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

[JonMA1]

I think @iacas is correct that the field strength will not necessarily improve in a linear fashion. Many variable exist - which you have pointed out - that will improve the fields, but they may not continue to improve that much in another generation or so. I think the improvement of golf was probably even more exponential than linear at one point, as it was in all other sports - call it a "Golden Years" effect where such a wealth of breakthrough and interest made the improvement that much more drastic than at other periods in time.

Thanks for the explanation @mmoan2 .

[ItsaSandTrap]

New to site, and did not read all of the nearly 300 pages of posts before this.

Are we talking strictly about athletic talent and wins, or are we talking full package? I think Jack has probably done more for golf as an institution, but then again, is significantly older than Tiger. I just haven't see Tiger doing all the philanthropic things that Jack has other the length of his career. I find Tiger to be aloof and sometimes even abrasive in interviews, and Jack has almost infallibly been a class act. I'm from central Ohio and have met him a few times before, he is as kind a guy as he seems on camera, will take the time to talk to anyone. I'm biased, I admit.

That said, though, Tiger changed golf more dramatically than what I feel like Jack did. Tiger elevated it and made it a major sport instead of something that old men sat around and watched on Sundays. Tiger pulled a new generation into the sport, and you can't deny the influence he had when you see the influx of all these new young golfers.

So, Tiger is younger and doesn't have as many titles, can be a real jackass, but brought the game to a whole generation and may have been a major reason we have most of the young golfers we have now.

I don't know what that makes either aside from very, very good.

...I somehow wrote this whole thing without addressing that both were/are just plain dominant on the course in their time.

.

[turtleback]

New to site, and did not read all of the nearly 300 pages of posts before this.

Are we talking strictly about athletic talent and wins, or are we talking full package? I think Jack has probably done more for golf as an institution, but then again, is significantly older than Tiger. I just haven't see Tiger doing all the philanthropic things that Jack has other the length of his career. I find Tiger to be aloof and sometimes even abrasive in interviews, and Jack has almost infallibly been a class act. I'm from central Ohio and have met him a few times before, he is as kind a guy as he seems on camera, will take the time to talk to anyone. I'm biased, I admit.

That said, though, Tiger changed golf more dramatically than what I feel like Jack did. Tiger elevated it and made it a major sport instead of something that old men sat around and watched on Sundays. Tiger pulled a new generation into the sport, and you can't deny the influence he had when you see the influx of all these new young golfers.

So, Tiger is younger and doesn't have as many titles, can be a real jackass, but brought the game to a whole generation and may have been a major reason we have most of the young golfers we have now.

I don't know what that makes either aside from very, very good.

...I somehow wrote this whole thing without addressing that both were/are just plain dominant on the course in their time.

.

I am one of the Tiger advocates here and I really cannot disagree with anything you've said (so far, lol).  I think, though, that the discussion has been about greatest player.  Which would essentially exclude considerations like personality, non-playing golf activities, philanthropic, etc.  That doesn't mean you shouldn't feel free to talk about those things,

Welcome to the site.  Although I am an avid Tiger advocate in the debate, I have a high regard for Jack's golf career as well - he was my favorite player before Tiger came along.  I never met him, but I saw him at the 1990 US Senior Open when he won his final USGA title at Cherry Hills.  By pure coincidence I was attending a professional conference at the hotel the many of the players, including Jack and Jackie, who was caddying for him,  were staying.  (Coincidentally they were holding try-outs for the Denver Broncos cheerleaders at the same hotel that weekend).  I walked by Jack and Jackie once at the hotel but  didn't want to be "that guy" so I didn't talk to them at all.  Then on Sunday a few of us went out to the course and I got to see him hole his final putt on 18 to win the Senior Open. I think one of the guys he beat was Weiskopf, speaking of Ohioans.

[isukgolf]

In reading through some of the older comments it was asserted that Jack changed his criteria to majors, from beating Snead, etc ... is there any thing to document that? It would be great if someone could at least point me in the right direction for research ... I have a long standing debate with a friend on Jack vs Tiger, and that is great fodder if I can find the info ... Thx

[iacas]

In reading through some of the older comments it was asserted that Jack changed his criteria to majors, from beating Snead, etc ... is there any thing to document that?

Look through specifically at @turtleback 's posts in this thread.

[turtleback]

In reading through some of the older comments it was asserted that Jack changed his criteria to majors, from beating Snead, etc ... is there any thing to document that?

It would be great if someone could at least point me in the right direction for research ... I have a long standing debate with a friend on Jack vs Tiger, and that is great fodder if I can find the info ... Thx

Post 4684 of this thread (which is on page 261 of the thread)  in the quote box has all the details.

[isukgolf]

@turtleback thank you for that info ... I had started at page 254 and was working my back ... the wrong direction.

[turtleback]

@turtleback thank you for that info ... I had started at page 254 and was working my back ... the wrong direction.

No problem.

[JRoy]

Lucky to have seen both careers in it's entirety. Thought Tiger was better for a shorter time. But Tiger's goal to be the best was surpassing Jack's 18 professional majors. (On his bedroom wall as a kid) The majors are against the best and that has been the standard we judge who the best golfers are. Jack's play against the best in the world was amazing. Don't just look at his 18 majors but the 19 second place finishes also. ( 56 top 5) I just wished the young players of today could have seen this man climb a leader board on movement day and see the fear he would put in the other players minds well into his thirties. I could only imagine if Jack wasn't setting the record but after it how many he could have won. Love seeing greatness and Tiger was great also. But unless Tiger surpassing Jacks major total, history will judge him accordingly.

[TreyWingbat]

I knew about the 19 second-place finishes, but 56 top 5... wow, another 19 placing 3rd, 4th or 5th.

