A little game of best ever, where we throw up something and you tell us if it was the best ever and either why or why not? We present a few pros and cons.

FOR IT BEING BEST
2019 Masters featured Tiger Woods return to winning a major after a long drought.
Come from behind win, where Tiger was not leading at the end of any of the first 3 rounds.
11 players with in 3 strokes of winner.
Stacked leaderboard of Tiger, DJ, Brooks, Xander, Fowler and more.
3 players with in 1 stroke of the lead
AGAINST IT BEING BEST
Tiger only took the lead when Molinari seemingly choked it away by rinsing his shot on the 12th and 15th.
Woods bogies the 18th because there wasn’t much of a chase.
All three players that finished 1 back parred the 18th.
Give us your thoughts in the comments below.
Is one of the best, the best? Or not the best?
Have to say I did feel sad for Norman, don’t think he was ever the same after that
It is not THE best. Definitely the best in recent years…but ever? I don’t think so but my Masters knowledge isn’t fantastic
The 1986 Masters is the best ever.
I think this one stands out for a lot of people, but I am always curious why? Is it because Jack won at 46 or because of the actual play? I remember watching that tournament as a kid getting close to high school and thinking about the pompous nature on 16 when his son says "be good" or "be right" and Jack says "It is". But that was Jack.
At the time it seemed like the impossible to win at his age, but more because he wasn’t playing as much. After that though we had Kenny Perry who should have won a major at 48 and Tom Watson who should have won more than a decade older than that.
Tiger was not just older, he was rebuilt on an operating table. With that said, Tiger came in as a near favorite due to his Tour Championship win prior.
Because it was the greatest of all time (at that time) winning what was clearly his last, a last moment in the sun and his son on the bag made it even more special. With Tiger, it’s not a fluke or his last, he will compete for a few more years and win again, it was a return yes, but not a last hurrah. With Jack, it was like a going away celebration.
So if Tiger doesnt win another, this adds vintage and gets to that spot?
I think 40 years of aging has added allure to this event, because unlike Jordan, it is not as if Jack stopped playing after this, he just didn’t compete as much or as well.
Jack winning was a sheer fluke, a brilliantly special fluke. Tiger winning was a matter of the back holding up, and we know it can and he will win more.
If we are using the injury card though I’ll put Hogan in 51 up.
I genuinely dont think anybody was talking about it other than me. Both of them are and have been. I was telling the story of watching it as a newcomer to golf getting ready for high school, not that it was a real negative.
I am just of the mindset that the only reason 86 is viewed a certain way is because it aged well, not because of any other significance other than his age. Had he ridden into the sunset, maybe I have a different view, but he placed 5th or 6th at the Masters more than a decade later.
But given we know Tiger is going to do the same thing, wouldn’t that too put this in the same category?
With that being the case, what do you quantify as the greatest ever? 97? Would be hard to argue.
Jack played an incredible second-nine that Sunday, Especially with the putter. The GOAT at the time who hadn’t done anything in a few years and of which nothing was expected captured lightning to give everyone one last thrill. Tiger in 2019 has some similarities but not exactly. Tiger was playing very well in the year prior to the 2019 Masters. As for Jack being pompous, I’ve never heard anyone view him that way as a golfer. I think in interviews he has said that his response to his son on 16 was the cockiest thing he ever did in a golf round.
It could put it in the same category, but I guess as this becomes vintage we will know.
To me right now, I think it was 2019, only because of the battle back. I always thought for Jack, he not only had better Masters wins, but that it was only the case for 86 based on age. Had Watson not choked, would that be the best ever?
That’s the subjectivity of all this though, had Mollinari not choked, would this be the best ever?
I enjoy these topics, because there is no one correct answer.
I think that is the million dollar question, because FM, definitely choked.
If we are looking at only the best performance ever, then it’s 1997. If we are looking at the best overall Masters based on compelling story, 1997 and 1986 would both have it over 2019 for me.
As for choking in 2019, 4 out of the 5 leaders put it in the creek on 12. The one who didn’t- Tiger. Maybe you can say all the others choked, but I would credit Tiger for being the one who didn’t.
So so so so badly.
I am not sure about that. Koepka said he had no idea the wind was blowing in on 12 and when his ball came up short in the water he purposefully didn’t react to it because he did not want the Molinari, Finau, and Woods group to know about it. Then Molinari had the honors and came up short. I think Finau was the true choker because he should have known. Tiger changed clubs after Molinari’s shot so if he had honors he may have been in the same boat.
He didnt only dunk it on 12 though.
‘97 Masters ushered in the Tiger Woods Era. He dismantled the golf course, the competition, and forever changed golf as we knew it. All of golf changed after that Masters Week.
‘86 Masters for a Sunday afternoon to remember.
‘09 Open at Turnberry For 76 holes, glued to the TV, can he do it? Tom Watson, may not have won the Open that year, but his play at 59 years old had every golf fan in the world watching in sheer amazement.
From a fan perspective, I watched ‘86 Sunday back nine and ‘97 both Saturday and Sunday. ‘09, virtually all 76 holes.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
True, after that he was in the Tiger tailspin.
To be the best the finish has to have more excitement than that.
2001 had fire power all around it, and it also gave us the first time all four professional majors were under one roof.
here’s a question: are 1986 and 2019 basically the same thing? How many people choked on the second 9 in order for Jack to win? How many people did the same for Tiger to win?
This ??…
Jack came from 6 back, shot a 30 on the 2nd nine. In the twilight of his career, Jack put the Sun back in the sky one last time, and gave us one more day of summer.
Can you share that data because just looking it up on Google, that isnt correct.
And that is with the rain at Augusta causing a move up in time.
Can you supply where that data came from? Because The Open Championship actually had the lowest ratings it has had in years.
British Open falls to four-year low
http://www.sportsmediawatch.com
I looked it up on Google a week or 2 ago. Not sure where I saw it but it may be one of those things where, "I saw it on the internet, so it must be true".
And of course, now that I actually want to find it, I cant find it from any source that is reputable or that Ive even ever heard of. ???? The only link I could find is the one you shared, which isnt what Id call reputable.
The Masters was the highest rated and Sunday, even with rain delay.
Other than winner of 18, that was a good one too!
I only started watching the Masters in 96 so my history is shorter.
The weather starting the round early (in Mountain Time Zone) meant I had to get updates on my phone during a round. I knew what was going to happen when I went home to watch it. I still was on pins and needles watching the coverage. The only other times I was so invested in watching was ’04 Mickelson, ’05 Tiger, and ’12 Bubba. Of the 4 mentioned I would say that ’19 had the best story line so I would put it on top of the Masters that I have seen.
Patrick Reed just called and he said his win was in the top 5 so there is that as well.


This. 100% this.