This was what you said.

If you seriously think that you can hit more shots or play more shots than me....well, I don't know what to say.

If u don't think I can hit high hooks, low fades, punch wedges, buried sand shots or flop shots....well again, I don't know what to say.

You do realize that the one round we played together, I was less than 1 year removed from back surgery that had me layed up for 2 months? I was maybe playing my 4th or 5th round of golf in a 16 month span??

:mad:
:tro:

again i never said better , but if you took 100 people and asked them to vote , some of them may not know a thing about golf at all , i might get a few votes just based on distance and distance alone

i am admitting i need 6 shots , and , i am willing to play you with 6 shots whenever you would like. i myself an stuck behind a computer 10 hrs a day at work and play 1x a week so i won't have my "A" game either

So what you are saying is that Phil is more talented on the reasoning that a bunch of people who know nothing about golf might think he was based on a few shots?

Im not saying you ever said better. You just talked about being able to hit more shots and play more shots.

you think you can hit more and play more shots than me?

some people who are non-golfers may come to the conclusion that phil is more talented based on what the see on the course or on tv

i personally think phil has as much if not more talent than tiger

tiger has the abiltiy to hit all the shots under the biggest circumstances , today phil missed 2 putts on 15 and 17 that tiger never misses when he is tied for the lead or has the lead and NEEDS to make the putt - that is not talent , that is heart and all heart - he has the biggest heart in the majors when it counts , do you really think that if glover was tied with woods with 4 holes to play that woods would not have won?

you watch AM works scott , there are some horses that can do it in the AM as good if not better than some stakes horses and then they go across the street in the afternoon and they can't run a lick - why is that , the talent is there but maybe the heart is lacking when they get in the gate with 8 others?

:rolleyes: Oh wow....Look what happens when I stay away from the internet for a couple hours, serious INTERNET TOUGHNESS right here

:eek: :eek:

^^ John Daly Jr.:rolleyes:

I have to give props to both Ricky, and Duval. They both held it together much better than I thought they would. I thought Ricky would shoot about 81, or 82 in the 4th round. I thought Duval would shoot about a 75. Considering their results over the last 5-7 years,$559k is a lot of money for either of them to be making on this tour.

me personally no , you are a pro , but if you take 100 people off the side of the road some may be golfers some may not be golfers , and i hit shots and you hit shots -- will i really get no votes at all ,zero votes do you really believe that?

if you showed those same people results from tournaments , and you asked them to vote based on our results in those tournaments , there is no way i could ever get a vote , not 1 , not even a 1/2 a vote

no question - both played better than phil the last 4 holes!

You would defenitely get some votes. I know a decent player when I see it. I know you are better than what your handicap says. But you made it sound like you had all these shots in your game that your are capable of that I am not.:zz:

Okay I am one of the biggest Tiger fans out there, but enough is enough. Way to much coverage of him and wouldnt you know it, a long post interview while the others are still playing for the Cup. Interesting Stenson finishes 1 shot behind Tiger but they show how many of his shots today? None!
How many shots did they miss from Tiger today? None! I didnt feel like Tiger ever had a shot at this today.

Good for Danny Glover. Nice to see someone like him not fold under the pressure.

But this US Open will be remembered as the one Phil let slip away (broken record) and the one Tiger didnt have his A game in. A third story will be the nice comeback of David Duval. The golf media are very predictable.

They showed 1 of his shots...the putt he made for birdie on 18:)

Anyhoo....check out this crazy ass golf course Im playing in a couple weeks:zz: :zz:

http://www.tobaccoroadgolf.com/

I'd say more like 80 :D

Just kidding!

Gales, I'd say if you played in today's US Open Final Round and had a 9 shot lead heading into 16, you would have had a puncher's chance to hold on and win.

What is most frustrating when they completely neglect the shots of anyone but the top couple groups is that when they do actually show them you know they are going to make the shot. It takes all the excitement out of seeing someone hole a long fairway iron when you know it is coming.

Oh my bad, I did see that.
That is when he was declared the "Leader in the Clubhouse."

if i came off that way i apoligize , my whole point was to try to explain to lori that talent is subjective - and with phil and tiger the talent is there with both of them , they both have won a lot of tournaments , but we have seen phil miss two putts today in the last 4 holes of a major that he should have won ..... i have never seen tiger miss a putt in a similar situation, i can't ever remember him having a miss with a lead in major with under 4 holes to go from 6 ft and in ..... and those shots/putts have nothing to do with talent ..... so once we watch these tournaments and base our opinions of talent on these tournaments , whether we like it or not our opinion on who is more talented is flawed

agree - that's what the suits don't get , if you are always on tiger and the last group or groups and someone else does something and you have been watching the whole time and the cut to this guy all of a sudden , you know what coming ....... the ball is going in the hole , it's terrible really

In Phil's defense, at least he made putts early on that gave him a relaistic chance to blow the tournament, which he indeed did. Tiger putted so bad today and you cant say those werent "clutch putts". Thats BS. They all were. Had he made half of the 4 or 5 I saw him miss, the end result of the tournament may have been very different. And had he had the Eagle like he usually gets in the final round of majors he wins or at least gets very close to winning, I think he would have won. But he "made nothing" today. Call it what you will, but one might argue that Tiger choked as much as Phil did today.

