Jump to content
IGNORED

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


sungho_kr

Greatest Golfer (GOAT)  

217 members have voted

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

    • Tiger Woods is the man
      1629
    • Jack Nicklaus is my favorite
      817


Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, saevel25 said:

You are assuming that the points for player of the year should be the same. If the argument that Tiger faced deeper strength of competition is valid, which I believe, then him winning player of the year should hold more weight.

I think it should be more like, Tiger gets 120 points per player of year versus Jack getting 100 points.

 

I haven't adjusted any of it because I wanted to see how close they would be if we gave Jack the same credit for his performances as we would give any of the modern players. Tiger fares very very well in this comparison despite the deck heavily stacked in Jack's favor (lots of points for 2nd and 3rd place finishes lol). You would have to go back and adjust all of these data points...the major finishes, the regular tour wins, the PLAYERS wins, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Guys, don’t skew the stats.  

Jack was not eligible for WGCs, Arnie/Memorial bonus, fed ex cup bonus.  

Youre saying tiger should get strength of field bonus, but not aknowledging the extra bonuses he already gets.. 

Edited by lastings

:tmade:  - SIM2 - Kuro Kage silver 60 shaft
:cobra:  - F9 3W, 15 degree - Fukijara Atmos white tour spec stiff flex shaft

:tmade: - M2 hybrid, 19 degree
:tmade: - GAPR 3 iron - 18degree
:mizuno: MP-H5 4-5 iron, MP-25 6-8 iron, MP-5 9-PW

Miura - 1957 series k-grind - 56 degree
:bettinardi: - 52 degree
:titleist: - Scotty Cameron Newport 2 - Putter

check out my swing here

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

18 minutes ago, lastings said:

Guys, don’t skew the stats.  

Jack was not eligible for WGCs, Arnie/Memorial bonus, fed ex cup bonus.  

Youre saying tiger should get strength of field bonus, but not aknowledging the extra bonuses he already gets.. 

 

Jack is already getting bonuses by giving him 50 points for tournaments that were probably more like 30 points in reality. And the "Jack didn't have WGC" argument falls apart when we realize neither Jack nor the media cared about screwing over the likes of Hagen, Jones, Hogan, Snead, and others in this debate many decades ago.

I think I'm being pretty dang generous to give Jack the points I gave him. Nobody is giving Phil Mickelson any extra credit for all of his 2nd and 3rd place finishes in majors, even though he has an incredible record in that regard.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Administrator
38 minutes ago, Dr. Manhattan said:

I think I'm being pretty dang generous to give Jack the points I gave him. Nobody is giving Phil Mickelson any extra credit for all of his 2nd and 3rd place finishes in majors, even though he has an incredible record in that regard.

Just in U.S. Opens alone, he's got, what, six second-place finishes?

I'm not a big fan of the points system. It would come down entirely to how you weight them. As @turtleback showed, some of those British Opens were significantly easier to win than some regular PGA Tour events, even at the same time, let alone compared to NOW.

  • Like 1

Erik J. Barzeski —  I knock a ball. It goes in a gopher hole. 🏌🏼‍♂️
Director of Instruction Golf Evolution • Owner, The Sand Trap .com • AuthorLowest Score Wins
Golf Digest "Best Young Teachers in America" 2016-17 & "Best in State" 2017-20 • WNY Section PGA Teacher of the Year 2019 :edel: :true_linkswear:

Check Out: New Topics | TST Blog | Golf Terms | Instructional Content | Analyzr | LSW | Instructional Droplets

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

1 hour ago, lastings said:

Guys, don’t skew the stats.  

Jack was not eligible for WGCs, Arnie/Memorial bonus, fed ex cup bonus.  

Youre saying tiger should get strength of field bonus, but not aknowledging the extra bonuses he already gets.. 

That never stopped Jack from touting total number of majors, and REALLY skewing the stats, since he played in WAY more than any prior player, including majors that didn't exist when the guys he had to beat out initially were playing.  Completely skews the stats, yet to Jack it was the 'fairest' way to compare.

  • Like 1

But then again, what the hell do I know?

Rich - in name only

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

@Dr. Manhattan II'm confused as to why the Memorial/API tournaments are treated separately from 'regular' events on that points breakdown? Seems to me they shouldn't be given any preferential points treatment. 

It's an interesting comparison, but for the other reasons already stated by you and others, is far from perfect. 

Edited by skydog
Link to comment
Share on other sites


26 minutes ago, skydog said:

@Dr. Manhattan II'm confused as to why the Memorial/API tournaments are treated separately from 'regular' events on that points breakdown? Seems to me they shouldn't be given any preferential points treatment. 

It's an interesting comparison, but for the other reasons already stated by you and others, is far from perfect. 

