Jump to content
sungho_kr

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

Greatest Golfer (GOAT)  

207 members have voted

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

    • Tiger Woods is the man
      1633
    • Jack Nicklaus is my favorite
      817


6,837 posts / 568785 viewsLast Reply

Recommended Posts

Hogan Fan

he would have shown some of the premaddonas on the tour what golf is all about

a great player and a real grinder-better than most but Tiger and Jack, who knows?..different era, like comparing cans of coke with hot dogs

bb69

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A great golf topic...

I am sorry to all the Jack fans, but Tiger is the man. I believe that in even if matched in there prime with the same equipment, Tiger would beat Jack.

As far as competition, the golfers of today far surpass the golfers of the past. The reasoning is quite simple. You play to your competition or you get left in the tracks.

- In Jack's time, the world population was about 3 Billion and today there are over 6 Billion people in the world.

- A fewer percentage of the world played golf then do now. Simple mathematics means a fewer % of fewer people equals less competition.

- The money wasn't that good in Jacks' prime, which led to less of a drive to play well. Unfortunately, it is part of human nature. I am not speaking about players on tour, but the drive to be there.

- Tiger, no matter what, is way more fundamentally a better ball striker. People say that Jack was hitting "the older equipment" passed the competition. I have no doubt that Tiger has a stronger, faster golf swing than Jack ever did and therefore would hit a golf ball further no matter what equipment.

- As far as equipment, Tiget has been beating the competition with Nike Golf products. They are just starting to catch up to Acushnet, and are still lagging. Phil said it correctly, when he said Tiger is whooping everyone using worse equipment. Jack was using the best tools of his times.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as competition, the golfers of today far surpass the golfers of the past. The reasoning is quite simple. You play to your competition or you get left in the tracks.

Lets take a moment to compare Jacks competitors to Tigers... Jack played against .... (Player and number of Majors) Gary Player 9, Tom Watson 8, Arnold Palmer 7, Lee Trevino 6, Seve Ballesteros 5, Raymond Floyd 4, Billy Casper 3, Johnny Miller 2, Ben Crenshaw 2, Tom Kite 1. all the while Jack was winning 18. (player and number of tour wins) Palmer 62, Casper 51, Watson 39, Littler 29, Trevino 29, Miller 25, Player 24, Floyd 22, Irwin 20, Norman 20, Sanders 20, Crenshaw 19, Kite 19. Jack had 73 wins Tiger played against.... (player and number of majors) Renie Els 3, Phil Mickelson 3, Vijay Singh 3, John Daly 2, Retief Goosen 2, Jose Maria 2, Mark Omera 2. ( player and number of tour wins) Vijay Singh 30, Phil Mickelson 29, Davis Love 19, Mark Omera 16, Fred Couples 15, Ernie Els 15, Corey Pavin 15, David Duval 13. Granted, Tigers competition is still playing, but I don't see any of todays players reaching 62 wins like Arnold did or even 51 like casper. They probably won't match Watsons 39 with the exception of Vijay. It is pretty impressive to see Tigers name on the list of most major wins. But don't forget, Jack was outdriving his opponents the way Tiger does today. He was making unbelievable putts as does Tiger. He was hitting shots that nobody could believe. He was playing with clubs that I feel were inferior, I don't think too many people went out and purchased Magreggor clubs like Jack was playing. Its hard to compare different generations of golfers. But don't argue the point that Jack didn't face the competition the Tiger does. Palmer, Watson, Casper, Trevino, Player are on top of the list of greatest golfers of all time. I only see 2 of Tigers competitors making that list - Singh, Mickelson.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jacks clubs were I believe the MacGreagor Tourney forged irons and the MT85 woods, I still have a set and those clubs were fantastic, still remember how it felt to hit that 3 wood. Those were the days, I enjoyed golf more then before everything got so hi-tech, the crack of persimmon on Titleist balata, the bladed putters, the colorful clothes, it was all good, and Jack was the Golden Bear, Arnie the King.

but . . .

Tiger is the greatest, no need for stats, just watching him and comparing is enough, every facet of his game is brilliant and he keeps raising his game to new heights.

Keep in mind that Trevino had the Bears number until he got injured, Watson definitely had his number and eclipsed him, but no one can tame Tiger.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Keep in mind that Trevino had the Bears number until he got injured, Watson definitely had his number and eclipsed him, but no one can tame Tiger.

I woudn't say Lee (29 wins, 6 Majors) or Tom (39 wins, 8 Majors) to Jacks 73 wins, 18 Majors was "having the Bears number". And my friend, they deffinately didn't eclipse him. This thread is not about Lee or Tom being compared to Tiger is it?

I'm not saying that Tiger isn't better than Jack or that he won't surpass him, I'm just saying some of the arguments in this thread about Jack not having the level of competitors that Tiger does is not just. Tiger will surpass Jack's numbers someday, but he hasn't yet. Lets not knock the King from his throne too prematurely. If Tiger goes into a slump the rest of his career and finishes with lets say 15 majors and 65 wins, is he better than Jack???? I think he would fall short. Jack was just as exciting as Tiger when he came on the seen. He was the young Fat Jack trying to dethrone Arnold and Hogan. He outdrove everyone by miles and won every major played for years. And he also took down a pretty good field of players in the 1986 Masters at the age of 46. Do you know what Tigers back will feel like at the age of 46 the way he swings a club. And after a few good years of carrying around Tiger jr??? He's simply not there yet. Jack did just as much if not more for the game of golf as Tiger has, just in different ways. Jack brought the sport into the mainstream of sports. Made it comparable to football, baseball etc, Tiger is making the game popular with Minorities and kids. All these great things you guys feel and think about Tiger have been done. I was here and watched Jack do them. Give the king his props! (well Arnold is the King, Jack would be the Emperor and Tiger is the well accomplished prince)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But......I still say Ben Hogan was better than them all..
I'm just too tired to argue

Here is Tigers stats to date.....
54 wins, 10 Majors.
He needs 19 more wins and 8 Majors. Thats a lot of golf my friends!

