The Instigator
dcdriver
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
ewilliams1043
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Tiger Woods Will Eventually Surpass Jack Nicklaus' Record for Most Majors Won All Time (18)

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/1/2012 Category: Sports
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 2,331 times Debate No: 23998
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (0)

 

dcdriver

Pro

Resolved: Tiger Woods, should he remain on Tour for a similar length of time as Jack Nicklaus did, will eventually hold the record for most majors (consisting of the Masters, US Open, Open Championship, and PGA Championship) won by any single player.

From 1997 through 2008, Tiger Woods won a total of fourteen majors over the course of twelve seasons on Tour. Since 2008, however, he has failed to win a single major, missing a total of four due to injuries. (The 2008 Open Championship and PGA Championship and the 2011 US Open and Open Championship.) As it stands, Tiger Woods needs another five majors to surpass the record of eighteen majors currently owned by Jack Nicklaus. Here is why I believe that Tiger Woods will win at least five more majors over the course of his PGA career, thus surpassing the number of majors won by Jack Nicklaus.

First of all, it should be noted that Jack Nicklaus did not win his fifteenth major until he was thirty eight years old. Tiger Woods is currently thirty six years old, meaning that if he wins a major in 2012 or 2013 he would be ahead of the pace set by Jack Nicklaus despite going four or five years without winning a single major. All he would need to do after that is to keep pace with Jack Nicklaus by winning four more majors in the next eight seasons. Considering that Woods once won all four majors consecutively, winning four total majors over an eight year period should be no problem. (He also won every major at least twice in the eight year period from 1999-2006.)

Second, it should be noted that Jack Nicklaus won a major at age forty six in 1986. Given today's advanced training methods and technological advances, it is very likely that we will see players contend well into their forties, possibly into their fifties. One needs to not look back very far to see that this is already happening- Tom Watson nearly won the 2009 Open Championship at age fifty nine, and fifty two year old Fred Couples shared the thirty six hole lead heading into the weekend at this year's Masters. Since Tiger Woods possesses a greater degree of talent than either Watson or Couples (as evident by his superior achievements) it is safe to assume that Woods will compete in majors at least through age fifty. That gives him fifteen seasons, including 2012, to win five more majors. Since, as noted above, a major every other season shouldn't be a problem for Woods, a major every three seasons shouldn't be either.

Tiger Woods will surpass the majors record currently owned by Jack Nicklaus because he is immensely talented and has many years of competitive golf ahead of him. If someone would like to debate this, they must claim that either a.) Woods is not talented enough to win five more majors or b.) Woods does not have enough time left to win five more majors. I can argue both contentions.
ewilliams1043

Con

You have a flaw in your reasoning. A large part of your argument is that the golfers are becoming more physically fit. If you were to say only the older generation is becoming more fit then this may help your cause but because the entire field of golfers, young and old, are becoming progressively better at golf and progressively stronger there would be no possible change in the outcome.

You also stated how Jack Nicklaus had a draught in winning a major as well as Tiger, but may I remind you that Tiger had some personal problems in which he stopped golfing competitively and therefore lost production where as Jack Nicklaus continued to train and get better. Also in this argument you made, may I remind you Tiger Woods was injured he has yet to return to the old Tiger we are used to seeing. You can see now that as you stated neither Tiger or Jack had an advantage on each other at this point in life yet as I have shown Jack had a sleight edge over Tiger mostly because Tiger took a break in golfing and he has yet to look the same ever since.

You have presented a very compelling argument but I must say you have some logical inconsistencies in your argument as I have pointed out here. I thank you for the challenge as this is my first debate on here good luck! :)
Debate Round No. 1
dcdriver

Pro

I would like to thank my opponent for accepting this debate and wish him luck in what will be his first debate and probably mine as well, seeing as how the debate I posted before this one has yet to receive a second round response.

First of all, I would like to point out that my opponent misinterpreted my original post. I did not state that golfers were becoming more physically fit as he suggested, but merely that the advanced training and technology of today would allow golfers the opportunity to play longer than they had in the past. In addition, these advantages being available to everyone does not give older golfers an advantage over younger ones, but that wasn't my point. My point was not that Tiger Woods would have an advantage over the younger players, but that he would be able to play for a longer amount of time, thus increasing the likelihood of him winning nineteen majors.

It is also true that Tiger and Jack both suffered major droughts throughout their respective careers, but the fact that Tiger's most recent drought came as a result of personal problems does not make it any more severe as you have suggested. You claim that Tiger Woods has clearly not returned to the level of play we saw from him earlier in his career, but Woods has already won two events in 2012 with four finishes inside the top three. That's a career for most golfers, yet Tiger Woods was able to accomplish it before the second major of the year. This drought also comes at a time when Tiger is in the middle of his third swing change, intended to take the pressure off of his left knee and thus increase the length of his career. The last time he made a swing change, he ended up winning two majors in 2005 and two more in 2006 before winning another in 2007 and yet another in 2008, this time on one leg. Clearly, his new swing is working well for him, as evident by his nine under par performance at the Memorial this weekend.

The argument that you have presented here seems more like a critique on the current state of Tiger's game than an explanation of why he will not surpass Nicklaus' record for the most majors won all time. Clearly, you must do a better job of proving this in the second and third rounds if you wish to walk away with a win on your first debate.
ewilliams1043

Con

ewilliams1043 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
dcdriver

Pro

My opponent has forfeited the previous round, an obvious display of my argument's superiority. Since my opponent either a.) has given up on the debate altogether or b.) was unable to come up with a rebuttal, voters must therefore logically vote in favor of my resolution.
ewilliams1043

Con

ewilliams1043 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by Wallstreetatheist 5 years ago
Wallstreetatheist
Well said, Joe.
No votes have been placed for this debate.