Lou Ferriggoff wrote:
He's sure as hell not as accurate.
Interesting to note, though, that most of the guys, according to the stats, are less accurate now than in '97, to randomly pick a year. For example, the 50th guy in '97 in accuracy was around 72%, but the 50th guy now is around 64% (fairways hit). They aren't all worse golfers, obviously. I think it's because the PGA has tried to Tiger-proof courses ever since Tiger sodomized Augusta for his first green jacket. Narrower fairways, deeper rough. As for length off the tee, with more penal rough and never being all that accurate to begin with, Tiger clearly doesn't hack as wildly at the ball off the tee as he did when he came out. He is much more controlled relative to his younger self. Its not only Tiger, of course, that prompted the PGA to try to toughen up venues. Because there has been no control over ball technology, everyone hits it farther - if they want to - than they did 10 years ago. Not to mention the clubs these days aren't exactly mashie niblets and the like. One might argue that the technological changes have lessened the game. No more need, in most tournaments, to hit a 4 iron into a par 4 and try to hold the greens. Aside from narrowing the fairways and growing jungle rough, we now increasingly see insanely long holes, like the 667 yard par 5 at Oakmont. Some venerable old courses without extra real estate available are becoming unplayable for the purpose of PGA tournaments because they are too short.
As for the idea that Tiger must be juiced because he's bigger than he used to be, that's just stupid. The guy works out. Vanity might well be a part of it. Who knows? But its typical of these boards and humanity in general that some doofus would suggest he must be cheating. I expect that the next winner of the Nobel Peace Prize will be accused of juicing by some troglodyte on this board.