[iacas]

Lucky to have seen both careers in it's entirety. Thought Tiger was better for a shorter time. But Tiger's goal to be the best was surpassing Jack's 18 professional majors. (On his bedroom wall as a kid) The majors are against the best and that has been the standard we judge who the best golfers are. Jack's play against the best in the world was amazing. Don't just look at his 18 majors but the 19 second place finishes also. ( 56 top 5) I just wished the young players of today could have seen this man climb a leader board on movement day and see the fear he would put in the other players minds well into his thirties. I could only imagine if Jack wasn't setting the record but after it how many he could have won. Love seeing greatness and Tiger was great also. But unless Tiger surpassing Jacks major total, history will judge him accordingly.

Have you considered how much weaker the fields were in Jack's day versus how much stronger they have been in the Tiger era? If not, skip back about 30 pages and start reading again from there.

[32quattro]

Have you considered how much weaker the fields were in Jack's day versus how much stronger they have been in the Tiger era? If not, skip back about 30 pages and start reading again from there.

Arnold Pamer

Gary Player

Lee Trevino

Seve Ballesteros

35 majors combined. That's how weaker fields Jack had to play against in his career.

[mvmac]

Lucky to have seen both careers in it's entirety. Thought Tiger was better for a shorter time. But Tiger's goal to be the best was surpassing Jack's 18 professional majors. (On his bedroom wall as a kid) The majors are against the best and that has been the standard we judge who the best golfers are. Jack's play against the best in the world was amazing. Don't just look at his 18 majors but the 19 second place finishes also. ( 56 top 5) I just wished the young players of today could have seen this man climb a leader board on movement day and see the fear he would put in the other players minds well into his thirties. I could only imagine if Jack wasn't setting the record but after it how many he could have won. Love seeing greatness and Tiger was great also. But unless Tiger surpassing Jacks major total, history will judge him accordingly.

Arnold Pamer

Gary Player

Lee Trevino

Seve Ballesteros

35 majors combined. That's how weaker fields Jack had to play against in his career.

Guys, this is page 268, these points have been made over and over again.

http://thesandtrap.com/t/74049/strength-and-depth-of-field-in-jacks-day-and-tigers-day/18#post_980829

http://thesandtrap.com/t/74049/strength-and-depth-of-field-in-jacks-day-and-tigers-day/198#post_1091208

http://thesandtrap.com/b/thrash_talk/tiger_vs_jack

[iacas]

35 majors combined. That's how weaker fields Jack had to play against in his career.

Those players also benefitted from weaker fields. Nicklaus himself has said that fields are way, way stronger these days.

Seriously, give it a little thought before just responding with such weak sauce.

[boogielicious]

[QUOTE name="iacas" url="/t/2203/jack-or-tiger-whos-the-greatest-golfer/4806#post_1157851"]   Have you considered how much weaker the fields were in Jack's day versus how much stronger they have been in the Tiger era? If not, skip back about 30 pages and start reading again from there. :-) [/QUOTE] Arnold Pamer Gary Player Lee Trevino Seve Ballesteros 35 majors combined. That's how weaker fields Jack had to play against in his career.

and the fields had Club Pros in them too. this has been discussed ad nauseum in this thread. Please read the previous posts.

[32quattro]

http://thesandtrap.com/t/74049/strength-and-depth-of-field-in-jacks-day-and-tigers-day/18#post_980829

http://thesandtrap.com/t/74049/strength-and-depth-of-field-in-jacks-day-and-tigers-day/198#post_1091208

http://thesandtrap.com/b/thrash_talk/tiger_vs_jack

Seriously, give it a little thought before just responding with such weak sauce.

i don't care about fields. I care about the top 3/4 players contending me a Trophy. Can they deliver on Sunday ? That's my weak sauce for today. See ya

[14ledo81]

[QUOTE name="mvmac" url="/t/2203/jack-or-tiger-whos-the-greatest-golfer/4806#post_1157864"] Guys, this is page 268, these points have been made over and over again. [URL=http://thesandtrap.com/t/74049/strength-and-depth-of-field-in-jacks-day-and-tigers-day/18#post_980829]http://thesandtrap.com/t/74049/strength-and-depth-of-field-in-jacks-day-and-tigers-day/18#post_980829[/URL] [COLOR=181818][URL=http://thesandtrap.com/t/74049/strength-and-depth-of-field-in-jacks-day-and-tigers-day/198#post_1091208]http://thesandtrap.com/t/74049/strength-and-depth-of-field-in-jacks-day-and-tigers-day/198#post_1091208[/URL][/COLOR] [COLOR=181818][URL=http://thesandtrap.com/b/thrash_talk/tiger_vs_jack]http://thesandtrap.com/b/thrash_talk/tiger_vs_jack[/URL][/COLOR] [/QUOTE] [QUOTE name="iacas" url="/t/2203/jack-or-tiger-whos-the-greatest-golfer/4806#post_1157865"] Those players also benefitted from weaker fields. Nicklaus himself has said that fields are way, way stronger these days. Seriously, give it a little thought before just responding with such weak sauce. [/QUOTE] [QUOTE name="boogielicious" url="/t/2203/jack-or-tiger-whos-the-greatest-golfer/4806#post_1157866"] and the fields had Club Pros in them too. this has been discussed ad nauseum in this thread. Please read the previous posts.[/QUOTE] i don't care about fields. I care about the top 3/4 players contending me a Trophy. Can they deliver on Sunday ? That's my weak sauce for today. See ya

Top 3 or 4? So if there is only 3 or 4 players capable of having a decent chance, how much stock can we put in a fifth place finish?

[mvmac]

i don't care about fields. I care about the top 3/4 players contending me a Trophy. Can they deliver on Sunday ? That's my weak sauce for today. See ya