| |
Main
Date: 21 Aug 2006 03:29:46
From: Colin Wilson
Subject: Tiger wins comparison
|
http://publishing.kyneton.net.au/golf/tiger.htm
Updated.
--
Cheers
Colin Wilson
------------------------------------------------------------------
Trentham Golf Club: http://www.trenthamgolf.com
Barnbougle Dunes: http://publishing.kyneton.net.au/barnbougle
------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
| |
Date: 22 Aug 2006 09:41:16
From: david s-a
Subject: Re: Tiger wins comparison
|
Colin Wilson wrote:
> http://publishing.kyneton.net.au/golf/tiger.htm
>
> Updated.
>
Great stuff Colin. It would be interesting to see Graph 1 as a measure
of performance against age, or can we assume all players started at a
similar age?
This certainly clarifies one small point for me....I always did think
that Armold Palmer and Tom Watson matched Tiger's record in their
respective eras, once they got going....and your charts certainly show that.
cheers
david
|
| | |
Date: 22 Aug 2006 00:23:19
From: Colin Wilson
Subject: Re: Tiger wins comparison
|
david s-a wrote:
> It would be interesting to see Graph 1 as a measure
> of performance against age, or can we assume all players started at a
> similar age?
Woods certainly started winning younger than anyone. If anything the
graphs understate his performance a bit because they count his first
year as a pro as 1996, even though I think he didn't play his first pro
event until ober or November of that year. Shift the lines one year
leftwards and they look even more impressive.
But the point is to see where he might end up relatively. All the others
started "flattening off" in their win record after about 15-18 years of
professional golf, but Woods has the potential to play for well over 20
years before this occurs (if the sort of record a player like Vijay
Singh has in his 40s is any indicator).
My guess is he could easily end up with 25+ majors, 100-120 USPGA tour
wins and 120-140 total tour wins ... given 15 more years of winning and
if the graph follows the same trend. Scary.
--
Cheers
Colin Wilson
------------------------------------------------------------------
Trentham Golf Club: http://www.trenthamgolf.com
Barnbougle Dunes: http://publishing.kyneton.net.au/barnbougle
------------------------------------------------------------------
|
| | | |
Date: 21 Aug 2006 18:26:31
From: multi
Subject: Re: Tiger wins comparison
|
On Tue, 22 Aug 2006 00:23:19 GMT, Colin Wilson <nowhere@nospam.com >
wrote:
>Woods certainly started winning younger than anyone. If anything the
>graphs understate his performance a bit because they count his first
>year as a pro as 1996, even though I think he didn't play his first pro
>event until ober or November of that year.
September, but the point is he didn't play any majors as a pro that
year. On the other hand, you also show Jack winning his first major
in his second year, and most people consider 1962 his first year.
Technically, he turned pro in 1961, but most sources ignore that, and
in any case he didn't play any official tour events as a pro until
1962. Can you explain?
|
| | | | |
Date: 22 Aug 2006 03:12:07
From: Colin Wilson
Subject: Re: Tiger wins comparison
|
multi wrote:
> September, but the point is he didn't play any majors as a pro that
> year. On the other hand, you also show Jack winning his first major
> in his second year, and most people consider 1962 his first year.
> Technically, he turned pro in 1961, but most sources ignore that, and
> in any case he didn't play any official tour events as a pro until
> 1962. Can you explain?
On pgatour.com, under the media guide for each player, there is a line
"Turned pro:", followed by a year. I've arbitrarily taken that as "Year
1" for each player. For Jack it's 1961, for Tiger it's 1996. That's the
"official date", and they seem line ball on wins in this respect, both
having had none in Year 1 with hardly any opportunity. So my statement
about Tiger's graph maybe needing to "shift leftwards" is probably wrong
vis-a-vis Jack.
The purpose of the graphs is not to provide fodder for quibbling over a
few months at the beginning of their careers, but to project for the
next "x" years to "crystal ball" a possible outcome.
