Tiger to miss U.S. Open

[Coach34]

as Jack found out- injuries start taking their toll even on the great ones.

[Dawgface]

He will have a tough time ever winning another major. If its not the knee, achilles heel, its the back. He may get over the back problem, but good chance something else pops up.

[RossDawg82]

Hey coach, anyway you re up my vcash?

[Dawg61]

Tiger had surgery for a pinched nerve. He's not going to have reoccurring back problems. He'll come back strong as before and regain his #1 ranking very quickly. He'll break Jack's record. Never bet against the best ever.

[Coach34]

Hey coach, anyway you re up my vcash?

have you looked at your vcash soldier?

[Coach34]

Tiger had surgery for a pinched nerve. He's not going to have reoccurring back problems. He'll come back strong as before and regain his #1 ranking very quickly. He'll break Jack's record. Never bet against the best ever.

The best ever is Jack. Not only does he the most majors- but he has an unreal amount of 2nd place finishes also.

Tiger will win another- maybe a 2nd...but he wont break Jack's record

[sleepy dawg]

He's not going to break Jack's record, and I have never wanted him to. I do hate for the reason to be injuries though. I know everyone has injury issues, but Tiger has had many for a while now.

[Dawg61]

The best ever is Jack. Not only does he the most majors- but he has an unreal amount of 2nd place finishes also.

Tiger will win another- maybe a 2nd...but he wont break Jack's record

Agree to disagree on the best ever. You'll never convince me different from Tiger Woods and I'll never convince you different. You really can't compare the two eras though. All those 2nd place finishes are flawed in a comparison when you start comparing past the top 20 guys. Meaning the 100th ranked player today would rip a new one in the 20th ranked player in 1965. Comparing the best ever when they don't play vs each other really doesn't work.

[Dawg61]

He's not going to break Jack's record, and I have never wanted him to. I do hate for the reason to be injuries though. I know everyone has injury issues, but Tiger has had many for a while now.

Only injury Tiger really needs to overcome is the one to his pride.

[Churchill]

I always suspected Woods of being on steroids......when I heard he had had problems with BOTH Achilles that sealed the deal. Big time red flag. He hasn`t won a major since just before the PGA started testing in 2008 and won`t win again if they make him stay clean.

[Martianlander]

Agree to disagree on the best ever. You'll never convince me different from Tiger Woods and I'll never convince you different. You really can't compare the two eras though. All those 2nd place finishes are flawed in a comparison when you start comparing past the top 20 guys. Meaning the 100th ranked player today would rip a new one in the 20th ranked player in 1965. Comparing the best ever when they don't play vs each other really doesn't work.
I generally like your posts but I have to disagree on this one. Tiger intimidated all the also rans early in his career, but can't do it with the young lions. He also couldn't have done it with Jack, Palmer, Miller, Trevino, Hogan, probably even guys like Beard, Moody, Boros, and I'm sure I'm leaving some out. Tiger came along at a lucky time or he would have had less majors.
Edit-I left out Gary Player! Can't believe I did that.

[Coach34]

Agree to disagree on the best ever. You'll never convince me different from Tiger Woods and I'll never convince you different. You really can't compare the two eras though. All those 2nd place finishes are flawed in a comparison when you start comparing past the top 20 guys. Meaning the 100th ranked player today would rip a new one in the 20th ranked player in 1965. Comparing the best ever when they don't play vs each other really doesn't work.

Jack came along when there were still some great golfers playing. Tiger came along during kind of a lull.

Tiger is outstanding- but there is a question about PED's and the stigma of him not being the same since. Jack with the modern technology would have put up some amazing numbers as well. Injuries slowed Jack- now injuries are slowing Tiger. Just the way it is

[Dawg61]

Why is there a question about PED's? Has Tiger failed a drug test before? Totally unfair to raise question to players accomplishments by labeling them PED users without proof. That's a slippery slope we shouldn't go down.

[quickstrike2]

I just can't see Tiger breaking Jack's record. He has yet to get over the hurdle of winning a major after the scandal and injuries. He was playing awesome golf last year winning 5 times, but still no majors. One of the greatest ever, but I don't see him taking the record.

[esplanade91]

Tiger may or may not break the record, but he helped bring the game into the 21st century... And probably won't ever get the recognition he deserves for it.

