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

[MikeHW]

When and if when reaching 50, Tiger has surpassed Jack's record, he may be arguably a better golfer. However, he will still need another lifetime to even equal Jack's stature and course demeanor. MikeHW Texas

[jbishop15]

When and if when reaching 50, Tiger has surpassed Jack's record, he may be arguably a better golfer. However, he will still need another lifetime to even equal Jack's stature and course demeanor.

MikeHW

Texas

Jack was not exactly a nice guy on the course. A lot of fans I've spoke to who watched Jack in his prime said that he didn't seem very friendly. Along with that, I'm pretty sure I've read that Jack was pretty cold to his playing partners too.

And what about Jack's stature looms so much larger than Tiger Woods?

[Gunther]

Jack was not exactly a nice guy on the course. A lot of fans I've spoke to who watched Jack in his prime said that he didn't seem very friendly. Along with that, I'm pretty sure I've read that Jack was pretty cold to his playing partners too.  And what about Jack's stature looms so much larger than Tiger Woods?

His course design business, his tournament, his 18 majors, his Congressional Medal of Freedom.

[jbishop15]

His course design business, his tournament, his 18 majors, his Congressional Medal of Freedom.

Tiger has two tournaments, a successful charity, more Tour wins. He doesn't have a CMOF, but then again, neither should Jack probably.

[Gunther]

Tiger has two tournaments, a successful charity, more Tour wins. He doesn't have a CMOF, but then again, neither should Jack probably.

Haha, u r a funny cat, but predictable.

[jbishop15]

Haha, u r a funny cat, but predictable.

Doesn't mean I'm wrong.

[Gunther]

Doesn't mean I'm wrong.

That's why ur so funny. Ur tryin to compare Tiger's tournament or 2 with the stature of Jack's? Tour wins against majors? I won't put Jack's charities ahead of Tiger's (but one might), call that a push but you used the word stature. At this point in their careers, there is no question Jack's looms much, much larger. Not to say that won't be different 20 to 30 years from now but to try to put Tiger ahead of Jack today, again, in terms of stature, I find comical.

[jbishop15]

That's why ur so funny. Ur tryin to compare Tiger's tournament or 2 with the stature of Jack's? Tour wins against majors? I won't put Jack's charities ahead of Tiger's (but one might), call that a push but you used the word stature. At this point in their careers, there is no question Jack's looms much, much larger. Not to say that won't be different 20 to 30 years from now but to try to put Tiger ahead of Jack today, again, in terms of stature, I find comical.

You put up Jack's tournaments as a measure of his stature. I put up Tiger's two as a measure of his. I think that Tiger's 79 wins compares favorably with Jack's major titles, yes. How many regular Tour titles is a major title worth to you? I think having seven more Tour wins in an era of tougher and deeper competition is pretty important.

Course design, I would say Jack has an edge. But I'm not including the Congressional Gold Medal, because that doesn't really mean much to me. Only two other golfers (Byron Nelson and Palmer) have ever won it. It's a pretty random award, really; Ben Hogan not getting it is a pretty glaring absence. Sam Snead, too. Or Gary Player. I find the CGM to be a strange award that doesn't seems very subjective.

[Tgb02]

I would say Jack easily. He had way more competition then Tiger and not only did Jack win 18 majors he placed like top 3 in majors like 48 times or something crazy.

[Phil McGleno]

He had way more competition then Tiger

No he did not.-Heck I was one of his competitors.

[Tgb02]

No he did not.-Heck I was one of his competitors.

Tiger's only competition that had won more then three majors was Phil and Ernie and a couple of one major winners. Jack was playing against- Gary Player, Arnie, Tom Watson, Lee Trevino, and so on.

[jbishop15]

Tiger's only competition that had won more then three majors was Phil and Ernie and a couple of one major winners. Jack was playing against- Gary Player, Arnie, Tom Watson, Lee Trevino, and so on.

I don't want to be the guy who says "read the thread", but–

read the thread

Or at least a few pages. We've been down this road before.

