Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon?

623 is an important number for Tiger Woods. No, it is not the number of women he is reported to have ‘transgressed’ with but rather the amount of time, in weeks, that the 14-time major winner has spent ranked as officially the number one golfer on the planet. No mean feat then, when you consider that the modern game is played across the world and has existed since the 15th Century; where the first written record of golf shows James II of Scotland banning the sport for being an unwelcome distraction to learning archery. Indeed, Tiger has been a fixture atop the rankings for the majority of his illustrious career – having amassed more weeks at the top spot, than the combined total of any six golfers to have previously held the position.

This is all very well and good, but how do Woods’ achievements hold up in a wider sporting context? After all, to refer to any sporting figure in terms of ‘genius’ is nowadays an ineffectual way of describing a person with true ability, primarily due to the way in which terminology has been abused. Meaningless titles have been arbitrarily attached to the extent that, in modern sport, we have become used to and therefore disdainful of labels such as the ‘greatest of all time’. In the case of this particular achievement, however, it is perhaps possible to suspend such criticisms when Tiger’s golfing record is considered next to that of the nearest comparable sport: Tennis. Understandably, it is difficult and generally wrong to make comparisons between different sports, however this one does help to illustrate my point rather nicely. You see, in this similarly individualistic sport – played worldwide – the ATP ranking system shows that the highest total number of weeks that the top ranking position has been held by any player is Pete Sampras’ 286. This falls short of the record set by Tiger Woods in golf by a massive 337 weeks or, if you prefer to look at it this way, six and a half years.

Now before I continue I would like to clear up one particular argument for readers. Some of you may well be reading this and quite rightly pointing out that the average golfer’s career will outlast that of the average Tennis player, due to the different physical demands of each sport. So how is it possible to compare an aspect which is entirely dependent upon the timescale in which a sport is played? Well, barring any ill-advised returns to Tennis, Pete Sampras’ career lasted approximately 14 years from 1988 to 2002. And yes, you guessed it; Tiger Woods’ record of 623 weeks (just under 12 years) at number one has been set in a period from 1996 to 2010.

At the end of last month, however, Tiger Woods was deposed, bringing an end to his 281-consecutive week reign which had stood since June 12, 2005. In itself this is hardly surprising; following an injury plagued 2008 season Woods returned for 2009 only for his past marital infidelities to surface which led to yet another period of absence from competitive golf. He himself has admitted that it’s been a “tough 12 months” for his golf following these revelations and the need to reconstruct his swing. More surprising is the identity of the newly crowned world number one – none other than England’s very own Lee Westwood.

Westwood, who has been sidelined by a calf injury since helping Europe win the Ryder Cup, was confirmed as the new world number one after Germany’s Martin Kaymer failed to secure the top-two finish at the Andalucía Masters that would have resulted in him usurping Woods. Now higher mathematics has never been a strong point of mine, but I cannot be the only one who has been struggling to get to grips with this equation: one victory all year + one full tournament appearance in 14 weeks = world number one. Never mind the fact that Westwood has never won a major.

So how has this situation arisen? Mainly because of the decline of Woods, who in previous years has amassed 400-450 ranking points but has only been able to add a mere 90.53 in 2010 – most of them earned by finishing joint fourth at the Masters and the US Open, his best results of the year. On top of this, no-one has lost more ranking points than Woods (337.38) and – in the top 40 – only world number 39 Stewart Cink has accrued fewer points than the fallen world number one.

Now if the standings were calculated over the course of one year, then Woods would certainly have lost his position before now. However, the rankings are calculated over a two-year period, with points gradually diminishing in value from 13 weeks after they have first been earned. The total number of points is then divided by the number of tournaments played over the two-year period (the minimum number has to be 40) and this average figure is the one used to determine where you stand in the golfing world.

At the height of his powers, Woods’s points average was as high as 16, but has now slipped to 8.13. More points earned two years ago have now disappeared, so his average has fallen below that of Westwood who, despite his injury problems, has gained 279.11 points in the last year, in addition to those points gained in his stellar 2009 season.

Many believe that this signals an end to Woods’ most prolific period and that amidst the host of up-and-coming talent both within the United States and further afield it will be hard for him to again dominate the game in the same way that saw him achieve the ‘Tiger Slam’ in 2000-1 and dominate the 2005-2007 seasons. Claims that the mystique surrounding Tiger Woods has gone, that players no longer fear him and in particular that the players themselves have improved are all fuelling the argument that he will be unable to overhaul Jack Nicklaus’ major record.

Actions, however, often speak a lot louder than words. Particularly criticisms. And if Tiger is judged on recent form alone then his play at the Ryder Cup – where he effectively dismantled Francesco Molinari – and at the HSBC Champions tournament recently mark a rather ominous resurgence to his play. History too, favours Woods who, at 34, has already won two more majors than Nicklaus had at the same age. “It took Jack over 20 years and I haven’t been playing that long,” Woods himself reasoned when reflecting on his career so far. “No-one has done better than Jack with 18… at the end of the day, hopefully I’ll have more than 18 major championships.” Indeed, the second half of a golfer’s career can often be their most prolific – Ben Hogan didn’t win any of his nine majors until after the age of 34.

You only have to consider Woods’ own history to find evidence that a comeback is still on the horizon. The death of his father Earl in 2006 was followed by victories at the Open and US PGA Championships with Woods then ending the year by winning six consecutive PGA Tour events. Even more striking is the similarity between his recent fall from atop the rankings table with that of 2004; both were presaged by periods of poor play and subsequent swing adjustments. And we are all aware of how Woods reacted to his displacement at the hands of Vijay Singh.

For Tiger Woods, the 2010 season is clearly one to forget, however, losing out to Lee Westwood as world number one could provide him with the inspiration needed to recapture winning form in the coming year. Critics say that Jack Nicklaus’ record of 18 major championships is safe. Is it? Is it hell.