Sure he'll probably get there. The way players keep in shape today.
In Jacks days you were older than dirt at 40. Guys like Vijay are hitting thier prime at 40 today.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe Hogan was the best, I never saw him play and I don't care if he has less majors and victories than Jack, if he could play golf better than he was better, the accident cost him plenty . . . the question is; who is the greatest, not who has won the most majors. I take it that 'greatest' means who can play golf the best, not who has the best career stats.

So I seems that it depends on what you take the word, 'greatest' to mean. Jack has more victories and majors, Tiger has superior golf skills, and maybe Hogan was beyond them both . . . I would have loved to see Hogan play that's for sure!!!! But I believe Tigers combination of tremendous power, radar irons, super scrambling, dead eye putting, and desparate will to win would be tough to surpass.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think today we measure greatness by Majors.
Thats why Tigers eye is always on the majors. He knows to be considered the greatest, he has to top Jack. It's going to be fun to watch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As long as Tiger is "chasing" Jack, Jack will always be the best. I do believe El Tigre will have his day. I love watching the old classic golf footage of Jack and The King. Their swings were "their" swings. Tiger is like a machine, just incredible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm too young to remember Jack at his best but that's not my main reason for voting for Tiger.

With the "arms race" you have today with all the new equipment getting better and better, the field is very strong. If you take these guys' talent levels and give them a little bit of an edge, it would seem they have a realistic chance at winning every week.

Tiger has consistently dominated that field and only moderately stepped up the technology he uses. His performance this past year at the British Open speaks for itself. I'd be screwed if the biggest club I could use was my 4 iron.

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
  • Support TST Affiliates

    SuperSpeed
    TourStriker PlaneMate
    Golfer's Journal
    Whoop
    FlightScope Mevo
    Use the code "iacas" for 10% off Mevo
  • Posts

    • Day 308 - October 31, 2020 Played 18 at Bedford Springs with a small group of TST people.
    • Day 130.  I had a good hour in my practice room (off a mat, real balls, into a net, indoors).  I hit quarter shots with a 56 degree wedge and with an 8-iron, then trouble shots and full swings with a 6-iron.  
    • I hit through a bag of G410's today my playing partner had ( we were almost alone out there and hit multiple balls). Besides being disturbingly thick , the offset made me over draw or hook everything, unless I tried to fade them, in which case they may have gone straight. Not for me. But he shot a 75 playing his first ball on every hole. Me? Hell no. I shot 86 with him conceding putts I had a 50% chance of holing.
    • As other stated, Welcome! This is my response to your first paragraph. Agree with other responses above. Will respond regarding my experience/views with epoxy/ferrules/golf shaft, etc in another response. IMO Quality control with possibly a higher quality material makeup is one key discriminator between the cheaper references (in price$/materials) vs the more expensive. Not a guarantee but in most cases/brands there are design qualities combined with superior materials (i.e. low quality zinc material component club head vs a 1025 carbon steel/431 stainless steel/17-4 stainless steel/and many varieties of titanium/carbon fiber golf club head, etc) .I have purchased OME brands (Ping/Callaway/TM, etc) and when I measured loft/lie they were spot on or off ~1 deg vs a set of Top Flites a friend bought that were order of magnitude off (like 4,5,6 all within 1 deg loft). Component club heads from Maltby/Golf Works and Wishon -- again -- spot on (always) vs knockoff components (to be fair 50/50 in my experience -- little better than boxed sets). I am not against boxed sets as my boys for junior golf started with boxed sets (Callaway and/or PING) and they were near perfect. Its the adult sets that I recommend people proceed with caution. Another key that affects costs may be the engineering design that drives possibly unique materials to be combined to produce a certain type higher quality club head. Does that guarantee you a better game? -- maybe/maybe not at beginner level -- but many argue about this, I will not here but attempt to share from my experiences from the materials/quality of the clubs.  Where would I recommend a cheap/or lower cost boxed set? IF you are  high hncp once a month golfer that does not practice --- imo save your money and buy a boxed set of matching clubs--but do your research best you can so you get quality(after all there is a difference in a 6 iron into a green vs a 8 iron -- those clubs need to be different to work as designed (again I will refer to Top Flight boxed set my friend purchased years ago). My comments above come from someone that has built/repaired and learned to fit (with/without swing monitors/video) for over 35 years. There are plenty of quality used OEM brand equipment and comparable components from Golf Works or Wishon, etc. that are made from quality and/or premium materials with good engineering design qualities that are as affordable as a cheap boxed sets that has most likely been mass produced/put together with less than desirable quality control and consistencies. Last let me say I firmly believe in quality instruction combined with fittings to build a top notch set that meets your needs/capabilities over time vs going out first and buying either economy or high end. Just my opinion. There is a great used golf club market in which there are some great deals but I would want to know what I fit to before investing. There are relationships in place between many instructors/fitters (some do both) and I believe that is an avenue to not only improve your game but invest wisely.    
  • TST Blog Entries

  • Today's Birthdays

    1. Jakester23
      Jakester23
      (38 years old)
    2. Tennhacker
      Tennhacker
      (46 years old)
    3. wthomas21
      wthomas21
      (33 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...