Posnanski: Why do so many assume Tiger Woods will return to form one day?

18 is a lot. Hell, 4 is a lot and that's what Tiger still has left to close the gap.

If Tiger comes up short of the record, I would hate to see the common belief be "oh well he just never fully recovered from the scandal/divorce." It just sounds like a cop out to me. Has it played a role in him falling off his dominant pace? Sure it has. But it's certainly not the only thing. There are a number of variables that are factored into a golf career that spans so many years. He's 0-for-8 in majors since his knee surgery. He's on his 4th swing coach. His nerves are growing older. He's had 2 laser surgeries on his eyes. The death of his father. "Tiger-proofing" at Augusta. Pro golf is deeper than ever now in the 20-25-year old range. He has admitted several times that he does not practice as much now as he did before having kids. There are so many things at play here.

Tiger has long been credited with being so tough mentally. Well he can't have it both ways. If he's so darn mentally tough then he should be able to play through his off-course distractions. So after years of people crediting him with such mental toughness now everyone is blaming the distractions for his struggles. You can't have your cake and eat it too.

Much of what makes Jack's 18 so impressive is that he was able to sustain such a high level of play for so long. Jack had 5 kids. He had his father die during the peak of his career. He struggled briefly with his weight. He had personal-life issues with financial trouble.

If Tiger comes up short of the mark, people will forever say "What could have been only if ...." But that "if" is a large part of the equation.

 

What used to set Tiger apart was his ability to grind out a 70 on a day when he should have shot 75. Even when not at his best, he never played himself out of contention. During this slump, that hasn't been the case. He hasn't had that edge.
Until Tiger came along, Nicklaus was the greatest clutch putter ever. He never seemed to miss a putt he had to make. I think Tiger, until now, was at least Jack's equal in that regard.
I don't know if Tiger will pass Jack, but I'm not ready to say he's done, either.

 

And Jack won his final major at the age of 46, with persimmon woods, and fat. No one in golf worked out back then. That gives Woods at least a window of 11 years to get this done. He'll stay in shape and still won't have the competition that Jack had. Jack played against tougher guys when it comes to the top 10 or 20 in the world back then. The Tour is deeper now when it comes to the top 100 or 125. I think if Tiger can find a way to win the next major, he'll crack the record.

 

Nicklaus wasn't fat in 1986.

He was fat indeed in his early years, but after the early 1970s, he was relatively trim.

Not Tiger Woods trim, but trim compared to what he was in his 20s.

 

Read Jack's various accounts of that Masters. He said one thing that helped is that he bulked up a little after losing some weight. He said the weight loss changed his swing and he realized it wouldn't hurt to eat a little. Either way, he wasn't on treadmills or hitting the weights. The 1986 Jack might not have been fat in the Craig Stadler sense but he certainly was not sculpted.

 

Jack Nicklaus may not have been anyone's version of Adonis, but he also never had his knee rebuilt several times, he didn't have a bum Achilles tendon, he never had serious neck problems, or a bulking disk in his back. The idea that Woods will be able to stay in peak physical condition for another decade and pound balls endlessly on the range is a fantasy.

He'll be fitter than Nicklaus, no question, and at some point he'll have six months where he'll probably get hot with his putter, and he'll look like the old Woods, however briefly. I think Woods is especially likely to win a few more majors on some of the shorter links courses in the British Open rotation over the next decade.

But Nicklaus also had the same swing from age 12 to about age 65. The fact that he finished T-6 at the Masters in 1998 at age 58, being in contention all day, is almost as impressive than finishing first in 1986.

 

Double D, this is probably going to be the norm for ALL the younger golfers who're so into physical strength, training and whacking the ball many miles. If they become more like jocks in other sports, the frequency of their injuries will change and so will the nature of those injuries, that is, more severe. Hell, for the first 40 years of my life, the most serious injury suffered by a U.S. golfer was when Lee Trevino got hit by lightning.

 

What is less likely, Tiger recovering or asking the same question about Vick 2 years ago? Let's get ready to go through all of that again with Burress, though with less fanfare - there's no People for the Ethical Treatment of Your Own Leg.