 

Arnold and Jack get special treatment in the OWGR. Look at 2017 results...

http://www.owgr.com/en/Events/EventResult.aspx?eventid=6524

http://www.owgr.com/en/Events/EventResult.aspx?eventid=6605

 

Valspar winner got 52 points this week.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


30 minutes ago, Dr. Manhattan said:

Arnold and Jack get special treatment in the OWGR.

No, they don't.  Other than the majors, the Players, and a few non-PGA tour championships, the number of WGR points is strictly based on the rankings of the players in the field.  The more strong players, the higher the points.  For example, the Genesis was worth more points than the API last year.

A PGA event can award as few as 24 points to the winner for weak-field events.  If the current WGR system had been around in Jack's era, almost all of his events would have been on the low end of the scale, since there were so few international players in PGA events.

Edited by brocks
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


2 minutes ago, brocks said:

No, they don't.  Other than the majors, the Players, and a few non-PGA tour championships, the number of WGR points is strictly based on the rankings of the players in the field.  The more strong players, the higher the points.  For example, the Genesis was worth more points than the API last year.

 

The Palmer fields have not seemed very strong lately, just looking at the names on paper. They even have past champs who have no business playing with current Tour players.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


1 minute ago, Dr. Manhattan said:

 

The Palmer fields have not seemed very strong lately, just looking at the names on paper. They even have past champs who have no business playing with current Tour players.

Well, you can't just look at the names on paper, you have to look at their records.  Even the most dedicated golf fan doesn't closely follow more than a dozen or two players, so it's very easy to not realize that X has been racking up a lot of top tens, especially if he's come close but hasn't won.

And I would have to say that anybody who wins the API has proved he belongs on tour.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


I didn't really see any information posted (could be buried in this thread) on the amount majors the high level players from Jacks era competed in, though its been discussed a bunch.

Majors competed in Jacks era:

  • Gary Player = 150
  • Arnie = 143
  • Billy Casper =94
  • Lee Trevino = 89
  • Jack Nicklaus = 164
  • Nick Faldo = 100
  • Tom Watson = 145
  • Johnny Miller = 74
  • Seve Ballesteros = 87
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

4 minutes ago, JxQx said:

I didn't really see any information posted (could be buried in this thread) on the amount majors the high level players from Jacks era competed in, though its been discussed a bunch.

Majors competed in Jacks era:

  • Gary Player = 150
  • Arnie = 143
  • Billy Casper =94
  • Lee Trevino = 89
  • Jack Nicklaus = 164
  • Nick Faldo = 100
  • Tom Watson = 145
  • Johnny Miller = 74
  • Seve Ballesteros = 87

Very nice, but it would help to know what years you are defining as the Jack era, and whether you are including majors played after they were well past their primes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


I didn't take the time to read all 306 pages of comments so forgive me if this is redundant. When Tiger wins his 19th major, I'l say he's the best ever. Until that happens; Jack is my pick for the best. Frankly, comparing Bobby Jones, Ben Hogan, Jack and Tiger is difficult because of how the game changed in each of their eras. I missed Mr. Jones's career and most of Mr. Hogan's, but I've had a front row seat for Jack and Tiger. For that opportunity i am most great-full. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


5 minutes ago, brocks said:

Very nice, but it would help to know what years you are defining as the Jack era, and whether you are including majors played after they were well past their primes.

That is subjective as to what their prime is. I mean Jack came in 6th in 1990 at the masters, which still puts him at about 120ish majors and tied for 6th in the masters 1998 which puts him at 155ish. If we are talking wins then that still puts him at around 100ish. Still putting him past most even counting every major that the rest played "out of their prime".

Edited by JxQx
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

1 minute ago, Hoganman1 said:

I didn't take the time to read all 306 pages of comments so forgive me if this is redundant. When Tiger wins his 19th major, I'l say he's the best ever. Until that happens; Jack is my pick for the best. Frankly, comparing Bobby Jones, Ben Hogan, Jack and Tiger is difficult because of how the game changed in each of their eras. I missed Mr. Jones's career and most of Mr. Hogan's, but I've had a front row seat for Jack and Tiger. For that opportunity i am most great-full. 

Seriously?  If Tiger has only 18 majors, same as Jack, but more US Ams, more money titles, more scoring titles, more wins, more POTY awards, and more sheer dominance against much deeper fields, you still won't think Tiger is the best?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Administrator
12 minutes ago, Hoganman1 said:

I didn't take the time to read all 306 pages of comments so forgive me if this is redundant. When Tiger wins his 19th major, I'l say he's the best ever. Until that happens; Jack is my pick for the best.

:sigh:

@turtleback continues to be proven right, and my old opinion wrong, about the sheer number of people who cling to "18 > 14" as their sole determining factor.