There have been 100 all-time greats who grew up in poverty and defied the clubhouse setting or whatever, but none of broken down the image of the all white male golf course where everyone drives up in the Benz than Tiger... Even though that's slightly undeserved... He went to Stanford... But people identify with Tiger (perhaps pre-scandal) and it's going to pay dividends for fans of the game for 20+ years. I'm young enough to not remember golf pre-Tiger. He's the face of golf for me. Probably always will. Jack is the greatest, but he does nothing for me. I don't know if anyone of you older folks feel the same.

[Churchill]

"A Canadian doctor whose patients previously included golfer Tiger Woods and baseball player Alex Rodriguez pleaded guilty in federal court to a charge of bringing steroids and other illegal substances into the U.S."

There is plenty more evidence available if you care to look it up. The fact is that Woods is still too big of a "cash cow" for the PGA to let him get fully exposed for what he`s done but they`re not going to let him compete in any more majors on PED`s. Be patient, it will all come out one day when he is not so valuable to the tour.

[Coach34]

The fact remains that ever since the PGA installed testing- Tiger Woods has not won a major.

[Dawg61]

Nike had nothing to do with Golf before Tiger. Nothing. No clubs, no balls, no gloves, no clothes, no bags, no shoes. Nothing. Think about that for a sec. The man has been tremendous for the sport of golf and for Nike and Nike has been tremendous for golf.

[Homedawg]

The fact remains that ever since the PGA installed testing- Tiger Woods has not won a major.

And has played in approx half the majors since then due to injury. Coincidence? Maybe. We won't know. But 6 years ago it wasn't will he break the record, it was by how many. Now, it's how will he win ONE more. I think he will win another. But the record is safe.

[ScottH]

He really hasn't been right since the Thanksgiving night (2009?) the Viking chick tried to kill him with a 5 iron in his foyer.

[Dawgface]

Nike had nothing to do with Golf before Tiger. Nothing. No clubs, no balls, no gloves, no clothes, no bags, no shoes. Nothing. Think about that for a sec. The man has been tremendous for the sport of golf and for Nike and Nike has been tremendous for golf.

Explain this one then. Curtis Strange winning the U.S. Open in the late 80's. Some wore Nike shoes back then too.

http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a274/MSDOGS1976/curtisstrange_zps14bba96b.jpg (http://s13.photobucket.com/user/MSDOGS1976/media/curtisstrange_zps14bba96b.jpg.html)

[Dawg61]

Explain this one then. Curtis Strange winning the U.S. Open in the late 80's. Some wore Nike shoes back then too.

http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a274/MSDOGS1976/curtisstrange_zps14bba96b.jpg (http://s13.photobucket.com/user/MSDOGS1976/media/curtisstrange_zps14bba96b.jpg.html)

Photoshop?**

[thf24]

I think the only way he's ever going to win another major is to take a year or so off and work out a gentler swing. If he doesn't, it's just going to be one injury after another for the rest of his career.

[Goindhoo]

I don't think everyone understands that his downfall has very little to do with injuries. If he was healthy, he still wouldn't be winning majors. He can't putt like he used to. He used to drain everything. Especially those 8-15 footers that were crucial in majors. He was a putting machine. I being biased towards Scotty Cameron putters believe a lot of his putting issues revolve around him switching from a Scotty to a nike putter. He has never been the same on the greens. Not sure if his contract makes him use a Nuke putter but he didn't have to in the beginning.

[War Machine Dawg]

He really hasn't been right since the Thanksgiving night (2009?) the Viking chick tried to kill him with a 5 iron in his foyer.

I wish she'd succeeded.

[Dawg61]

I wish she'd succeeded.

Wow. Keep your crazy to yourself bro. Wishing Tiger Woods had been murdered. wtf dude

[Dawgfan77]

Nike had nothing to do with Golf before Tiger. Nothing. No clubs, no balls, no gloves, no clothes, no bags, no shoes. Nothing. Think about that for a sec. The man has been tremendous for the sport of golf and for Nike and Nike has been tremendous for golf.
You would be incorrect on the clothes and shoes. Remember Tiger was a Titeilst clubs and balls with a nike contract for clothes and shoes. I can assure you that nikes was in the clothes games long before tiger. Curtis Strange won back to back us opens wearing Nikes clothes in 88 and 89.

[Dawgface]

Photoshop?**

Nope. Just google. Easy to find. I remember him wearing Nike stuff long before Tiger came along.

