This is not a vent board or any other kind of therapy. Before you hit the POST button, ask yourself if your contribution will add to the level of discussion going on.
Important notes on articles:
- Please do not copy entire articles into your post; rather, provide links to them.. We are now links-only for ALL Internet publications. If only a small portion of the article pertains to your post, Fair Use allows you to copy those one or two paragraphs, provided you cite the author's name and the publication for which he writes. Otherwise, put a link in the HTTP Link box.
- Even if you're copying a reference to an article, provide a link to the page from which the article came. We're trying to cut down on duplicate topics, and the posting process will check the link to your article to see if it's already being discussed on this board. At the very least, you'll save yourself some grief on the boards.
- If your first reaction after reading the article you're going to share is the author is uninformed / stupid / a jerk / all of the above, it's not worth sharing with anyone. Not every article needs to be discussed. The more the hair-pulling articles are discussed (e.g. ESPN Page 2), the more the authors will write hair-pulling articles.
Post being replied to
Very similar for me by Pat85
I also find myself cheering for Tiger more as he gets older, as did a lot of the Palmer fans as Jack got older. IMO Jack faced a better caliber of clutch opposition than Tiger has (at least so far). I would like to see one of these young guns become a Tom Watson, Lee Trevino or Gary Player and take a couple of majors away from him in a duel. I guess Koepka did that at the PGA last fall (not so much last Sunday). AND I recognize the depth of fields is stronger in Tiger's era compare to Jack. Golf is more interesting with Tiger and if his chase of Nicklaus is back on that will make it even more compelling over the next decade. Always fun to debate GOAT, and plenty of good reasons to make the case for either Jack or Tiger.