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

[beaker]

Thats said well marpr...if we go back twentyfive years ago when Jack played his style of golf I cant see putting Tiger style in there anywhere...it seems too cut-throat for that period of time...dont get me wrong tour players were competitive...Tiger was cultavated out of watching style from the early to mid eighties...yes he does hold some superior ability&technique; although it just would not be possible if there were wasnt ever a Golden Bear.

[local568]

Jack was great but Tiger is a golf machine like Iron Byron.

[Lost Ball]

Right now, Lost Ball is going with Jack.

Lost Ball doesn't like to use dollar amounts made as some since it would be absurd to think that dollars 30 years ago could compare to today.

Lost Ball looks at Jack's Major record, 2nd place finishes, and competition around him.

In 5 years, it most probably will be Tiger

[BigSlimDog]

Have to go with Tiger.

[Ruari]

Tiger for sure. And anyone who says Jack had better competition is wrong. In jacks day the 100-300 best golfers in the world had 0% chance of winning any major or even an event for that matter.

Today there is a much higher caliber of play from the 100-300 best in the world. The Top 100 quality is about the same, but the depth of fields is so much greater now.

[mikelz]

Tiger for sure. And anyone who says Jack had better competition is wrong. In jacks day the 100-300 best golfers in the world had 0% chance of winning any major or even an event for that matter.

Sorry but I don't get your point.

What do you mean by "...the 100-300 best golfers in the world had 0% chance of winning any.." I never noticed that. Why is Charles Howell III a bigger threat than Doug Sanders?

[Three Putt]

If they played in the same era probably go 50-50. Jack being a little "meaner" the reason for the split.

Replace Phil with Jack at the same age today and "let him loose".

Always easier to chase a record then set one...

PS. Not a big fan of Jack, just my opionion.

[bwgolfer]

I know this has long been a debate and make no mistake as to the greatness of jack during his era. The most common arguments are equipment, and ball. What people in general forget to take into account is how different the game has become over the last 50 years. No one wants to or will ever admit that their time has been past by, but the fact is that it has. Not only is the equipment light years ahead but so is the difficulty of all of the courses. Watch the golf channel which plays a series showing great championships from the past and check out the conditions of the tracks. Stemp meter was a non factor back then because all of the greens back then were lke the 2nd cut of the rough. As in every sport there has been a huge level of increase in the players abilities not to mention the level of golf as a business. Even Jack himself has been quoted when asked about Tiger's game, "he plays a game for which I am not familiar". bwgolfer

[IanM]

JACK....now


....Tiger soon! (propbably!)

[1underpar]

How can anyone make a legitimate response. If Tiger were in Jack's era he would have had the likes of the big three. Plus equipment has changed dramatically. Strength training was really non existant. But if Jack was in Tigers' era who knows what could be happening. What Jack has done to date is a tremendous goal for anyone . But as we all know records were made to be broken . Tiger has every shot in the bag because the courses are longer and very difficult . It would be a very hard to decide. To me they are dead even.

[tonethebone]

Jack Vs. Tiger Lets Compare

Driving Ability Even Best In Their Era
Long Iron Play Even Ditto
Short Iron Play Tiger
Scrambling Tiger By A Mile
Mental Toughness Even
Marketability Tiger By A Mile
Putting Jack Very Slightly
The Winner Tiger Via Scrambling

[Lost Ball]

Marketability Tiger By A Mile

Lost Ball asks, who cares about Marketability?

Lost Ball sees John Daly as a top draw marketability wise as well

[golftide]

tiger, by far.

[Barry in Napa]

Tiger - for tremendous athleticism, grace and power. And because I think the competition is at a higher level today.

[Backspin]

I'm going with Jack for a few reasons.
First, he had legendary rivals he had to beat. Trevino, Palmer, Player, Watson, you name it.
Second, traveling back then was much more grueling. No private jets and long layovers, etc.
Third, He was a family man. Playing golf with family stress is much more difficult.
Fourth, Jack was a great Ryder Cup player. More stress there, many say, and Tiger is a bust in that arena. Tiger needs to make hay in that event and I don't think he can, or will.

Honorable mention- Jack placed 6th at the Masters at age 58. Enough said...

[dave39]

I have to go with Tiger, he just seems like the kind of guy who you wouldn't want to have biting at your heels in a tournament and he has fought through a lot of stuff on the tour being a black member. Jack is awesome but I think Tiger has worked harder.

[Aciddrag0n]

Tiger all the way

[bcoulter]

If Tiger stays healthy he will surpass all of Jack's records. The level of competition that Tiger faces is higher than what Jack faced. That makes Tiger's dominance that much more impressive.