Tiger Woods day

First topic message reminder :

So today's the day, the Tiger returns.

So how well or how bad will he be ?

With such a small field, he couldn't have comeback into an easier tournament.

I have another take on Tiger's perceived Course Management.

First of all what is Course Management? It's an ability used to manage your way round the course in the lowest score you can by weighing up what your abilities are and how you're executing on that day and factoring in things like conditions (e.g. gusty winds, ground conditions etc. Good course management is about weighing up the risks and making decisions based on the perceived risk/reward.

Where we find it difficult weighing up whether Woods has good course management or not is the fact that some shots that we would consider outrageously optimistic and risky Woods wouldn't bat an eyelid. Like it or lump it Woods did possess an incredible talent and so would take on some shots that most would consider crazy with a less than 10% chance of success whereas he and his caddy would assess as being maybe 70% chance of successful execution and even if it didn't come off he would still rate his chances of recovery at 80-90%.

The trouble even Woods has now is that he is no longer at the peak of his powers, he could probably still pull off miraculous shots but his percentage chance of successful execution will be way down. So in that respect course management will now be a huge factor for him, will pride, bravado, delusion even cloud his Course Management decision making??

To me course management is playing % golf. That doesn't mean doing what most club hackers do which is hit driver at every opportunity when it's your weakest club which is what 9C does.

As Mac pointed out, there is more to course management than playing 3 wood off the tee.

Safely finding the middle of the fairway and the middle of the green is a good strategy to shoot level par, generally you need to be a bit bolder to win tournaments.

For me, the one of the greatest elements of Tiger's success has been his approaches to tricky pins. Because he had such a great short game he could take on the flag and back himself to get up and down if he missed the green.

Those who criticise him for using driver because his driving is wayward are missing the point. Typically, you have to hit driver if you want to win, otherwise you can't attack the flag with your approach. Laying back is ok if you want to par the hole but generally isn't going to get you many birdies. It's no coincidence that the best drivers (Rory, Jayday, dustin) are at the top of the OWGR.

It's gauging when and when not to take on a shot. This is his Achilles heel.

The difference between hitting a 3 wood and a driver isn't that great in terms of distance, as Stenson has shown to great effect.
It simply means he might be hitting a club or two more in. Big deal.

Using a driver is great IF you are a great driver and can combine length with accuracy, but 9C isn't in that category (especially when his putting and chipping are rustier than a 14 year old Corsa), so he ought to be playing to his strengths on holes where the risk of a bad drive, is a double bogey, and he didn't do that well in the last tournament.

If you aren't a good driver, you shouldn't be taking it when the penalty for a bad drive is likely to be a double bogey.

9C needs to realise, his Hollywood shots are years behind him

super_realist wrote:To me course management is playing % golf. That doesn't mean doing what most club hackers do which is hit driver at every opportunity when it's your weakest club which is what 9C does.

But 9C isn't a club hacker, your comments are relevant for amateurs, not for people trying to win majors.

Incidentally, not sure about the 9C moniker any more. He was looking very slim last week, don't know if he plans to bulk up again but clearly he's not been able to lift heavy weights during his recovery (apart from that ridiculous tiger trophy). I was quite surprised, usually people who do a lot of weights get really fat as soon as they stop.

Super - I'm surprised you've not given him more stick for his comments about finding it difficult to walk 18 holes. I thought this was pretty shocking coming from a professional golfer.

Buggy golf = epitome of laziness.

I didn't hear those comments actually Ray, thanks for highlighting that. That is pretty deplorable if you can't walk 18 holes.


As for his driving, yes, he's not in the class of driver as McIlroy, Day, Stenson, Johnson etc, so he shouldn't pretend that he is, which means not taking on the shots they can play but he can't.

So whilst they are in a position to hit driver at most opportunities, he is not. So, his behaviour IS like a club hacker, because he goes to the club when the tariff for a mistake is high, and it cost him dear, several times.

