Tiger Era vs Current Era

bobgeorge

Kentucky Wildcat Fan!
Joined
Jan 6, 2011
Messages
2,046
Reaction score
51
Location
Georgetown, KY
Handicap
15
A lot of times I hear people say that Tiger played in an era without other great players. My thinking is that there were great players, but that Tiger was that much better.

So remove Tiger from his era...who would you predict to win in a 3 day Ryder Cup type event?

Tiger Era - Phil, Ernie, Vijay, and Freddie

Current Era - Jason, Jordan, Rory, Rickie

Sometimes it seems like the quality of play is deeper now......but there were guys in the Tiger era that were hot for a year or a month and then fell off the wagon like David Duval.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
 
I think it gets deeper every year!
 
Need to find another golfer with Vijay. To me Freddie is not a major part of the Tiger Era. Probably would have to throw in a guy like Goosen with 2 US Opens. That's the problem to me, today's tour is much deeper with great talent. Duval had a really good 4-5 year stretch too. DL3 works too with 20+(11 since 97) wins and a major.

Vijay at his best took over world number 1. I'll take him.
 
Need to find another golfer with Vijay. To me Freddie is not a major part of the Tiger Era. Probably would have to throw in a guy like Goosen with 2 US Opens. That's the problem to me, today's tour is much deeper with great talent. Duval had a really good 4-5 year stretch too. DL3 works too with 20+(11 since 97) wins and a major.

Vijay at his best took over world number 1. I'll take him.

You are correct...Freddie was a little earlier than Tiger. Ok....I will add:

Jim Furyk vice Freddie.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
 
You are correct...Freddie was a little earlier than Tiger. Ok....I will add:

Jim Furyk vice Freddie.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
It works. I think I still take Vijay, assuming I answered your question properly.
 
I think during tigers era there were only a handful of really good/great golfers and today the field is much deeper.

May just be a perception but I think the guys today aren't as scared to go after it and go low compared to during tigers era. I would probably go with today's crew in Ryder cup style match
 
I think it gets deeper every year!

It seems correct, but I'm not sure how you can prove it with data.

Like now...in Tiger's era there were guys like Jason Dufner who were hot for a period of time...then faded.

Then you have some guys that cross over into both eras like Sergio Garcia and Zack Johnson.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
 
It's less about stars and more about overall depth of field. It's not arguable that the overall Seth of field right now is deeper than it has ever been.
 
I'm taking current players in this hypothetical Ryder Cup type event. Because Tiger and Phil have never been good in that events.
 
I think comparing across eras is hard to do for all sports. But it sure seems like the golfers today are more sport-specific athletes who are using the latest in sport science for training and performance. Also the gap between the best players and the field seems to be smaller, indicating more depth, greater parity in ability. But then I see Langer doing well and think, huh. Food for idle thought.
 
It is much deeper now compared to tiger but I also think he was just that good, because he was ahead of the game in terms of fitness and everything hence why today's guys know what it takes today because of tiger
 
It's less about stars and more about overall depth of field. It's not arguable that the overall Seth of field right now is deeper than it has ever been.

Agree with this. In any "era", there were always a small group of stars. The difference, now, is that the depth of high quality players is so much more than in prior eras. (IMO, of course)
 
No today's era has much better stars than he ever had to face. Spieth and McIlroy are all time greats who will probably win 10+ majors and Day seems as if he's ascended to that level


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I think the Tiger era was just as good as today's. The big difference was that Tiger was so utterly dominant that he often won before he stepped onto the tee.
 
No today's era has much better stars than he ever had to face. Spieth and McIlroy are all time greats who will probably win 10+ majors and Day seems as if he's ascended to that level
Pretty strong statement since only three people have ever reached double digit wins in professional majors in the history of ever, none in the same era. The closest was probably during the Nicklaus era, when Player won 9 and Watson won 8. There was little doubt by a lot of people that Watson would win at least ten, but he just stopped winning anything, let alone majors, for a while.
 
No today's era has much better stars than he ever had to face. Spieth and McIlroy are all time greats who will probably win 10+ majors and Day seems as if he's ascended to that level


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Spieth and McIlroy are the best of this era so far......all time greats?? It is really to project out how many wins a player will get.

I think if you remove Tiger from sucking up all the media......then Phil's 5 majors and 42 PGA wins make him one of the greatest to play.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
 
I will take the current era against those 4. That being said I take tiger against any of them 1v1
 
I think the current era is definitely deeper and better overall. However I think tiger in his prime does the exact same thing to the current guys that he did in his prime.
 
Tiger made the current golfers as good as they are. These current golfers looked up to Tiger in his work ability.
Look at the current Rory Nike commercial with the 5:30 am thing and working out. It's because of the Tiger's work ethic that makes these current guys do what the do.
Can you see Craig Stadler doing that 15 years ago?
 
I love this current era of golf...so much talent in so many guys. Week in and week out there are so many that can rise up and win, so I take this current era. Though I will say this, I don't think this current era is as strong without the Tiger era.
 
Strength of field has been argued forever. Jack's era had only a few who could win consistently. Tiger's era had more and now there are still more. Tiger made it cool to be a golfer and and all those little boys who idolized him are now young men and playing fantastic golf with a chance to win almost any given week. 10 years from now, I think, there will still be more!
 
Tiger Era vs Current Era

When I think back to Tigers dominance it always seemed to be his ability to sink the long putts that destroyed the competition. Haven't seen many in this era consistently sink miraculous putts.

Maybe due to better approach shots...
 
Back
Top