[quickstrike2]

I don't think everyone understands that his downfall has very little to do with injuries. If he was healthy, he still wouldn't be winning majors. He can't putt like he used to. He used to drain everything. Especially those 8-15 footers that were crucial in majors. He was a putting machine. I being biased towards Scotty Cameron putters believe a lot of his putting issues revolve around him switching from a Scotty to a nike putter. He has never been the same on the greens. Not sure if his contract makes him use a Nuke putter but he didn't have to in the beginning.

I heard Faldo say last year that during Tiger's dominance he was the best bunker player in the game and now he probably not top 10. I have no idea, but I do think his short game was where he won a bunch of his majors. The way Tiger and Phil drive the ball, very long but also very erratic at times, their short games and scrambling ability is always on display.

[FISHDAWG]

Agree to disagree on the best ever. You'll never convince me different from Tiger Woods and I'll never convince you different. You really can't compare the two eras though. All those 2nd place finishes are flawed in a comparison when you start comparing past the top 20 guys. Meaning the 100th ranked player today would rip a new one in the 20th ranked player in 1965. Comparing the best ever when they don't play vs each other really doesn't work.

competition is competition regardless of time or era ..... your statement is way off base .... maybe todays 100th ranked player should try his talent with 1965 technology .... maybe today's player couldn't make it on yesterdays' tour when there weren't so many sponsors to absorb expenses and quick success was key to remaining on tour ....... and how can you say with a straight face that the 2nd place finishes are flawed ? (and that doesn't make any sense at all) ..... Tiger is your hero we get that, while Jack is a hero for another generation .... Tiger dominated during his prime as Jack did his

[smootness]

I'm with Dawg61 here. I just can't consider Nicklaus the best ever when I know there was a golfer who was definitely better for an extended period of time than anyone else ever thought about being.

Tiger Woods, from late 1999 to about 2005, was just absurdly, otherworldly good. No one else will ever be able to duplicate what he did during that time period. He won just about half of the events he entered over that stretch; just think about that, it's mind-boggling.

Tiger Woods from that era chews up and spits out Nicklaus from any point in time.

Now, obviously Nicklaus lasted longer than Woods appears to be lasting, and he won a major at 46, which is incredible. His record just may stand, and he was undoubtedly better than anyone else, outside of Tiger, by a wide margin. But for me, that stretch for Tiger, and the fact that he was able to reach #1 in the world after 3 complete swing overhauls (does not get talked about to nearly the extent it should since for some guys, just a minor tweak completely ruins their game), puts him over the top. Some probably won't fully appreciate that stretch from him until they look back in 20 years and realize just how many tournaments he won and try to remember if it really happened and how someone could possibly do that.

[FISHDAWG]

[QUOTE=smootness;184244]I'm with Dawg61 here. I just can't consider Nicklaus the best ever when I know there was a golfer who was definitely better for an extended period of time than anyone else ever thought about being.

Tiger Woods, from late 1999 to about 2005, was just absurdly, otherworldly good. No one else will ever be able to duplicate what he did during that time period. He won just about half of the events he entered over that stretch; just think about that, it's mind-boggling.

Tiger Woods from that era chews up and spits out Nicklaus from any point in time.

ever hear about some guys named Sam Snead, Byron Nelson, or Ben Hogan ?

[Dawgface]

[QUOTE=smootness;184244]I'm with Dawg61 here. I just can't consider Nicklaus the best ever when I know there was a golfer who was definitely better for an extended period of time than anyone else ever thought about being.

Tiger Woods, from late 1999 to about 2005, was just absurdly, otherworldly good. No one else will ever be able to duplicate what he did during that time period. He won just about half of the events he entered over that stretch; just think about that, it's mind-boggling.

Tiger Woods from that era chews up and spits out Nicklaus from any point in time.

ever hear about some guys named Sam Snead, Byron Nelson, or Ben Hogan ?

Yup, Nelson won 11 straight pga tour events.

[FISHDAWG]

which NO ONE else has done since

[Churchill]

I'm with Dawg61 here. I just can't consider Nicklaus the best ever when I know there was a golfer who was definitely better for an extended period of time than anyone else ever thought about being.

Tiger Woods, from late 1999 to about 2005, was just absurdly, otherworldly good. No one else will ever be able to duplicate what he did during that time period. He won just about half of the events he entered over that stretch; just think about that, it's mind-boggling.

