Jump to content
IGNORED

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


Greatest Golfer (GOAT)  

213 members have voted

  1. 1. Tiger or Jack: Who's the greatest golfer?

    • Tiger Woods is the man
      1630
    • Jack Nicklaus is my favorite
      817


Recommended Posts

  • Administrator
11 hours ago, StuM said:

As for the Tiger post, it shows the subjectivity in how to choose.  Some are using records to make objective decisions and in that case 18 majors vs 15 Majors = Jack, if looking at overall US Tour wins, 82 vs 73 = Tiger, there are other records such as world-wide wins (Tiger), percentages of cuts made at majors (I've not fully researched this but I know Jack made 39 of 40 cuts in majors in the 1970s), weeks at #1 in WGR (did not start until 1986 so not great for comparison), most runner-ups in majors (Jack), most top 5 finishes in majors (Jack), Decisive victory in a major (IMO Tiger at The Masters).  The issue is subjectivity in choosing which record/stat to consider and which carries more weight.  If you are trying to give different weight to majors, which I agree majors are worth more, again subjectivity enters the equation as to how much weight to give them.

I'll second what @turtleback said and add only this: those stats and many others are why some people — not you, obviously — CAN and DO make actual determinations for themselves who they think is the GOAT. And the majority tends to favor Tiger… and this topic is pretty old, and has always been in favor of Tiger, since… 2006 when it started.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Replies 7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

For some reason, you have missed hundreds of posts that do accept that.  I've often said I can't even prove that Tiger would beat Vardon head to head, although I'd bet on him. What I CAN prove is

That's very unfair to Jack, since he played events well into his 60's.  It also distorts Tiger's record, since he played injured for several years. It would be more fair to look at the the period

Your quote highlights something that Tiger is seldom given credit for, which is that he has never (to my knowledge) tried to lobby for himself the way Jack did. Tiger is pursuing the two biggest

Posted Images

13 minutes ago, iacas said:

I'll second what @turtleback said and add only this: those stats and many others are why some people — not you, obviously — CAN and DO make actual determinations for themselves who they think is the GOAT. And the majority tends to favor Tiger… and this topic is pretty old, and has always been in favor of Tiger, since… 2006 when it started.

 

How about a 1A and a 1B?  For different reasons they both qualify as GOATs...

Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

26 minutes ago, Double Mocha Man said:

How about a 1A and a 1B?  For different reasons they both qualify as GOATs...

They don’t. Tiger is clearly the GOAT. What’s arguable is whether Jack is actually second.😉

Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

8 minutes ago, Vinsk said:

They don’t. Tiger is clearly the GOAT. What’s arguable is whether Jack is actually second.😉

IDK.  How can one overlook 18 majors?  Do you have Hogan in 2nd place?  😃

Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

11 minutes ago, Double Mocha Man said:

IDK.  How can one overlook 18 majors?  Do you have Hogan in 2nd place?  😃

Brace yourself, old chap. I sense terse reminders that the British Open in the late '60s and early '70s had slightly weaker fields than a Sunday medal at the Salina Kansas Country Club, may soon be headed your way.

 

...And yes, Tiger is the GOAT. And Jack is sort of the smaller, older, back-up GOAT. Or 2nd place GOAT. Reserve GOAT. Call it what you will.

Edited by ScouseJohnny
Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, turtleback said:.  I always offer them a challenge.  Take the years of Jack's career and line them up from best to worst.  I'll do the same with Tiger's carrer.  And then we'll play matchplay, going down the line, comparing years.  They never take me up on it, but I've done it myself and the match ends 10 & 8.

I will work on putting this together.  I will not be able to focus on it for a few days but will send you a message.

4 hours ago, turtleback said:  I always offer them a challenge.  Take the years of Jack's career and line them up from best to worst.  I'll do the same with Tiger's carrer.  And then we'll play matchplay, going down the line, comparing years.  They never take me up on it, but I've done it myself and the match ends 10 & 8.