--
Cheers
Colin Wilson
------------------------------------------------------------------
Trentham Golf Club: http://www.trenthamgolf.com
Barnbougle Dunes: http://publishing.kyneton.net.au/barnbougle
------------------------------------------------------------------
|
| | | | | |
Date: 21 Aug 2006 21:08:39
From: multi
Subject: Re: Tiger wins comparison
|
On Tue, 22 Aug 2006 03:12:07 GMT, Colin Wilson <nowhere@nospam.com >
wrote:
>multi wrote:
>
>> September, but the point is he didn't play any majors as a pro that
>> year. On the other hand, you also show Jack winning his first major
>> in his second year, and most people consider 1962 his first year.
>> Technically, he turned pro in 1961, but most sources ignore that, and
>> in any case he didn't play any official tour events as a pro until
>> 1962. Can you explain?
>
>On pgatour.com, under the media guide for each player, there is a line
>"Turned pro:", followed by a year. I've arbitrarily taken that as "Year
>1" for each player. For Jack it's 1961, for Tiger it's 1996. That's the
>"official date", and they seem line ball on wins in this respect, both
>having had none in Year 1 with hardly any opportunity.
Fair enough. I've noticed other discrepancies between the PGA site
and Jack's site, and I am inclined to agree with you, and use the PGA
site as the official source.
> So my statement
>about Tiger's graph maybe needing to "shift leftwards" is probably wrong
>vis-a-vis Jack.
I agree.
>The purpose of the graphs is not to provide fodder for quibbling over a
>few months at the beginning of their careers, but to project for the
>next "x" years to "crystal ball" a possible outcome.
I intended no criticism. I think your chart is great.
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 21 Aug 2006 21:27:28
From: multi
Subject: Re: Tiger wins comparison
|
On Mon, 21 Aug 2006 21:08:39 -0700, multi <multi@asm.org > wrote:
>>On pgatour.com, under the media guide for each player, there is a line
>>"Turned pro:", followed by a year. I've arbitrarily taken that as "Year
>>1" for each player. For Jack it's 1961, for Tiger it's 1996. That's the
>>"official date", and they seem line ball on wins in this respect, both
>>having had none in Year 1 with hardly any opportunity.
>
>Fair enough. I've noticed other discrepancies between the PGA site
>and Jack's site, and I am inclined to agree with you, and use the PGA
>site as the official source.
Another point in favor of your decision is that both Jack and Tiger
played majors as amateurs for at least a couple of years, so they did
have chances to win majors in the year they turned pro, regardless of
whether they actually played them as pros that year.
|
| | | | | |
Date: 21 Aug 2006 20:48:02
From: glfnaz
Subject: Re: Tiger wins comparison
|
"Colin Wilson" <nowhere@nospam.com > wrote in message
news:bCuGg.15857$rP1.9499@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> The purpose of the graphs is not to provide fodder for quibbling over a
> few months at the beginning of their careers, but to project for the next
> "x" years to "crystal ball" a possible outcome.
>
> --
> Cheers
> Colin Wilson
This Yellowtail is for you Colin!
Chers.
bg
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 22 Aug 2006 04:35:08
From: Colin Wilson
Subject: Re: Tiger wins comparison
|
glfnaz wrote:
> This Yellowtail is for you Colin!
$9.99 at the Trentham supermarket. I've got enough trophy vouchers to
get four bottles. ;-)
--
Hic
Colin Wilson
------------------------------------------------------------------
Trentham Golf Club: http://www.trenthamgolf.com
Barnbougle Dunes: http://publishing.kyneton.net.au/barnbougle
------------------------------------------------------------------
|
| | | | | | | |
Date: 22 Aug 2006 04:54:25
From: JJK
Subject: Re: Tiger wins comparison
|
> glfnaz wrote:
> > This Yellowtail is for you Colin!
