I wasn't saying it was better or more dominant than those. In fact no one was, you brought those up. I'm saying that "a nice win by a young guy" is not at all close to describing what this was.WayBackVazquez said:I guess we'll just disagree. Scoring records don't mean much to me when the entire field is eating it up. Courses and conditions change. Justin Rose and Phil are going to have Top 5 scores alltime. He's nowhere close to the record against the field average, winning margin etc. It just doesn't seems comparable to what Rory did at Congressional or what Tiger did.
Rory himself seems to view it as comparableWayBackVazquez said:I guess we'll just disagree. Scoring records don't mean much to me when the entire field is eating it up. Courses and conditions change. Justin Rose and Phil are going to have Top 5 scores alltime. He's nowhere close to the record against the field average, winning margin etc. It just doesn't seems comparable to what Rory did at Congressional or what Tiger did.
LOL, okay. You guys win, this is one of the greatest sports performances EVAR.twibnotes said:Rory himself seems to view it as comparable
Who came close last year and has taken the further step.WayBackVazquez said:It's a nice win by a young guy, but that's about it. It's not like Tiger winning this tournament by 12, or Rory winning the U.S. Open by 8. He's the winner when the course was playing its easiest in history.
twibnotes said:Rory himself seems to view it as comparable
Said exactly no one in this thread.WayBackVazquez said:LOL, okay. You guys win, this is one of the greatest sports performances EVAR.
Yeah, I'll repeat it. It's a nice win, by a young guy, but is nowhere near is impressive, dominant, or momentous as Tiger or Rory's first major.The Four Peters said:Said exactly no one in this thread.
You're the one who made the ridiculous statement trying to downplay this from a comparison no one made. Own it and move on, it's ok.
Yes Tiger's win was absolutely more dominant. So was Rory's at Congressional for sure.RedOctober3829 said:WBV is right. Spieth was great this week but the course played much easier than normal. Tiger in 97 was much more dominant.
It didn't just play easy for him. It played easy for everyone and he led wire to wire. I don't know where it stands historically, but it's incredibly impressive.RedOctober3829 said:WBV is right. Spieth was great this week but the course played much easier than normal. Tiger in 97 was much more dominant.
And I'll repeat, it's a hell of a lot more than a nice win by a young guy, and it's definitely not as dominant as those wins. As exactly zero people have said that I saw.WayBackVazquez said:Yeah, I'll repeat it. It's a nice win, by a young guy, but is nowhere near is impressive, dominant, or momentous as Tiger or Rory's first major.
The "nowhere near" rhetoric is what seems silly.WayBackVazquez said:Yeah, I'll repeat it. It's a nice win, by a young guy, but is nowhere near is impressive, dominant, or momentous as Tiger or Rory's first major.
It's disappointing Spieth is getting all the attention, really.Lupe Whalewatch said:But bones Popped out of Tigers wrist?!?!?!
When Tiger shot this score at a slightly younger age, he won by 12 strokes. There were ELEVEN players closer than that to Spieth. That's nowhere near in my book.twibnotes said:The "nowhere near" rhetoric is what seems silly.
That's fair, and golf is not my area of sports expertise...but, isn't there more talent, including good young talent from all around the world, now vs then?WayBackVazquez said:When Tiger shot this score at a slightly younger age, he won by 12 strokes. There were TEN players closer than that to Spieth. That's nowhere near in my book.
She knows she is getting voted of the island very soon.The Four Peters said:Haha the girlfriend got a cursory hug there.
Which also means there was a lot more pressure on Jordan to actually perform.WayBackVazquez said:When Tiger shot this score at a slightly younger age, he won by 12 strokes. There were ELEVEN players closer than that to Spieth. That's nowhere near in my book.
So the closer the margin, the more impressive it is. I think I'm starting to get it.LogansDad said:Which also means there was a lot more pressure on Jordan to actually perform.
Spieth just tied the course record. Last I checked, there is no defense in golfWayBackVazquez said:So the closer the margin, the more impressive it is. I think I'm starting to get it.
twibnotes said:Spieth just tied the course record. Last I checked, there is no defense in golf
bball831 said:Why does Jim Nantz get congratulated?
