Jump to content
IGNORED

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


Greatest Golfer (GOAT)  

222 members have voted

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

    • Tiger Woods is the man
      1628
    • Jack Nicklaus is my favorite
      820


Recommended Posts

Hard to say, give Jack Tiger's equipment in his prime and see.

Bag: SunMountain KG:3 Cart Bag
Driver: Titleist 913 D3

Fairway: Nike VR_S Covert Tour 3

Hybrid: Nike VR_S Covert 3
Wedges: 51° ,55°, 59° Trusty Rusty

Irons: Adams CMB
Putter: TM Ghost Spider

Glove: LeviTee Golf Glove

Shoe: True LinksWear Sensei, Proto

Ball: Srixon Z Star XV

 


I decide to stop in to The Trap and this argument's STILL going on. It's been going on for years. Awesome.

"I played like shit." -Greg Norman after the '96 Masters.


I wasn't alive at jack's prime so I go with tiger being the greatest golfer, also tiger can rip it further, has a better short game, and he's a built athlete, what else is their to say?

I wasnt alive when Jack was at his climax either......but i still think he was the best golfer to ever walk the fairway. He has more majors than any other golfer in the pga currently.

Whats in my bag?
909 D 10.5 Driver

-Hippo exp3 3 wood and hybrid

-Hippo exp3 irons

56 degree wedge

Rosa Monte Carlo putter

Dt roll golf ball


definitely tiger.
What's in my Bag:
Driver-TaylorMade 09 burner 10.5* | 3 wood-TaylorMade 09 burner | 3 hybrid-TaylorMade Rescue 09 | 4-GW-Titliest AP1 710s | 54.08 wedge-Titliest Vokey spin milled | 60.04 wedge-Titliest Vokey spin milled | Putter-Odyssey white hot #7 | Ball - whatever i find

I think there is deeper field of players today. Very hard to compare the two head to head

PGA Championship

Don Massengale Don January-1967 Julius Boros-1968 Masters George Archer -1969 Billy Casper-1970 British Open 1970&71-Trevino 1972-Weiskopf US open Johnny Miller-1973(Nicklaus palmer trevino tied for fourth...) Hale Irwin-1974 Pga championship Davis Love 3-1997 Vijay-1998 Masters Olazabel-1999 Vijay-2000 British open Duval-2001 Els-2002 US Open Furyk-2003 Goosen-2004 I don't know about deeper fields. That's a random smattering of majors from both their eras & it's pretty diverse. Also, if you look at the leaderboards for those years it's apparent how much talent there was behind the winners. So in Jack's era, when you look down the list you see weiskopf, miller, watson, palmer, trevino, snead, irwin, etc. Those are some pretty heady names to have on a top ten/twenty behind you. Tigers era, mickelson, els, vijay. Sometimes furyk, goosen, sergio(ok i'm just being mean...). I could look at it a couple of different ways. The field could be conceivably deeper these days, or the top players are complete headcases who cannot finish for more than a season or two at a time. It seems like theres a more consistant group in Jacks era in & around the top ten/twenty. & they're all regarded fairly highly in the ranks of golf elite. But that's the field. & this about Jack vs Tiger. Really until Tiger passes Jack's records there's no contest. People said Jack was the greatest. Then Tiger came along & everyone wasn't so sure anymore. Until a couple of years ago Michael Jordan was pretty much the undisputed greatest basketball player ever as well. But now there's Kobe & people aren't so sure anymore. Just wait 20 years. "Jack was good, & Tiger was alright, but JB is the undisputed greatest!"

Not having been alive during Jack's reign, I have to go with Tiger. Seems when he is on his game, nobody can stop him. The only thing that seems to screw with him is off the field shenanigans that he has to put up with.

2013 Goal:

 

Single digit handicap


Tiger.

Jack came first. Tiger came second.

Tiger is better.

A) You need to hit alot of different clubs.
B) Whatever works for you.
C) It's the indian, not the arrow.
D) A 5 wood, 19* hybrid or a lob wedge.


Tiger is a beast!!! Jack is also but I am a huge Tiger fan.....I think they both share a common ground, on the course that is...;)

Hard to say, give Jack Tiger's equipment in his prime and see.

Don't forget to give all the other players of his time the same equipment.

I suppose talent was more important before, without the high tech equipment available today. Balls, clubs, swing speed, club speed, trackman, high speed video. I would say it is easier to get good at golf today, but of course that goes for everyone, which makes it harder again to compete in the top. You see players on the tour today that is there almost only on talent, with a swing not honed by cameras. You also got players that use a lot of equipment to their benefit. Earlier, you didn't have this equipment, so those with the talent and ability to play good golf had an advantage over those who didn't.

Ogio Grom | Callaway X Hot Pro | Callaway X-Utility 3i | Mizuno MX-700 23º | Titleist Vokey SM 52.08, 58.12 | Mizuno MX-700 15º | Titleist 910 D2 9,5º | Scotty Cameron Newport 2 | Titleist Pro V1x and Taylormade Penta | Leupold GX-1

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Jack, and I'm not just talking about golf.

