Jump to content
Check out the Spin Axis Podcast! ×
IGNORED

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


Greatest Golfer (GOAT)  

222 members have voted

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

    • Tiger Woods is the man
      1627
    • Jack Nicklaus is my favorite
      820


Recommended Posts

Posted
you gotta go with jack, he's still getting endorsements in his seventies while tiger is getting dropped from endorsements and he's only in his thirties

They will beat their swords into golf clubs and their spears into putters. Nation will not take up sword against nation, nor will they train for war anymore. Old Tom Morris 2:4


Posted
With all the money that even the ones who finish low in a tournament today I think the pressure to win was even greater in Jacks time. I vote Jack

Posted
you gotta go with jack, he's still getting endorsements in his seventies while tiger is getting dropped from endorsements and he's only in his thirties

It was between this and the Jack is a legend for his designs quote (paraphrasing) for the mot foolish I've seen in a while. I flipped a coin and you won Ganja-congrats!

BO THE GOLFER

In my Top Flite stand bag:

Driver-Ping G400+ 10.5 degrees regular flex Hybrids-Ping I25 17 & 20 degrees stiff flex Irons-Ping I3 O-size 4 through lob wedge regular flex Putter-Nike Oz 6


Posted
tough call... i dont even see how you can compare the two... different eras have different champions... but since tiger is around now an i can watch him play now... i had to pick him
RUSS's avg drive - 230yrds and climbing

Posted
I have watched them both, and while I understand why people would want to say it's Jack (he was the undisputed "best-ever" for more than three decades), I don't see how anyone can say that Tiger is not the best. Tiger has exceeded every achievement Jack reached at a similar point in his career, and Tiger has done things that Jack never did (winning the Master's by 12 strokes, the U.S. Open by 15 and the British Open by 8). Jack had an uncanny ability to find a way to get the "W". Well, Tiger has that, too, but he also has the ability to blow the best fields in golf completely out of the water.

The argument about changes in equipment is a complete red herring and I really wish people would stop using it. Of course it is a different era, but the question is who is better relative to his peers. The fact that Tiger uses a 460cc titatanium driver isn't relevent to this debate because everyone Tiger is playing against is using the same technology.

The only issue left to settle is whether -- and let's be honest, WHEN -- Tiger is going to break Jack's record for total wins (73, second only to Sam Sneed) and total majors. I think Tiger will break Jack's win total within the next two years. He's only 8 wins away. And I think he'll pass Jack's major total in the next 3 years--more than a decade earlier than when Jack got his 18th.

I think Tiger will finish his career with more than 100 tour wins (about 125 worldwide) and 22-25 majors. He just needs to say healthy.
STICKS:

TAYLOR MADE R9 (9.5) (Fuji Motore)
EXOTICS XCG (15.0) (Aldila DVS)
TAYLOR MADE Rescue TP (17, 21) (Fuji Reax)MIZUNO MP-62 (5-PW) (Dynamic Gold SL Sensicore)MIZUNO MP-R (52, 56, 60) (Dynamic Gold SL Sensicore)YES! Natalie (Tiger Shark)TAYLOR MADE Black (#68)

Posted

Tiger all the way

In My Hank Haney IJGA Bag
Driver: FT Tour 9.5 w/ Aldila Voodoo Stiff
3 Wood: i15 15.5 w/ avixcore red stiff
Hybrids: Rescue 09 19, 22 w/ fujikara fit on stiff
Irons: 4 & 5 MP-52, 6-PW MP-58 w/ KBS Tour Stiff Wedges: MP T-10 52*, 58* w/ KBS Tour StiifPutter: Fastback 1 34 inBall: : Pro...


Posted
royal bank of scotland has been bailed out and nationalized. no word yet on its relationship with jack as its ambassador. certainly if jack is let go, this would put him more on par with tiger who was let go by buick

They will beat their swords into golf clubs and their spears into putters. Nation will not take up sword against nation, nor will they train for war anymore. Old Tom Morris 2:4


Posted
I grew up in Jack's era, so I lean towards him a bit more, but I believe Tiger is so much more aware of what's going on with his swing and his mechanics at all times, that he's better than Jack in that respect. We have to look at the different technology available to the pros now though. With all the computers spitting out data and video now, it's no surprise that Tiger would be able to learn more about what's going on and why in his swing than Jack would in his time. If Jack had that technology in his prime, I'm sure he would have won even more majors than he did. No matter what, if they had played in the same era, it would've been one hell of a good show.

Posted
Tiger is amazing, but it's kinda like comparing football players of different eras. If Jack came up with the technological and training advances of today, would he have won even more? ie. Having to hit a screaming draw/hook with an iconsistant at best golfball and a tiny persimmon headed driver versus hitting a Pro V1 with any of the current crop of 460cc drivers..? Does beg one to wonder...

Posted
As uglande said, the technology argument is completely irrelevant because it applies to everyone playing in that time. If Jack was playing these days, it's not like he would have a 460 cc driver and video analysis and everyone else would be stuck with old technology. The argument is just bad logic. IMO the only argument for Jack is that he had greater competition; an argument that is unprovable because eras cannot be compared.

