A couple of weeks ago, Y.E. Yang stared down the Tiger.
This week, it was Heath Slocum. Slocum has a 20 foot putt, and drains it. Tiger has a seven foot putt, and blows it by the hole. Slocum wins.
Is the era of the Tiger coming to an end?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Tiger Woods' domination has been so total that its continuation, to the same degree, seems inconceivable -- as it has for several years. In 2009, however, he has won five tournaments and is the PGA leader in scoring average and in money won (which is an important stat because the big-purse events attract the toughest competition).
ReplyDeleteAll this while coming off a layoff of several months.
His apparent shortcomings, in 2009, are his failure to win a major and his two recent second-place finishes.
To place those in context, I think we should recognize the role of chance, both in the way the ball bounces and in the intangible constellation of mental and physical functioning that puts one in or out of "the zone" for no discernible reason. Thus, if one shoots 276 in a tournament, I would speculate that this includes a "margin of error" of perhaps four strokes; so he could just as easily have shot 272 -- or 280. I think that explains Tiger's second-place finishes better any hypothesis of a choke, fatigue, or loss of concentration (not that you have suggested any of those). By the same token, I think many of his past victories could just as easily have been second- or third-place finishes.
I know that this random or margin-of-error interpretation makes a less compelling story line than believing in choking, momentum or "whoever wants it best" (again, I'm not attributing any of those interpretations to you). Sometimes, we spectators can see a golfer's game clearly deteriorate at the end, under pressure. More often, I believe, he or she merely reveals that golf is, at best, only 99 per cent skill.
Bottom line: Tiger is unlikely to totally dominate the game -- and always has been!
Ron C
ps: Basketball offers an analogy. Empirical studies of the percentage of successful shots from the field have shown no correlation with the shooter's immediately previous success. Thus, the strategy of passing to the player with the "hot hand" is based on superstition or misconception. That player's probability of sinking his next shot is about equal to his season average.
r
I agree Ron with your take on Tiger.
ReplyDeleteBig question: Does he win 4 more majors and catch Jack?
The winning of major tournaments is, by a consensus unmatched in any other sport, the ultimate measure of career achievement among American golfers. Catching Jack has been defined as Tiger's ultimate test, by the American media for many years. I don't think Tiger has ever suggested that he does not accept that as the gold standard of a golfing career. I suspect that the events -- surgery, second-place finishes -- of the past two years have emphasized to him that catching Jack is not the slam-dunk that his boosters may have imagined. I predict that Tiger will further narrow his focus (already, he plays fewer events than many top golfers) in a concerted effort to win 18 majors before age 35. Of course, he's only one of three factors -- the others being his opponents and chance. I'd bet he does it and I'll address this as a Las Vegas oddsmaker might:
ReplyDeleteOdds that Tiger will win at least 18 majors in his lifetime: 5/4.
Over-under of the age at which he will win his 18th (ie, even-money bet as to whether he wins 18 by this age: Before 36th birthday.
I wonder whether there is a Las Vegas line on this?
Ron