No
© Bill Howard
To my admittedly conservative way of thinking, winning the Grand Slam means winning all four major golf tournaments in a single golf season. I'm not quite sure why, it's just the way I've perceived the Grand Slam since I was old enough to grasp the magnitude of its difficulty. So Tiger's wins at the U.S. Open, British Open, PGA, and the Masters do not technically qualify according to my personal view.
I do, however, have a hunch that we had better get used to Tiger forcing us to redefine things. Who ever thought we'd be quibbling about whether or not a golfer had won the Grand Slam? The quality of Tiger's play has the potential to tilt the game of golf right off its traditional foundation. As I see it, we have but one remaining benchmark by which to measure young Mr. Woods. That would be Jack Nicklaus' record for professional majors. And it seems to be a simple matter of time.
Tiger has won four consecutive majors. All the available major championship trophies are gathering dust at Tiger's house. Nobody else has one. It may not actually be a Grand Slam, but it is a once in a lifetime occurrence.
Listening to Tiger's post-Masters interviews, I was struck by how he seemed perfectly content with the is it or isn't it a Slam questions. It was almost as if he felt like he might win another four. Just another lap.
The way he's playing, I'm not discounting the possibility.
Come to think of it, the next major tournament is the U.S. Open. Tiger won the last one by a busload of shots.
Someone had better beat him soon, while he's still mortal.
Go To Page: 1
