers. Where does this put the Tour’s policy of receive-a-check, made-a-cut? Many made a cut without receiving a check.

Moreover, Byron’s streak included many four-ball tournaments, in which Nelson played with his good friend Harold “Jug” McSpaden. Those cuts counted?

These fourball events shouldnt be counted as individual or consecutive cuts. Its my belief he has 10 wins and far less cuts made.

With all due respect to "stats guru Sal Johnson"..whoever the heck he is, Lord Byron says he cashed (yes that's top 20) in 113 straight. The lack of money in golf and paying only the Top 20 had absolutely nothing to do with the number of good players back then, BTW. Nelson also said that Tiger is the best he's ever seen, both physically and mentally.

Hey i love Lord Byron probably the greatest gentleman in the game of golf ever. My thread is about one thing and thats a Miami Fourball event i think should not count as a individual victory. Nothing more.

Oh, then all of that stuff you posted about what Sal Johnson(who ?) thinks of Nelson's streak was some sort of typo ?

Waz very funny stuff. No someone mentioned that streak and i came across that quote. Beyond that quote his streak was against smaller fields so to me Woods' streak was more impressive. No offense Lord Byron.

I think it's one of those things where context matters. Since he's won 10, why not give him credit for the 11th? If he wins 8, loses a team event, and then wins 2 more, would it be considered 10 in a row in the annals of history? My guess is yes. People love celebrating the positive and so they look at things like this in the most favorable light possible. Is it fair? Who knows.

Just my $0.02.

Maybe "Sal" can help us out identifying all of those scrubs... him being such a "guru" & all.

Hard to belive you would think this way.

Last night TGC was trying to give him credit for twelve. Hard to believe that you would try to rerwrite history.

I'm sure you are a nice guy, but wondering who you are isn't on my list of things to do.

For everything I have read, the streak was 11. Which is exactly 11 more than I have ever won.

get outta here ! MINE TOO, hahaha

If you win an event at anytime in which you do so with another player it should not count imo in an INDIVIDUAL streak.

I once won two scrambles and a junior club championship that I played in consecutively...but alas, two were "unofficial team events" and I cannot count them toward my win streak.