Pity, I was hoping to see him in the flesh for the first time at Birkdale next month. It's not made me reconsider going to the tournament, but it's still a shame. Whoever wins this, and the USPGA, will have a kind of an asterisk against their names in the record books - "won a major while the clear world number one was not playing".

Mind you, if someone else from the top four or five - Mickelson, perhaps, or Ogilvy - wins both, in Woods' absence, it's still possible Woods won't be world number one by the end of this season. With the way the new ranking system devalues achievements more than three months old, by next year Woods' current massive lead in those standings (he's currently on more than double the points of anyone else) could have dwindled to almost nothing. It's not impossible that Woods could yet finish this year not even ranked number 2, a situation he's not found himself in since he won the US Masters in 1997.

When he comes back, he might have had to tone down the massive swing he's got, too, to relieve pressure on that knee. He might - might - not be the same player ever again. Maybe Nicklaus's career records will be safe after all, although Woods should still have another 13 or 14 years left to hunt down the 4 majors he still needs.

Nicklaus didn't play with magic clubs, though.

Tiger plays with the same kind of clubs that his competitors do. It was the same for Nicklaus in his day. Neither player had any distinct advantage over the field.

The asterisk comment is very true. Whoever wins the British Open and US PGA will be regarded as having won a 'soft' major.

and shouldn't the title be "Can't see the Woods for the knees"?

The cynical amongst us thought, when Woods was limping, "My, he's got a very muscly upper body. How convenient to be taking a couple of months off just when drug testing is about to come into golf."

Perhaps that was a little unfair.

Tiger can rest up now and count all the money

The other top players in world golf need to realise that they are the ones that are being laughed at

a one legged man beat them all last week

Not one of them has had the balls to go out and beat Tiger Woods in the last round of a major

never has he been beaten while leading going into the final round of a major

This really is a sad state of affairs , sport after all is about competition

world golf is about as competitive as the Zimbabwe presidential election at the moment

You can list the names off Els,Goosen, Casey, Donald, Garcia, Lefty,

All millionaires , all supremely talented, yet none of them have learned to deal with the pressure on a regular basis

Maybe Tigers self imposed absence might just trigger a new found fighting spirit, but somehow i would doubt it

You'd have to be very, very cynical to infer any drug-taking on Woods' part (although you're right, he is, suddenly, rippling). There's just little point, in golf, is all - the biceps play hardly part at in a golf swing, except possibly in chopping the ball through long rough, and even there, the really key muscles are in the forearms and wrists, and I don't think steroids would help much with developing those, would they? Jack Nicklaus apparently used to take a big broadsheet newspaper like the Times and roll it up, sheet by sheet, into tiny balls with the palms of each hand, to develop his forearm and wrist muscles. I tried that when I read about it; it bloody hurts after about four or five sheets, and I got shouted out by my Mum for leaving black print-ink handprints all down the hallway later on.

Impact Substitute wrote:

QUOTE:
Tiger plays with the same kind of clubs that his competitors do. It was the same for Nicklaus in his day. Neither player had any distinct advantage over the field.

Good point well made.

Indeed, though I do think that there is something to the assertion that Tiger's dominance is primarily based on his distance off the tee, which is in part due to his equipment advantage. He doesn't have an appreciable advantage over his contemporaries, but the courses that he and Nicklaus have both played regularly now play differently than they did in Jack's day. Put another way, if Tiger was playing with persimmon woods and Wilson Staffs, he would still be 20 yards longer than many of his rivals off the tee, but that 20 yards wouldn't put him as close to the hole as he gets now. And anytime one introduces more long iron shots into a round, one tends to introduce more risk and uncertainty (unless one is Hale Irwin).

BTW, has anyone here actually played a round with Wilson Staffs (which had a monopoly share on the Tour in Nicklaus' heyday?); they are beautifully simple and efficient tools, but completely unforgiving of mistakes. One of my more humbling experiences in golf.

I've got Wilson Fat Shafts and I think they're great.

Better clubs doesn't minimise Woods' achievements does it? That is like saying Schumacher doesn't measure up to Stirling Moss because he has a better car.

If you were comparing Woods' driving length with Nicklaus then the quality of the equipment, especially golf balls, would come into play. As it is everyone at that level has access to pretty much the same equipment.

As for muscling up being a sign of drug taking, I have muscled up enormously in the past few months. Two visits a week to the gym and no steroids in sight.

However, if steroids make a beer gut disappear, where do I sign up?

Beginning to turn my mind to the odds on this one, and as expected, with Woods absent, the book is wide open.

Current odds at William Hill:

Ernie Els 12-1
Padraig Harrington 14-1
Sergio Garcia 14-1
Lee Westwood 16-1
Justin Rose 16-1
Phil Mickelson 16-1
Vijay Singh 25-1
Adam Scott 25-1
Geoff Ogilvy 25-1
Robert Karlsson 25-1
Retief Goosen 25-1
Jim Furyk 25-1
Andres Romero 33-1
Stewart Cink 33-1

Virtually impossible to pick a clear favourite out of that lot. Pretty much all of them have been in the top ten of one of the last 3 Opens, with the exceptions of Mickelson (who you can never completely write off), Westwood (who had such a good US Open and will be home favourite) and Rose (who will be backed by a lot of people who remember his 3rd-place finish as an Amateur at Birkdale ten years ago).

I've got a sneaking feeling this could be another of those years when a complete outsider comes through the field. In fact, I might have a check on Ben Curtis's form - he finished 8th last year, and might just become this decade's Dave Stockton or Lee Janzen (winning 2 majors despite hardly winning anything else).

It'll be a journeyman from the US Tour. Again.

The greatest story ever, in sports history, is bubbling under ...

I would literally wet myself with joy if Van De Velde won next week.

My clubs cost a grand total of £3.