89Hen wrote:AZGrizFan wrote:
Between '59 and '83 15 of the 24 were won by either Nicklaus, Palmer, Player or Trevino. Between '59 and '92 21 of the 33 were won by one of those 4 or Ballasteros or Faldo. That's complete domination of a tournament by a very select group of golfers. Since '92 (20 years) the only golfers with more than one win are Tiger (3) and Padraig (2), and four of those 5 came in a four year span '05-'08.
Once again proving that the overall competition is tougher today.
Mmmmm....I gotta disagree. I don't think it "proves" anything. During that span from the end of '99 (when he won the PGA for major #2) and the middle of 2008 when he won the U.S. Open for his final major (# 14) Tiger himself won 13 of 39 majors (including 3 of 8 Opens) and had 9 other top 10 finishes, including 5 2nd place finishes, a 3rd and 2 4ths. That's pretty dominant, and more dominant than anybody during the Nicklaus/Palmer/Player heyday.
Maybe it proves there is tougher competition today
for that particular kind of golf, but I don't know. The Masters has been won 57 times by an American and just 19 times by somebody NOT from America. The U.S. Open? 80 times by an American, 32 by non-Americans. The PGA: 78 times by an American, 15 times by non-Americans. The British Open, on the other hand,
has been won 41 times by an American and 99 times by non-Americans (including 63 by Scottish or British golfers). Using British Open statistics to prove or disprove relative levels of competition is misleading, at best.
"Ah fuck. You are right." KYJelly, 11/6/12
"The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam." Barack Obama, 9/25/12
I wanted a new driver anyway, but not on those terms.