Something happened is recent quote do re- posting.

it will take me a few days to put the list together and will message you.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Here is a list of links to a lot of the numbers that pretty clearly establish that Tiger has far exceeded Jack in every relevant metric with the sole exception of what, back then was 18>14, and is now 18>15.  


https://thesandtrap.com/forums/topic/2203-jack-vs-tiger-whos-the-greatest-golfer/?do=findComment&comment=1366814

 

3 hours ago, Vinsk said:

They don’t. Tiger is clearly the GOAT. What’s arguable is whether Jack is actually second.😉

The people who are in the worst position are the ones that dismiss strength of field arguments, because the only defense of Jack as #2 over Hogan at #3 beyond pure longevity is that Jack's fields were tougher than Ben's.

2 hours ago, StuM said:

I will work on putting this together.  I will not be able to focus on it for a few days but will send you a message.

Something happened is recent quote do re- posting.

it will take me a few days to put the list together and will message you.

BTW, it is nice to have someone enter the thread in good faith with an open mind.  That hasn't been all that typical in this thread.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

23 hours ago, StuM said:

Decisive victory in a major (IMO Tiger at The Masters). 

Assuming you are talking about the '97 Masters, I don't even agree with your opinion on that let alone the Tiger v Jack Debate.

In the 2000 U.S. Open Tiger was leading after 54 holes by 10 strokes and ended up winning by 15 strokes, which is the largest margin of victory in a major ever. He played the final round bogey free, and was the only player to break par for the week and became the first player in 106 years of the U.S. Open to finish at double-digits under par.

In the 1997 Masters, he had a 9 shot lead after 54 holes, won by 12, had 2 bogeys in the final round, and 10+ people finished under par.

So what about Tiger's win at The Masters makes it more decisive than his win at the 2000 U.S. Open?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

38 minutes ago, klineka said:

Assuming you are talking about the '97 Masters, I don't even agree with your opinion on that let alone the Tiger v Jack Debate.

In the 2000 U.S. Open Tiger was leading after 54 holes by 10 strokes and ended up winning by 15 strokes, which is the largest margin of victory in a major ever. He played the final round bogey free, and was the only player to break par for the week and became the first player in 106 years of the U.S. Open to finish at double-digits under par.

In the 1997 Masters, he had a 9 shot lead after 54 holes, won by 12, had 2 bogeys in the final round, and 10+ people finished under par.

So what about Tiger's win at The Masters makes it more decisive than his win at the 2000 U.S. Open?

Both were great wins.  In addition to score/lead I was also considering that the '97 Masters was his 1st major win.  I should not have called it the dominant win.

Edited by StuM
typo
Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

5 hours ago, StuM said:

Both were great wins.  In addition to score/lead I was also considering that the '97 Masters was his 1st major win.  I should not have called it the dominant win.

 

Well, it was certainly A dominant win.  And consider that few players have had one dominant wins in majors, while off the top of my head I can think of 3 for Tiger - 97 Masters (12), 2000 US Open (15), and the 2000 British Open (8).

Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • 2 weeks later...

 

Good morning.  It is time for me to eat crow and adjust my opinions stated previously.  First, I had stated, often, that choosing a GOAT across era's was not possible, or at least extremely difficult, but after much research I feel I can make a choice.  I have been silent on this topic for the past 8 days as I took a deeper look.

I would like to thank @turtleback for sharing various pieces of information.  To me, one of his most relevant suggestions was to look at "Gifted Majors".  In digging deeper I learned that Jack had 2 major victories that I concluded were "Gifts".  In the 1966 Masters Gary Brewer 3-Putted #18 costing him the outright lead.  Jack also won the 1970 Open Championship in a playoff but Doug Sanders took 4 shots to hole-out from 74 yards and missed a short putt that would have given Sanders the victory in regulation.  I understand "A Win is a Win" but if we are giving Majors higher value than non-Majors then we should consider these gifts as being not as significant as other major victories. Tiger had some playoffs victories in Majors but in looking I could not categorize them as "Gifts".  If anything the 2000 PGA was Tiger fending off a surging Bob May and the 2005 Masters was Tiger fending off a great round by DiMarco.  The 2008 US Open was Tiger getting Birdie on 18 to force playoff then winning a tough battle against Rocco in the playoff.  This, to me, brings less value to "18>15" argument.

I also looked over various prior comments in this topic, as was suggested by many.  When considering Tiger's long-term dominance, overall more tour & worldwide victories along with the above I am able to make a choice.