Tiger Woods from that era chews up and spits out Nicklaus from any point in time.

Now, obviously Nicklaus lasted longer than Woods appears to be lasting, and he won a major at 46, which is incredible. His record just may stand, and he was undoubtedly better than anyone else, outside of Tiger, by a wide margin. But for me, that stretch for Tiger, and the fact that he was able to reach #1 in the world after 3 complete swing overhauls (does not get talked about to nearly the extent it should since for some guys, just a minor tweak completely ruins their game), puts him over the top. Some probably won't fully appreciate that stretch from him until they look back in 20 years and realize just how many tournaments he won and try to remember if it really happened and how someone could possibly do that.

Twenty years from now Tiger will be the Lance Armstrong of golf.

[smootness]

[QUOTE=smootness;184244]I'm with Dawg61 here. I just can't consider Nicklaus the best ever when I know there was a golfer who was definitely better for an extended period of time than anyone else ever thought about being.

Tiger Woods, from late 1999 to about 2005, was just absurdly, otherworldly good. No one else will ever be able to duplicate what he did during that time period. He won just about half of the events he entered over that stretch; just think about that, it's mind-boggling.

Tiger Woods from that era chews up and spits out Nicklaus from any point in time.

ever hear about some guys named Sam Snead, Byron Nelson, or Ben Hogan ?

First, LOL on trying to compare that era.

Second, ok, let's go there:

Sam Snead - 15% winning percentage
Byron Nelson - 18% winning percentage
Ben Hogan - 21% winning percentage
Tiger? Over 27% for his career, and it was quite a bit higher during the stretch I was talking about. 27%, in this era. Even the guys you mentioned, who played in an era far more conducive to winning percentage due simply to the number of guys in tournaments, can't hold a candle to Tiger here.

What was Nicklaus' win %? 12%. And no one else in history is even really that close to that. That's the thing, Tiger is going to break Sam Snead's win % in far fewer years while playing fewer tournaments per year, in a completely different era with much more competition. I'm telling you, I don't think some people truly understand what Tiger has done.

He's won 42.8% of the WGC events he's entered, and from late 1999 through 2006, he won 11/29 majors he entered, and that includes a stretch in which he went through a major swing overhaul. There was an 11-major stretch from 1999 to 2001 where he won seven of them.

When we look back in 20 years and nobody has won more than 10% or so of the tournaments they've entered over that stretch, we're going to realize just how special Tiger has been. It's unprecedented and it won't ever be matched again.

BTW, Tiger's win % in majors, even with his recent stretch, still stands at 20%. Jack Nicklaus' (at the time he won his final major, it's obviously not fair to count all those when he was too old to contend) was just over 17%.

[Coach34]

Younger people seem to have no concept of golf history and think domination started with Tiger for some reason

[smootness]

Twenty years from now Tiger will be the Lance Armstrong of golf.

Ha, please. First, let's just assume he did use PEDs. Please tell me how that helps so much in golf. Tiger could hit it far but guys now hit it further, and golf is far more about feel than it is distance.

[smootness]

Younger people seem to have no concept of golf history and think domination started with Tiger for some reason

Domination to this extent did.

And I understand golf history. I also understand that competition back when Sam Snead was playing just can't be compared. It was easier to win a higher % of events then. It's why you see guys like Snead, Hogan, and Nelson with far higher win %s than Nicklaus, Palmer, Player, etc. But then there's Tiger, who in an even more competitive era, rose above even the old-timers.

[FISHDAWG]

they still had a CUT then just as they do today ... I don't understand the "competition" thing you refer to ..... your argument is nothing more than a pom-pom cheer for Tiger ............ no, I DON"T think you understand golf history

[smootness]

they still had a CUT then just as they do today ... I don't understand the "competition" thing you refer to ..... your argument is nothing more than a pom-pom cheer for Tiger ............ no, I DON"T think you understand golf history

My point is that when Sam Snead won his first Masters, there were 58 players in the field. When Tiger won his first, there were 86 and this year there were 97. There are just more players in the field now, which means there are more players to compete against who can go on a run and beat you. There are also obviously more players who have poured their lives into playing golf, so the player at the bottom of the field is much more capable of beating you now than was the case back then.

