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

[cybear]

I voted for Tiger, better condition, better techinque, and still mighty young, so lots of time to keep winning.

He may beat Jack's record but will he ever win as many as Sam Snead or win the same percentage of times Sam won when he teed it up.

cybear

[thegreenmonstah]

I voted for Tiger since he's played his career entirely in the period since I became interested in golf. Both are amazing players and Jack is certainly one of the greatest of all time, but I think by the time Tiger ends his career he'll hold all the records and especially for this era, he'll be the best.

[Logie]

I've grown up in the Tiger era so its got to be Tiger for me!

[fluxcapacitor]

I think I'm going to change my vote to Tiger. I was a little weary of his new swing, parenthood, ect. But it looks like as long as he stays healthy and keeps his demeanor the same, stat-wise he'll be the greatest when its all said and done.

Another aspect i just thought about was, who has done more for the sport. Granted, we live in a media driven society, and with more information and media available at the click of a mouse or TV remote than in Jack's time, I think that Tiger has brought a lot more to the game. Is it all good? I don't know, I'd like believe that its all been good for the sport, but i'm sure someone, somewhere, can find something negative to say about it. Anyway, back to my original point...Do you guys think Tiger's brought more fans, marketing, "sell-ability", etc. to golf? Or even in his "Low-tech" era, did Jack have more power in helping the sport.

The only thing I can think of, is when Tiger does retire, where will golf go? Has his reign as THE superstar of the sport taken the spotlight off all the other golfers, and when he leaves will the game suffer? Or will there be another 21 year old kid that makes us all wonder, "What am I doing wrong?"

Sorry for the long post!

Cris

[keygolf]

HI Cris:
I thought it was rather thoughful post. You raise some very formidible questions that may take some time to answer, but good ones.

The matter of contributions will probably have to wait for the historians, but both Tiger and Jack will have many credits, though likely in rather different realms.

[GolfinTexan]

Gonna have to go with Tiger on this one

[hurley9192]

the big comment from the Pro-Jack crowd always is that Nicklaus had more competition. However, was that because Jack didn't dominate as much and left the door open more? It's a Catch-22...if Tiger blows away the field more than he let's them stay around him, he will win more majors and thus fewer guys win majors, which keeps the other competitor's totals down and makes them look like weaker competition. It's not like we don't have multiple major winners playing now...Ernie has 3, Phil has 3, Vijay has 3, Retief has 2...they just don't have 5 like some of Jack's contemporaries because Tiger wins more majors more often.

[Madriver]

...what I do know is that both Tiger and Jack are two of the greatest representatives of the game of golf. For all of us lucky enough to have grown up watching Jack and now Tiger....WOW...does it get any better. In my opinion, both Tiger an Jack are what makes golf the sport that we all love and seperates it from all others. Kudos to both for letting me enjoy and appreciate the game that much more. I really don't think we will ever read that either one has bet on the game, used steroids, or was arrested at 3am in the morning outside a strip club.

[Big Lex]

This is a fun subject, but it's been done to death and is getting boring. Apples and oranges...I can give many reasons why Tiger should be considered the best, and a similar number favoring Jack. And the fact that Nelson, Hogan, Jones, and even Mickey Wright or Kathy Whitworth should be considered is well taken. Sheesh, when you look at what he's done since age 40, even Hale Irwin could be in the running as the greatest ever, depending on how you set up the criteria. I know that's a stretch, but I think you know what I'm saying.

So...I won't take the bait. Each was the unquestioned greatest of his time.

[BrianMN]

The Golden Bear is the Gold Standard but..ceteris paribus I think tiger would beat him.

[BrianMN]

Though it would be a good match to watch.... I wonder what format you would test them in. Match play or Stroke Play?

[Andrew]

I would have to say tiger

[FIJIGolf23]

No way to compare, IMO. Different eras, different courses, different equipment, and different competitors. We don't have the opportunity to see them play during their prime against each other so I see no way to really compare them.

[chad1043]

Tiger is of course a yar younger than me, so I will be watching him well into the future...

Chad

[Master Joe]

Players are much better these days, tournaments were far less competitive in Jacks era, only a handful had a great chance of winning and there were far less shocks, these days its far harder to win, gotta be Tiger! he would have dominated by a long way if he was exactly the same man in Jacks era, although this is only my opinion!!

[Benefactor]

What the hell is with all these people saying Tiger is the best because he is the one they watched the most, or grew up watching? What kind of meaningless drivel criterion is that? I'd say Jones winning 13 majors in 20 tries (starting the count after he won his first major) is pretty impressive. To get to 13, it took Tiger 44 attempts, I believe. Also, Tiger's competition is completely overrated, and so is the depth of the fields. Sure they're deeper, but how often is that of any relevance on the Sunday of a major as far as it pertains to Tiger? When has he lost a major to a nobody? To somebody who rose up from the depths (yes, the pun is intended) of the field and snatched one away from him? Never. Hell, the closest that has even come to being true was the US Open this year and that was only one tournament and Cabrera was fairly well known. So the depth of the field is really of no value as to how you evaluate his majors, at least not so far.

[GRMCLE]

One of the announcers on the GOLF channel predicted Tiger would eventually have between 30 and 35 major wins versus Jacks 18,

[Benefactor]

One of the announcers on the GOLF channel predicted Tiger would eventually have between 30 and 35 major wins versus Jacks 18,

When was that prediction made?