So today, I cast my vote for Tiger.

Thanks for pushing me to look deeper into this.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Gifted Majors.....Faldo probably the leader in this. Profoundly lucky. Norman blowing a six shot lead, collapsing and Hoch choking a 2’ putt. Faldo totally gifted there.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • 2 weeks later...
On 10/2/2020 at 9:39 PM, Vinsk said:

Gifted Majors.....Faldo probably the leader in this. Profoundly lucky. Norman blowing a six shot lead, collapsing and Hoch choking a 2’ putt. Faldo totally gifted there.

Faldo was lucky that Hoch choked,( he shot a 65 to get to the playoff BTW) but he was stone cold against Norman at the Masters. He shot the low round of the day, won by 5. Not blowing it when the pressure is on is a   major skill set and Faldo was very good under pressure 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

4 hours ago, Beastie said:

but he was stone cold against Norman at the Masters.

Norman shot a 78. Faldo didn’t have to be too stone cold to win that one. Norman only had to shoot even par to win. Faldo played great. But it wasn’t an astronomically good round as much as Norman’s was astronomically bad. 

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • 2 months later...
  • Administrator
Quote

To many people inside Tiger's circle, Jack Nicklaus' record of 18 majors wasn't as important to Tiger as it was to the golfing media and fans. He never mentioned it. Multiple people who've spent significant amounts of time with him say that. When Tiger did talk about it, someone else usually brought it up and he merely responded. The record instead became something to break so he could chase something that truly mattered. He loved the anonymity of wearing a uniform and being part of a team. "It was very, very serious," the friend says. "If he had had a hot two years and broken the record, he would have hung up his clubs and enlisted. No doubt."

r75901_1296x729_16-9.jpg

The death of his father set a battle raging inside the world's greatest golfer. How he waged that war -- through an obsession with the Navy SEALs -- is the tale of how Tiger lost his way.

Tiger’s records, Jack’s records on Tiger’s bedroom wall, were about the age at which Jack accomplished certain things, not the total number of things he did.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • 2 weeks later...
5 hours ago, The Flush said:

Possibly already discussed here

Yes it’s been discussed but really cooL to see it in writing like that. So many melancholic Jack lovers will still cling to their silly Jack 18 argument. But yeah, Jack said it all right there. Several of Jack’s majors were about the equivalent of a today’s player John Deere Classic.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • Support TST Affiliates

    TourStriker PlaneMate
    Golfer's Journal
    Whoop
    SuperSpeed
    FlightScope Mevo
    Use the code "iacas" for 10% off Mevo and the code "iacasjun21" for 10% off SuperSpeed.
  • Posts