When Snead played, if you were the best player on tour (Snead is an all-time great, no doubt, one of the top 5 or 6 players ever), you stood a decent chance of winning any tournament because there weren't a whole lot of other really good players capable of beating you. Now, there are plenty of guys who have devoted their lives to playing golf who can beat you in any given week. That's why, over time, the win percentages of the best golfers have dropped, unless you believe that it just so happened that all of the best golfers ever played back then. Win percentages have been dropping, yet here comes Tiger who not only towers over everyone of his era, his win percentage dwarfs even the old guys.

It's not a 'pom-pom cheer' for Tiger, it's just fact. If you want to argue that Tiger wasn't the most dominant golfer of all-time around 2000, given all the changes in the game, you're simply blinded by bias against him.

Ask any player on tour, ask any older player, ask any golf analyst - what Tiger did for 5-10 years was both unprecedented and unlikely to ever be matched again.

[Dawg61]

[/B]

competition is competition regardless of time or era ..... your statement is way off base .... maybe todays 100th ranked player should try his talent with 1965 technology .... maybe today's player couldn't make it on yesterdays' tour when there weren't so many sponsors to absorb expenses and quick success was key to remaining on tour ....... and how can you say with a straight face that the 2nd place finishes are flawed ? (and that doesn't make any sense at all) ..... Tiger is your hero we get that, while Jack is a hero for another generation .... Tiger dominated during his prime as Jack did his



I generally like your posts but I have to disagree on this one. Tiger intimidated all the also rans early in his career, but can't do it with the young lions. He also couldn't have done it with Jack, Palmer, Miller, Trevino, Hogan, probably even guys like Beard, Moody, Boros, and I'm sure I'm leaving some out. Tiger came along at a lucky time or he would have had less majors.

You're missing my point. Take Tiger and Jack out of the equations and just compare the top 100 guys in 1965 to the top 100 in 2014. Once you get past the top 20 in 1965 the talent level falls off a cliff. Therefore you have to summarize that it is much easier to finish at the top of a tournament in 1965 than in 2014. Still a very difficult feat no matter what year though so I'm not trying to totally discredit Jack here. He's a fantastic golfer and no doubt the second best of all-time in my eyes.

And Tiger Woods is not my hero. I see his ugly personal flaws just like the rest of you but I don't let it cloud my judgement when talking best ever.

[smootness]

You're missing my point. Take Tiger and Jack out of the equations and just compare the top 100 guys in 1965 to the top 100 in 2014. Once you get past the top 20 in 1965 the talent level falls off a cliff. Therefore you have to summarize that it is much easier to finish at the top of a tournament in 1965 than in 2014. Still a very difficult feat no matter what year though so I'm not trying to totally discredit Jack here. He's a fantastic golfer and no doubt the second best of all-time in my eyes.

And Tiger Woods is not my hero. I see his ugly personal flaws just like the rest of you but I don't let it cloud my judgement when talking best ever.

I'm essentially in 100% agreement. I'm no Tiger fanboy; I think the guy is a terrible person. I just love watching him play golf, especially for that stretch around the turn of the century...because it was obvious we were watching history before our eyes.

[War Machine Dawg]

Might want to cut on your sarcasm meter, 61. Obviously I don't wish Tiger had been murdered. But Elin had every right to beat his ass to a bloody pulp for what he'd done. Don't pretend like he's a victim who didn't have it coming.

[Dawg61]

Might want to cut on your sarcasm meter, 61. Obviously I don't wish Tiger had been murdered. But Elin had every right to beat his ass to a bloody pulp for what he'd done. Don't pretend like he's a victim who didn't have it coming.

Haha you're right I shoulda known that was sarcasm, my bad.

[Goat Holder]

Dawg61 you don't know anything about back surgery if that's what you think. Tiger is likely done. He'll never be as good as he once was.

I mean, have you seen him play lately? He sucks. Dude needs to work on his flexibility, he lifted too many weights.

[drunkernhelldawg]

I think the only way he's ever going to win another major is to take a year or so off and work out a gentler swing. If he doesn't, it's just going to be one injury after another for the rest of his career.

I have a different take. I think his competitive spirit is blurred by all of his personal and injury problems. I won't be surprised to see him win another big one if and when he regains his amazing focus on winning.

[Dawg61]

Dawg61 you don't know anything about back surgery if that's what you think. Tiger is likely done. He'll never be as good as he once was.

I mean, have you seen him play lately? He sucks. Dude needs to work on his flexibility, he lifted too many weights.