 

I think what many people are failing to realize is that while Tiger is a fitness guru and will be in better shape in his 40's than Nicklaus was, the other tour players are also hitting the gym, eating right, etc. and extending their careers as well. Tiger is not the only one working out anymore. He will not have a longevity edge over his competition because they are doing the same thing nowadays. The other tour players will also be in better shape in their 40's than Jack was. So from a longevity standpoint, it's more or less going to be a level playing field because they are all doing the same thing as Tiger. Just like it was a level playing field for Jack in terms of longevity because nobody (except Gary "the fitness freak" Player) was working out back then.

There is one thing that cannot be extended with any amount of workouts or nutrition and that is nerves. As you grow older, so do your nerves. What did Tom Watson say after nearly winning the Open at age 59? He said he just didn't feel the same over those pressure putts as he did in his younger years. Any older player will say the same thing. It's one thing that older guys like Watson, Kenny Perry, Greg Norman and some others have come close to majors in their older years. But actually closing it out and winning is a whole different animal. It's easy to say "well if he had made just a couple more putts then he would've won." Yes, but do you know what the difference is between someone like Tiger and a no-name fringe player who struggles to make cuts? Just a couple putts. A couple putts -- especially in a major -- is much more than just a couple of putts. You can't compare coming close to actually winning.

Also, while golf is getting older it's also getting younger. The 20-somethings are better and deeper today than ever before. So while careers of the older guys like Tiger will be extended, there is more competition coming in from the opposite end of the spectrum.

 

The injuries and wear and tear will definitely be a huge thing. And DD's points about guys winning in their 30s is a great one. But, since Tiger was far better in his prime than everyone else historically - with the exception of Jack - I don't think it's absurd to think that his later career will be more like Jack's than all the other greats. Those two really are completely separate from everyone else. For instance, yes, he'd have to win more than Mickelson has his entire career, but he's already won more than three times as many as Mickelson, in about four fewer years. If Tiger has lost something, permanently, what he still has could certainly still be capable of accomplishing what Mickelson has in his career. Mickelson: one of the top 20 ever, certainly. Still, not even close to Jack and Tiger.

And as terrible as he is, as pathetic as his driving is (ahem), as bad as his putter can look, as unfocused as he appears at times...he was T4, T4, T23, T28 in the majors last year (compare those numbers to 2003, 2004, which were worse). If he gets it back together at all, I don't think it's a great leap to see him winning a major this year, two another year, another in three years, etc. And he's had surgeries and the fiascoes of last year and 2003 and 2004 aren't perfect comparisons, but they are useful in that we have seen Tiger struggle before. We have seen him look bad for entire seasons. And he's come back. In the 2005 paperback of Johnny's Miller book, he wrote about Tiger's 2003 and 2004 struggles and said he didn't think he'd break Jack's record. He then won six of the next 14 majors. I don't think it's outrageous to think he can get it back again, even at 35, even with the injuries, physical and otherwise.

And with the injuries caveat attached, if Tiger wins one of the next 13 majors - just one - he'd again be ahead of Jack's pace, who won his 15th at 38 at the U.S. Open in 1978. Five does seem a lot right now - it is a lot - but one out of the next 13? To me that seems perfectly reasonable to expect and it doesn't have anything to do with needing him to break it or not wanting him to be Mays with the Mets.

He's certainly not the same. Will almost certainly never come close to being as dominant. But he can certainly still get to 19.

It's a good story by Pos. But believing he still has a good shot at 19 isn't simply because of a need for us to have our athletes stay young forever; there are actual reasons to believe it's still perfectly plausible.

The injury, wear and tear argument makes me think of Simmons' column from last week about guys like Kobe, Nash, Pierce and Allen and how they're extending what we think is possible for perimeter players when it comes to longevity. While these younger golfers might have more severe injuries, they also have the means to rehab and recuperate that are far beyond what previous generations had (insert PED joke).

 

Some strong points.

I think the biggest major win for Tiger is the next one. If he doesn't win at Augusta this year it will be three full years since his last major. Jack had two winless streaks of around three years during his career (67 US to 70 British; 75 PGA to 78 British; I'm not counting the 6 years without a major prior to his Miracle at the Masters).

If Tiger can win ONE more and prove to himself (not to mention to all of us talking heads, but more importantly to himself) that he can indeed get back to major championship form than I think the floodgates could come open a little and he could bang out a couple more. But winning that first major post-surgery, post scandal, post 4th swing coach, etc. is crucial.