This was not used as an insulting term. There is a definition of the term freak that means unusual or abnormal. While Tiger is definitely not unusual or abnormal with respect to genetics or the human race, he is definitely unusual and abnormal with respect to professional golf. If he continues to compete at the level he is currently at for another 5 to 10 years, I think we can all agree he will be peerless as he fairly much is right now.

At least in my generation, we have not seen a golfer near the likes of Tiger. Those who witnessed the best golfers from previous generations may say otherwise, but in 5 to 10 years, Tiger may surpass [and by a very wide margin] even the historical greats of the game. Only a handful of greats of yesteryear from any sport transcended their profession -- Ali, Ruth, Gretzky[?], etc. -- and Tiger is fast becoming one of them.

>Could someone please tell the originator of this thread that it's not a compliment to call someone a "freak"? I believe this statement was made in regards to Tiger Woods winning the grand slam of golf tournaments. To respond to this incredible accomplishment by passing him off as a freak does not do him any justice.
>
>Dennis Rodman...now HE's a freak. Richard Simmons....yeah I'd say he qualifies as a freak (no argument there). OJ Simpson...definitely a freak. The guy who I heard about on the radio this morning who drives around in a hearse dressed like the grim reaper - most freaky. You see where I'm going here?
>
>Tiger Woods does not fit the image of what I would consider a freak!
>
>I was kind of hoping someone would point this out before now but I guess the thread evolved into some kind of cycling enthusiasts discussion.
>
>Thanks folks!
>
>-JT