"Colin Wilson" wrote:
> $9.99 at the Trentham supermarket. I've got enough trophy vouchers to
> get four bottles. ;-)
Get this stuff instead:
http://www.domaine-mordoree.com/
RED CHÂTEAUNEUF-DU-PAPE Cuvée " La Reine des Bois " 2003
RED LIRAC Cuvée " La Reine des Bois " 2003 (lovely ruby color, more brash
than the CHÂTEAUNEUF-DU-PAPE but pretty interesting).
|
| | | | | | | |
Date: 23 Aug 2006 11:41:22
From: david s-a
Subject: Re: Tiger wins comparison
|
Colin Wilson wrote:
> glfnaz wrote:
>
>> This Yellowtail is for you Colin!
>
>
> $9.99 at the Trentham supermarket. I've got enough trophy vouchers to
> get four bottles. ;-)
>
Trentham has a supermarket? Where?
:-)
|
| | | | | | | | |
Date: 23 Aug 2006 02:14:11
From: Colin Wilson
Subject: Re: Tiger wins comparison
|
david s-a wrote:
> Trentham has a supermarket?
Until a couple of years ago, it had *two* supermarkets!
--
Cheers
Colin Wilson
------------------------------------------------------------------
Trentham Golf Club: http://www.trenthamgolf.com
Barnbougle Dunes: http://publishing.kyneton.net.au/barnbougle
------------------------------------------------------------------
|
| | | | | |
Date: 22 Aug 2006 03:48:17
From: rich
Subject: Re: Tiger wins comparison
|
"Colin Wilson" <nowhere@nospam.com > wrote in message
news:bCuGg.15857$rP1.9499@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> On pgatour.com, under the media guide for each player, there is a line
> "Turned pro:", followed by a year. I've arbitrarily taken that as "Year 1"
> for each player. For Jack it's 1961, for Tiger it's 1996. That's the
> "official date", and they seem line ball on wins in this respect, both
> having had none in Year 1 with hardly any opportunity. So my statement
> about Tiger's graph maybe needing to "shift leftwards" is probably wrong
> vis-a-vis Jack.
??
Didn't Tiger win a couple in '96?
Rich
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 21 Aug 2006 21:18:24
From: multi
Subject: Re: Tiger wins comparison
|
On Tue, 22 Aug 2006 03:48:17 GMT, "rich" <dummy@nothere.com > wrote:
>
>"Colin Wilson" <nowhere@nospam.com> wrote in message
>news:bCuGg.15857$rP1.9499@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>> On pgatour.com, under the media guide for each player, there is a line
>> "Turned pro:", followed by a year. I've arbitrarily taken that as "Year 1"
>> for each player. For Jack it's 1961, for Tiger it's 1996. That's the
>> "official date", and they seem line ball on wins in this respect, both
>> having had none in Year 1 with hardly any opportunity. So my statement
>> about Tiger's graph maybe needing to "shift leftwards" is probably wrong
>> vis-a-vis Jack.
>
>??
>
>Didn't Tiger win a couple in '96?
We're talking about the majors chart. The wins chart (scroll down)
shows his 1996 wins.
|
| | |
Date: 22 Aug 2006 00:03:52
From: puttster
Subject: Re: Tiger wins comparison
|
Really great stuff!! thanks.
BTW I see why Jack decided to make "Majors" the measure of his success.
That is the only thing he exceeded everyone in!
"david s-a" <dsantwyk@bigpond.net.au > wrote in message
news:4kuul9Fdvs8eU1@individual.net...
> Colin Wilson wrote:
> > http://publishing.kyneton.net.au/golf/tiger.htm
> >
> > Updated.
> >
>
>
> Great stuff Colin. It would be interesting to see Graph 1 as a measure
> of performance against age, or can we assume all players started at a
> similar age?
>
> This certainly clarifies one small point for me....I always did think
> that Armold Palmer and Tom Watson matched Tiger's record in their
> respective eras, once they got going....and your charts certainly show
that.
>
> cheers
> david
|
|
