I think at least 3 of those (if not all 4) were by one stroke too.Originally posted by kennyboy
Second - 4
Originally posted by SJN
I think at least 3 of those (if not all 4) were by one stroke too.
He's had at least 2 seasons when he posted the low aggregate score in all 4 majors combined (but didn't win any of them).
A handful of strokes here and there over his career and he could have half a dozen majors. That's saying something in the Tiger-era.
Originally posted by kennyboy
Tiger Woods
Major starts - 42 (not including US amateur)
Wins - 10
Second - 2
Third - 3
Total top 10 finishes - 20
Tiger is obviously a much better closer, and some his major wins were run aways, but on a percentage basis based on top ten finishes:
Tiger - 48%
Phil - 42%
Pretty close, and pretty damn impressive.
Originally posted by SJN
ok then, if 27 wins, with 2 majors and all those 2nds, 3rds and top 10s means he "DON'T GOT WHAT IT TAKES", then who DOES have what it takes?
Originally posted by StarvinMarvin
HE'S A CHOKER PLAIN AND SIMPLE TO BE GREAT YOU HAVE TO BE CONSISTENT WHEN IT COUNTS AND HE'S NEVER REALLY BEEN THAT.......
MAJORS IS WHAT MEASURES GREATNESS IF YOU ASK ME
Originally posted by SJN
you didn't answer my question.
if Phil doesn't have what it takes, then name me some players who do
Originally posted by StarvinMarvin
I HATE PHIL DON'T REALLY FOLLOW EVERY OTHER PLAYERS STATS AS MUCH I JUST BASH HIM AND WATCH TIGER RUN SHIT LIKE IT OR NOT PHIL IS A CHOKE ARTIST BITCH AND WILL NEVER BE AS GREAT AS HE COULDA BEEN......
IF HE WAS CONSISTENT THERE WOULDN'T EVEN BE A PROBLEM HERE.....AND NOT CONSISTENTLY IN SECOND PLACE
WOOHOO I'M THE GREATEST PLAYER ALIVE I CAME IN SECOND IN EVERY EVENT I'VE EVER PLAYED BUT NEVER WON.....HALL OF FAME HERE I COME.........I DON'T THINKS SO AND THIS GOES FOR MORE PEOPLE THAN JUST PHIL I'M SURE
BUT KEEP CHEERING FOR HIM MAYBE HE'LL RULE TH SENIOR TOUR ONE DAY
BTW NEED CAPS FOR WORK AND IF I CHANGE IT FOR EACH POST MY STONER ASS FORGETS TO CHANGE IT BACK
Originally posted by kennyboy
![]()
And a fine day to you too. Get back to me when you know what you're talking about.
Originally posted by kennyboy
Give me a name. Tiger? Jack? Arnold? Who would you like to discuss / debate. I have no problem having an intelligent debate on the sport. We don't have to agree on things, but I think it's a little short sighted to discount someone just because they have only won 2 majors (Phil) It's obvious you're not a fan, and that's fine. But to discount his talent is not a fair assesment.