Tiger is the modern player with the attitude to win. Sam (Snead) didn't have that desperate attitude. Tiger will be the most successful golfer ever. But that's not the same as being the best. With both playing at their best, Snead would beat Tiger.
5-time British Open winner Peter Thomson in the July 2008 issue of Golf magazine
about 1 year ago
Mulligan Stu
1 comment
0 recs |
Comments
opinions are like belly buttons...
just add that to the list – Sampras v Laver…70’s Steelers v 90’s Cowboys…20’s Yankees v 60’s Yankees…Mary Ann v Ginger…
This is another one of those arguments that could be debated until the cows come home. They are fun fan debates when there is nothing going on, but there is no real answer.
What I can’t agree with is that “Snead didn’t have that desperate attitude.” Did he forget that Snead’s desperation was a bit more basic than Tiger’s ? Snead played for money to live – played for money to take care of his family – played for money during a period of time when golfers didn’t have the luxury of thinking about breaking records, even though they were the ones making the records. The golfers back then travelled in car caravans from tournament to tournament, driving hundreds of miles to play.
Tiger has had nothing to worry about since the day he turned pro. Money has never been a concern – just the vanity of glory and history. He travels in a private jet everywhere – unless he’s on his yacht, of course.
Both men are/were plenty driven – one by survival, the other by a record book.
"this ball will fit in that fairway"
by courtgolf on Jun 8, 2008 9:31 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs















