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

[buddhabob]

Turtleback hold off on the plaid pants o.k.? It does not follow that Nicklaus would be spraying shots all over the place. I understand the logic of your proposal but Nicklaus was in fact often in the middle of the fairway. And the fairways back then were tighter in design. Since the introduction of souped up technologies they have widened fairways to attract millions of duffers to the game and to quadruple the number of eyeballs glued to the t.v. screens. More money in it. I recommend for you a simple course in political economics and please again, leave the red plaids hanging in the closet. Woods simply cannot compete on championship level classic courses with narrow fairways and old time rough, it makes  for an easy bet in Vegas against all the numbskulls and lemmings who pick him to win everything he enters.

[MSchott]

Turtleback hold off on the plaid pants o.k.? It does not follow that Nicklaus would be spraying shots all over the place. I understand the logic of your proposal but Nicklaus was in fact often in the middle of the fairway. And the fairways back then were tighter in design. Since the introduction of souped up technologies they have widened fairways to attract millions of duffers to the game and to quadruple the number of eyeballs glued to the t.v. screens. More money in it. I recommend for you a simple course in political economics and please again, leave the red plaids hanging in the closet. Woods simply cannot compete on championship level classic courses with narrow fairways and old time rough, it makes  for an easy bet in Vegas against all the numbskulls and lemmings who pick him to win everything he enters.

It would be nice to see if you could actually provide data to back up what you post.

[k-troop]

Hey buddhabob...

This is a fun, friendly, and well-informed forum.  We like debate and discussion here, and we welcome all forms of reasoned, informed opinions.  You've got 8 posts on the forum now; half of them are name-calling Tiger rants, and the other half are tall tales about your athletic abilities back in the 60's.  All of your posts are laced with poor grammar, misuse of words, and insufficient punctuation.

If you took a little more time to write out a reasoned response supported with factual examples then you might get some interesting discussion going.  (Note:  "Tiger seems like a hysterical drama-queen on the course" is not factual support, it's nonsense.)  On your current path, you're simply going to be viewed as a troll whose posts are basically unreadable.

Again, it's your call.  You're only at 8 posts, so I'm guessing only a few guys have blocked you at this point.  If you're still on this path at post 20 then you'll simply be posting to yourself because all of the regulars on the forum will have blocked you.

[Jakester23]

Augusta National was 6905 in 1986. 2013 it is 7435. Not only have they added distance but they have added trouble to make the course harder. I think that the courses were easier in Jacks era. You can really say that Tigers shooting better scores on more difficult courses.

[k-troop]

Augusta National was 6905 in 1986. 2013 it is 7435. Not only have they added distance but they have added trouble to make the course harder. I think that the courses were easier in Jacks era. You can really say that Tigers shooting better scores on more difficult courses.

I agree with your premises, but not the conclusion.  Tiger is also playing with a much longer ball and more advanced gear.  It's really a moot comparison--the courses are longer and more tricked up now, but that's in response to better equipment.  You could also argue that Tiger has a significant advantage over Jack on the greens because course maintenance and conditions are so much better now than they were from 1960-1980.  It's a lot easier to make 10 footers on smooth-as-glass greens than it was on the closely-mown cow pastures Jack started playing on.

Again, I think there are so many points that could go either way it's hard to draw any conclusions about course difficulty/equipment.  The only conclusion I'll say that I do agree with is that modern equipment brings a lot more players into the mix, and makes it tougher for really great players to separate themselves from the pack.  I see this in my own game--I can hit a lot of shots today that I couldn't hit 20 years ago when I was playing very competitive high school and college golf and playing/practicing every day.

[Mulligan Jeff]

I've read that in order to bring more players into the mix the PGA should decrease the course yardage. That would end the domination of the bombers. The major at Bethpage Black had a par 4 that required a 270 carry over water/swamp - heck some pros can't carry that.

[Fourputt]

I've read that in order to bring more players into the mix the PGA should decrease the course yardage. That would end the domination of the bombers. The major at Bethpage Black had a par 4 that required a 270 carry over water/swamp - heck some pros can't carry that.

Actually that was the dogleg left 12th hole and it wasn't swamp, just native rough, with a bunker to carry right before they got to the fairway.  It wasn't a mandatory carry, as they had the option of playing to the corner of the dogleg and just leaving a longer approach shot (It's about 210 to the start of the fairway on that line).  It did still give an advantage to the longer drivers, but it wasn't an impossible situation for the normal hitters.  I just measured it in Google Earth, and it's 260 yards to carry the farthest point on the bunker from the very back of the back tee.

[Mulligan Jeff]

I remember some shorter hitting pros complaining but 210 doesn't seem much of a carry especially for a pro.

[turtleback]

Turtleback hold off on the plaid pants o.k.? It does not follow that Nicklaus would be spraying shots all over the place. I understand the logic of your proposal but Nicklaus was in fact often in the middle of the fairway. And the fairways back then were tighter in design. Since the introduction of souped up technologies they have widened fairways to attract millions of duffers to the game and to quadruple the number of eyeballs glued to the t.v. screens. More money in it. I recommend for you a simple course in political economics and please again, leave the red plaids hanging in the closet. Woods simply cannot compete on championship level classic courses with narrow fairways and old time rough, it makes  for an easy bet in Vegas against all the numbskulls and lemmings who pick him to win everything he enters.

A non-argument accompanied by insults.  About par for your course.

[Fourputt]

Quote:

Originally Posted by buddhabob

Turtleback hold off on the plaid pants o.k.? It does not follow that Nicklaus would be spraying shots all over the place. I understand the logic of your proposal but Nicklaus was in fact often in the middle of the fairway. And the fairways back then were tighter in design. Since the introduction of souped up technologies they have widened fairways to attract millions of duffers to the game and to quadruple the number of eyeballs glued to the t.v. screens. More money in it. I recommend for you a simple course in political economics and please again, leave the red plaids hanging in the closet. Woods simply cannot compete on championship level classic courses with narrow fairways and old time rough, it makes  for an easy bet in Vegas against all the numbskulls and lemmings who pick him to win everything he enters.

A non-argument accompanied by insults.  About par for your course.

Just another troll, fishing for a reaction.

[phan52]

Augusta National was 6905 in 1986. 2013 it is 7435. Not only have they added distance but they have added trouble to make the course harder. I think that the courses were easier in Jacks era. You can really say that Tigers shooting better scores on more difficult courses.

There are so many arguments that can be made about this on both sides of the issue. How about the equipment and, more specifically, that balls that they used back in the day. My club hosted a PGA event for 18 years from 1963 to 1980. We have a 238 yard par 3 that was by consensus one of the toughest holes on the entire Tour. Most of the players in the 60's were hitting 3-woods and drivers and, even in the late 70's, they were all hitting woods to that green. Before the one-ball rule was implemented, they used to hit no-spin rocks to that green and change to balata balls to putt (in fact, that hole was one of the reasons for the one-ball rule change). Now we have kids hitting mid-irons to that green, kids who wouln't even crack the top 20 in our club championship. Is that hole easier today? By all metrics, yes it is, as is the whole golf course for good players, even though we have added 450 yards from the tips in the last 25 years.

Comparing eras in that regard is an exercise in futility.

[Mulligan Jeff]

What do you think about the evolution of the greens from the 60's till now? I look at 60's footage of The Masters and it appears that pros would whale on a putt of say 30 feet - my point is greens were not cut as short then as nowadays so by today's standards they are more difficult to putt.

[phan52]

What do you think about the evolution of the greens from the 60's till now? I look at 60's footage of The Masters and it appears that pros would whale on a putt of say 30 feet - my point is greens were not cut as short then as nowadays so by today's standards they are more difficult to putt.

I would posit that good players prefer faster greens. The good players that I know do for sure.

[bplewis24]

There are so many arguments that can be made about this on both sides of the issue. How about the equipment and, more specifically, that balls that they used back in the day. My club hosted a PGA event for 18 years from 1963 to 1980. We have a 238 yard par 3 that was by consensus one of the toughest holes on the entire Tour. Most of the players in the 60's were hitting 3-woods and drivers and, even in the late 70's, they were all hitting woods to that green. Before the one-ball rule was implemented, they used to hit no-spin rocks to that green and change to balata balls to putt (in fact, that hole was one of the reasons for the one-ball rule change). Now we have kids hitting mid-irons to that green, kids who wouln't even crack the top 20 in our club championship. Is that hole easier today? By all metrics, yes it is, as is the whole golf course for good players, even though we have added 450 yards from the tips in the last 25 years.

Comparing eras in that regard is an exercise in futility.

Did that hole's length remain the same?  Has the scoring average changed much?

[phan52]

Originally Posted by phan52

There are so many arguments that can be made about this on both sides of the issue. How about the equipment and, more specifically, that balls that they used back in the day. My club hosted a PGA event for 18 years from 1963 to 1980. We have a 238 yard par 3 that was by consensus one of the toughest holes on the entire Tour. Most of the players in the 60's were hitting 3-woods and drivers and, even in the late 70's, they were all hitting woods to that green. Before the one-ball rule was implemented, they used to hit no-spin rocks to that green and change to balata balls to putt (in fact, that hole was one of the reasons for the one-ball rule change). Now we have kids hitting mid-irons to that green, kids who wouln't even crack the top 20 in our club championship. Is that hole easier today? By all metrics, yes it is, as is the whole golf course for good players, even though we have added 450 yards from the tips in the last 25 years.

Comparing eras in that regard is an exercise in futility.

Originally Posted by bplewis24

Did that hole's length remain the same?  Has the scoring average changed much?

The length is the same and, for most amateurs, no, the scoring average hasn't changed much. It is pretty much a par 4 for the average player and always has been. The differentials have changed slightly over the years, as the low handicap players will par it more often, but even that hasn't changed much. It's as easy to miss a long shot with a 5-iron as it is with a driver when you are dealing with amateurs, especially on a hole that has more trouble than just length.

[Fourputt]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jakester23

Augusta National was 6905 in 1986. 2013 it is 7435. Not only have they added distance but they have added trouble to make the course harder. I think that the courses were easier in Jacks era. You can really say that Tigers shooting better scores on more difficult courses.

There are so many arguments that can be made about this on both sides of the issue. How about the equipment and, more specifically, that balls that they used back in the day. My club hosted a PGA event for 18 years from 1963 to 1980. We have a 238 yard par 3 that was by consensus one of the toughest holes on the entire Tour. Most of the players in the 60's were hitting 3-woods and drivers and, even in the late 70's, they were all hitting woods to that green. Before the one-ball rule was implemented, they used to hit no-spin rocks to that green and change to balata balls to putt (in fact, that hole was one of the reasons for the one-ball rule change). Now we have kids hitting mid-irons to that green, kids who wouln't even crack the top 20 in our club championship. Is that hole easier today? By all metrics, yes it is, as is the whole golf course for good players, even though we have added 450 yards from the tips in the last 25 years.

Comparing eras in that regard is an exercise in futility.

You are incorrect about the part I put in bold.  The following quote is from the 1952 Rules of Golf, and it does not allow for the player to change his ball on the putting green.  The 1950 rules did not include this phrase under the wrong ball rule.  There is nothing in Section XI, Rule 35 covering the putting green which would modify the prohibition about changing balls.

RULE 21     PLAYING A WRONG BALL

The responsibility for playing his own ball rests with the player. Each player should put an identification mark on his ball.

1. General: Holing Out Original Ball

A player must hole out with the ball driven from the tee unless it be lost, unplayable, out of bounds, in a water hazard, unfit for play, or when under the Rules a ball may be substituted. In any such case the player may substitute another ball as provided for in the Rules.

[phan52]

There are so many arguments that can be made about this on both sides of the issue. How about the equipment and, more specifically, that balls that they used back in the day. My club hosted a PGA event for 18 years from 1963 to 1980. We have a 238 yard par 3 that was by consensus one of the toughest holes on the entire Tour. Most of the players in the 60's were hitting 3-woods and drivers and, even in the late 70's, they were all hitting woods to that green. Before the one-ball rule was implemented, they used to hit no-spin rocks to that green and change to balata balls to putt (in fact, that hole was one of the reasons for the one-ball rule change). Now we have kids hitting mid-irons to that green, kids who wouln't even crack the top 20 in our club championship. Is that hole easier today? By all metrics, yes it is, as is the whole golf course for good players, even though we have added 450 yards from the tips in the last 25 years.

Comparing eras in that regard is an exercise in futility.

Originally Posted by Fourputt

You are incorrect about the part I put in bold.  The following quote is from the 1952 Rules of Golf, and it does not allow for the player to change his ball on the putting green.  The 1950 rules did not include this phrase under the wrong ball rule.  There is nothing in Section XI, Rule 35 covering the putting green which would modify the prohibition about changing balls.

I am not going to argue with you about this. Guys did it. I caddied for Johnny Pott and Jerry McGee and they both did it. I caddied for Larry Ziegler and he didn't, because he didn't have to. He was the big hitter in his day.

[bplewis24]

So guys were cheating I guess?  Too bad they didn't have cameras on them ;-)