I think he'll find it even harder if he's paired with a really long and straight driver of the ball because he'll try and mash it past and get in even more trouble.

I just don't think he plays to his strengths, and his strengths are nowhere near what they were 10 years ago, he's a bit like the old boxer who still thinks he's got it.

Yes. Apart from the hairdo he's reminiscent of Mickey Rourke in The Wrestler.

super_realist wrote:To me course management is playing % golf. That doesn't mean doing what most club hackers do which is hit driver at every opportunity when it's your weakest club which is what 9C does.

I think you've got a massive case of confirmation bias working there. From my observations... and going all the way back to at least a few years after leaving Butch, he does EXACTLY the opposite, hits driver way less than most other players of his length. It's just that when he misses with that driver, sometimes it's so badly it's easy to 20-20 hindsight it with "oh, he shouldn't have hit driver there". Well DUH, ya think? So easy to say after the fact and write it off as bad course management, when most the time it's just poor execution.

Super

How often do you watch pro golf these days? Sometimes your comments make it sound like you haven't watched the game since the mid 90's.

Wasn't the Hank Haney book that caused all that controversy a few years ago called "The Big Miss"? Seems that's exactly what Tiger is experiencing too often these days .. perhaps he ought to ask Mr Haney for another copy of the book ;-)

robopz wrote:

super_realist wrote:To me course management is playing % golf. That doesn't mean doing what most club hackers do which is hit driver at every opportunity when it's your weakest club which is what 9C does.

I think you've got a massive case of confirmation bias working there. From my observations... and going all the way back to at least a few years after leaving Butch, he does EXACTLY the opposite, hits driver way less than most other players of his length.  It's just that when he misses with that driver, sometimes it's so badly it's easy to 20-20 hindsight it with "oh, he shouldn't have hit driver there".  Well DUH, ya think?  So easy to say after the fact and write it off as bad course management, when most the time it's just poor execution.

If I was as bad as him with a driver, or so unpredictable or unreliable with it, i'd probably not have one in the bag, because it's costing him shots and it's costing him tournaments.

Poor execution is part of it, however you can't ignore that he's not considering the tariff for a bad drive. He had several double bogies last week. Yes, he might have hit the driver badly, hence poor execution, but that's part of Course Management.

Poor execution or the possibility of it, is absolutely a part of the course management equation.

"Yes, I could hit driver here, but if I hit it badly, then there's a high chance I'm going to make bogey or worse"

By the way, when did 9C start taking beard tips off that other repulsive moron Lewis Hamilton?

By Woods's own admission, the Albany course was wide open. Not surprising if he was tempted to lash it as far off the tee.
Let's judge him after a dose of Torrey Pines and Riviera where penalties are all to obvious, rather than most of the places he favours where it's pretty much grip it and rip it and find it. Repeat.

Have to agree about the facial hair management though, super's spot on there.

super_realist wrote:
By the way, when did 9C start taking beard tips off that other repulsive moron Lewis Hamilton?

You do see the irony of sitting at a keyboard criticising multiple world champions, don't you?
Funny that they're both mixed race - true colours (pun not intended) showing through?

MontysMerkin wrote:

super_realist wrote:
By the way, when did 9C start taking beard tips off that other repulsive moron Lewis Hamilton?

You do see the irony of sitting at a keyboard criticising multiple world champions, don't you?
Funny that they're both mixed race - true colours (pun not intended) showing through?

Only a left wing zealot like you (or Mac) would make such a ridiculous connection Monty. If anything, Hamilton is even more of an arse than Woods.

When was Woods a world champion anyway? There's no such thing in golf.

World no 1 then.
Only saying what I see, a pitiful excuse for a keyboard warrior with no class or appreciation for those who have achieved. Sad for you to be honest, must be a lonely life.

I'm sorry that you can't allow other people to have an opinion Monty unless they agree with you. That's more sad.

I did actually credit 9C for his 65, so well done for cherry picking.

