Jump to content
sungho_kr

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

Greatest Golfer (GOAT)  

199 members have voted

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

    • Tiger Woods is the man
      1633
    • Jack Nicklaus is my favorite
      816


6,793 posts / 533387 viewsLast Reply

Recommended Posts

I vote we dig Bobby up, get samples from Tiger, Hogan, and Jack. Send them all to Hitlers Dr. in Argentina, clone all of them, then they can grow up again under the same conditions and play against each other all the time. Then maybe we can tell who is really the best. Numbers, titles, statistics won't ever tell you, because of the differences in time, equipment and competition. This months golf digest online has an interview with the little pro, he draws a distinction between winners and champions. These guys are all champions and I have decided I don't care who is best, I will just gaze in awe at each ones unique greatness.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Register for free today and you won't see this ad spot again!

Jack was great but Tiger is better.

When he retires he is going to have so many majors it will be amazing. The guy has his best years ahead of him.

Fun argument, one of the joys of golf is discussing all the great players

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

it's hard to say who is better but Jack is definitely greater than Tiger.

In his prime, Jack was stronger and longer than anyone else on the Tour and could hit it 290 with equipment that we would consider to be terrible these days.

Jacks biggest asset was his mind, not his swing-reverse pivot and reverse c finish.

Jack is and was a real gentleman on and off the course- no gobbing all over the greens-Tiger is not a team player either.

Is anyone else sick of the ridiculous amount of coverage that TW gets in tournaments?!-there are other people playing on the course!

BB69

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest
Difficult question, since one has past prime and one is approaching prime. that being said, Tiger has been more productive to date than Jack.
I would not accept that one is "greater than the other".
Different era's different conditions.
Bill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The idea that Tiger plays against weaker competition is one of the most persistent myths in the Tiger-Jack debate.

It is true that Jack's principal rivals were legends of the game (Palmer, Watson, Player, Trevino), but Tiger plays in fields that are solid from top to bottom. The worst players on the tour today would have been elite golfers in the 1960s and '70s.

In Jack's day, there were only a handful of golfers in each event, particularly the majors, who had a reasonably good chance of winning. Today, just about anyone on tour has the ability to win if they can string four good rounds together (E.g., Chad Campbell, Rich Beam, Ben Curtis, Michael Campbell, Todd Hamilton, Paul Lawrie, Shaun Micheel).

Also, the argument that Tiger plays against guys who haven't won majors is also false. Ernie, Vijay, Retief, Jose-Maria, Phil, Jim F., Freddy -- these are guys who have proven their talent on the big stage and provide just as much competition as Watson, Kite, Miller and the other guys Jack played against on a regular basis. (Also, one of the reasons these guys don't have more major wins is because Tiger keeps winning them. Ernie would have won 5 or 6 majors by now if not for Woods).

Yes, it's too early to tell who is the best, but Tiger is on pace right now to blow Jack away. I predict 100 tour wins (plus 30 more worldwide) and 24 majors. And I think he will retire when he's in his early '40s and will never tee it up on the Champions Tour.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Like a few of you have said, I don't think you can compare Jack and Tiger. And I will go further to say you can't compare Jones with these too. I say this because look at the difference in equipment to start out with. Compare the shafts, drivers, irons, wedges, putters, even the clothes are "better". Imagine how good Bobby would be if he hadn't been wearing a suit and work mock turtle necks and dress pants that were very good at cooling you. And look how far jack could hit it with old wooden clubs.

Then if you look at golf fitness looks at all the advances that have come along. An example would be TPI, they have 100s of excersices you can do that are all targeted at golf. They didn't have those back then.

Another thing is teachers and the swing changes and ideas that have come along.

IMO Tiger, Jack, and Bobby were all amazing golfers but just in diffrent eras. If you think you can compare a guy with playing with wooden clubs to a guy playing the latest greatest clubs your nuts, well maybe not nuts but you get what I am saying.

I could go on for a long time talking about how much the game has changed from equipment to longer courses. They were all great and won a ton but I don't think one is greater then the other. Some of you may think that you can compare stats like how many majors one but Tiger isn't pass his prime.

