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

[lastings]

14 minutes ago, Jack Watson said:

@mvmac

Whats the date on the video?

Tigers heyday was what 17 years ago?

Tiger wasn’t beating the guys today silly.  Back then the field was so weak at the top.  Not many knew how to win.  

a lot of those players would have had a lot more wins if Tiger wasn't stomping on everyone's chances week after week. Major after Major. 

[iacas]

19 minutes ago, Jack Watson said:

@mvmac

Whats the date on the video?

Tigers heyday was what 17 years ago?

Tiger wasn’t beating the guys today silly.  Back then the field was so weak at the top.  Not many knew how to win.  

You do realize it's possible, mathematically, to demonstrate how incredibly stupid that statement is, right?

But I'll let Jack do it himself, dating back to a comment he made in 1996:

You're just trolling at this point @Jack Watson. The depth and strength of field is vastly superior in even 1997 than it was in 1967 or 1977.

[Jack Watson]

@iacas There’s no point to repeated assertions regarding field strength.  I and others pointed out some things and it seems we are at an impasse.  I’m done on that.  That’s ok.

This quote from Tiger here at the bottom regarding the looks of his swing troubles me.  One difference in style between Jack and him is Tiger tore down and rebuilt while Jack managed his swing with whatever.

https://www.golfdigest.com/story/tiger-woods-didnt-like-his-1997-swing-butch-harmon/

[Golfingdad]

8 minutes ago, Jack Watson said:

and it seems we are at an impasse.

In which case, I propose a battle of wits ... to the death.

It ends when you choose, and then you and @iacas both drink.

[iacas]

27 minutes ago, Jack Watson said:

@iacas There’s no point to repeated assertions regarding field strength.

Then why did you continue? (<--- Rhetorical question.)

27 minutes ago, Jack Watson said:

This quote from Tiger here at the bottom regarding the looks of his swing troubles me.  One difference in style between Jack and him is Tiger tore down and rebuilt while Jack managed his swing with whatever.

And the relevance to this topic is… what exactly?

@Golfingdad obviously knows I've spent years developing my immunity to iocane powder.

[Jack Watson]

@Golfingdad

Clearly you have a dizzying intellect!

[mvmac]

8 hours ago, Jack Watson said:

@mvmac

Whats the date on the video?

Tiger wasn’t beating the guys today silly.  Back then the field was so weak at the top.  Not many knew how to win.  

I figured that I could post the video and wouldn't have to explain something so obvious.

Yes fields are deeper now than in 2005. In 2005 they were deeper than they were in 1975 and 1965. Do I really have to point that out?

8 hours ago, Jack Watson said:

Tigers heyday was what 17 years ago?

Tiger won his last major in '08 and was player of the year in 2013. 

[Wally Fairway]

Here is my advice, for many who post in this thread:

There is no reason to wrestle with a pig, you both get dirty but only the pig is happy about it!

No onward toward 300 pages ....

or conversely you could watch this and continue as is

 

[RussUK]

The way see it is that both are the greatest of their generation. Both have done more for the sport than pretty much any other player (maybe apart from old Tom Morris ).

Everyone will have their own personal favourite and sometimes nothing will change their views which isn't a problem as we cant always agree on the same thing. As long as we respect and understand each others opinions then alls good. Right, now that's sorted I'll get onto sorting the middle east peace process. Hmm which leader is GOAT?

1 minute ago, Wally Fairway said:

Here is my advice, for many who post in this thread:

There is no reason to wrestle with a pig, you both get dirty but only the pig is happy about it!

No onward toward 300 pages ....

or conversely you could watch this and continue as is

 

love that clip!

[iacas]

 

[NEhomer]

I would say that Jack's the greatest golfer ever but that Tiger played the game on a higher level than any player in history including Jack. It gets tough though going blow for blow on stats as they both have a lot of punches.

The biggest difference to me now is that I still admire Jack while I've grown beyond weary of Tiger's babbling and his being over hyped constantly. 

[iacas]

2 hours ago, NEhomer said:

I've grown beyond weary of Tiger's babbling and his being over hyped constantly. 

You're welcome to vote for whomever you wish, but neither of those things are really a measure of who Tiger was as a golfer. One is his personality (and Jack didn't have the constant TV and media coverage that Tiger has - I could just as easily say I hate Jack because he smoked; it's not a measure of his ability as a golfer) and the other is the media's fault, not Tiger's.

[NEhomer]

My first sentence answered the thread question while the second had no such intent.

....but hello from a board newb.

[Patch]

Just thinking. Could today's Tiger beat Jack at the same age? Say a best of 7 series.

[iacas]

10 minutes ago, NEhomer said:

My first sentence answered the thread question while the second had no such intent.

Fair enough.

Spoiler

 

[Piz]

4 minutes ago, Patch said:

Just thinking. Could today's Tiger beat Jack at the same age? Say a best of 7 series.

Either Tiger would have to go back in time, or Jack would have to move forward.  The culture shock, for each, would make it a wash.

[mvmac]

1 hour ago, Patch said:

Just thinking. Could today's Tiger beat Jack at the same age? Say a best of 7 series.

Probably a better question to ask after Tiger has played several events for the year. 

Jack had a bit of a resurgence in his early 40's after not taking things too seriously in his late 30's. Went winless in '79.

 

[turtleback]

20 hours ago, NEhomer said:

I would say that Jack's the greatest golfer ever but that Tiger played the game on a higher level than any player in history including Jack. It gets tough though going blow for blow on stats as they both have a lot of punches.

The biggest difference to me now is that I still admire Jack while I've grown beyond weary of Tiger's babbling and his being over hyped constantly. 

No  it really is not close at all if you go blow for blow on stats.  Jack has more majors and that is about it (unless we want to look at pseudo stats like second place finishes).  In what other measurable stat is Jack ahead of Tiger?  In this thread are listings of the many ways Tiger is ahead of Jack, stat-wise.  Winning percentage, winning percentage in majors, margin of winning records (Tiger holds the record in all the majors other than the PGA), POY awards, Vardon trophies, winning streaks, stroke average margin over next best guy, winning streak in majors, cuts made streak, and on and on.  And all that is on the other side is 18>14.  Unless you have something more to back up your claim.

But I think your final comment really tells us, because it is the apotheosis of irrelevance to the point of the thread.  It isn't about who you admire more, particularly when Jack got away with saying some stuff that would make him a virtual pariah in today's 24/7 internet world.

http://articles.sun-sentinel.com/1994-08-21/sports/9408200266_1_nicklaus-blacks-comments

It got some press, but died away quickly.  That wouldn't happen today.