Arnold Palmer played attacking golf. He lost many majors that he should have won, but he also won some that he had no right to. He'd probably won more by being conservative. Is that poor course management? The galleries loved him for his "swash buckling style".

Super

Most of Tiger's misses from the tee would probably have found trouble even with a 3W.

But you do seem stuck in the mindset of old when the game was played with persimmon drivers and balata balls. The modern player (with modern irons and ball) needs to get it out as far as possible and regardless of the lie would prefer to get a short iron on the ball. We have heard numerous players over the last 5 years confirm this.

Just look at how Day, DJ and Rory play the game.

super_realist wrote:I'm sorry that you can't allow other people to have an opinion Monty unless they agree with you. That's more sad.

I did actually credit 9C for his 65, so well done for cherry picking.

But attacked him for his beard, which I presume didn't fit your idea of a proper beard (why this should be of concern the baby jesus only knows)? Or his shirt? You are a strange one...

If that's the case Mac, it's clear where he needs to be doing more "reps" then isn't it?

On what basis am I based on a Persimmon mindset?

If a par 4  is 450 yards. Someone like Stenson, Mickelson, Day, Rory etc can get a 3 wood out 290-300 no problem, leaving a 150 yards shot, probably about a 9 iron (and often a wedge) for them into the green. Hardly putting them out on a limb is it?

It's fine IF you have the ability to drive the ball like Mcilroy or Day, but Woods doesn't. So don't you think his tactics need a re-think?
Only idiots keep doing the same things and expecting different results. Don't you agree?

Look at the first hole in this years Open. What was the best tactic there? Wasn't going for the green that's for sure.

How about those masters of course management - Lefty & Seve ?

How many majors have these 2 blown over the years ?

Yeah he should play wedge, driver off the deck.

SetupDeterminesTheMotion wrote:How about those masters of course management - Lefty & Seve ?

How many majors have these  2 blown over the years ?

Plenty. I've never said that course management, or not thinking through the consequences is unique to 9C. Every golfer has made errors to some degree, but some keep making them time and again without addressing their issues.

TW stats for 2015, which was only a short season for him, had him with 55% fairways hit. Which is obviously not brilliant but isnt to bad compared to the 2016 stats. similar to DJ and above Jday (50%).

Has he really got a big issue with his driving?

You probably have to look at how bad his misses are, and judging by the number of double bogies he had, probably very bad indeed.

You can't compare ONE tournament, with Day and Johnson's full year stats. Johnson isn't known as being accurate anyway come to think of it.

If you're going to be long off the tee, and long players usually have LOW accuracy, you need a proper short game and putting game, if you don't have that, you better try and hit the fairway instead.

I was basing it on his 2015 stats, he hit 250 out of 400 and something and based it against DJ/JD 2016 stats. Its all we have to work on. His accuracy off the tee is not really that bad, he is no Bowditch anyway!

I didnt really catch much of it, were all his double bogies due to a bad tee shot?

You can get away with being rubbish and long off the tee IF you have a good short game.

Similarly, you can get away with being short and accurate off the tee IF you have a good short game. Even if you are long and accurate, you need to hole the putts.

That's how Donald, Zach Johnson, Mike Weir have done it.

If you are long and accurate though, you're more likely to put yourself in position where you are putting for more birdies, rather than if you are long but miles off line, which most of the longer players are.

beninho wrote:I was basing it on his 2015 stats, he hit 250 out of 400 and something and based it against DJ/JD 2016 stats. Its all we have to work on. His accuracy off the tee is not really that bad, he is no Bowditch anyway!

I didnt really catch much of it, were all his double bogies due to a bad tee shot?

Not a helpful stat. Does that distinguish between when driver hit and when not?

kwinigolfer wrote:By Woods's own admission, the Albany course was wide open. Not surprising if he was tempted to lash it as far off the tee.
Let's judge him after a dose of Torrey Pines and Riviera where penalties are all to obvious, rather than most of the places he favours where it's pretty much grip it and rip it and find it. Repeat.

