[Mathew]

Unfortunately, you are wrong, Matthew. Math is necessary to verify your statement as follows:

- let's assume that an average fairway is 30 yard wide;

- let's assume that post-accident Hogan's FIR was 80% on the average and his average drive was 253 yard long;

- let's assume that Woods's FIR is 50% on the average and his average drive is 305 yard long;

Unfortunately Darruis, YOU ARE WRONG.

Ok lets just go along with these assumptions just for now even though they are heavily weighted towards your arguement.

- in order to be on the average fairway after the driver tee shot:
a. Hogan's misses should not exceed 15 yards left or right that makes nearly 6% of allowed deviation margin (15:253=0.059);
b. Woods's misses should also not exceed 15 yards left or right that makes nearly 5% of allowed deviation margin (15:305=0.049);
c. the difference is only 1% that is much much too small a value to justify Tiger's inferior ball striking quality comparing to Hogan's.

You don't just divide the driving distance (yards) by the fairway with the half of the fairways width(yards) and expect to find anything useful. All you have found is the difference between a fifteenth of their driving distance - you could of just subtracted their driving distances together and divided by 15 and you would of come up with the same answer....an answer which isn't much use for anyone. It doesn't say much about your maths skills or those of GPStyles who seems to think your akin to Albert Einstein.

The correct differences are these.... I've omitted the sums because you won't understand them anyhow...

Woods hitting 300 yards onto a 30 yard fairway has 5.73197 degrees margin for error.

Hogan hitting 250 yards onto a 30 yard fairway has 6.87963 degrees margin for error.

So hogan at 80% FIR having to be 83.4% less accurate than Woods would only hit the fairway 66% of the time at 300 yards.

- if Woods is the same quality of ballstriker as Hogan was, his average FIR should oscillate between 70 and 75% which is an unreachable goal for him until now;

So where you plucked this number from I do not know - perhaps you clicked your heels together three times.

The pure maths is pointless to the debate and anyhow the maths becomes more in Tigers favour when you increase the fairway from the super tight hypothetical width you set. I could think of plenty of arguements that when added up make the maths arguement sound silly. It would be like a game of Jenga but its your arguement falling after each one of these blocks (variables you have not accounted for) and you couldn't even set the game properly up to begin with because you suck at Maths.

My feeling is that Wood's golf stroke is better than Hogans... You just wanted to try and own me - You tried and you failed... Try harder next time.