I didn't vote for this because I think that they are all amazing golfers just in different eras and its like comparing apples to oranges.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

its tiger and its not even close

-everyone that says "jack had more competition" is wrong, the only reason tiger doesnt have "competition" is because hes beaten the crap outta everyone.
think about it all of the people who have challanged tiger they are great golfers and will all be in the hall of fame someday (vijay, goosen, els, phil, luke donald, adam scott, david duval etc. etc.) Theyre not competition only because of how dominating tiger is.
-courses are harder, and tigers ability to do everything incredibly (driving, short game, ball striking) puts him ahead of jack.
-p.s. jack was awsome, but his swing looks like garbage next to tigers and no one can debate that-

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tiger is just now in his prime, and he's already on Jack's tail. I think that by the end of Tiger's career this thread will be useless because tiger is going to show his strength in the coming years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tiger, Tiger, Tiger!!!
Nobody has shown the shots that Tiger made to win his tournaments!
Jack used to be great in his prime time, but his game/shot repertoire was a bit smaller than Tiger's one... nonetheless, look at the media influence that Tiger is getting... the money prize he is earning at each tournament... he is the man... absolutely!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Before Tiger rules the PGA, all we know that golf is a game played by businessman, rich white people and retired granpas which we used to call "gentleman". I don't even know Jack Nicklaus before I start playing golf in 2001. I start golfing when I see this black guy teeing off for 300 yards or more, which latter I recognize him as Tiger Woods in Master 2001.

Tiger has changed Golf from a rich man game to a Sport just like Tennis and Football.

I would just say Tiger is the best golfer ever, not only because of his ability but also he has changed the image of golf to anyone's sports. Thanks to tiger... I would have never started to play Golf if I didn't see his 300 yards drive.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't even know Jack Nicklaus before I start playing golf in 2001. I start golfing when I see this black guy teeing off for 300 yards or more,

If you don't even know who Jack Nicklaus is, how can you distinguish who is better.

To my knowledge not one single golfer on the planet has accomplished the things that Jack has to date. This my friend is Jack Nicklaus! 73 official PGA Tour victories 2nd place 58 times 3rd place 36 times Total victories around the world 113 #1 in lowest scoring avg 8 times- runner up 6 times 18 PGA majors - 6 Masters, 5 PGA, 4 US Open, 3 British 8 Champions tour majors 2 Amateur Championships Career Gland Slam: 3 professional, 1 Champions tour 19 hole in ones Won at least one tournament 17 years in a row! This must be why he is called "the Golden Bear" Just thought I'd help you with your vote . Sure Tiger is great, but lets not forget Jack just yet. Tiger still has a way to go, and he has to get there before we crown him king! Don't get me started on the great Ben Hogan! He was even better than Jack.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree, Tiger has many more years ahead of him and as long as he stays healthy and wants to compete, there will be no telling how far he can go.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tiger: Not for his Golfing ability (which still is unreal) but for his actions towards the game of golf; making it exciting, getting younger people to play, his morals, and helping stop racism in golf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Has anyone read about Dave Pelz short game bible where he talks about Jack Nicklaus.

He talks about PEI (percentage error index). He says that for his full swing his PEI was 42nd on tour, for putting he was 25th, short game 35th, sand play 128th, although he was a good lag putter so aimed away from bunkers.

This seems a bit poor for such a great player of our ggreat game. I sure if Dave Pelz plotted the same data for Tiger then im sure tiger would be in the top 10 for all if not most of them.

I cannot judge in this arguement as i have not been able to see Jack Nicklaus play but i have seen Tiger so i no that if Jack is better that Tiger he was one heck of a golfer.

They both have there positives like for tiger the way has changed the game of golf but are we forgetting one of the most important things in Jack favour, he is one heck of a guy. He would not ignore his fans. Tiger has set up the Tiger foundation which has helped a lot of people.

BUT JACK IS A GREAT GUY AND THAT STANDS HIM VERY HIGH IN MY EYES

No one is ever going to agree on this unless like in the new rocky film Jack is transformed to his peak in a one of match with tiger. (i could be onto something here)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why does everyone mention the equipment they used? Does that truly make a difference to how great they are compared to everyone else on tour at the same time? Bobby Jones won using the equipment everyone else was using at the time. Same with Jack, same with Tiger. I don't think you can honestly make a good comparison between the three, because everyone is biased. My dad grew up watching Jack, and thus favors Jack when we talk about it. I've watched Tiger, and I favor Tiger. Two things I throw at my dad when we discuss it is that Tiger grew up learning in the late 70's and 80's, using the same equipment that Jack used. I don't think Tiger would have been at a great disability if they were forced to use old equipment. Another thing is that I think the average professional these days might be slightly better than that of the 70's because of all the childhood training and such, and many have referred to Tiger as "simply better than us." I don't think you would catch Johnny Miller or Tom Watson in an interview talking about how much better Jack is than them. But that's all for arguments sake, because I really don't think there can be a true comparison. They were all great at different times of the game. It would be interesting to see what Bobby Jones would have done if he had ever turned professional and went at the game full time. Just something to think about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I voted for Tiger because of what he has accomplished in so short of a time. Jack is great for all of his accomplishments but perhaps Bobby Jones is the greatest ever.