Agree... I think there were a lot of different things at play this last week and judging Tiger's career "course management prowess" from this event is ridiculous. Bottom line is sometimes his swing was there last week and sometimes it wasn't. He hits driver left on #18 into the water on Thursday and makes double.... then hits "the course management correct" 3-wood there Friday, Saturday and Sunday, and still makes doubles the last two rounds.

IMO Tiger gives so much "legitimate" fodder for criticism, both personal and game wise... not sure I understand why that's so insufficient for his detractors they find themselves obsessed to embellish most everything else wrong with him too, even the things that aren't....

MontysMerkin wrote:Yeah he should play wedge, driver off the deck.

Hey.... if it's good enough for Moe Norman....

super_realist wrote:That's how Donald, Zach Johnson, Mike Weir have done it.

If you are long and accurate though, you're more likely to put yourself in position where you are putting for more birdies, rather than if you are long but miles off line, which most of the longer players are.

And IMO with each passing year the more rare we'll be seeing the Luke's, Zach's and Weir's being successful.  That's the pressure that guys like Rory, Day and DJ put on a field on the weeks they're driving it accurately or the rough is so lite it hardly matters as long as they're not missing badly. All 3 of those guys have adequate wedge and short game skills to go along with it, and at times all can be top-notch putters as well.   Thus no wonder they're up there in the rankings.  The shorter guys have so few venues these days where they're not at a severe disadvantage. Even a guy like Stenson who's not short even with his strong 3-wood, has big issues competing with (or winning against) the big sticks when they're on.. and a guy like Spieth has to be "unworldly" around the greens and putting to compete

Zach Johnson won at St. Andrews last year. Furyk shot a 58 somewhere else.
Stenson produced the performance of the year against an on fire Mickelson.

You could also say there are courses in which the long and wayward hitters are in severe trouble, such as Augusta.

Bottom line, if you're long or short and not accurate coupled with a rubbish short game and putting, you're in trouble, so you have to play to minimise the potential for a holocaust.

Big Phil took ages to win his first major, and had a bunch if 2nd's in general, because he was too agressive. Fans loved him for it, but he only really started to win big and more consistently when he started to do 'course management'.

super_realist wrote:Zach Johnson won at St. Andrews last year. Furyk shot a 58 somewhere else.
Stenson produced the performance of the year against an on fire Mickelson.

You could also say there are courses in which the long and wayward hitters are in severe trouble, such as Augusta.

Bottom line, if you're long or short and not accurate coupled with a rubbish short game and putting, you're in trouble, so you have to play to minimise the potential for a holocaust.

I understand what you are saying, but I still believe with each passing year the shorter hitters are at more and more of a disadvantage. That's not to say there aren't venues that balance the scales or even favor them, but they're getting fewer and further between. And of course you can never completely discard talent... as your Furyk and Zach examples illustrate.  

However... consider the following. This may or may not be as true on the Euro Tour, I don't know... but as for the PGA Tour the longer hitters seem to have a distinct advantage.

This is a list of the top-10 money earners on the PGA Tour in the 2015-16 season. (I think money is a better measure than FE points because of FE point 4x playoff multipliers and resets).  The number to the left is the driving distance rank for the top-10 money earners.

2 - Dustin Johnson
15 - Jason Day
13 - Adam Scott
9 - Rory McIlroy
41 - Patrick Reed
51 - Jordan Spieth
137 - Russell Knox
46 - Kevin Chappell
65 - Hideki Matsuyama
24 - Jimmy Walker

185 players had enough drives to be listed in the Driving Distance category for the 2015-16 season..

#1-4 on the money list were in the top-8% of the driving distance stat. 7 of them in the top-25% and only 1 of the 10 money leaders was outside the top 35% in driving distance. I don't think the trend we're seeing above is happenstance. Every year going forward may not be as biased towards the longer hitters as the above, but IMO unless there's a significant change in course setup standards, the above trend is destined to continue.

