The Tiger Effect ...

Don't want to hijack any threads with this, but some more fodder for the always debated Tiger Effect:

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/16/sports/tiger-woods-golf.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Fgolf&action=click&contentCollection=golf&region=stream&module=stream_unit&version=latest&contentPlacement=1&pgtype=sectionfront

Great to see him come back from all his woe's and win a Major again. It really didn't look probable when he had the chipping yips. He truly is box office, there's no one as electric as he is with a club in his hand. It is not just good for the game of golf, it's great for the game of golf. I don't see him dominate the way he once did, but he can certainly compete in majors again so injury permitting it could be an entertaining couple of years of golf.

Can't see it having any effect on the actual game of golf in the slightest.
Participation is on the slide, courses are shutting, companies are stopping making equipment.

All it is likely to do is put a few more bums on seats in regards to the TV and crowd and make money for the TV companies. I doubt it will develop the game in the slightest.

On the plus side, it means the Yanks will continue to pick him for Ryder Cup.

Personally I think it will Super, now that Team Sky have all but disappeared and Tigers back winning, I think the lycra brigade will dig out the bats and get back into it. I'm sure sky sports are delighted at the very least.

I know you're only joking, but it didn't make much difference before BtB, that's the point. I can't see the Lycra guys come back to golf. Golf is still quite sedate and boring, and if you've got into a more exciting and dynamic sport, and which you can actually be half decent, I don't think they'll come back. Everyone has got too old for that sort of misty eyed adoration of a particular sports star as a reason for playing too (except one bus riding person on here).

Also, people didn't get into cycling because of Sky's sponsorship of a British based team,  the team still exists, albeit with a new sponsor and Sky will still televise races, so I don't see it having any effect on Cycling just because Ineos are now the main sponsor, it might ruffle a few feathers of some environmental hysterical hypocrites, but I can't see people giving up cycling.

One of my clubs memberships has dwindled from about 650 to around 400 in recent years, if it suddenly jumps back up to 500 post 9C's win I'll let you know.



Interestingly, I passed the recently defunct Potters Bar course on the train the other day. It's very odd to see a course closed and in a fallow condition.

I think any effect would be marginal at best, I do think he added a bit in golfs boom years but the boom years are gone and not coming back any time soon.
Will he add to viewing figures, yeah probably, will his recovery and influence herald in a new age of increased participation in the sport...na, I don’t think so.
Anecdotally just asked workmates in my immediate vicinity. What did you think of Tigers win at the Masters? The answers ranged from “Who?” to “amazing” . The subsequent question...Did it make you want to pick up a club and go have a go? Not one of the 5 got anywhere near even maybe.

I do think Woods and the hoopla that surrounds him raises awareness and publicity of the game beyond the boundaries of a very insular golfing world, it almost certainly helps Nike’s golf clothing business but beyond that it’s not in itself going to reverse the current downward participation trend.

super_realist wrote: because Ineos are now the main sponsor, it might ruffle a few feathers of some environmental hysterical hypocrites,

Maybe, maybe not. It might just signify Ineos shift into the pharmaceutical industry.

super_realist wrote:
I passed the recently defunct Potters Bar course on the train the other day.

What? Public transport? Did you spend too much time with mac?

pedro wrote:

super_realist wrote: because Ineos are now the main sponsor, it might ruffle a few feathers of some environmental hysterical hypocrites,

Maybe, maybe not. It might just signify Ineos shift into the pharmaceutical industry.

super_realist wrote:
I passed the recently defunct Potters Bar course on the train the other day.

What? Public transport? Did you spend too much time with mac?

First class dear boy.

super_realist wrote:

pedro wrote:

super_realist wrote: because Ineos are now the main sponsor, it might ruffle a few feathers of some environmental hysterical hypocrites,

Maybe, maybe not. It might just signify Ineos shift into the pharmaceutical industry.

super_realist wrote:
I passed the recently defunct Potters Bar course on the train the other day.

What? Public transport? Did you spend too much time with mac?

First class dear boy.

Wasn’t Potters Bar Jacklin’s home course? No idea how good a track or otherwise it was but surely a shame if it’s now bitten the dust.

Also the decline you mention Super, our club has pretty much almost done that in reverse. Gone from a low of 450 in 2012 to almost 650 now. Nowt to do with Tiger either, more like people realising the grass isn’t greener at new upstart courses and a junior program that would be the envy of most.

JAS wrote:Wasn’t Potters Bar Jacklin’s home course? No idea how good a track or otherwise it was but surely a shame if it’s now bitten the dust.

Indeed it was. When I was not a member of a golf club, I used to play in the job's society tournaments. All around North London. We used to try and get Potters Bar but it was sometimes too expensive for my colleagues tastes. Good course.

The Tiger Effect of PGATour purses

I compiled this graph a week or so ago.

I summed up the PGAT Career Earnings of the Top 200 from 1980 onwards, and plotted the percent increase from year to year. You can see that the first few years of the Tiger era pretty much tracked the same as the (for lack of better name) the "Greg Norman" era.

Spoiler:

And any bump that Tiger did have in his first 9-10 years was certainly not sustained