or Connect
TheSandTrap.com › Golf Forum › The Clubhouse › Tour Talk › Jack or Tiger: Who's the greatest
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Jack or Tiger: Who's the greatest - Page 189

Poll Results: Tiger or Jack: Who's the best?

 
  • 69% (1632)
    Tiger Woods is the man
  • 30% (715)
    Jack Nicklaus is my favorite
2347 Total Votes  
post #3385 of 4659
I look at it this way... top 3 finishes in major tournaments... in every other sport it's about the title... why not golf. Performance on the biggest stages is what matters imo.
post #3386 of 4659
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fourputt View Post

 

The argument which that brings up is that then you have factor in the fact that Jack simply didn't have as many opportunities with a field of that magnitude, because the WGC events didn't exist then.  If a player makes a point of entering the biggest events each year, he has no control over how many other top 100 players also choose to play.

 

 

But that is exactly the point.  Jack was a big part of how majors got to be the metric for GOAT at a time when the players before him did not have the opportunity to play 4 majors every single year, as he did.  Jack didn't have the opportunity to play tournaments with the strength of fieldthat Tiger does, but Vardon, Hagen, Sarazen, Hogan, Nelson, and Snead didn't have nearly the number of opportunities to play majors as Jack did.  Yet no one is saying the using majors as a metric is unfair - even though it is patently unfair to all of the generations of golfer before about 1970.  I think if you look at the top players since then you will find that almost all of them play 4 majors every year.  If you look at the top golfers before then you will find it hard to find very many years where ANY of them played 4 majors in a year.

 

So you cannot "factor in the fact that Jack simply didn't have as many opportunities with a field of that magnitude, because the WGC events didn't exist then"  without also factoring in the fact that Jack had a huge advantage over the guys who came before him because they "simply didn't have as many opportunities with a field [# of majors]of that magnitude, because the WGC events didn't exist then [because they didn't exist or the logistics of travel made them prohibitive to attend regularly].  

post #3387 of 4659
Quote:
Originally Posted by iacas View Post

Yes, he has. The only real difference is that earlier in his career he would either finish T43 or he'd win. There was no "close" to talk about - he was either out of the conversation or he got to talk about winning. He wasn't "close" as often, so he didn't have the opportunities to talk about being "close."

 

Yeah, except the numbers tell a different story. 

 

For his career, Tiger has averaged a finishing position of 17 in majors that he did not win (assuming a finishing position at the cut line for missed cuts). Since his win at Torrey Pines in 2008, his finishing position in non-wins has been 20.8. Before that point, it was 14.9. Up to 2008, he finished in the top 5 11 times, or .92 times per year. After 2008, he has finished top 5 6 times, or 1.2 times per year. His career average is 1 top 5 per year. There's really not a huge change in how many times he's been close. 

 

I think now he's feeling the pressure to win majors quickly, so he was to talk about being close, as if that's somehow ok. I don't know if he is getting complacent, but I could see how his behavior could lead one to believe that he is.  

post #3388 of 4659
I honestly think when he wins 1 he could win a few in a short period of time. Its just getting the 1st one that's the tough part.
post #3389 of 4659
Quote:
Originally Posted by mmoan2 View Post

BTW- I believe that right now, Tiger is the best, but if he never wins another major, or even ends at 15 or 16, I may change my mind.

I'm leaning the other way. Right now, I think it's Jack by a whisker, but if Jack never wins another major, I'd have to go with Tiger.
post #3390 of 4659
Quote:
Originally Posted by MSchott View Post


While it's impressive that Jack came second 19 times in majors I guarantee he himself doesn't care. It doesn't matter where you place unless it's first. Nicklaus himself has said that no one remembers who came in second. And that's true. Arnold won the Masters in 1964. Guess who came in second? Jack, but it means nothing. He lost.

 

But Jack also points out that the large amount of top 3's is a factor in the final number of wins because he understood that being patient will garner you more wins in the end. So far, he has been proved right. Hang around, don't be a hero, and the field come back to you. Just ask Doug Sanders.

 

Sometimes it doesn't work and someone like Lee Trevino or Tom Watson will have a great Sunday and spoil your plans. But Jack still has the number and Tiger is the one doing the chasing. Hell, when was the last time Tiger even finished second in a Major?

 

But I really hope Tiger does it, and it is always more interesting when the best player in the world is in the mix in the Majors. Jack taught us all that, BTW. Duel in the Sun, '71 at Merion, '82 at Pebble Beach...compelling stuff (and they are ones that he lost).

post #3391 of 4659
Quote:
Originally Posted by JCRuzanski View Post

I look at it this way... top 3 finishes in major tournaments... in every other sport it's about the title... why not golf. Performance on the biggest stages is what matters imo.

 

 

Cause golf is a individual sport, its a bit different. If Peyton Manning didn't win the superbowl, i would still rank him as one of the greatest QB's ever to play the game. Just his ability to throw the ball, and his knowledge of the game, and his career stats. Though he might define his career by not winning one, but i can't fault him, when its a TEAM sport. Same with baseball. Some amazing players have never won a WC ring. Manny Ramirez almost didn't, if he wasn't traded out of Cleveland. He was one of the premiere players in the late 90's to the early 2000's. Guy was on pace one year to break the RBI record. When it comes to team sports, i can not base the person's whole career on titles. I get the player might, but i understand its a team sport in most regards.