Yeah man, home runs count the same in Colorado as San Francisco, and a win's a win in the 100-meter. But nobody's confusing Dante Bichette with Barry Bonds, and you don't get a world record when there's a 5m/s tailwind.twibnotes said:Spieth just tied the course record. Last I checked, there is no defense in golf
And do you think the other golfers today are the same as when tiger played against when 21?WayBackVazquez said:Yeah man, home runs count the same in Colorado as San Francisco, and a win's a win in the 100-meter. But nobody's confusing Dante Bichette with Barry Bonds, and you don't get a world record when there's a 5m/s tailwind.
If you're suggesting they're 8 shots better, you're insane. And you'd better tell everyone here who has just expressed the idea that Jack Nicklaus was better than Tiger that they're way off because the quality of golf in the 60s was so much worse than the 2000s.twibnotes said:And do you think the other golfers today are the same as when tiger played?
You didn't just say spieth's accomplishment was fell behind those of Mcilroy and woods. You said it wasn't comparable..."nowhere near."WayBackVazquez said:If you're suggesting they're 8 shots better, you're insane. And you'd better tell everyone here who has just expressed the idea that Jack Nicklaus was better than Tiger that they're way off because the quality of golf in the 60s was so much worse than the 2000s.
Not to mention than dominant means dominant.
Deathofthebambino said:Spieth had 3 bogeys and a double today and still shot 70. If he does just that again tomorrow, Rose would have to shoot 66 to tie him, and 65 to beat him. Subtract one each for Phil.
The thing is I think Augusta doesn't have it's teeth this year, so as long as you keep the ball in play, the par 5's are playing relatively easy with the greens being a bit soft. There are a lot of birdies to be made, so he can afford to make some mistakes and as long as he makes some birdies, it's hard to catch him. It's not like when Augusta's greens are like cement and it's incredibly hard to make any birdies so if you go backwards, it's hard to go forward again.
I'll certainly be tuning in, but I think it's going to have to be an epic collapse for him to lose this tomorrow. Which would be kind of sad to see on some level. Would love to see a 3-4 person horse race coming down the stretch though.
Plus, he has a reputation as a cheater in his early years.doldmoose34 said:Fucking Nantz, Crenshaw was a great player but same class as Arnie and Jack? I don't think so
It is nowhere near. He won by four strokes. mcIlroy won the U.S. open by eight, Tiger won the Masters by 12. You're now attempting to make moronic assertions that it may be different because golfers now are much better than they were in 1997. Putting aside the fact that one of the guys who was within 4 of Spieth is 44 years old, and a 58 year-old just finished the tournament at -2. The course played easy. When courses play easier than they ever have, you often get tournament records.twibnotes said:You didn't just say spieth's accomplishment was fell behind those of Mcilroy and woods. You said it wasn't comparable..."nowhere near."
Kid's 21 and tied the course record. He led wire to wire. The excitement is justified.
If buchholz throws a no hitter tonight, no one in the game thread is going to start talking about how Nolan Ryan threw way more no hitters.
What kind, like using "hand irons"?Average Reds said:Plus, he has a reputation as a cheater in his early years.
The allegations from his college days were very similar to what is said about Patrick Reed's college days today.Al Zarilla said:What kind, like using "hand irons"?
Agreed and said in much fewer words.Zomp said:Yeah at this point I don't even know what people are arguing. How good the win was? I think, given his age, its a top 10 major performance of the past 50 years. To me, that's more than a nice win.
If you really went and looked at them, I wonder whether you'd think so. Forget all the ones you can think of your head, like Tiger's first, last, Rory's first, Jack's last...there are going to be so many 1978 Masters' type tourneys that will change your mind. And lord, the 2000 US Open.Zomp said:Yeah at this point I don't even know what people are arguing. How good the win was? I think, given his age, its a top 10 major performance of the past 50 years. To me, that's more than a nice win.
Sadly not an issue.twibnotes said:If buchholz throws a no hitter tonight, no one in the game thread is going to start talking about how Nolan Ryan threw way more no hitters.