Yeah I’ll Admit It I Still Like Tiger Woods

By Marcus Belman, November 10, 2025

Record, Rhythm, Reach

Tiger Woods’s competitive record provides the baseline for any appraisal. He has won 82 PGA Tour events, a total that ties him with Sam Snead for the all-time Tour lead. His major championship total stands at 15, which places him second on the men’s all-time list behind Jack Nicklaus. The Official World Golf Ranking records indicate he has spent 683 weeks at No. 1, the most weeks in the ranking’s history.

man in black shirt and black pants playing golf during daytime

Those numbers matter because they are public, persistent and comparable across eras. Tournament wins and weeks at No. 1 represent aggregated outcomes of thousands of strokes, rounds and events; they are measurable achievements rather than impressions. The factual frame clarifies why admiration for Woods is not merely affective fandom: it rests on performance that is historically significant.

The Arc: Peaks, Setbacks, Comebacks

Woods’s career follows a recurring pattern: sustained dominance, an abrupt setback and, at intervals, a performance rebound. Early dominance was unmistakable: a 12-stroke Masters victory in 1997 announced a new competitive standard. Persisting excellence produced multiple major runs and a period of world ranking supremacy. Injuries, personal scandal and surgical procedures have then truncated that rhythm.

The personal scandal of late 2009 and the public apology that followed were documented in primary reporting. In a widely reported statement Woods said, “I am deeply sorry for my irresponsible and selfish behavior.” That phrasing was transmitted by major outlets at the time and remains part of the public record.

Injury history includes recurrent back problems and, more acutely, the February 2021 single-vehicle crash that produced “comminuted open fractures affecting both the upper and lower portions of the tibia and fibula.” Surgeons inserted a rod into the tibia and used screws and pins to stabilize the ankle and foot; medical updates described a lengthy surgical and rehabilitation sequence. The medical narrative constrained competitive expectations and recalibrated public perception of what a return might entail.

The 2019 Masters functions as a clear inflection point. It was his fifteenth major and his first since the 2008 U.S. Open, closing an 11-year major gap. In public remarks at the tournament he said, “It means the world to me. Their love and their support, I just can’t say enough how much that meant to me throughout my struggles when I really just had a hard time moving around.” The comeback prompted wide-ranging commentary across sports media.

What Drives Continued Liking

Three factors explain why someone might state plainly that they still like Tiger Woods.

  • Performance history. Objective milestones—majors, Tour wins, weeks at No. 1—supply durable evidence of excellence. Those metrics allow supporters to ground admiration in achievements that do not erode with time.
  • Competitiveness and craft. Technical analysis from coaches and shot-level data underline the quality of Woods’s ball-striking, course management and competitive instincts. This produces appreciation from observers who evaluate form, shotmaking and tournament temperament rather than the athlete’s private conduct.
  • Narrative of resilience. The arc of setbacks and returns produces a narrative that appeals to many observers: sustained work against injury, rehabilitation efforts and intermittent returns to contention create an affective bond that coexists with critical awareness of off-field failings. Contemporary reporting on his recovery from the 2021 crash documented both medical hazard and the athlete’s public expressions of gratitude.

Ethical Friction: Achievements vs. Conduct

Admitting continued admiration does not negate ethical concerns. The 2009 personal revelations and related consequences are part of the record and inform how a public figure’s legacy is evaluated. Public statements such as the apology cited above are documented and available for independent review. Consumers of sports media can therefore hold simultaneous positions: appreciation for professional mastery and a critical stance about personal conduct.

For readers who weigh moral factors when forming sporting preferences, a transparent rule set helps. One reasonable rule is to separate consumption of athletic performance from financial patronage in cases where endorsement or direct monetary support of the individual raises ethical issues. Another is to demand accountability and transparency from associated institutions—tournament organizers, sponsors and governing bodies—so that the athlete’s public role aligns with accepted standards.

How To Convert Interest Into Knowledgeable Support

If the aim is to retain interest in Tiger Woods without becoming uncritical, the following practices convert passive fandom into informed observation:

  • Rely on primary sources for high-stakes claims. Tournament records, official statements and peer-reviewed analyses have priority over social clips.
  • Compare longitudinal metrics rather than single performances. Winning percentage, major frequency and recovery timelines paint a more robust picture than isolated highlight reels. Official record pages and major reporting archives remain the most accessible repositories: the PGA Tour archive, Tiger Woods’s official biography and the OWGR historical records are starting points.
  • Distinguish admiration for craft from endorsement of conduct. A disciplinary, contractual or philanthropic response to transgression can be evaluated on its own merits.
  • Watch for narrative compression in highlight packages. Editing and montage can misrepresent continuity of form; primary competition footage and shot-by-shot logs reduce the risk of misinterpretation.

Sources For Verification

Wrapping Up

Preference for a public athlete is rarely a statement of unqualified endorsement. For a figure such as Tiger Woods, liking an athlete can rest on measurable performance, on appreciation for competitive craft and on empathy for rehabilitation from catastrophic injury. Those motives coexist with scrutiny of personal conduct and insistence on institutional accountability. Public records—tournament logs, medical and police releases, press transcripts—supply a stable evidentiary base that enables reasoned judgment. For readers who want to maintain an informed attachment, the recommended path lies in consulting primary documents and balancing admiration for performance with a critical stance on conduct where warranted.