"IF YOU LIKE GOLF"
weekly online golf column
by
Chris Dortch
August 1, 2000

No sooner had the engraver finished putting Tiger Woods’ name on the British Open trophy last week, the outcry began. Given Woods’ second dismantling of a major championship field in a month, many wondered whether his dominance was hurting golf.

I decided to pose that question of some people in the local golf community whose opinion I value, and whose love of the game is unquestioned. Is Woods, who has won his four major championships by an average of 6.5 shots, hurting golf because no one has risen to challenge him?

I say no, but I wanted to ask around and see what other golf purists are thinking in light of Woods’ 15-stroke win at the U.S. Open and eight-shot win at the British. My expert analysts made some interesting comments.

"Would you rather watch history being made, or watch mediocrity?,’’ said Doug Stein, a principal partner in the Black Creek at Cummings Cove project. "I for one have always thought dynasties, and the ‘dominant’ players that often fuel them, are good for sports.

"When Babe Ruth hit more home runs than the rest of the league combined, was that good or bad for baseball? When a great performer transcends the old limits of what was achievable, then everyone else must step up their game as well."

My sentiments exactly. I was one of Woods’ harshest critics earlier in his career, not because he wasn’t a great player, but because of the way he treated the media and his lack of decorum around fans. But since Woods has polished his public relations act, I’ve begun to appreciate him for what he is: The best player in golf history.

After Woods has dusted every significant record in golf, I can tell the fellow geezers in my foursome that I interviewed him at The Honors, and The Farm and Augusta National. Truly, Woods is becoming a golfer for the ages. No, make that THE golfer for the ages. When he’s not playing in a tournament, frankly, I’m not interested in watching.

Is this bad for golf? Perhaps for the rank-and-file touring pro whose efforts go largely unnoticed. But when Woods is playing, televised golf has enjoyed unprecedented ratings.

"Woods’ dominance is good for the game," said Mike Jenkins, past president of the CDGA and founder of the Chattanooga TPC. "The TV ratings alone (when he’s playing) verify that."

"Look at the ratings," Stein said. "People watch to see Tiger chase Nicklaus. They root for him to beat everybody else, every time he tees it up, so they can have those ‘did you see that’ conversations and compare Tiger to Jack and Byron and Ben and Bobby."

It is incredible that, at 24, Woods has already fueled those kinds of conversations.

Is Woods better than Nicklaus? Name one shot that Nicklaus could hit better. Could he win 11 straight tournaments, as Nelson did? Woods probably wouldn’t play in 11 straight, but his recent accomplishment of six wins in as many appearances is comparable, given the overall depth of the fields. Could he win the Grand Slam in a single year, as Jones did? 

Were it not for two bad swings (that resulted in a double and triple bogey) at the Masters, where he finished fifth, Woods might be trying for the Slam at the PGA Championship this month. Whose to say he couldn’t pull off the feat some day?

What has set Woods apart from his talented peers and given rise to those comparisons with the greatest players in the game’s storied history? Again, there isn’t one facet of the game where Woods doesn’t excel.

He’s always been the straightest and longest driver on the tour, but when his distance control on short irons was causing him to hit approach shots over greens, he retooled his swing. Short putts used to give him problems because he tried to power-ram them into the hole, but he’s learned when to back off. Woods’ bunker play wasn’t the greatest last year, but he’s greatly improved it this season.

Along with physical skills, Woods also has a sharp, analytical mind. He’s fearless. He has a strong sense of golf history. No one loves playing the game more. Woods has a great support group around him, and a learned swing coach in Butch Harmon. Most important of all, with his fortune long since secure, Woods can concentrate solely on winning major championships.

Considering Nicklaus won the Masters at 46 and that Woods has begun to surpass the Golden Bear’s records, it isn’t inconceivable to suggest Woods can win majors until he’s 50. That gives him 26 more years to eclipse Nicklaus’ record of 18 majors. Nicklaus likes to add his two U.S. Amateur titles for a total of 20 majors, so if Woods does the same (he has three Amateur trophies), that makes him more than a third the way to Nicklaus’ record (with seven majors).

As Stein suggested, is Woods’ pursuit of history good or bad for golf?

"Not good, but EXCELLENT for golf,’’ said King Oehmig, a fine amateur player and son of Tennessee Golf Hall of Famer Lew Oehmig. "The bar has been raised, by a man of color in a white man’s domain. I love it. It’s as if God is saying, ‘Hey guys, take that.’ "

###