I think Tiger is the greatest fo sho.

Cleveland Hi-bore 9.5* stiff, Taylormade Burner T3 14.5* stiff, Mizuno mp 32 3-PW, Nike SV Tour Black Satin 52, 56, 60* wedges, Scotty Cameron Studio Select Newport 2 35 inches
In the market for a new driver, then my bag will be the shiz.


Posted
I grew up in Jack's era, so I lean towards him a bit more, but I believe Tiger is so much more aware of what's going on with his swing and his mechanics at all times, that he's better than Jack in that respect. We have to look at the different technology available to the pros now though. With all the computers spitting out data and video now, it's no surprise that Tiger would be able to learn more about what's going on and why in his swing than Jack would in his time. If Jack had that technology in his prime, I'm sure he would have won even more majors than he did. No matter what, if they had played in the same era, it would've been one hell of a good show.

But Tiger needs a swing coach (Hank Haney) at his disposal to tinker with his swing. Nicklaus has been quoted saying that his original teacher (Jack Grout) taught him how to fix his own swing on the fly. He didn't need the constant attention of a swing coach like Tiger and other modern Tour players do.

My Tools of Ignorance:

Driver: Ping I20 9.5*
Woods/Hybrids: Cobra AMP 3W and 3 HY

Irons: Cobra AMP 4-GW

Wedges: Callaway Forged Copper 56* and 60*

Putters: Scotty Cameron  35" (Several of the flow neck blade variety)

Ball: Bridgestone B330-RX and Srixon Z-Star

Bag: Nike Performance Carry


Posted
In their prime, both using the same equipment Jack would WHOOP on Tiger. :)
G5,9
F-50,13.5
MP33(2-9)
200,48.06
SM,54.11MP-T,60.05Anser 2

Posted

For now Jack is still wearing the Yellow Jersey but if the knee holds on, Tiger might get it soon.
I agree with some posts that Jack's competition was stronger, but there is a change in generation going on right now and when the Garcia, Kim, Scott will shoot their maiden Grand Slam victory, he will then have competition.
On equipment, I don't think it's relevant to say Tiger is favored, he is the almost the only one of the top players who did not gain 10 to 20 yards in driving distance with the arrival of 460cc & High MOI drivers (remember he was still using steel shaft on his driver not so long ago).
@+

---------------------------------------------------
In my bag:

TM R9 Supertri 9.5 UST MAMYIA Axiv core green R | Titleist 904F 15° YS-10 Stiff | Sonartec MD hybrid irod shaft stiff | Titleist 804.OS NS PRO 970 R-Flex(3-PW) | Cleveland 588RTG 53º SW| Cleveland 588RTG 60º LW| Yes!Golf Tiffany Putter


Posted
I voted Tiger, but I'd love to see him play with the technology from Jack's prime. That would put a real premium on hitting the fairway and level the playing field somewhat.

Posted
In their prime, both using the same equipment Jack would WHOOP on Tiger. :)

true, tiger actually decided to be born 30 years later cuz he knew he couldn't compete with jack

They will beat their swords into golf clubs and their spears into putters. Nation will not take up sword against nation, nor will they train for war anymore. Old Tom Morris 2:4


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

    Carl's Place
    PlayBetter
    Golfer's Journal
    ShotScope
    The Stack System
    FitForGolf
    FlightScope Mevo

    Coupon Codes (save 10-20%): "IACAS" for Mevo/Stack/FitForGolf, "IACASPLUS" for Mevo+/Pro Package, and "THESANDTRAP" for ShotScope. 15% off TourStriker (no code).
  • Popular Now

