Jump to content
IGNORED

Greatest golfers of all-time


The Pope
Note: This thread is 3533 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

Recommended Posts

I'm purely looking at there performance results, anything else would be speculative (equipment, conditions, etc.)... I'm not trying to tip any scales. But you're right, whether one looks at major wins, or includes major runner ups... Nicklaus tops Woods either way. Again, we haven't seen the twilight of Woods' career... The facts may change. And BTW... The first round golf I ever played was in 1997, the Spring of my Freshman year in college. So I started golfing during the Tiger era, I'm not some long time Nicklaus follower... And neither of them are my favorite golfer, so I really could care less which winds up being considered the best of all time. My current opinion is that Nicklaus is the best of all time.
Link to comment
Share on other sites


My top ten, in order: Woods Nicklaus Hogan Snead Jones Player Palmer Nelson Vardon Mickelson Totally subjective.

Hunter Bishop

"i was an aspirant once of becoming a flamenco guitarist, but i had an accident with my fingers"

My Bag

Titleist TSI3 | TaylorMade Sim 2 Max 3 Wood | 5 Wood | Edel 3-PW | 52° | 60° | Blade Putter

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

I agree with all this. But it is also fair to say that Nicklaus's record is all the more impressive when one considers his lack of single-mindedness. Over a 25 year period he placed in the top 3 in almost half the majors that were played. That is pretty extraordinary.

Comparing different generations is fraught with problems, even in sports that have more objectively measurable standards than golf. There's no argument that Usain Bolt is much faster than was Jesse Owens. But Owens was similarly superior to his contemporaries, and it must be at least arguable that had he had the same advantages in terms of nutrition, training, equipment etc. he might have found a way to run under 9.7 or jump over 29 feet. This reinforces your point about Hogan, and probably elevates the claims of even earlier players. Crappy equipment, inferior greens, I'm inclined to believe that some of the very early players must have been highly talented to shoot anything approaching a decent score. Does this mean they played as well as Woods or Nicklaus? Certainly not. Does it mean they may have been as talented, or had similar potential? Perhaps.

As to your first point I would say not really.  Because in Nicklaus' era none of the players, with very rare exceptions, had the kind of single-mindedness we see commonly today.  OTOH, one could argue that since Jack was really the first guy to play his whole schedule around te majors, was one of the first ones to go ahead of time to major venues to practice and prepare he had an advantage over his contemporaries that top players do not have today.

As to our second point, you are talking about absolute level.  In comparing eras I think it is more appropriate to compare level of dominance rather than absolute scores.  When people talk about the equipment, ease of traveling, percs, etc. that the current players get, as if that is some kind of advantage vis a vis the players of Jack's era they are really missing the point  Jack played with the same equipment as his contemporaries just as Tiger plays with the same equipment as HIS contemporaries.

Equipment: According to Jack, the improvements in equipment, while maybe lowering lower scores in general, actually hurts the ability of the top players to separate themselves.

Travel: Jack was one of the few players in his era who could afford to fly to events regularly - even had his own plane.  That seems like no big deal because all the players fly now, but if you read a book like Pro: Frank Beard on the Pro Tour which recounts the day to day year-long experience of a fairly high level player (won the money title the year of the book) in the heart of Jack's career, you will see what a slog even a top level guy went through in driving to events, staying in cheap motels, etc.

So these factors actually were an advantage to Jack in helping enable him to beat his competitors.  But even with these advantages, Nicklaus was never as dominant as Tiger.  Rank their years from best to worst and compare them side by side and there is no comparison  From 1999 to 2008 there were only 2 years, '98 and '04, the swing change years, when Tiger was not clearly the best player in the world.  In Jack's 25 years there are surprisingly few years in which he was clearly the best player in the world.  He was always in the top 3 or so, bu not really #1 all that often.

But then again, what the hell do I know?

Rich - in name only

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Note: This thread is 3533 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • TST Partners

    TourStriker PlaneMate
    Golfer's Journal
    ShotScope
    The Stack System
    FlightScope Mevo
    Direct: Mevo, Mevo+, and Pro Package.

    Coupon Codes (save 10-15%): "IACAS" for Mevo/Stack, "IACASPLUS" for Mevo+/Pro Package, and "THESANDTRAP" for ShotScope.
  • Popular Now

  • Posts

    • Makes sense.  Like I said, I wouldn't have been upset at their original offer either, and based on the fine print it seems like they've held up their end of the deal.  
    • If you've only had to adjust retroactively one time in 8 years and have around 5 people each year without handicaps, that's like 40-50 people total so it sounds like you're doing a pretty good job. I think your questions give enough to go off of. This might be a good way to get new people to actually post a few scores during the 6 weeks leading into the first event. Something like "New members will be eligible for tournament money once they have at least 3 posted rounds in GHIN" or something like that. If they can get 3 rounds in prior to their first event, then they're eligible. If not, they'll soon become eligible after an event or two assuming they play a little bit outside of events.
    • This is a loooooong winded narrative so if you don't like long stories, move on. 😉 Our senior club typically gets about 25 new members each year. We lose about 25 members each year for various reasons (moved to FL/AZ, disabled, dead, too expensive). Of the new members, usually 20 have an active GHIN handicap. About 5 each year do not have a GHIN handicap. When they join our club, we give each member a state association membership that includes GHIN handicapping services. We play a series of handicapped tournaments over the summer. When we sign up a new member who does not have a GHIN handicap, we attempt to give them an estimated index until they have sufficient scores posted to have an actual GHIN index.  Our first event typically is around May 15 so, in theory, a new member has about 6 weeks to post a few scores. Posting season in the Mitten starts April 1. Inevitably, several of the unhandicapped individuals seem  to either not play until the first tournament or can't figure out how to enter scores (hey, they are seniors). That situation then leads to my contacting the new member and asking a series of questions: a. Did you ever have a GHIN handicap? If yes, which State and do you recall what it was? b. Do you have an alternate handicap through a non-GHIN handicap service or a league? c. What do you think your average score was last year (for 9 or 18) d. What was your best score last year? Where did you play and which tee was used? e. What do you consider a very good score for yourself? Based on their responses I attempt to give them an index that makes them competitive in the first couple events BUT does not allow them to win their flight in the first couple events. We don't want the new members to finish last and at the same time, we don't want someone with a "20" playing handicap to win the third flight with a net 57. In the event some new member did shoot a net 57, we also advise everyone that we can and will adjust handicaps retroactively when it is clear to us that a member's handicap does not accurately reflect their potential. We don't like to adjust things retroactively and in the 8 years I have chaired the Handicap Committee, we have only done it once. So here are the questions to the mob: Any ideas how to do this better? Any questions one might ask an unhandicapped individual to better estimate their index/handicap? Would it be reasonable to have a new player play once (or more?) without being eligible to place in the money?
    • Wordle 1,013 4/6 ⬜🟨⬜🟨🟨 ⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜ 🟩🟩🟩🟩⬜ 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
    • Awesome! I got that a while back with my start word! Wordle 1,013 4/6 ⬜⬜🟨⬜🟨 ⬜🟨⬜🟩⬜ ⬜⬜🟩🟩🟨 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Welcome to TST! Signing up is free, and you'll see fewer ads and can talk with fellow golf enthusiasts! By using TST, you agree to our Terms of Use, our Privacy Policy, and our Guidelines.

The popup will be closed in 10 seconds...