[iacas]

Tiger's only competition that had won more then three majors was Phil and Ernie and a couple of one major winners. Jack was playing against- Gary Player, Arnie, Tom Watson, Lee Trevino, and so on.

C'mon, man… Jack literally played against club professionals in his day. That argument has a whole thread dedicated to it, in fact… .

[k-troop]

C'mon, man… Jack literally played against club professionals in his day. That argument has a whole thread dedicated to it, in fact…  [CONTENTEMBED=/t/74049/strength-and-depth-of-field-in-jacks-day-and-tigers-day layout=inline]​[/CONTENTEMBED] .

So did tiger. 17 times. In the PGA Championship. Which, incidentally, has the strongest field of the year measured by cumulative OWGR points. So there. (Btw this post is totally sarcastic, even though 100% factually true.)

[turtleback]

His course design business, his tournament, his 18 majors, his Congressional Medal of Freedom.

Only one of which has anything at all to do with who is the greatest golfer of all time.  THAT is the issue, not some Miss Congeniality award.

No he did not.-Heck I was one of his competitors.

Ah, what do you know.

So did tiger. 17 times. In the PGA Championship. Which, incidentally, has the strongest field of the year measured by cumulative OWGR points. So there.

(Btw this post is totally sarcastic, even though 100% factually true.)

Factually true but kind of misleading since you omitted the all important point of the percentage of club pros playing against Jack and the percentage playing against Tiger.

Except in the PGA I doubt tiger has ever had many club pros in the field

And even in the PGA the percentage of club pros was way higher in Jack's day than it has been for the past 20 years.

But, more importantly, in Jack's day there were only 60 fully exempt players.  The rest of the field had to qualify.  A significant number of the people trying to qualify were local club pros and a lot of them got in because unlike today there weren't another 65 guys on the tour full time they had to compete against.    When a guy fell out of the top 60 he generally went and got a club job,  There were no mini-tours to hone the skills of winning big time golf.  So back in the day you had a field in which up to half were not tour-seasoned tournament golfers but club pros.

I've mentioned it before, but Frank Beard's book Pro gives a contemporaneous picture of life on tour in the late 60s that is very different than what most people think it was.

[Gunther]

Only one of which has anything at all to do with who is the greatest golfer of all time.  THAT is the issue, not some Miss Congeniality award. Ah, what do you know. Factually true but kind of misleading since you omitted the all important point of the percentage of club pros playing against Jack and the percentage playing against Tiger.   Except in the PGA I doubt tiger has ever had many club pros in the field   And even in the PGA the percentage of club pros was way higher in Jack's day than it has been for the past 20 years. But, more importantly, in Jack's day there were only 60 fully exempt players.  The rest of the field had to qualify.  A significant number of the people trying to qualify were local club pros and a lot of them got in because unlike today there weren't another 65 guys on the tour full time they had to compete against.    When a guy fell out of the top 60 he generally went and got a club job,  There were no mini-tours to hone the skills of winning big time golf.  So back in the day you had a field in which up to half were not tour-seasoned tournament golfers but club pros. I've mentioned it before, but Frank Beard's book Pro gives a contemporaneous picture of life on tour in the late 60s that is very different than what most people think it was.

The question I responded to in that post was one about stature, not greatest player; as such, my response was relevant. Pls read more carefully before a knee-jerk comment. It's becoming a habit.

[turtleback]

The question I responded to in that post was one about stature, not greatest player; as such, my response was relevant. Pls read more carefully before a knee-jerk comment. It's becoming a habit.

OR, maybe you should read the thread title and not go off topic?

[Golfingdad]

But, more importantly, in Jack's day there were only 60 fully exempt players.  The rest of the field had to qualify.  A significant number of the people trying to qualify were local club pros and a lot of them got in because unlike today there weren't another 65 guys on the tour full time they had to compete against.    When a guy fell out of the top 60 he generally went and got a club job,  There were no mini-tours to hone the skills of winning big time golf.  So back in the day you had a field in which up to half were not tour-seasoned tournament golfers but club pros.

Blah, blah, blah, something about hard work, putting food on the table, grinding, etc.  Ergo, Jack had tougher competition.