Originally Posted by tefunk
However, there really are only two contenders... Nicklaus and Woods. I give the title to Nicklaus until we see how Woods finishes up his career.
Considering that he won majors at a higher success rate than Nicklaus, how do you write Ben Hogan out of the conversation? Or do you think Jack was right when he said majors are the way to compare players of different eras, in the full knowledge that they had far fewer opportunities than he did?
The funny thing is that Tiger supporters frequently get accused of believing that golf didn't even start until 1997, yet the reality is that the Jack supporters seem to be the ones who think golf started in 1962, since they utterly disregard guys like Hogan.
As to putting Jack over Tiger, do you have any criteria supporting that ranking other than 18>14? It is OK if that is your reason, but I am always interested if anyone has anything ELSE, because I haven't heard much in the 250 page Jack v Tiger thread.