I agree totally. Tiger had a great shot to put himself in the clubhouse at 2 or 3 under which would have totally changed the way those guys played down the stretch. And had he put himself in at 4 under he probably wins.

listen tiger fans whether they like it or not still have to come to grips that he hasn't won a major when not leading after 3 rounds

that being said he is 14/14 when he has the lead after 3 rounds in a major and that is probably the greatest achievement in golf in and of itself .....they all have lost with leads after 3 rounds - jones, hogan ,snead , nelson, palmer , nicklaus, trevino , player - tiger has never lost 14/14 is simply remarkable

True. And as the stigma of Phil blowing Majors on the last nine holes continues to grow, so too does the predictablitiy of Tiger Wood's game.
Hes either all or nothing which is why he is such a great frontrunner.

Reminds me of that damn horse who won yesterday's 8th at Belmont- Greenspirit. Give the horse an easy lead and hes damn near 100% sure to win. Tiger is to golf as what Greenspirit is to horse racing.

still some of his wins were closee timmy , he had an epic battle with bob may , bob really was never heard from again , i personally think tiger wore out duval , he beat dimarco in sudden death at the masters , so while he enjoyed some big wins on big leads , when he got looked in the eye he never let them pass him in deep stretch

Okay, so hes a lot better than Greenspirit.

Really though, the 2001 Masters and 2006 British are the only times he's faced a close lead through three rounds with big names right behind him and come out to shoot sub 70 and win the tournament. All the others were blowouts, facing overmatched golfers, or shooting in the 70s and still holding on to win. Only twice has he elevated his game in the final round when faced with adversity.

I dont think Tiger choked... he really doesnt have it in him to choke. But he putted horribly.. not just today but all week. Saturday I swear every hole he had a 8 to 25 ft birdie putt on every stinkin hole and he couldnt make a thing. It was strange...

The commentator (which annoys the hell out of me) made an interesting point, though it may have been 100% BS.. he said Tiger has a lot of trouble with slow greens and also when he has a speed down for the greens (in practice rounds) than the greens slow up (from all the rain), he has difficulty making adjustments (which was visible all week he was leaving putts short).

its still so funny that Tiger's "nothing" game leads to 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, place finishes in basically every event.

Tiger's "C" game is still in the top 5 of all golfers.

not only is this wrong, but what is it supposed to mean or prove? except nothing?

What exactly is wrong about it? And all it means is that Gales analogy that he's been looked in the eye by all these great golfers in the stretch and prevailed is really only true in two of his Majors.

SO the other 12 majors we can say he stared the whole field in the eye over 72 holes and just simply beat their asses into the ground:)

Yeah, pretty much 54 hole domination and then no one can catch him from behind on Sunday.

Anybody who thinks Tiger doesn't or can't choke never watched any of the like 37 Ryder Cup matches where he's completely come up empty in the clutch.

I just always think this "never won from behind" in a major is just the stupidest of all arguments.

A win, is a win, is a win. If someone were to ask Jack.."Hey Jack, what would you think about winning all 18 majors from on the lead or tied for the lead after 54 holes?"

I bet he would smile and say "I wish I would have won 19 majors that way"

Anyone that thinks that Tiger not winning a major from behind somehow diminishes his 14 majors or makes him less of a player is simply fooling themselves.

Completely different ballgame John. When you have to rely upon a partner in 4 out of the 5 matches during the Ryder Cup...it's completely different.

I think his singles record in the Ryder Cup speaks for itself though.

Ultimately it and a Grand Slam are the only things he has yet to accomplish. Tiger's legacy is stamped already as an all time great and likely the greatest of all time. But winning 16 more majors wouldn't do as much to elevate him to that next level of legendary status as a dramatic come from behind Sunday win would. That is what everyone is waiting for, the day Tiger goes from great to legendary.

So his body of work isn't complete until he wins one from behind? I don't see why it matters so much.

NT

Tiger is beyond legendary. Only player to hold all four modern major trophies at the same time.

So far he has been a mere mortal. People want to see him make that dramatic come from behind victory that puts him in demigod territory where currently only Michael Jordan resides.