 

Now you talk about sports like Tennis or Golf. Then its all about titles, that's an individual accomplishment.

post #3392 of 4659
Quote:
Originally Posted by phan52 View Post

But Jack also points out that the large amount of top 3's is a factor in the final number of wins because he understood that being patient will garner you more wins in the end. So far, he has been proved right. Hang around, don't be a hero, and the field come back to you. Just ask Doug Sanders.

 

Sometimes it doesn't work and someone like Lee Trevino or Tom Watson will have a great Sunday and spoil your plans. But Jack still has the number and Tiger is the one doing the chasing. Hell, when was the last time Tiger even finished second in a Major?

 

But I really hope Tiger does it, and it is always more interesting when the best player in the world is in the mix in the Majors. Jack taught us all that, BTW. Duel in the Sun, '71 at Merion, '82 at Pebble Beach...compelling stuff (and they are ones that he lost).

 

It's also a factor in the percentage of purses that you earn. Tiger leads that category as well.

post #3393 of 4659
Quote:
Originally Posted by phan52 View Post

 

But Jack also points out that the large amount of top 3's is a factor in the final number of wins because he understood that being patient will garner you more wins in the end. So far, he has been proved right. Hang around, don't be a hero, and the field come back to you. Just ask Doug Sanders.

 

Sometimes it doesn't work and someone like Lee Trevino or Tom Watson will have a great Sunday and spoil your plans. But Jack still has the number and Tiger is the one doing the chasing. Hell, when was the last time Tiger even finished second in a Major?

 

But I really hope Tiger does it, and it is always more interesting when the best player in the world is in the mix in the Majors. Jack taught us all that, BTW. Duel in the Sun, '71 at Merion, '82 at Pebble Beach...compelling stuff (and they are ones that he lost).

All true but Tiger's major wins came in a different way. I believe he never came from behind and only won when he was leading going into the last round. I think that's what will need to happen for him to win again as Woods has not shown the ability to go low when needed or even shoot par or lower.

post #3394 of 4659
Quote:
Originally Posted by phan52 View Post

 

Actually, no I don't. But nice try.

Wow, you are a piece of work.  I've heard of the phrase "agree to disagree," however, I don't think I have ever heard the phrase "disagree to agree," which is basically what you are doing here.

 

Erik was responding to geauxforbroke, who was responding to you saying "Tiger will never get to 18 ... ," which is what Erik believes as well.  Hence, you guys agree.  Just to be contrarian, you are trying to say he won't get to 18 (which, may I remind you will or won't happen in the FUTURE) by saying that he hasn't finished second as many times as Jack in the PAST.

 

Whatever.  The reason why you think that Tiger won't get to 18 - and thus will never be considered GOAT - is because he doesn't have patience.  Fine, so what?  It still makes not a hill of beans difference TOWARDS THE GOAT DISCUSSION how many seconds anybody has.  It only matters towards your point that you believe it's the reason Tiger won't win anymore, and thus will always be no. 2.

post #3395 of 4659
I think there is more than just the majors. Look at tour wins, player if the year awards, and leading money winner. Tiger has him beat soundly in all three of those categories. Saying the majors are the end all be all is just plain stupid.
post #3396 of 4659
Quote:
Originally Posted by newtogolf View Post

Most people claiming Jack is clearly GOAT are heavily influenced by Tigers personality and personal life.

 

 

 

 

Tiger's involvement with Dr. Galea played a part for me. Not the largest part, but a part nonetheless. I realize there is no absolute proof Tiger received PED's from the guy, but this isn't a court of law. It is a court of public opinion. Tiger claims to have been treated by Galea for something any hospital in Orlando or Palm Beach could have treated him for, so why would Tiger have this guy fly in from Toronto, Canada when there existed numerous facilities right in Orlando that could have done the same thing for him? It defies logic that someone would do this ...... unless the real reason is that Dr. Galea was performing some other service for Tiger that he does not mention

 

Galea was investigated by the Royal Mounted Police of Canada and the Buffalo, NY Office of the FBI for peddling illegal drugs. Galea is associated with known PED users like Alex Rodriguez. Galea has been arrested for passing illegal drugs, and the Australian Police seized his medical bag when he attempted to enter their Olympic venue. It is clear that numerous investigative branches of multiple countries believe Galea to be a supplier of PEDs.

 

So why did Tiger Woods see Dr. Galea? If you believe Tiger he saw him for something purely innocent, but I wouldn't fault anyone for thinking their may have been another reason. What is the old adage? Where there is smoke there is fire?

post #3397 of 4659
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jakester23 View Post

I think there is more than just the majors. Look at tour wins, player if the year awards, and leading money winner. Tiger has him beat soundly in all three of those categories. Saying the majors are the end all be all is just plain stupid.