You testing my sarcasm meter again? Lol. Tiger is recovering from surgery so he hasn't played at all. Day of his surgery he was still ranked #1 in the world. He'll return soon and be closer to his pre-2009 form. Surgery for a pinched nerve is going to end up being a great thing for Tiger.

[Goat Holder]

You testing my sarcasm meter again? Lol. Tiger is recovering from surgery so he hasn't played at all. Day of his surgery he was still ranked #1 in the world. He'll return soon and be closer to his pre-2009 form. Surgery for a pinched nerve is going to end up being a great thing for Tiger.

Again, you don't know much about pinched nerves and the surgery required for them. Ask myself, Chaz Ramsey or Jarrod Parks (who by the way was apparently in a bad car accident). You've already been owned once in this thread with the Nike stuff, don't push your luck.

[Dawgfan77]

[QUOTE=FISHDAWG;184254]

Yup, Nelson won 11 straight pga tour events.

True but some of those events were the Miami Four ball and Seminole invitTional not true PGA tour events

[smootness]

Again, you don't know much about pinched nerves and the surgery required for them. Ask myself, Chaz Ramsey or Jarrod Parks (who by the way was apparently in a bad car accident). You've already been owned once in this thread with the Nike stuff, don't push your luck.

I've had a severe herniated disc with a pinched nerve twice, though luckily I've been able to correct it with physical therapy both times and have avoided surgery. I know a couple of people who have had surgery, though, and it just depends. Some people aren't ever 100% again, others are able to be essentially pain-free while still maintaining much of their athleticism afterward. It depends partly on how damaged the nerve is.

With the physical shape Tiger's always been in, if the nerve isn't permanently damaged much, there's probably a pretty good chance he can come back and be ok for an extended period of time. I don't know what kind of surgery he had; if they had to fuse anything, then he'll lose a little bit of flexibility but it shouldn't be anything major. If they just chipped away part of the disc, he'll be fine.

In regard to Nike, nobody owned anybody. Nike has always made apparel and shoes. Yes, Dawg61 threw those in, and he was mistaken, but his point still stands - Nike Golf essentially didn't exist before Tiger. They were not in the business of making any clubs or any golf equipment; yes, they made some t-shirts. They weren't 'in the golf game' before Tiger and now they're a major player. I'm sure they would have made the attempt with or without Tiger, but they probably would not have been able to gain any major traction without him.

[Dawg61]

You've already been owned once in this thread with the Nike stuff, don't push your luck.

Really Goat? Cause Curtis Strange is wearing a Nike polo. Don't be a dumbass. Tiger Woods IS Nike Golf.

"Tiger's relationship with Nike is especially entangled. The two have been together since the day Tiger turned pro in 1996. Before he came on board, Nike had no golf division. Today Nike is a major player in golf, selling Tiger-branded clubs, clothes and gear that bring in hundreds of millions in revenue. Tiger even has a special arrangement where he gets veto power on any product that Nike creates in his image."

http://www.investopedia.com/financial-edge/0110/the-tiger-woods-effect---12-billion-wiped-out.aspx

[Dawg61]

Before Tiger there was no Nike Golf Division. This is what Nike Golf is doing ANNUALLY now

"Last year in golf, Nike had about 7 percent market share -- $726 million in sales -- of golf's $10 billion market. The division has 750 employees, 250 of whom work at the headquarters -- "The Clubhouse" -- in a Beaverton office park about two miles north of the company's main World Headquarters campus."

http://www.oregonlive.com/playbooks-profits/index.ssf/2013/01/nike_golf_competes_in_unusual.html

[Martianlander]

[QUOTE=FISHDAWG;184254]

Yup, Nelson won 11 straight pga tour events.

And I believe he said he won around $2800 that year, just to compare money.

[FISHDAWG]

Winning percentage in majors

Bobby Jones........44%
Tiger Woods........33%

[mic]

Im not a Tiger Fan.. But Eldrick has done more for golf than anyone has. If he plays in a tourney the ratings are always higher. I am more apt to tune in to a non major if Tiger is playing.. Even the majors take a hit in ratings if Tiger dosent play. He did go thru a stretch that's the greatest ever. And probable will never be done again..
I bet if Jack could have played during this era he would have done as much or more for golf than Tiger. And if he could have played with the equipment now compared to then he probably would have won more majors..
Also The "Golf Gods" may be doing their best to make sure he doesn't break Jack's record. They are a fickle bunch..