they never Jack-proofed a course, though... courses ARE tiger proofed now, and courses are far longer to combat the guys hitting it farther.
how? they are making the courses more difficult, thus making his records more impressive. hell, ask jack, he will tell you that tiger's A-game would crush his. he says it on tv all the time.
True. But we've already assumed that the equipment is better today giving players more advantage causing these changes. It's hard to even compare two athletes from the same sport, different era, much less two different sports.
I hate when ESPN loves all over the 85 Bears. Most teams today would crush the 85 Bears. ....ok maybe not crush....but still
On the 630 yard par 5, Woods crushed his tee shot and then blistered his long iron safely onto the putting surface. He almost made a 60 foot eagle. Looks like it's not working.
They tried, but it obviously didn't work. Tiger's short game (chipping, pitch shots, bunker play) is much better than Jack's. They are the two best clutch putters I have ever seen. Tiger's dominance is more mental than physical.
I went with Federer. He's more dominant now. Over the long haul, Tiger has been more dominant. It seems he's been winning majors since he was born...at least that's what ESPN would lead you to believe. Of those 150 that Tiger competes against, how many are really good enough to beat him? How many of those have won a major?
i dont dispute that tiger is the greatest golfer that ever lived. he just isnt as dominant as federer. who didnt even lose a single set (!) during the australian open.
it really is so damn hard to compare... b/c i mean, how do you compare winning 7 weeks in a row to not losing a set? it really is impossible.
