Originally Posted by allin
I am expressing my frustration that topics and threads have increasingly become venues for simplistic ego fests. Topics are reduced to incredibly simplistic there is only one right answer, as if every topic was a math problem. The gladiators have at it then declare themselves victors as they are obviously superior. Intelligent adults recognize the limits of facts, comparing eras is not a science experiment, things are rarely that black and white.
I'm sorry you feel that way. I don't think that's the way it is at all. I think - in this specific case since this is the thread in which you've chosen to say this - people are simply backing their personal opinions with the facts they feel are relevant. You're free to dispute those facts OR share some of your own facts that support YOUR opinion.
There's no right answer to "who is the greatest?" Those who feel it's Tiger will have different facts to support their claims than those who feel it's Jack. Both sides can (and have) told the other that "majors are all that matter is a lousy stat and here's why..." as well as "Jack played against weaker competition and here's why" (and so on - I'm not even going to check to see if those are both the same side because, well, who cares?).
I agree that things are rarely black and white, and I don't see this thread being an example of stuff that's too black and white. People who think it's Tiger can probably admit that it's not entirely obvious and the Jack people can make some valid points. And vice versa.
Originally Posted by allin
Yes Eric I hold you accountable for a significant part of this. Your recent post about an outdated swing thought by a fine old time player, emphasize the left side, is typical. Rigidity and intolerance to any point of view you don't share is frequent. You basically run the site, so you can do what you want . Of course if I respond with anything like that tone I am lashing out. Please look at your own house first. I have a 30 year background in social work, as far as I know experience you do not share. Please leave the analysis to someone more qualified.
This Eric fella sounds like a tool. Who is he anyway, and why does he run the site?
Leave the analysis of what to someone more qualified? I'm not sure what that means. Look, I'll respect people for the arguments they're able to make, or the knowledge they'll have. I'll respect them in an entirely different way for their accomplishments, but "teaching" and "playing" are two very different skills, and the knowledge gap between them is often quite wide. I don't care if Tiger Woods, Jack Nicklaus, and Ben Hogan risen from the grave come to me tomorrow to tell me something that I know is wrong - I'll tell them they're wrong and why. We question ourselves all the time at Golf Evolution, and all I ask of people here is to make me think. I have a thick skin, and a background not in social work, but in the hard sciences, where facts are just facts, and people don't take personal offense to them. If Nick Faldo says the ball starts on the swing path, I don't care how many majors he won - he's wrong, and worse than that, he's in a position of power to educate (or miseducate), and that annoys me, because I love and care for the game of golf, and people will want to listen to Nick Faldo, and he's screwing them up with incorrect baloney passed off as fact.
My post said simply "Garbage." That was probably harsh, but I think I've done a reasonable job lately of expanding on things and explaining my thoughts. That one was a mistake. It didn't educate, it was just snarky. But I also think it's possible you read into it too much, and I was hardly the first person in that thread to say something bad about the advice. It was given without context and is just flat out wrong. Someone else said it - the "always/never" type of of advice is typically poor in golf, because different people need different things. I don't know how took the comment I made later about "so we have to die first?" but that was a bit of fun. For all I know you were somehow personally offended by that, too.
Again, I come from the sciences. If I said "garbage" and nothing else, it was a mistake, and while I don't remember the specifics, I may have been in a hurry and figured if people wanted more from me they'd ask, and I'd share it. It's a forum, and I post a LOT because again I both love and care about the game of golf, and you know, not every post is gonna be a winner. I'll screw some up. The best I can do is learn from them and move on. Like the math error I made on the 300+ thread. Stupid, but I admit it, correct it in this case, and move on. I don't know what more I can do, as I certainly feel like Mike and I offer a LOT of good stuff. We're human, though, and occasionally I screw up and just say "Garbage."
You're no saint, allin. You ignored my questions in this very thread and called someone "arrogant" and said his perspective was "as shallow as a child's wading pool." That's kind of rude too, especially when, from where I'm sitting, the person was right. Turtleback posted some facts to back his case, and someone responded about him being butt hurt and crying himself a river. I don't see how turtleback's posts warrant the responses they've gotten, including some from you. Are you upset that the facts you said (like "the best pros played in both") were called into question and, from my perspective, disproven? Not everyone here deals in emotion and is okay with playing fast and loose with the facts. If you have an opinion, be prepared to back it. That's all I ask.
In other words, let's get back to the topic (Tiger vs. Jack).