I thought I'd check the Euro Tour distance vs money stat.. here's what I found...

Below is the top-10 on the R2D final points list for 2015-16 season. Each players driving distance rank is listed to the left.

59 - Henrik Stenson
80 - Danny Willett
86 - Alex Noren
55 - Tyrell Hatton
11 - Rory McIlroy
145 - Matthew Fitzpatrick
22 - Branden Grace
120 - Rafa Cabrera Bello
16 - Louis Oosthuizen
83 - Chris Wood

The Euro Tour driving distance stat lists 196 players with enough drives to be ranked. The trend on the Euro Tour is not near as strong as it is on the PGA Tour... but still tilts in favor of the longer hitters..... 8 out of 10 are in the top half of the distance stat, but only 3 of them in the top-22.

beninho wrote:TW stats for 2015, which was only a short season for him, had him with 55% fairways hit. Which is obviously not brilliant but isnt to bad compared to the 2016 stats. similar to DJ and above Jday (50%).

Has he really got a big issue with his driving?

There is big problem with fairway percentage stats because it is black/white "discrete" measurement

You either hit the fairway or you don't.

The "Don'ts" counts a ball that missed the fairway by 1 ft (in the first cut) the same as a ball that in the middle of a lake or behind a grove of trees.

Obviously a missed fairway by 12 inches is not as penalizing as missed fairway into someone's back yard (Out of Bounds).

GPB wrote:There is big problem with fairway percentage stats because it is black/white "discrete" measurement

You either hit the fairway or you don't.

I agree with you on that point. The old saying "it's about the QUALITY of your misses" that matters.

But IMO 2015 is a "throw out year" for Tiger anyway.  He only played 11 events and clearly was playing so sparingly and so "outta sorts" and injury hampered it's not relevant for comparative purposes any more than this one event last week was.  Same reason the PGAT has minimum "attempts" in most their stats to be officially ranked, because too few aren't as good a measure.  IMO 2012 and 2013 are more relevant years to compare and he hit 64% (Rank 55) and 62.5% (Rank 69) FW's respectively.  

Who knows what he's gonna do next year, but IMO if TW can play a reasonable number of events, be somewhere around top-50 in distance and inside the top-70-80 in accuracy, that's GENERALLY good enough to compete off the tee most weeks... but again... not if 10% of those misses are outta play...

"Its not how good your good shots are, its how good your bad shots are"

robopz wrote:

super_realist wrote:Zach Johnson won at St. Andrews last year. Furyk shot a 58 somewhere else.
Stenson produced the performance of the year against an on fire Mickelson.

You could also say there are courses in which the long and wayward hitters are in severe trouble, such as Augusta.

Bottom line, if you're long or short and not accurate coupled with a rubbish short game and putting, you're in trouble, so you have to play to minimise the potential for a holocaust.

I understand what you are saying, but I still believe with each passing year the shorter hitters are at more and more of a disadvantage. That's not to say there aren't venues that balance the scales or even favor them, but they're getting fewer and further between. And of course you can never completely discard talent... as your Furyk and Zach examples illustrate.  

However... consider the following. This may or may not be as true on the Euro Tour, I don't know... but as for the PGA Tour the longer hitters seem to have a distinct advantage.

This is a list of the top-10 money earners on the PGA Tour in the 2015-16 season. (I think money is a better measure than FE points because of FE point 4x playoff multipliers and resets).  The number to the left is the driving distance rank for the top-10 money earners.

2 - Dustin Johnson
15 - Jason Day
13 - Adam Scott
9 - Rory McIlroy
41 - Patrick Reed
51 - Jordan Spieth
137 - Russell Knox
46 - Kevin Chappell
65 - Hideki Matsuyama
24 - Jimmy Walker

185 players had enough drives to be listed in the Driving Distance category for the 2015-16 season..

