Long for show, short for go, Pick.

As long as the public was focused on Wood's long game, birds sang, the sun rose and endorsements flowed. The public only needed a Disney-fied wake up kiss.

That kiss went to someone else. Several someone elses. Tiger's "short game" revealed, in succession, feet of clay, legs of clay, torso of clay and even eyebrows of clay.

Heroes have shown the ability to shoot themselves in the leg, literally and figuratively. Industries exist to create and dismantle them. We pay for our ticket.

From Fatty Arbuckle to Tiger Woods, the game goes on.

tiger is average at best during ryder cup, so i don't think it changes the odds much.
but the deal is, tiger was poertrayed as being bigger than golf...golf was just his medium to change the world. that's how he was marketed, by his dad, nike, buick, IMG, etc. all of those people porbably knew who tiger really was/is and sold the lie. a lot of people bought it. and they will again...right after tiger proves he's the front runner.

uhh... hey Signe.... sup?

I expect a lot of Tigers problems are his personal problems and its in his head. His game will return I expect by next years Masters. I don't see him winning tournaments by 8 to 10 shots anymore but he'll win enough to get Nicklaus' major record. Tiger's 2000 US Open was the best anyone
has ever played golf. Better than Nicklaus, Hogan and Snead.

Chances are less than 1 percent that Tiger wins the PGA Championship. The U.S. Ryder Cup team won't be hurt by Tiger not being there.

All Big 8, 2nd base, 1966. Info available on any Sooner letterman web site.

Gene, one way to gauge "best ever" is the esteem of a contemporary's peers. The other is obviously average score, number of Championships and top five finishes per tournaments played. Those simple standards could be applied regardless of course and equipment changes. There is an arc of consistent excellence by those standards that starts with Walter Hagen and Bobby Jones, and continues through Sam Snead, Ben Hogan, Byron Nelson, Jack and Tiger (omissions of others is inadvertent). Only the latter two have had the opportunity to make "real" money competing on the tube with enormous corporate backing. The market place has changed which causes some tourneys to be far more important now than sixty years ago.

Mr. Picker, I thought we were level? When you say "Majors" do you include The Masters? That is a very high classed invitational but because of a very limited field, it can't be compared to a US Open or The Open. Let me opine that if Bobby Jones and Jack were in their prime today, Mr. Jones would win 2 - 3 Majors every year and Jack and Tiger would be very competitive in the others. Jack and Tiger never came up to the level of Mr. Jones.