John B

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • 2019 TST Partners

    PING Golf
    FlightScope Mevo
  • Posts

    • It is not. Jeez. A golf course can put whatever par they want down for a hole. They can make one set of tees a par five and another set of tees a par four for the same gender if they want. They can pretty much do whatever. And it happens, in the wild. We've all seen relatively flat 410-yard par fives. When I play the white tees at some courses, there are "par fives" that I can hit PW into. At some other courses, they'll split the par on the scorecard and call that a par four. I understand what you both are saying about the official guidelines, but they're just that: guidelines. They're not regulations, and what could anyone do if there's a card with a hole listed as "Par 5/4"? Remove them from the course rating database? Not gonna happen. It doesn't imply that, no. There are holes where the course will list something as a par five that is played as a par four, and if they enter hole-by-hole scores it'll correctly apply net double max. It says "should." It doesn't say "shall" or "must."
    • I believe this statement is incorrect (see Appendix F quote below). It also seems to imply that it is the player’s responsibility to determine the par of each hole for purposes of handicap posting. If so, this is contradicted several places in the 2020 Rules of Handicapping.  Definition of par: “The score that a scratch player would generally be expected to achieve on a hole under normal course and weather conditions, allowing for two strokes on the putting green (see Appendix F). The Authorized Association or, at the discretion of the National Association, the golf club is responsible for adjudicating par (see Appendix A).” [emphasis added] From Appendix A: "Apply and/or communicate the stipulated procedures for establishing par...” is a listed responsibility for everyone except the player.   Also from Appendix A, the Golf Club/Handicap committee is responsible for “Display a Course Handicap and Playing Handicap adjustment table for each set of tees, for players’ reference.” Par is part of the calculations of Course Handicap and Playing Handicap. From Appendix E: “The Rules of Golf state: “The Committee is responsible for publishing on the scorecard or somewhere else that is visible (for example, near the first tee) the order of holes at which handicap strokes are to be given or received. (See Rules of Golf, Committee Procedures, Rule 5I (4)). It is recommended that a stroke index allocation be applied over 18-holes, split into six triads with each hole ranked on its playing difficulty relative to par.” So assignment of par is implied here also. From Appendix F: “It is important that an accurate par be established for each hole on a golf course for both men and women, and these values should be printed alongside each hole on the scorecard.” (Explicitly states that the scorecards cannot “say whatever they want.”)  
    • Because they can. Because the old guys at The Golf Club of Somewhere have always played the fifth hole as a par five, so gosh darnit, it's gonna say "5" on the scorecard. The WHS says that even if people use the scorecard par instead of the true par (whatever you want to call it) for their net double max thing, the effects on the handicap system will be negligible.
    • By why would they?  You need an accurate par to calculate your "playing handicap", to determine what net double bogey is and to score in forms of play such as Stableford.
    • Dude, we're on page 10. You're going to have to be more specific. If you're referring to the video in the first post, it's not meant to be completely scientific. It's meant to be illustrative, and I feel that it is. Two additional points: 1) My arms were not "loose" in the first swings, and 2) the shoulders (which move the arms) count as "the arms" for the purposes of this discussion. Those two points address almost everything else you've got to say: You keep substituting "tense" or "stiff" when I'm saying the muscles are working or active. Tense/stiff isn't the same as active/working. You leave out that the muscles which move the arms across your chest, etc. are part of your "arms" for this discussion. They move the arms relative to your torso, etc. My arm muscles are not "passive" at all. Nor are the muscles which move the arms relative to my torso, which I've included in the discussion as "arms." Look at the way the arms work in a long driver. They're anything but "passive." Look at how far Jamie Sadlowski can still drive the ball from his knees. He's limited in his rotation and his ability to use the ground for jumping, but his arms can still move across his chest, fold, lift, etc. Again, the muscles which move the arms relative to the torso are part of the "arms" for this discussion. There's no such thing in a good golf swing. The arms contribute speed and power and expend effort. That video is stupid, man. "Try running with stiff legs"? Again, you're just substituting the word "stiff" when I'm saying the arm muscles (and those that move the arms) are WORKING, expending effort. They're not just limp ropes hanging from the shoulder socket. Working muscles don't have to be stiff. The guy who wins the race in that video has legs that are WORKING. This is a horrible straw man. Never have I said to make your arms "stiff." You're misunderstanding what "relaxed" means. By "relaxed" I mean not working, I don't mean "stiff." C'mon man. No, it's not. His arm (and the muscles that move his arm) are working hard and contributing the vast majority of the speed of a pitch.
  • TST Blog Entries

  • Blog Entries

  • Today's Birthdays

    1. B_easy20
      B_easy20
      (27 years old)
    2. GolfClubbas
      GolfClubbas
      (20 years old)
    3. Jimmy1
      Jimmy1
      (24 years old)
    4. KTMrider
      KTMrider
      (52 years old)

×
×
  • 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...