• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

2019 Masters Thread

PhDeac said:
Can’t believe he didn’t list David Duval.
Click to expand...

Duval is a very strange guy. He was a great player for like 3-4 years and got to #1 for a short while. Then he won the Open and fell apart. It was usually painful to watch him after that.
 
cville deac said:
Duval is a very strange guy. He was a great player for like 3-4 years and got to #1 for a short while. Then he won the Open and fell apart. It was usually painful to watch him after that.
Click to expand...

Sort of similar to Curtis. He was world #1, won back to back Opens, and was never the same player after that.
 
Shorty said:
I'm not trying to be difficult, but what's your point?
Click to expand...

that the equipment matters but less than people think. a lot of the current tech was a result of the rise of tiger and surge in interest in golf. i don't think we should be knocking Tiger for having as much advantage via equipment
 
ImTheCaptain said:
i bet tiger learned to play with persimmon woods. I know I did and i'm 8 years younger.
Click to expand...

I'm sure he probably did, but the equipment makes a huge difference. If Jack played today, would he still have as big advantage being long and straight since today's equipment is much easier to hit long (especially) and straight? Would Jack have as big an advantage with his ability to hit his mid and long irons so much higher than everybody else since we have hybrid technology now? By the same token, with Tiger struggling to hit his driver straight with even today's technology and golf balls that curve much less, would he be able to hit it in play enough to be the player he is today? Great players adjust, I think Jack Nicklaus would've been great today and Tiger would've been great then, it's really just a matter of how great they would be. Appreciate Jack for winning 18 professional majors, finishing top 3 in 47 other majors, against some of the true legends of the game and being a great sportsman and family man through it all. Appreciate Tiger for playing the game relative to his peers at a level never seen before, winning 4 in a row and now winning a major in a third different decade, and rebuilding his game and reputation after a great fall physically and personally.
 
Shorty said:
No shit. Anyone who says equipment doesn't matter isn't a golfer today, knows nothing about golf today, and clearly wasn't a golfer forty years ago.
Click to expand...

How about the courses? How do the courses compare now to 40 years ago? I'm guessing there has been somewhat similar evolution to equipment.
 
could Jack have rebuilt his game from the same physical and mental lows that Tiger fell back to being able to win a Masters is another question
 
WFcatamount22 said:
Real question we should be asking ourselves is if Tiger is the most iconic sports figure in the history of sport? I think I would put him at two, behind Jordan and slightly ahead of Brady and Ali.
Click to expand...

Brady? LOL. He isn't even in a global Top 10.

Tiger is a global icon, but let's keep in mind that globally Tennis is a bigger sport than Golf and that Soccer is the biggest of them all. Ronaldo and Messi are both more iconic than Tiger. And while this isn't true in the US, Federer is pretty damn iconic himself. And then you have to go on and discuss history - the Ali's, Jordan's, Lebron's, Pele's, Ruth's, Maradona's, etc. would all have a lot to say.
 
PhDeac said:
How about the courses? How do the courses compare now to 40 years ago? I'm guessing there has been somewhat similar evolution to equipment.
Click to expand...

The game is definitely different today. That being said part of the reason Tiger has five Masters is he can spray the shit out of the ball with his drive and not always suffer dire consequences for it because the course really has no rought. There is only one course where driving distance equates to lower scores by definition (something Michelson tweeted out earlier this week via a study some consulting group or another did). And that's Augusta.
 
DeacMan said:
Brady? LOL. He isn't even in a global Top 10.

Tiger is a global icon, but let's keep in mind that globally Tennis is a bigger sport than Golf and that Soccer is the biggest of them all. Ronaldo and Messi are both more iconic than Tiger. And while this isn't true in the US, Federer is pretty damn iconic himself. And then you have to go on and discuss history - the Ali's, Jordan's, Lebron's, Pele's, Ruth's, Maradona's, etc. would all have a lot to say.
Click to expand...

America is the global hub for world culture. If you are not relevant in the US then you are not the most iconic sports figure in the world.
 
liveanddiedeac said:
I'm sure he probably did, but the equipment makes a huge difference. If Jack played today, would he still have as big advantage being long and straight since today's equipment is much easier to hit long (especially) and straight? Would Jack have as big an advantage with his ability to hit his mid and long irons so much higher than everybody else since we have hybrid technology now? By the same token, with Tiger struggling to hit his driver straight with even today's technology and golf balls that curve much less, would he be able to hit it in play enough to be the player he is today? Great players adjust, I think Jack Nicklaus would've been great today and Tiger would've been great then, it's really just a matter of how great they would be. Appreciate Jack for winning 18 professional majors, finishing top 3 in 47 other majors, against some of the true legends of the game and being a great sportsman and family man through it all. Appreciate Tiger for playing the game relative to his peers at a level never seen before, winning 4 in a row and now winning a major in a third different decade, and rebuilding his game and reputation after a great fall physically and personally.
Click to expand...

Umm golf balls curve less now then older balls? I don't think that is true, having high spin velocities is a good thing for dual core performance balls.
 
WFcatamount22 said:
America is the global hub for world culture. If you are not relevant in the US then you are not the most iconic sports figure in the world.
Click to expand...

Yeah, which is why Ronaldo has 30 million more followers on one of his social media pages than any other athlete has on one of their's on earth (and that next athlete is Leo Messi). It likely also explains how Ronaldo has the largest single endorsement deal in history (estimated at over $1 billion for life). And that probably also explains how Roger Federer earned more from endorsements in 2018 than any other athlete on earth too. But do go on.
 
ImTheCaptain said:
that the equipment matters but less than people think. a lot of the current tech was a result of the rise of tiger and surge in interest in golf. i don't think we should be knocking Tiger for having as much advantage via equipment
Click to expand...

Nobody is knocking Tiger for having an equipment advantage. Every golfer today has the same advantage. But as someone who played blade irons and balatta balls in the 70s and 80s, I can tell you, the difference in equipment between then and now is huge. And I actually think that difference is bigger than people realize. The fact that I can play my dad's club at age 58 and hit three fewer clubs into par fours than I did at age 20 is evidence of that to me.

in 1975, the thirteenth at ANGC was 465 yards. And some players laid up. That hole is now a 510-yard forced carry and no one lays up, even the shortest hitters. Unless they hit it in a bad spot off the tee. It's basically a par 4.
 
DeacMan said:
Yeah, which is why Ronaldo has 30 million more followers on one of his social media pages than any other athlete has on one of their's on earth (and that next athlete is Leo Messi). It likely also explains how Ronaldo has the largest single endorsement deal in history (estimated at over $1 billion for life). And that probably also explains how Roger Federer earned more from endorsements in 2018 than any other athlete on earth too. But do go on.
Click to expand...

that doesn't really counter his point. to be a worldwide icon you have to be a worldwide icon
 
well then lol if you don't think Messi or Ronaldo are iconic in the United States
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top