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
If Tiger can stay fit now he's had the op i think his drive and determination to equal and then beat Jacks record will keep him going. I just hope in the next 5 years we get some young and hungry golfers who can challenge Tiger and not get intimidated by him.

Posted
Tiger's swing is deeply flawed due to the fact he "snaps" his left knee straight during impact...this has been putting an incredible strain on that wobbly left knee.

He's been getting away with it till now.

Unless he overhauls his golf swing his career and his quest to beat Jack's major record may be short lived.

Posted
Tiger's swing is deeply flawed due to the fact he "snaps" his left knee straight during impact...this has been putting an incredible strain on that wobbly left knee.

While agree, I don't think an overhaul as much as a slight adjustment is necessary.

Outside of Palmer, no great player that I can remember, swings so hard. So, IMHO, Tiger can change his tempo and sacrifice some distance. Or he can learn to bend his left knee and finish off balance like Arnie did. Palmer did stiay healthy his whole career despite his violent swing because of his follow-through.

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
I don't like Tiger's swing that much, it always feels like he isn't taking it to the max.
My achievements:
Eagles: 0
Birdies: 18
Best Round: 89

Posted
Right now Jack is the greatest until Tiger betters his record.

I'm down to a 10 handicap. At this rate, I'll get to scratch at 90 years old!


Posted
Hey everyone,

New to the forum here and thought I'd chime in...


I really feel that the competition back in Jacks day wasn't as good as it is today.

I know everyone is going to say that there were better players back then because of the household names, but if you look at the pure number of players that actually played the game of golf then and now then our game today should be considered a more competitive era. The more people that play a game the more likely you are to find a Phenom or someone who has the potential to dominate.


This kind of goes back to how Wilt Chamberlain was so dominate in his day. If the game had been as global as it is today those players would not have been so dominate. Michael Jordan never scored 100 points in one game, did not win the most championships, did not hold the highest career average, etc but we see him as the best player to play the game. He had to play with far greater competition and with far more players with similar athletic ability.


If you take away Nicklaus from his day, you would have a small handful of players that would have won all those majors and may have been who we would be comparing Tiger to. If you take tiger away there are a hundred golfers that would split up the majors because there are that many good players out there.

This is why I feel Tiger is the best. With the population of golf expanding to numbers that far exceed Nicklaus' day we have to give it to Tiger for still dominating the sport.


My two cents.


Eddie

Posted

tiger woods never had to play with actually wood "woods"

jack owns that fool

plus jack lifts his left foot a bit like me

HES THE MAN


Posted
I voted for Tiger.

In my Xtreme Sport bag
'09 Burner 9.5*
F50 15* 3 Wood
Burner 18* 5 Wood
MX-19 4-GW SV Tour 54.12 & 58.08 White Hot 2-Ball SRT


Posted
Definitely Tiger, it seems like there was more competition back in Jack's day but the courses are longer and tougher now. Also Tiger's competition is young strong and always coming back for more. Every year a new young up and comer is out to challenge Tiger and he isn't exactly a youthful guy anymore, still young but not as young as his competition. but he still kicks the fields butt.

Posted
Definitely Tiger, it seems like there was more competition back in Jack's day but the courses are longer and tougher now. Also Tiger's competition is young strong and always coming back for more. Every year a new young up and comer is out to challenge Tiger and he isn't exactly a youthful guy anymore, still young but not as young as his competition. but he still kicks the fields butt.

there is WAY more competition for Tiger than Jack. Golf is now accesible to the masses whereas in Jacks day it was still a "country club sport" I still say Tiger FTW

Nike SQ 9.5 w/ ProLaunch Red
Titliest 906F2 15
Miura 202 3-5 Irons
Miura Blade 6-PW Irons
Mizuno MP 51 & 56Yes! Tracy IINike One Black


Posted

youve been brainwashed by nike what a SAD SAD day....

JACK OWNS TIGER ANYDAY


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).
  • 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.