    • My memories and reviews of the courses we played, finally: Sandbox 10 of 10 Just fun, 40 yards to 170, most under 100 yards, many options to play each hole, including putting, low lofted chip and run, to traditional pitches.  Highlights include 5 or 6 birdies the first two days, 1 over par on day 2 for total 52 strokes.  Also was the first to lose the “no sixes” challenge by going bunker to bunker on Hole 2 on the first day. Mammoth Dunes 8 Huge golf course, first fairway was over 100 yards wide, first green was probably 50 yards wide.  Maybe reading the Golf Club Atlas article helped me, but I was able to discern the major v-shaped ridge the course was built on and around.  Greens were generally pretty welcoming on many sides, in lots of areas a ball would funnel onto the putting surface.  However,  there were a few very deep greenside bunkers, in particular on the short 13th.  I enjoyed the course while playing fairly poorly.  Given the width of most fairways, I think additional rounds would lead a player to explore a variety of angles, there were a lot of ways to play most of the holes.  Or maybe the best way to play a hole would vary significantly depending on pin position.  I’d like to get a chance to figure it out a little more. Sand Valley 7.5 From satellite photos it would be hard to discern many differences between Sand Valley and Mammoth Dunes, but playing them becomes two very different experiences.  At Sand Valley the fairways seem a bit tighter, and the areas surround the greens generally funnel balls away from the green.  To me, this meant it played substantially tougher.  I also felt like there were more uphill walks, especially on the front 9, including several climbs to get from a green to the next tee.  Of course, that type of design tends to result in downhill tee shots, as was the case for almost every hole here.  A notable exception was Hole 7 (Dan’s favorite), which required a blind uphill drive to a “fade” fairway with sand on both sides beyond a certain distance.  Highlights for me were #1, with birdies both days, and #17 with two pars (driver on day 1, 3-wood on day 2).  Lowlights were some kind of high number on #2 (first day) after playing back and forth across the raised green a few times. All in all, I think I prefer Mammoth Dunes, but I’m glad we played Sand Valley twice. If I lived and played here regularly, I’d probably play Mammoth 6 times out of 10.  If I get back there, I’ll almost certainly play shorter tees than I did.    Lawsonia Links. 8.5 We went from modern courses designed by well-respected current designers to a 90-year old course, designed by well-respected designers of their time.  I really enjoyed the look of this course, its a style from a bygone era.  For the most part the course appears to follow the original terrain.  But the designers dug relatively linear bunkers and/or hollows, piling the excavated material to form linear mounds.  And they moved a lot of earth for at least a few of the greens, creating very steep drop-offs.  In many cases, the bunkers and mounds were well short of the greens, requiring a shot to carry the bunker or hollow, but not requiring the ball to carry all the way to the green.  This also confuses the depth perception at times, “just over the bunker” wasn’t anywhere close to being on the green.  Conditions were very good, the greens had plenty of contour, but never seemed to leave an “impossible to get close” putt.  Unlike the very tight turf at the Sand Valley courses, the turf here was a little more lush, so perfect contact on short game shots was a little less critical.  And there was rough, and beyond that some tall fescue, as opposed to the native sand at the previous courses.   The clubhouse and range and other facilities were pretty modest, but the staff were friendly and efficient.  Our foursome enjoyed the first few holes so well we decided that a second 18 was a great idea.  This is also where I had my best round, 76.  As much as I try to evaluate courses based on their merits, the quality of my play is bound to be at least a subconscious factor. Lac La Belle 7 This is a very recent rebuild on the site of a previous course.  From what I’ve read, there’s very little remaining from the old course, its been almost entirely redesigned.  Conditions were excellent, and the course is very pretty.  Its pretty demanding in places, with woods or creeks or bunkers on both sides of the fairway, and mostly slightly to significantly elevated greens.  Greens varied, some relatively small, others were huge and heavily contoured.  I thought in that on a few of the greens the slopes were too severe for the speed of the greens, but that was only a few.  The facilities were excellent, a good driving range, nice new clubhouse.  But the course just doesn’t stand out to me, its a good modern golf course.  And there are just a few goofy greens, 60 yards or more deep, really severe contours, its as if they’re done that way to inspire conversation, not to actually play. All in all, we played some really good golf courses, each and every one.  Of the 5 full-size courses, the ones I’d like to play most are Mammoth Dunes and Lawsonia Links. 
    • To me this is fairly simple geometry.  If you're set up right, your hips will turn around an inclined axis.  Imagine a hula hoop around your waist, tilted a little.  That means that in the backswing, your lead hip will move "around" that axis, away from the target, closer to the ball, and closer to the ground.  The trail hip does the opposite.  So your lead leg has to increase flex, your trail leg has to extend.  The opposite happens in the forward swing.   As to what feel will produce the most efficient movements, that's going to vary from person to person.  
    • Any guys here know the courses up near Albany/Saratoga Springs area ? Driving up from Northern NJ and doing a three day up to the race course in Saratoga Springs and would like to place a course close to the NY thruway going up and coming back. We already have a tee time at Saratoga National so looking for one or two more nice tracks. 
    • A better way to say it would be using the leg to push the hip, here's a video of what I mean he's referring to the downswing but am I right in saying for the backswing should you do something similar, where you use your leg to push the hip rather than just trying to get the hip to turn clockwise   
  • Today's Birthdays

    1. camerongautx
      camerongautx
      (30 years old)
    2. CyboNinja
      CyboNinja
      (40 years old)
    3. Hawk367
      Hawk367
      (54 years old)

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Welcome to TST! Signing up is free, and you'll see fewer ads and can talk with fellow golf enthusiasts! By using TST, you agree to our Terms of Use, our Privacy Policy, and our Guidelines.

The popup will be closed in 10 seconds...