#1-4 on the money list were in the top-8% of the driving distance stat. 7 of them in the top-25% and only 1 of the 10 money leaders was outside the top 35% in driving distance. I don't think the trend we're seeing above is happenstance. Every year going forward may not be as biased towards the longer hitters as the above, but IMO unless there's a significant change in course setup standards, the above trend is destined to continue.

You could also say that that reflects the lack of diversity in American tour courses and that had courses not been  lengthened in line with technology the courses are  far too easy. American courses have always been birdie fests, so they tend to be long to attempt to counteract this. It's putting the cart before the horse to say that you have to be long to be successful, as they are already long to begin with these days.

Wouldn't it be nice to see a short but very tight course with lots of hazards and small greens? Golf in America is a bit like the tennis of old where it's getting one dimensional, no real shotmaking, just bash it.

robopz wrote:He hits driver left on #18 into the water on Thursday and makes double.... then hits "the course management correct" 3-wood there Friday, Saturday and Sunday, and still makes doubles the last two rounds.

super_realist wrote:
Stenson produced the performance of the year against an on fire Mickelson.

Bottom line, if you're long or short and not accurate coupled with a rubbish short game and putting, you're in trouble, so you have to play to minimise the potential for a holocaust.

Doesn't this illustrate the point? If I remember rightly Stenson used the driver a lot during that round.

Ray

I also recall that Stenson used the Driver a lot on the final round of this years Open. I think it is also a myth perpetuated by the commentators that he is as long with the 3W as others are with the driver, it often seems on the coverage that most players hit driver further than he does with his 3w.

McLaren wrote:I also recall that Stenson used the Driver a lot on the final round of this years Open.  I think it is also a myth perpetuated by the commentators that he is as long with the 3W as others are with the driver, it often seems on the coverage that most players hit driver further than he does with his 3w.

I don't remember how many drivers Stenson hit at the Open... only that it was one quality shot after another from tee to green that week... And agree with you on the "myth" of Stenson's length with the 3-wood.  Certainly he's longer than most 3-wood vs 3-wood... but he'd be hard pressed to keep up with his 3-wood vs their driver against probably the longer 2/3rds of the field in any given week. Not that he'd be grossly behind most of them though....

Don't think anyone claimed he was as long with the 3 wood as many are with the driver.
More that he's not far behind as so as not to make too much difference with the approach shot.

super_realist wrote:Don't think anyone claimed he was as long with the 3 wood as many are with the driver.
More that he's not far behind as so as not to make too much difference with the approach shot.

I think the "problem" with Stenson is he's pretty wild with his driver so he's forced to his 3-wood in a lot of situations. The fact he might hit that 3-wood up to Zach's driver day after day isn't the problem. The problem is on holes when he needs the length, he's 30-40 yards behind the likes of Day, Rory & DJ. Sure... I'd still take Stenson with his 7-8-iron in the middle of the FW vs a Kokrak, Finau or Luke List with their wedges from most anywhere. But I'd take the likes of Day, Rory & DJ with their wedges, even out of light to moderate rough over Stenson's 7-8's almost every time. Especially considering Day and DJ are far better putters than Stenson, and Rory can be streaky good with the flat stick.

And keep in mind, I realize we're talking about a fantastic ball striking talent in Stenson, but every player has his weaknesses. It very well could be that Stenson playing the way he does is the best possible strategy for him, and watching him hit driver so poorly so often, I believe it probably is. My point is on the weeks those top players have their driver under control, which at least 1 or 2 of them will most weeks, Stenson's at big disadvantage not being able to hit driver as often as them.

Is Stenson really that much worse than DJ with driver? Johnson has never had a reputation for accuracy with the driver either.

I just looked up the PGA stats and Stenson in 2015 (no record for 2016) was 69%
Archdeacon Watson was 54%
Day was 55%
Adam Scott 60%
Fat Prick Reed 56%
Obviously DJ was too busy smoking crack and Rory had a broken leg in 2015, but their accuracy in 2016 wasn't that great. 57% and 61% respectively.

Super

I think Stensons number will include the times he took 3W of the tee.