  • Upvote 1

Erik J. Barzeski —  I knock a ball. It goes in a gopher hole. 🏌🏼‍♂️
Director of Instruction Golf Evolution • Owner, The Sand Trap .com • AuthorLowest Score Wins
Golf Digest "Best Young Teachers in America" 2016-17 & "Best in State" 2017-20 • WNY Section PGA Teacher of the Year 2019 :edel: :true_linkswear:

Check Out: New Topics | TST Blog | Golf Terms | Instructional Content | Analyzr | LSW | Instructional Droplets

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

10 minutes ago, brocks said:

Seriously?  If Tiger has only 18 majors, same as Jack, but more US Ams, more money titles, more scoring titles, more wins, more POTY awards, and more sheer dominance against much deeper fields, you still won't think Tiger is the best?

Nope. I'm sorry, but that's my standard. However, I'm not saying you can't consider him the best. There's no question Tiger was dominate for two decades and based on what I saw this past weekend he's not finished. Remember Hogan played some of his best golf after the wreck with a bus. Again it's hard to compare players that played in different eras, Just imagine what Bobby Jones could have done with today's equipment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Administrator
5 minutes ago, Hoganman1 said:

Again it's hard to compare players that played in different eras,

Except… you're literally punishing Tiger though, by requiring a higher standard, for playing against stiffer competition.

5 minutes ago, Hoganman1 said:

Just imagine what Bobby Jones could have done with today's equipment.

Probably not nearly as much as he accomplished playing with his equipment in his era, for two reasons:

  • Better equipment narrows the gap between the "great" and the "very good."
  • There are a lot more better players now.

Erik J. Barzeski —  I knock a ball. It goes in a gopher hole. 🏌🏼‍♂️
Director of Instruction Golf Evolution • Owner, The Sand Trap .com • AuthorLowest Score Wins
Golf Digest "Best Young Teachers in America" 2016-17 & "Best in State" 2017-20 • WNY Section PGA Teacher of the Year 2019 :edel: :true_linkswear:

Check Out: New Topics | TST Blog | Golf Terms | Instructional Content | Analyzr | LSW | Instructional Droplets

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • TST Partners

    TourStriker PlaneMate
    Golfer's Journal
    ShotScope
    The Stack System
    FlightScope Mevo
    Direct: Mevo, Mevo+, and Pro Package.

    Coupon Codes (save 10-15%): "IACAS" for Mevo/Stack, "IACASPLUS" for Mevo+/Pro Package, and "THESANDTRAP" for ShotScope.
  • Posts

    • Wordle 1,013 4/6* ⬛🟦🟦⬛⬛ ⬛🟦⬛🟦🟦 🟧⬛🟧🟧🟧 🟧🟧🟧🟧🟧 par is good after a double bogey yesterday.
    • I did read the fine print tonight. It said replace with “similar features & function”.  8 yeas ago my purchase had features that today are available on the lower end models and the current version of my model has more “bells & whistles” than what I got 8 years ago.  So I am thinking they honored the agreement and I can’t argue the offer. since getting a credit for the full purchase price all I am really out over the past 8 years was the cost of the extended warranty, which was less than a low end  treadmill would have cost me. now the question is which model to replace with.  I’ll stay with Nordic Track or I forfeit the $1,463 credit so I will get Nordic Track.  And they honored the warranty and were not hard to work with which is a plus.
    • Generally speaking, extended warranties are a terrible deal and should almost always be avoided. They are a huge profit center for the companies that offer them, which should tell you almost everything you need to know about how much value most consumers get when purchasing them.  This is correct, and the old adage applies - only buy insurance when you can't afford the loss. This usually doesn't apply to most consumer goods.  To your second question, no I don't believe the offer is fair. They are replacing it, but it is not being replaced at "no cost to you". Since the amount being disputed (over $500) is non-trivial, I would probably push the issue. Don't waste your time on the phone with a customer service agent or a supervisor. They have probably given you all they have the authority to do. Rather, I would look at the terms of your agreement and specifically legal disputes. The odds are you probably agreed to binding arbitration in the event of a dispute. The agreement will outline what steps need to be followed, but it will probably look something like this.  1. Mail the Nordic Track legal department outlining your dispute and indicate you are not satisfied with the resolution offered.  2. Open up a case with the AAA (American Arbitration Association), along with the required documentation. 3. Wait about 4-5 weeks for a case to be opened - at which point someone from Nordic Track's legal department will offer to give you the new model at no cost to you.  They certainly don't want to spend the time and energy to fight you over $500. 4. Enjoy your new Nordic Track at no cost to you. I recently entered binding arbitration against a fairly large and well known company that screwed me over and refused to make it right. In my demand letter, I made a pretty sizeable request that included compensation for my time and frustration. Once it hit their legal department, they cut me a check - no questions asked. It was far cheaper to settle with me than to send their legal team to defend them in the arbitration.
    • I never thought of looking at it on multiple purchases like you said.  Yes, the extended may help me on 1 or 2 items but not the other 5 or 6.
    • Day 84 - Forgot to post yesterday, but I did some more chipping/pitching.    Back/neck were feeling better today, so I did a much overdue Stack session. 
×
×
  • 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...