Is golf better off without Woods?

The PGA tour has had one notable absentee of late. World number one Tiger Woods had to take an enforced break from the game due to a knee injury that required surgery.

We know what’s in his bag, but is the game better off without him?

Tiger generally dominates the golf scene, so it has been argued by his fellow professionals that the game has benefited from its stint without Tiger.

Both Mark O’Meara and Colin Montgomerie have said that tournaments have been, and will be, much more open, leaving the path clear for anyone who has the cajonas to step up to the plate.

You can be sure that whoever does win a competition in Tiger’s absent will be posed the following question; “Would you have won it if Tiger was here?” Well the answer should be; “He’s not here, so it doesn’t matter! In ten years time people will forget that Tiger wasn’t here, they will just see who won it!”

I’m actually of the opinion that golf is weaker without Tiger. His persona and his performances often raise the level of good golf on offer, which can only be good thing and I’m looking forward to having him back on the tour.