U.S. Open

[SniperSB23]

Originally Posted by gales0678

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

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.

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by SniperSB23

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.

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

[SniperSB23]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

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.

[GPK]

Originally Posted by SniperSB23

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

[SniperSB23]

Originally Posted by GPK

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.

[slotdirt]

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.

[GPK]

Originally Posted by slotdirt

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.

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.

[GPK]

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.

[SniperSB23]

Originally Posted by GPK

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.

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.

[Antitrust32]

Ugh... I just had to look it up

all his wins:

'97 Masters - shoots 3 under in the final round (great golf)

'01 Masters - 4 under in final round (great golf)

'02 Masters- 1 under final round

'05 Masters - 1 under final round


Just want to point out that any score under even par is incredible on a Major Championship course... Tiger just makes it look easy.

Ok on to other ones..

'00 US Open - shot a 67 in final round (insane scoring)

'02 US Open - shot a 72 final round

08' US Open - shot a 73 final round with no ACL and two fractures (if that aint diggen down than nothing is)

PS... didnt put it as how many under par cause the par on each course is different and I dont feel like looking it up.

'00 British Open - 69 final round (great golf)

'05 British Open - 70 final round

'06 British Open - 67 final round (insane scoring)



'99 PGA - 72 final round

'00 PGA - 67 final round (just great golf right there)

'06 PGA - 68 final round (great golf)

'07 PGA - 69 final round (great golf)


Just wanted to point out again that breaking par in a Major is playing terrific. Also wanted to point out that a -2 on a par 70 course = a 68 and a -2 on a par 72 course = a 70 but they are both the same score.



He hasnt let anyone catch him from behind when he's in the lead because he posts numbers that no one else can even on their greatest round of golf.

Your comment "or shooting in the 70s and still holding on to win" was completely wrong. Unless you want to count last year when he had no ACL and two fractures in what I believe is his greatest golf accomplishment.

[SniperSB23]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

Ugh... I just had to look it up

all his wins:

'97 Masters - shoots 3 under in the final round (great golf)

'01 Masters - 4 under in final round (great golf)

'02 Masters- 1 under final round

'05 Masters - 1 under final round


Just want to point out that any score under even par is incredible on a Major Championship course... Tiger just makes it look easy.

Ok on to other ones..

'00 US Open - shot a 67 in final round (insane scoring)

'02 US Open - shot a 72 final round

08' US Open - shot a 73 final round with no ACL and two fractures (if that aint diggen down than nothing is)

PS... didnt put it as how many under par cause the par on each course is different and I dont feel like looking it up.

'00 British Open - 69 final round (great golf)

'05 British Open - 70 final round

'06 British Open - 67 final round (insane scoring)



'99 PGA - 72 final round

'00 PGA - 67 final round (just great golf right there)

'06 PGA - 68 final round (great golf)

'07 PGA - 69 final round (great golf)


Just wanted to point out again that breaking par in a Major is playing terrific. Also wanted to point out that a -2 on a par 70 course = a 68 and a -2 on a par 72 course = a 70 but they are both the same score.



He hasnt let anyone catch him from behind when he's in the lead because he posts numbers that no one else can even on their greatest round of golf.

Your comment "or shooting in the 70s and still holding on to win" was completely wrong. Unless you want to count last year when he had no ACL and two fractures in what I believe is his greatest golf accomplishment.

Please explain to me what I said wrong in my post. Everything I said is 100% true and is backed up by your data.

The shooting in the 70s and holding on to win was part of an 'or' statement which was also 100% true.