James Lawton: Woods uniqueness will roll back the tides of history

There is probably no sportsman on earth more capable of protecting his own reputation than Tiger Woods, but there seems a lingering belief in some corners of golf that the tides of history will sooner or later engulf the idea that the young man who has already won eight majors, and a Grand Slam, has already announced himself as utterly unique.

Certainly there was more than a hint of this from the august Sir Michael Bonallack when he suggested to my colleague Brian Viner that so far the Tiger has yet to exceed the impact of Jack Nicklaus, saying, "Arnold Palmer and Gary Player were tremendous players, yet he [Nicklaus] almost swept them aside."

But then what has Woods done since he won the first of his three Masters as a 21-year-old? Anyone who saw the élite of today's golfers, led by the twice US Open champion, Ernie Els, one by one melt under the pressure applied by the Tiger a few months ago at Augusta would be tempted to say that he has virtually suspended competition. Of course, that never can be true, and his listing as a 2-1 favourite for this week's Open to complete the third leg of another slam – this one potentially satisfying even those pedants who put the workings of the calendar before the welling of genius – is a statement about the hero's aura rather than his ability to control every variable of the game.

However, Sir Michael is unlikely ever again to commit the overstatement he rushed into a few years ago when the brilliant young amateur Justin Rose made a spectacular impact on the Open. "Justin Rose," said the great man, "is our answer to Tiger Woods."

Not the least of Rose's achievements, after a traumatic start to his professional career, is to have played away the burden of such a bizarre critical assessment.

Rose is a fine young player who might just touch greatness. Woods, I think we can assume, is indeed unique.