Talk is cheap. It is easy to say that Tiger Woods is so much better now than he was in 2000. Even Woods has been engaging of late in this verbal conditioning, further convincing his opponents that they have no chance. Yes, he can play more shots, and he’s improved his course management. But there is a good chance that these advances have been offset by a decline in his ability to execute other shots, most noticeably the driver.
So, the question remains: is Tiger really better in 2007 than in 2000? Considering the magnitude of his 2000 season, I had to wonder.
I decided to compare his play using a set of conditions that are as equal as possible, like a scientist conducting an experiment. It turns out that he played on the same seven courses at about the same time of the year in both seasons. I chose these seven to be my statistical lab.
Tiger’s scores can skew the results, and he or any player’s results can vary widely. So, to verify that the test conditions were as identical as possible, I calculated the average score for the top 10 players other than Woods. There were some significant differences in the individual events. The average at the 2007 Masters was 8.8 shots higher than in 2000, but the scores were 5.2 shots lower at the 2007 Tour Championship. In sum, the 10 best averaged .20 .o3 shots per round more in 2007, so the overall difficulty of the seven eight events was nearly identical.
Now for Tiger’s results. He won three of these seven eight events in 2000, four in 2007 both years. His average score per round was over a shot about a half shot better in 2000. He hit over 1.5 1.1 fairways more per round in 2000, an excellent indicator of his ability to hit long and accurate shots seven years ago. His GIR was slightly better in 2000, and he took fewer putts per round in that year.
(Note: Thanks to reader BD for pointing out that I had overlooked Cog Hill in my original figures.)
Woods 2000 vs. 2007 - Eight Same Course Events
———————2000————-2007
10 Non-W.*—-69.44———-69.41
Score————-68.34———-68.91
Fairways———9.53————-8.41
GIR—————73.78———–71.70
Putts————–28.41———–28.63
*Scores of the 10 best players at each event - excluding Woods.
Woods 2000 vs. 2007 - Seven Same Course Events
———————2000————-2007
10 Non-W.*—-69.49———-69.69
Score————-68.07———-69.43
Fairways———9.57————-8.00
GIR—————73.21———–70.64
Putts————–28.14———–28.82
*Scores of the 10 best players at each event - excluding Woods.
Tiger likes to think that he’s improving, and he definitely is, especially compared to the versions we witnessed from 2001-2006. But Tiger 2000 is the one version that he’ll have difficulty topping no matter how hard he works, how many shots he masters, or how intelligently he plots his way around the course.
Tiger 2000 was better at hitting long and accurate shots, golf’s most difficult challenge, with Nicklaus-like artistry. The Woods of today is superior in so many facets to the 2000 version. Bu he’s also become a pitcher who’s lost his heater, and who now wins with smarts and location.
Coming Soon - 22 Days of Masters Coverage at capellongolf.com
RSS
8 responses so far ↓
1 BD // Mar 20, 2008 at 5:47 am
Phil: Good work. Could you list the courses? Also, what about putts-per-GIR?
2 Ron // Mar 20, 2008 at 5:59 am
Actually, these statistics don’t surprise me at all. I’m glad to see these comparisons because it really seemed like he hit it better in 2000. He once even commented about pressing Fred Funk on winning the driving accuracy in 2000.
3 Phil // Mar 20, 2008 at 7:53 am
BD, Thanks for asking. The seven are: Torrey Pines, Bay Hill, Augusta National, Sawgrass, Muirfield Village, Firestone, East Lake
Putts per GIR are not available at the for the individual events (or I haven’t found them or don’t have access).
RON, I agree. Here’s another eye opener: in 2000 he hit 71.22% of the fairways (#54 on tour), in 2007 it was 59.83 (#152), and he’s probably using a lot more irons and fairway metals now then back then.
