What's the fuss over Tiger Wood's new swing?

Surely if his swing complies with the rules then it's alright isn't it?

Is it the other players spitting their dummies out as the best player in the world just got better?

I think that's the case - they're just gutted that no-one has come within touching distance of him, while he has had his dodgy period...and now he's back!

Tiger Rules!

I think many of the other players are afraid of him. I've seen them up against him in play offs and Tiger has won with a par after the other player crumbled.

Woods is the best of this era but Jack Nicklaus is the best of all time. During Nicklaus's era there was much more competition.

I think you have the wrong end of the stick.

The "controversy" is people thought that remodelling his swing may not be a good idea because he was so good before.

For example, David Duval remodelled his swing and went from being a top 5 player to being very very average.

Originally posted by Yodameister
....David Duval remodelled his swing and went from being a top 5 player to being very very average.
I think Duval is a bad example. His swing changed due to physical restrictions (amongst others a back injury from 2000). He didn't choose to alter a World No1 swing. His swing naturally changed - for the worse.

Faldo is a good example. Turned pro as a promising young golfer in '77, then spent a number of years re-building his swing under Leadbetter, before going on to win 6 majors.

Originally posted by Ginner
I think Duval is a bad example. His swing changed due to physical restrictions (amongst others a back injury from 2000). He didn't choose to alter a World No1 swing. His swing naturally changed - for the worse.

Faldo is a good example. Turned pro as a promising young golfer in '77, then spent a number of years re-building his swing under Leadbetter, before going on to win 6 majors.

Its not the same for everyone though. I was just basically saying the "why change a winning formula?" argument.

And in golf especially there is a lot of psychology involved, and Tiger's self control is perhaps his greatest strength, he never lets a bad shot effect him (which I guess is a bit easier if you are always winning anyway!)

Originally posted by Yodameister
Its not the same for everyone though. I was just basically saying the "why change a winning formula?" argument.
Yup. I know. Just thought I'd point out that Duval didn't purposefully deconstruct a swing that had gotten him to No1 in the world, (like Woods has done and been criticised for doing).
Originally posted by Yodameister
And in golf especially there is a lot of psychology involved, and Tiger's self control is perhaps his greatest strength, he never lets a bad shot effect him (which I guess is a bit easier if you are always winning anyway!)
Yes, and I think Tiger has the game and physical ability to get himself out of trouble moreso than his contemporaries. His game (especially his accurate length) also removes trouble/hazards that come in to play for most other top 10 golfers.

I think his performance at the Old Course showed a more mature Tiger than we've seen before. It bodes well for his future (30's are traditionally golfers' prime years - Nicklaus won most of his majors in his 30's - Tiger is 29!) and must be worrying the hell out of Singh, Els, Mickelson, et al.