Vinsk

You’re right. Sorry..I missed that. However I will add that sometimes people forget that maybe the Tour life isn’t what these guys want. Maybe teaching is their passion and so they do that to the best level they feel is possible. I don’t know about Haney, Harmon, etc..but I don’t know if they ever said it was their true dream to play on tour.

Again we’re on that ‘Tour level’ basis. Earning a living on the Tour is hardly the determining factor as to whether a teacher can ‘do.’ Hell I’d be extremely happy, proud and thoroughly satisfied if I could play this game as good as @iacas. I mean damn...as a life accomplishment he’s obviously a top notch instructor AND a damn good golfer..among other things. But as far as golf and ‘know how vs execution’ I’d say he’s got that covered as many others probably do who teach. Yes?

You don’t know anything about us friend. Take caution in your assumptions. I’ve got my own story so yes, I’m successful as I became something from nothing. How’s your Mckenzie Tour dream coming along?

More Majors as the criteria of GOAT was Jack’s idea. He decided that once he knew he wasn’t gonna top Snead in total wins. Jack also said ‘Not winning means nothing. Nobody remembers who finished second.’

3 more majors would just be more data. Based on what the Jack side believes Tiger could win 50 majors and we still couldn’t know if he’s the GOAT.

That’s just a super philosophy that leads to no room for debate. We’re not discussing things like ‘who’s the greatest philosopher, musician, poet..etc.’ This is about athletes performing. And performing with a set goal. To shoot the lowest score and win a golf tournament. Period. As far as not being able to cross generations and see how Hogan, Snead or Jones would’ve done is completely irrelevant. That impossibility does not preclude a competitor as the GOAT in his/her sport because it is of itself an impossibility. What we can see without question is players of golf and every other sport have gotten better. Period. You have to take what is present in the current reality and from that it’s not difficult to draw a conclusion. It’s ignorantly stubborn to believe that we can’t know if Billy Riggs was a better tennis player than Roger Federer. Period. No discussion. We can’t say ‘well..maybe if Billy in his prime played Federer he could’ve dominated him...we don’t know that.’ Sorry, no. That’s just stupid. And I’m not calling you stupid or ignorant. I am saying you’re applying a super philosophy where it’s not needed. At least not in this discussion.

Fair enough. Not sure why you’re bothering to post here then.😃

@brocks @turtleback

Exactly my point. So what does? Character? No. Charisma? No. Fan base? No. How about this ....Number of wins, domination of the sport, shots never seen before, putting other golfers including Hall of Famers in awe, coming back from tremendous injuries, laid out for almost 3 years then coming back to win a major..ya know...golf stuff. In all honesty you’re doing exactly what others have done just more politely. Naming a GOAT isn’t really as difficult as you want it to be. Hell, you even agree it’s Tiger but just seem hesitant to flat out accept it. It’s ok, you’ve come further than most. No hard feelings at all...hope you don’t think I have any as it wasn’t my intent.😃 Maybe. Of course it was Jack who made the snarky move of saying number of majors is the determining factor of greatness, not total wins...once he realized he wasn’t gonna beat Snead. Then he deemed Amateur Champ to not count once Tiger won three. Jack has been manipulative to pat himself on the back. He’s far from thrilled that Tiger is approaching his 18 major wins. However to anyone with a sense of logic and reason Tiger passed Nicklaus as GOAT quite some time ago. If Tiger gets 19 and Jack is still around...he’ll come up with some passive comment to somewhat soften the blow I guarantee you.

This I guess is where we disagree. An athletes results/accomplishments are based on their skill and talent. The better skill and talent, the more accomplishments. So by your logic Bjeergard is a greater golfer than Tiger because they did compete and Tiger lost.

The topic of equipment has been discussed and even Jack himself admitted that the improvement of equipment has lessened his advantage because it helped the lesser skilled stay closer to beating him. Training? Nobody forced Jack to smoke and eat ice cream rather than hitting the gym. He trained as he saw fit. Even if you disagree with that, it’s still falls as a reason Tiger is better whether it’s an advantage to Tiger or not. Preparation. Jack had his own preparation. Nobody prevented him from preparing. And how many times did Jack have to fly to Asia for a PR event then return immediately and play a four day event? If you want to say there are advantages for Tiger in preparation that weren’t available for Jack then again..just another reason Tiger’s better. It’s not a hypothetical argument. When we discuss athletes and their accomplishments it’s their accomplishments that we use to evaluate their status. Serena is easily considered a superior tennis player to Gabriella Sabatini. Why? They never played so how can we say that?

Huh? Of course you can. And it’s been well presented.

Well I get your point but don’t entirely agree. It’s really being a bit stubborn to not recognize that Jack’s fields in his earlier major wins were not nearly as deep and competitive as Tiger’s. The point made regarding the chances of winning with x number of ranked, quality players compared to y is true. It’s not opinion. It’s also a fact that Tiger’s winning percentage is greater than Jack’s. It’s also fact that Tiger has won more tournaments and in a shorter time period than Jack. This isn’t a question of taking Jack from his day and playing Tiger who would win. And that doesn’t matter because it’s golf. Any golfer can beat any golfer. That of course is impossible to know. The question is taking both their careers who is the greatest golfer of all time. More stats, data, and facts point to Tiger. At least if you read through the points that @iacas, @turtleback and @brocks have presented It appears that way.

Pull or hook?

I can see that working for you and maybe others. But that’s more of a ‘feel’ thing whereas @Golfing Dad suggests something anyone can try and there’s no ‘feel’ to it really. I’m not sure I said that clearly but I hope you get what I mean..lol.