ETA: I thought that Watson's performance in the Brit. Open last year would silence those who argue that competition is tougher now. I was disproved; idiots remain idiots regardless of empirical evidence. Imagine, one of Jack's rivals outplaying Tiger and all the other youngsters minus one, at the age of 60, and some folks still think Tiger has tougher competition.

MOST of the idiots who thought Tiger was a "good guy" still think he's a good guy. It should have been obvious since around 1996 (US Am playoffs vs. Steve Scott).

Jack, and I'm not just talking about golf.

One good day doesn't make a summer.....

fair play to watson, he did well at his specialty. Links golf in bad weather. But tiger would kill him even the way he is playing at the moment at any other course. Tiger DOES have tougher competition. Back then there was only a few guys playing on tour. Now you've got thousands of pro's all over the world trying their best to get on tour. Only a few of those people make it to the top and that's who Tiger has had to face to get his 14 majors.

My Clubs
Driver - LV4 10* R flex
Wood - sam snead persimmon 2 wood (for windy days)
Hybrid burner tour launch 20* stiff flex.
Irons - Tour Mode 3i,4i stiffIrons - FP's 5-PW R-flexWedge - spin milled 54.14Wedge - spin milled 60.07Putter - Victoria Lowest round 2010: 79 (par 70)Latest rounds at...


The point about equipment is this: Jack's peers played the same equipment. Tiger's peers play the same equipment.

Actually, if each of their peers played the same equipment, peer wise it is a wash. Say Jack's equipment = X and Tiger's = Y. So Jack, and all of his competition, would have the co-efficient of X and for Tiger and his cohort, Y. Basically, if each set has it's own similar equipment, it impacts each set equally.

Too soon to tell but I might have a new obsession.


One good day doesn't make a summer.....

Yes, it is hard to play consistently, day to day, for an entire summer, WHEN YOU ARE 60 YEARS OLD!!! I'm curious, how old are you?

I'm not saying it means everything, I'm saying it means A LOT, over the course of four days. The fact that Watson can come back, as a "part-time" golfer and full-time OLD GUY and hang with the best in the world for four straight days at the age of 60 is absolutely huge, ON ANY COURSE! And he isn't even Jack Nicklaus. Your arguments that "back then there were only a few guys on tour" and that "now there are thousands of pro's all over the world trying their best to get on tour" are the typical arguments always used to make your point. I hear you. However, there WERE quite a few players trying to get on, and win tournaments back then, and the best still rose to the top. It's not like the 1975 Masters was a club championship. Additionally, many would argue that overall the older generation of players were mentally tougher and attitudinally superior to many of today's tour "prima donnas". Tiger's intimidation factor is huge because as far as mental toughness, he is a giant, and in regular tournament play and playoffs, world-class players often and obviously wilt like drying daisies in his presence (where are the "battles" of Nicklaus' era?). I'm not going to regurgitate the typical arguments by those who agree with my point of view. I would just offer this idea: Go out and play one round of golf with a set of irons and balls from Nicklaus' era. Just one round. Even if you have done this before, say 10 years ago, try it now. Leather grips, crappy steel shafts so comparatively poor that they easily bend and snap over the knee, sharp/straight blades with zero/negative bounce and comparatively crappy grooves, tiny persimmon woods, an "L" putter, and those ridiculous wound balls that cut and deform upon impact or get surface tearing when someone like Jack hit them 300 yards on the screws (he then had to hit that deformed ball in to the green and putt with it), etc. etc. etc. Then think about this; Tiger Woods' low score in the Masters is 18 under; Jack's is 17 under. ONE STROKE separates those records over the course of four days and around 270 shots. After playing that round with Jack-era equipment, you tell me how many strokes you think Tiger gained on Jack, due to equipment, and nothing more (we won't even go into superior course conditioning, health/dietary/fitness technology improvements, Lasik, computer club fitting etc.). 32 years separates 17 under and 18 under. I have to wonder, not just how Tiger would have done with Jack-era equipment, but how Jack would have done had he had those advantages. One stroke? I think Tiger's advantage is worth more than that. I realize this is just one example, from one tournament. This is just one way to try and compare. Heck, Hogan was 14 under in 1953, and I think that was after the bus wreck. There is a temptation to think that one's own generation is superior, especially since technological innovation makes today's players LOOK superior to yesterday's legends. Golf is a foremost a mental game. As for this discussion, the size of the field of POTENTIAL contenders throughout the world isn't what is important. This is a discussion about the greatest golfers of all time. What matters is the size of the field in terms of ACTUAL contenders who could post a challenge to Tiger or Jack. Jack had to fight off legendary players on a regular basis, and those guys didn't just fall apart when he stepped up to the tee for a playoff.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • TST Partners

    PlayBetter
    TourStriker PlaneMate
    Golfer's Journal
    ShotScope
    The Stack System
    FitForGolf
    FlightScope Mevo
    Direct: Mevo, Mevo+, and Pro Package.

