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

[lumpuckeroo]

No kidding. Is that what the word "might" implies?

Don't stop now, the discussion is getting good. While I too would have said the modern field is deeper, I'm not so sure that is the case. I don't know that a field with Tiger, Phil, Ernie, Retief, Vijay and Todd Hamilton is any deeper than a field with Jack, Arnie, Gary, Lee, Tom and Phil Rodgers.

I do not disagree that Tiger has won at a higher rate, but is that because he is better or is that because he doesn't have the competitors like Arnie, Gary and Tom.

[AmenCorner]

No kidding. Is that what the word "might" implies?

I completely agree. My dad always tells me that golf used to be a game for nerds. By that he meant the popularity wasn't a fraction of what it is now. Tigers competition is leaps and bounds more dedicated to this game than competitors of years past. Gone are the days when a fat Bruce Lietzke can come out cold turkey, play 17 tourney's a year, win one, and score 3 more top tens. Doesn't happen, you have to be dedicated, because your competition is. Even Greg Norman said recently that things are totally different.

Just look at the purses too. Normal tourneys just 10-15 years ago had 1mm purses. 180k to the winner. Now, it's many multiples of that. There is much more on the line now. Naturally that will produce more competition.

[AmenCorner]

To Summarize: Jack was the man, but Tiger is borderline not human in my opinion. Problem is, most fans today lack perspective because they never watched golf before Tiger.

[leftcoastsrt04]

Jack also never put his name on every product known to man.... I think I saw Billy Mayes selling some "Tiger Putty".

Jack all the way!

[Golferblogger]

Until Tiger turns 50, we may not know. (Although I think we will before then.)

It must be tough for some of you to be young enough not have experienced Jack's day. His long putts, amazing irons, and clutch shots were every bit as exciting and decisive as Tiger's.

Statistics, eventually, will make the decision for us. But...if this is a statistical AND emotional battle, then you youngins have to disqualify yourselves. The best you can ever determine on those grounds is whether Tiger is the greatest of his era.

[KAC6]

The debate will go on forever. I think we can all pretty much agree that they are/were the best golfers of their generation. I feel that Tiger has better overall athleticism, and I think that Tiger in his prime is just a little bit better than Jack in his prime. Still in the grand scheme of things we'll never know because a true comparison just can't happen. I don't believe that there should ever be a greatest all-time player for any sport. As they say "records are always meant to be broken". People always want to find the next greatest thing when we should all just appreciate the players for what they are...the dominant players of their era.

[Tulsa]

Tiger's a great front runner and Jack was dangerous wherever he was in the field. Tiger may ultimately get that 19th major and secure his place in history as the best ever but he's never going to be the class-act that Jack is.

[Marmitetoo]

TIGER!

What I love is the fact that, many of us have had the privilege of watching both these guys play in overlapping era's. We never got to see, Sam Snead, Walter Hagan, Bobby Jones, Ben Hogan, etc (Well some of you might have done I guess.....lol)

So the fact that I've got to watch these two guys mastering the game has been Awesome!

Steve

[Jigowatt]

Go tiger!

[TMC]

If Tiger continues at this rate, he'll beat Jack during his career.

But If I could ever play one round as good as either of them on their worst day as a pro, it would probably be the best day of golf that I ever have had.

And for the life of me, I still can't imagine how Tiger won on a fractured leg. Some of those shots still send shivers down my spine!

[Reid Jones]

tiger's the greatest there ever will be.

[perksf]

Since I was born in the eighties, I grew up watching Tiger. Heard stories whenver I'd play Stanford about the impossible lines he'd take off the tee. How he was the prodigy of his generation. I saw him almost lose the US Amateur because he forgot to properly re-place his ball mark. Like many, I've watched nearly all his major wins, many in HD. He is the model to which most golfers of my generation aspire to be. To many of us, Jack Nicklaus designs golf courses and only plays sporadically. He is a shell of his former self. Which is completely understandable of course - he's old. He's pro golfer 1.0. Tiger is clearly pro golfer 2.0. Better built, taller,better equipped and just as focused. He clearly couldn't exist without Jack Nickaus and to compare the two doesn't seem particularly useful.

[JML22]

I like tiger because of his comebacks on the back 9

[lumpuckeroo]

If you combined the age thread with this tread you would probably find a trend.

[enis750]

tiger for sure....but im "young" , not to say Jack wasnt the man....

[bt4264]

Jack is a legend, Tiger is producing his legacy. Tiger will become all time great.

[AP2]

I have to go with Tiger, I never got to see Jack play. Tiger has got to be the greatest under pressure.

[jayph]

My vote goes to Tiger but for similar reasons as others before me as I never watched Jack play.