4 Kanadianhozer // Mar 20, 2008 at 8:05 am
Dudes I think you are forgetting a few vital variables into the matrix that you are thinking can give us a ruff guesstimate of Tiger’s progress, if we want to second guess tiger..lol…sum of the basic factors that need to be factored in imho, are the weather, golf ball improvements, Tiger’s new driver, and ’senior clubs, Green Superintendants of courses (setting them up more difficult with ruff etc @the longer landing spots), …etc, etc…and I know that you were not making a finite list, but still, there is a lotta factors that would suggest that Eldrick’s present claim is true, even without the added ’spin’ of Stevie Williams, who must now be making a fortine, and how is it again when the caddies (stevie) can probably make more than the 150th place pro on the PGA tour…lol…slight exaggeration for affect,….but mebbe Stevie is getting paid by Nike etc to be a shill as well these days?…
5 BD // Mar 20, 2008 at 8:30 am
Phil — Shouldn’t Cog Hill be on this list? If so, that should mitigate the gap somewhat as I have Tiger 15 strokes better there in ‘07 versus ‘00.
6 Phil // Mar 20, 2008 at 9:18 am
BD - Thanks for pointing out the Cog Hill omission. The tables now reflect the changes.
Kanadianhozer - Thanks for your insights. Yes, it is true that we are trying to analyze an ever changing world of golf as if it were static. And that is precisely why I like to look beyond the typical winning is everything or one stat or opinion tells all type of commentary that is all too prevalent in today’s golf world.
7 Aaron // Mar 28, 2008 at 2:57 am
Firstly, using only the top 10 best finishers in each given week is not the best practice since entire field scoring averages are available with a little bit of work. Also, why such focus on driving accuracy? You forget Tiger Woods is about 15-20 yards longer now than in 2000. Also, where did you get the idea that Tiger is hitting more fairway woods and irons now than he used to? In fact, it is the other way around. Since the courses have been legnthened, Tiger has been pushed into hitting more drivers nowadays than he used to. Remember 2000? Remember Tiger’s patented 2 iron stinger? Remember how many times he played that off of tees to get that 70% fairway stat? Factor in the extra length he has now, and you realize he is at about the same place with the driver…The reason he changed for the more length as opposed to the accuracy is because he saw Vijay Singh win 9 times in 2004 using the bomb-it-down-there-as-far-as-you-can method..so, in 2005, what did Tiger do? He changed drivers, length and type of shaft, and ended up 2nd in driving distance in 2005 with something like 316 yards off the tee. Your comment that you are trying to look beyond the “typical winning is everything” aspect is absurd, because that is all Tiger cares about! Since that is what Tiger is trying to achieve, winning more, and that is all, then THAT is the criteria you should be using. He does not care about his stats. He cares about the WINS. And until he needs to hit the ball in the fairway more to do that, the fairway% WONT be an issue. Go back to winning% as a comparison, and you will see he is better now. How can you not? He is winning at a better clip now than in 2000, despite how many of his challengers have gotten MUCH MUCH better. I’d have to say for that to happen, he has to have gotten a lot better too, huh? Yeah, think about it.
8 Aaron // Mar 28, 2008 at 3:06 am
Ahh, I would also like to point out one thing. Putting! The Tiger of 2000 putted his brains out. He finished 2nd in putting that year. He made almost everything that year, especially in majors! Now, does that mean Tiger2000 was a better putter than now? Well, I guess so. It’s hard to say, because we all know how fickle putting is. We all know one day, week, or even month we can have our putting and then the next its GONE. Well, ball striking wise, Tiger is far superior to 2000 in so many ways…however, his putting results are nowhere near the standard of 2000…Do a little research, and you will see, that if Tiger had putted like he did 2000 in the recent years..he would have won 4 majors in ‘05, 3 majors in ‘06, and 3 majors in 07′…all three of those years he had 2 majors where he finished all the way at the bottom of the field (and sometimes dead last) in putting, yet managed to only finish a couple strokes out of win (see ‘05 US open, ‘05 PGA, ‘06 Masters, ‘07 Masters, ‘07 Us Open). Think about that. Tiger putts like crap and still managers to practically win these majors. Think about how well he must be striking the ball to do that! Now think about if he had putted like 2000 in these majors? He would have ran away with them, just like he did in 2000.
Yes, Tiger had a pretty swing in 2000…however, it was not as effective as some people would like to believe. The driver was straighter simply because it was shorter. And his iron game has vastly improved since then, particularly with distance control, which is the key to good iron play. It’s the PUTTING that made 2000. If Tiger starts to putt like 2000, WATCH OUT. It looked like he almost started this year, but then at Doral he fell apart with the putter. Just like the last few years: a few good weeks, then it would leave him, just in time for the majors. Can’t wait to see him putt well in a major for a change..it would be a runaway.
Leave a Comment