    Coupon Codes (save 10-20%): "IACAS" for Mevo/Stack/FitForGolf, "IACASPLUS" for Mevo+/Pro Package, and "THESANDTRAP" for ShotScope. 15% off TourStriker (no code).
  • Posts

    • Day 11: 2/16/2025 Rince and Repeat: Just like yesterday I spent several 5-10 minute sessions working on what I learned on Friday.   
    • Quick update. So, I got the PXG Secret Weapon and I have to say I like it... mostly. (see below) I spent some time with it on the range and I even gathered some data in doors. I'm not going to post data yet, as my swing is still a bit of a work in progress and I'd like to gather some more data after I settle down a little bit more. But here's my review.  First as a driver replacement. ... IMO it is not a replacement, it's clearly more of a supplement... for me anyway. Not long enough to really replace the driver. For me it's about 20 yards short of my driver. It is longer than my 30-wood off the tee. (15 yards-ish) I will say it is easier to hit off the tee than my 3-wood. I get some of my best shots teeing it low, but I also get some of my worst. If I tee it about a full inch off the ground I get very consistent shots. Super repeatable. Amazingly repeatable even with my messy swing. Off the tee, I find it draw biased just a bit. You can tinker with the set up if that isn't your personal cup of tea.  As a 3-wood replacement. For me it's about perfect. It's longer than my 3-wood off the deck (my data showed 10 yards longer) and it has a gentle fade to it, which I love. You do need a clean lie, but I never hit my 3-wood off anything but a clean lie anyway. I found it interesting that I hit a gentle fade off the deck and a slight draw off a tee. I'm sure that's not uncommon. Again, you can tinker with the set up to optimize that if you wanted to... I don't want to.  It's clearly a lot longer than my 3-wood off the tee. Easier to hit off the tee than my 3 wood, and off the deck it's also longer. So, it's a no-brainer 3-wood replacement for me. I will say that over the years I've learned to use my 3-wood for this low-flying-100-yard-punch-out-from-under-a-tree shot.  I'll have to see if the Secret Weapon can handle that duty. But it's going in the bag to replace the 3-wood.  I also turned my 5-wood down from 19 degrees to 17 degrees. ... Incidentally my 3-wood had been 16 degrees. I used to always hit my 5 wood and my hybrid about the same distance. This adjustment helps my gapping a bit at the top of the bag. I can clearly hit my 5-wood farther than my hybrid now.  Overall on the PXG Secret Weapon. The good: It's clearly longer and easier to hit off the tee than my 3-wood. It's a bit longer off the deck than my 3-wood.  It's super forgiving... surprisingly so.  It's uber adjustable. ... Although I do suggest getting fit for it. That will save you having to (or wanting to) buy a weight kit just to try out the infinite number of set ups. The headcover is super cool.  The maybe not so good: Shots out of the middle sound great. Shots off the heal sound great. Shots off the toe sound ... what's the work... clangy? It's very forgiving off the toe and the heal. The flight and the distance are incredibly consistent. But the sound off the toe isn't great.  For me I tend to draw it off the tee and fade it off the deck. You can set it up to be biased either way, but in my hands I think if I set up a draw off the deck, that might induce a duck hook off the tee. ... In fairness that could also be where my swing is at right now.  It's pretty spendy. ... If I really stop and think about it, I paid $450 for a new 3-wood. Granted it's a better performing 3-wood. But for me it's really a 3-wood replacement.
    • I've got my pain mostly under control and the meds are working.   I'd like to join. 
    • I would definitely attend if my calendar allows.
    • Finland: I've played Mid-Night Golf in Finland. Really cool. I looked at the schedule for my week out there and I saw that we were teeing off at 9PM... Feels weird, 9 PM tee time. But it was really great. We finished well after 1AM and sat around and drank on the golf course terrace. It was cool. It's really easy to loose track of time when the sun doesn't set.  Here's a picture of me in Finland hitting my approach on the final hole. It's roughly 1:30AM in this photo.  Egypt: Another cool experience was playing golf in Egypt. The entire course is sand. The greens are called browns, cuz they are just sand with oil poured on them and pounded down a bit. Your ball gets kind of oily when you putt, but the caddy cleans it for you after each hole. You carry around a little piece of fake grass (maybe 2 foot square) and place your ball on it each time before you hit. That is except when you go into a sandtrap. The sandtraps are just areas marked off where you don't get to use your little piece of astro-turf. Sometimes they are dug down a bit to make a bunker, sometimes not.  Spain: No special events or anything, but I played a bunch of golf in Spain in the mid-1990's. At that time Spain's economy wasn't doing the best and Europe hadn't quite switched to the Euro. So Spain was using the Peseta. The country of Spain has some incredibly breathtaking courses. (incredible scenery in general) But because of the conversion from the dollar to the Peseta (If memory serves it was 150 to 1), I got to play them for what I remember as being incredibly inexpensive prices. Gorgeous country and really nice people.  Holland or The Netherlands: I lived for a couple of years in what's called The Flevoland in Holland. It's one of the Dutch provinces and it's all land that was recovered from the sea. So, it's all under sea-level. One of the courses I played a few times out there had flags on every hole to show just how deep the water would be if it wasn't for the dams. 
×
×
  • 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...