  • Posts

    • Day 41, June 14.  I spent 10 minutes, half hitting W half hitting 6-iron, practice shots (indoors, off a mat, into a net)
    • Day 620 - 2026-06-14 Got some work in before and after lessons. Definitely didn't adduct my arms 130° in doing so.
    • Day 79: played 18. Shot a +5 76. Iron play was much better - 11 GIR. Hit a drive 380. Normal day. 
    • Day 14 (14 Jun 26) - Continued work with irons (8i-Pw), hard foam balls and getting consistent impact - same as previous drills - using gates for 1/2 and “simulated” course conditions on the second half.  
    • I like discussing the golf swing. Whether you call it "swing theory" or what, I like to talk about things that can expand the potential for what I know and understand. As a scientist, I like being shown that I'm wrong, too, because as I've said a bunch of times… "you're wrong and here's why" is an instant opportunity to upgrade my knowledge. I also like to help golfers, and one of the things I'm most glad to have moved away from from 15 years ago was the "Hands In" idea from S&T. Jim Waldron is often credited (probably rightly so) with explaining why so many Tour players and good players talk about "keeping their hands in front of themselves" while it appears that they're moving their arms around their bodies. From over 30 years ago: I've also got videos like… this (Instagram link here😞 I'm happy to say that I've become friends with Shaun and Mike at Athletic Motion Golf (AMG), too. I tend to get along with other smart folks who measure things, who look critically at information, who don't assume that what they thought 20 years ago holds true today. I get along with folks who look for chances to instantly upgrade their knowledge. Andy Plummer remains one of the people who does not look for these opportunities. He didn't care in early 2013 when we had evidence that the information in their S&T 2.0 DVDs was bogus, and they seemingly don't care now. They've been attacking (it's their favorite pastime) AMG in particular for the better part of a year now. There have been a few shots back at them from AMG (like… this), no doubt. But as is typical of the AMG fellas, it's with measured data. Well, recently, Andy took yet another shot at AMG: https://www.instagram.com/p/DZfHe0DuPXC/. Andy demonstrates that true power in the golf swing comes from doing stuff like this: Andy claims that the idea that the arms mostly lift and lower, while the body turns, is bogus. What golfers should be doing is using "angular velocity" to abduct and adduct their shoulders to move the club fast like this (above). Then he makes a ridiculous example of what AMG supposedly teaches, but misses by a mile. Now, it doesn't take a biomechanist to know that you can't possibly swing as Andy demonstrates. His right arm is so far around and behind him that his left arm would have to grow several feet to reach the grip of the club (or alignment stick), and a follow-through with the right arm position like that would be absolutely silly. But, it's a demonstration, so let's not read too much into it. However, I find ideas like this dangerous. Again, I like to help golfers, and in my opinion, the idea that you should abduct and adduct your arms a lot is a dangerous one. There's some adduction and abduction going on, but… it's not much. Anyway, this statement was posted: 130 degrees of dynamic range of horizontal abduction and adduction is quite the claim! I posted some comments to Andy and others, and was issued a challenge: Well, okay then. Here's Bryson's lead shoulder adduction: This measures the angle between the "virtual spine," the left shoulder, and the elbow. Bryson has a 97.34° "adduction angle" at P1, a 62.53° angle at P4, and returns to an 89.21° angle at impact. Rounding, that's a change of 34° from address to the top, and then a change (back toward the angle at address) of about 26° from the top to impact. If we want to worry about only horizontal abduction and adduction (where D = adduction and B = abduction): Left shoulder: 8.33° D, 38.74° D, 14.67° D Right shoulder: 1.03° D, 55.75° B, 14.04° B If we call moving the arms farther around you as negative, those are changes of -30.41° from P1 to P4 for the left shoulder and +24.07° from P4 to P7 for the left shoulder and -56.78° and +41.71° for the right shoulder. I have no idea on earth where he gets 130°. From the last frame of Bryson's swing where he's at 126.98°? But the lowest that number gets is 62.53°, for a range of 64.45, or less than half of the 130° claimed (plus it includes part of the swing, post-impact, that has no bearing on what the ball does). For good measure, another pretty good player: Left: 22.55° D ➡️ 33.35° D (∆ 10.8°) ➡️ 17.36° D (∆ 15.99° from P4, 5.19° from P1) Right: 15.03° D ➡️ 24.29° B (∆ 39.32°) ➡️ 1.93° D (∆ 26.22° from P4, 13.1° from P1) Of the biomechanists and experienced 3D users (on any platform), none of them have seen anything like 130° of dynamic adduction/abduction from a good player P1 to P7. And, like my little joke above, even if you go to the end of the swing, you rarely get much more than a little over halfway there. Maybe Andy is adding them? He does say in the video "and then add it to that with the lead arm." (I think that's what he says, but this isn't an additive type system.) I regularly coach golfers out of positions with a lot of adduction and abduction. I regularly work golfers away from moving their arms around their bodies. Even my juniors (the ones who have paid attention anyway! 🤣) can recite "arms = up/down, body = around." Like this: So, I don't know where this leaves us. Andy claims to have seen something on GEARS that shows 130° of dynamic adduction/abduction. I'm open to being wrong, but… I don't think I am here on this one. And, until that comes to be, I will continue to stand up for what I think is the best information, and do my best to work with golfers toward simpler, easier moves that don't get them stuck. Simpler, easier moves like the moves Tour players and great players tend to make, not complicated, difficult moves. Shaun and Mike said it in a video once where they demonstrated that the average Tour player adducts their lead arm 20° across their chest from the top to impact (P4 to P7), while the amateur often tries to go 40°. They said something like "the amateur is trying to move their arm TWICE the distance in the same amount of time as the professional athlete." Yep. The swings of great players are often easier and simpler. They are not abducting and adducting their arms much in comparison to average golfers. As a smart man once said: "Why would you teach something (abduction in this case) that bad golfers already do?" On a related note… the S&T crowd continues to be… well, who they've been as long as I've known them. Take this comment for example: I mean… I would think that this is pretty self-explanatory, but then again… I didn't think it needed explaining to begin with. P.S. As I was finishing up this article, another biomechanist replied with something so simple I hadn't even thought of it as I had immediately jumped into looking at the actual measurements: "90 doesn’t even seem physically possible.“ No, sir. It doesn't.
×
×
  • 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.