 

No, I think if Tiger wins less than 18 majors, the consensus will be that Jack is the GOAT. If he wins 18, there will be an epic debate with no consensus, and if he wins more than 18, it's a no-brainer. For the past 20 years, the metric has been most majors. I don't see that changing any time soon.  

post #3398 of 4659
Quote:
Originally Posted by 9iron View Post

Tiger claims to have been treated by Galea for something any hospital in Orlando or Palm Beach could have treated him for, so why would Tiger have this guy fly in from Toronto, Canada when there existed numerous facilities right in Orlando that could have done the same thing for him? It defies logic that someone would do this ...... unless the real reason is that Dr. Galea was performing some other service for Tiger that he does not mention

That's like asking why Tiger would eat imported Russian caviar when there was perfectly good Spam down at the 7-11. The answer is, because he's rich, and he can afford the best. Galea had a reputation among other athletes at being the best in the world at what he did, and so Tiger flew him in. Obviously, he wouldn't have done it if he had known he was involved with PEDs.

Quote:
Galea was investigated by the Royal Mounted Police of Canada and the Buffalo, NY Office of the FBI for peddling illegal drugs. Galea is associated with known PED users like Alex Rodriguez. Galea has been arrested for passing illegal drugs, and the Australian Police seized his medical bag when he attempted to enter their Olympic venue. It is clear that numerous investigative branches of multiple countries believe Galea to be a supplier of PEDs.

Correct. And after all of that investigation, depositions under oath, and doubtless offers of reduced sentences for implicating other people, not even TMZ or the Enquirer has accused Tiger of getting PEDs from Galea. So you are just believing what you want to believe, against all the evidence to the contrary.
post #3399 of 4659

This is a question that will never yield a commonly accepted answer easily.

 

To ask someone to name the greatest golfer of all time is to ask the person to judge the golfer on various aspects of their game.  One person might believe that major wins are the ultimate factor.  Another might look at the money list, or lifetime earnings.  While another may look at GIR's and lifetime stats.  Another may judge the golfer on his finishes (see the posts herein praising T2 and T10).  Nothing wrong with any of those measures for judging a golfer's merit.  But it is important to remember that they are different.

 

The question is not dissimilar to "What's the best car?"  Well in order to answer that we need to be more specific.  Are we talking looks?  Gas mileage?  Speed?  Reliability?  Resale value?  Bang for your buck?  

 

A better question would be a more specific question.  For example, "Who dominated their era in the most convincing manner possible?" to which the answer is Tiger Woods.  Or Bobby Jones? Oh gosh here we go again... c3_clap.gif

post #3400 of 4659
Quote:
Originally Posted by 9iron View Post

 

 

 

 

Tiger's involvement with Dr. Galea played a part for me. Not the largest part, but a part nonetheless. I realize there is no absolute proof Tiger received PED's from the guy, but this isn't a court of law. It is a court of public opinion. Tiger claims to have been treated by Galea for something any hospital in Orlando or Palm Beach could have treated him for, so why would Tiger have this guy fly in from Toronto, Canada when there existed numerous facilities right in Orlando that could have done the same thing for him? It defies logic that someone would do this ...... unless the real reason is that Dr. Galea was performing some other service for Tiger that he does not mention

 

Galea was investigated by the Royal Mounted Police of Canada and the Buffalo, NY Office of the FBI for peddling illegal drugs. Galea is associated with known PED users like Alex Rodriguez. Galea has been arrested for passing illegal drugs, and the Australian Police seized his medical bag when he attempted to enter their Olympic venue. It is clear that numerous investigative branches of multiple countries believe Galea to be a supplier of PEDs.

 

So why did Tiger Woods see Dr. Galea? If you believe Tiger he saw him for something purely innocent, but I wouldn't fault anyone for thinking their may have been another reason. What is the old adage? Where there is smoke there is fire?

I can't provide you the answers you seek because only Tiger knows why.  Let's also keep in mind that PED's were available during Jack's time, but there wasn't a witch hunt to uncover PED's users back then.  I'm in no way saying Jack used PED's but simply pointing out that he and anyone else during his time could have and likely never been caught.  Tiger wouldn't be the first person to use PED's and deny it, but until he fails a test, we have to give him the benefit of the doubt just as we do Jack. 

 

Your response is reasonable, it's not easy to take personal feelings out of such as debate as GOAT.  My point was that many people that criticize Tiger or consider him the lesser golfer compared to Jack could be biased by things Tiger has said or done that are not related to his performance on the golf course. 

 

I think it's cool you can admit that factors other than golf might have influenced your opinion, it means your human and honest.   

post #3401 of 4659
Quote:
Originally Posted by saevel25 View Post

 

I wouldn't say that the math works. There are other factors as well, like consistency of play as well, dominance of wins, things like that. The math isn't that simple.

Phil won a Major, finished 2nd in another and won 2 other tournaments.  Tiger won 5 non-majors yet people consider him POTY.  I agree the math isn't that simple but the weight of Majors doesn't seem to factor in as greatly in determining POTY as it does in GOAT. 


Edited by newtogolf - 8/23/13 at 1:10pm
post #3402 of 4659

Thanks, newtogolf.
 

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Tour Talk
TheSandTrap.com › Golf Forum › The Clubhouse › Tour Talk › Jack or Tiger: Who's the greatest