Jack vs. Tiger: Who's the Greatest Golfer?

[cfuller03]

Never saw the Golden Bear, but Tiger is incredible...

[GJac10]

At this point, I have to give to Jack until Tiget breaks his major victories record. When that happens there is no doubt that Tiger is the best ever.

[max power]

Tiger wins tournaments at an entirely unprecedented rate, over twice as frequently as Nicklaus. He's in his early 30's and has already won 14 majors. He will set the all-time wins record, and will probably win more than 18 majors. I like Nicklaus more, but even if Tiger retired tomorrow he would be the best ever.

[Larson1544]

I simply enjoy watching Tiger like I enjoyed watching Jordon. Amazes all the time. Jack just doesn't get the 'wow factor' from me, but didn't get to watch him at his prime on t.v.

[O.B. Right]

Never saw Jack play but I think Tiger is probably the better golfer . .. time will tell.

[KaiL]

It should be Tiger!!

[garweft]

Both are/were great. But only Arnie is the king.

I voted tiger

[Ironman]

The competition is so much better today!

[Clambake]

The competition is so much better today!

Yeah, Jack only had to beat a bunch of no-names like Trevino, Player, Miller, Palmer, Jacklin, Watson, Floyd, Irwin, Ballesteros, Boros, Floyd, Zoeller, Wadkins, Venturi, Lema, Weiskopf, Casper, Thomson...... what a bunch of hacks!

I think Tiger will become the greatest, but he's not there yet.

[sabuff]

I wasn't alive to see Jack play, so I have to go with Tiger. Although I do think Jack had tougher competition and no edge with technology!

[Ironman]

While Jack was a great golfer, Tiger should prove to be the greatest golfer ever. I believe the competition is much better today. I'm 52, so I watched Jack, Arnie, Lee, and Chi Chi a lot. Arnie was a little before Jack, so Jack dominated his era like Tiger is dominating currently. I don't see anybody coming along that can compete with Tiger on a regular basis.

[max power]

While Jack was a great golfer, Tiger should prove to be the greatest golfer ever. I believe the competition is much better today. I'm 52, so I watched Jack, Arnie, Lee, and Chi Chi a lot. Arnie was a little before Jack, so Jack dominated his era like Tiger is dominating currently. I don't see anybody coming along that can compete with Tiger on a regular basis.

That's the thing, I think when you look at the numbers and the way Tiger has dominated, that he has already proved to be the greatest golfer ever.

[dai3015]

Gotta be Jack
All the technology today - When Jack was around it was all about shaping shots with tiny wooden headed drivers & butter knife blades
Gotta be Jack - hasn't it???

[misty_mountainhop]

That's the thing, I think when you look at the numbers and the way Tiger has dominated, that

Nonsense. Utter nonsense. As for "looking at the numbers"...what does that mean? You could argue that Byron Nelson is the greatest due to the season (or two) where his stroke average was wayyyyy better than the rest. He won 11 consecutive tournaments and 18 tournaments in all during 1945. Is he the greatest then "because of the numbers"?? The number of people saying "never saw Jack so I have to vote Tiger!" amazes me as well. If you can't compare them, your vote is pretty worthless isn't it? Actually, a bit like this poll.... How are we defining "greatest" anyway? Numbers of Majors? Well, until Tiger has actually beaten Jack's total, he's not the greatest. He may do it, he may not. He may get hit by a truck tomorrow....

[Golden]

Some say, Jack is better because he did not have the technology tiger has. So if it was harder then, it was harder for all of them and a selected few would have been able to "work" those hard to hit clubs,
Now that everybody has access to the better technology, maybe a lot more people can win any given tournament.

I personnally don't want to cast my vote, I don't like comparing player from an era to another. But I sure wish Tiger beats Jack records, just so I can witness it, I Just like to see records fall.

[max power]

Nonsense. Utter nonsense. As for "looking at the numbers"...what does that mean? You could argue that Byron Nelson is the greatest due to the season (or two) where his stroke average was wayyyyy better than the rest. He won 11 consecutive tournaments and 18 tournaments in all during 1945. Is he the greatest then "because of the numbers"??

I never made the argument about not seeing Jack play, as I indicated, I'm more of a Jack fan than a Tiger fan. I also never said the greatest golfer should be determined solely by number of major titles. I don't think Byron Nelson's stellar 2 year stretch compares to what Tiger has done for a decade and a half. Tiger has been

far more dominant than Jack ever was, against a stronger field. I'm not discounting the greatness of Jack Nicklaus, I think he and Tiger are #1 and #1A in the history of golf. And if Jack were playing in his prime against Tiger he would frequently give Tiger a run in majors and for player of the year. If Tiger gets hit by a truck tomorrow he's going down as the greatest professional golfer ever.

[misty_mountainhop]

I never made the argument about not seeing Jack play, as I indicated, I'm more of a Jack fan than a Tiger fan.

No, you didn't. Sorry if I gave the impression you did. A lot of posts in this thread have come from that point of view though.

I also never said the greatest golfer should be determined solely by number of major titles. I don't think Byron Nelson's stellar 2 year stretch compares to what Tiger has done for a decade and a half.

I know you never said Majors was the only measure. I'm asking what the general consensus for this title of "Greatest" is. A lot of people base it solely on Major wins.

I'm being awkward re. Byron's hot streak but you get my gist.

Tiger has been

You think? Look at Nicklaus' Major record for the '70s, in particular.

...against a stronger field.

Extremely debatable. I would argue the modern fields have a bit more depth but at the top end, those that really threaten when it matters, I think it's much weaker.

I'm not discounting the greatness of Jack Nicklaus, I think he and Tiger are #1 and #1A in the history of golf. And if Jack were playing in his prime against Tiger he would frequently give Tiger a run in majors and for player of the year.

I think Jack would do whatever needs to be done if he were 30 years old now. Would certainly be an interesting battle.

If Tiger gets hit by a truck tomorrow he's going down as the greatest professional golfer ever.

Nope. Certainly not in my book anyway. I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on that one or revisit it in maybe 20 years....

[BillyGoat13]

Im sure someone has already mentioned this but i believe each was probably the greatest of their era and if you put them together head to head they would probably come out to be pretty square on L's and W's. If fitness is a criteria on who is better then TW has that hands down.....this is debatable though because i have seen many string beans scorch it 315 and many heavy dudes do the same.