LICC

I said 50-60 and you picked someone ranked 61. That is a hair split that actually favors my point. I said it happens once or twice a year. Not enough to justify that strength of field today is a major factor in the comparison between Jack and Tiger. The fact that the bottom half or more of the players in Tour events are better now than 50 years ago doesn’t mean that much when it’s the top 1/4th of the players doing almost all the winning anyway.

In 1964 in Columbus, Jack won the long drive contest again with a drive of 320: 'You aren't going to believe this, but...' News from around the web.

There were no statistics measured in the 1960s, so what is your source for his averaging 270? In 1968 IBM did some recording of driving distance at some events and Nicklaus was the longest in their testing at 276 yards. But again, that isn't the longest drives. He was known to clear 300 yards where warranted, with persimmon drivers and balata balls.

Jack won the Long Drive competition at the 1963 PGA Championship with a drive of 341 yards. There were athletic, physical players in the 1960s- Arnold Palmer and Gary Player to name two. And there are the JB Holmes and Bubba Watsons' of today who bomb drives without athletic physiques.

The strength of field point is a valid one, but I think is getting a bit overblown here. In any significant PGA Tour event where most of the top players are playing (ie, not counting the swing season or tournaments played at the same time as WGC or majors), how often does anyone not ranked in the top 50 or 60 win? Maybe once or twice a year? Before the PGA Championship Brooks Koepka said he counts out half the field as not good enough to compete to win before the tournament even starts. Yes, I give credit to Tiger for playing in tournaments with more good players than Jack did, but I don't think that discounts Jack's accomplishments very much at all.

Jack in the 1960s would dial up 300+ yard drives when he needed. He was clearly significantly ahead of the rest of his peers with the driver. Legendarily so. It is just reasonable to opine that Jack in his young prime, playing today with today's equipment, would be at the top of the field in driving. And with his outstanding ballstriking and putting, there is no reason to think he wouldn't be winning at as good a rate as anyone else playing today. I do think Tiger is the GOAT because the level that Tiger played in 2000, and in separate 3 and 5 year periods was the greatest golf ever played and I put more weight into that than on longevity. But to downplay Jack by projecting him as just a top-10 player in today's fields is misplaced.

@saevel25 This might be it. It was Jason Kokrak, not Jason Day: Launch angles with the throwback club were much lower, around 9 degrees instead of Kokrak’s usual 11. Spin rates were dramatically higher, 3,100 rpm versus the usual 2,200; thus, the curve balls everyone was hitting. Ball speed was 164 mph against the 179 Kokrak gets with his Titleist 917D2. As for distance: Kokrak’s tournament roll-included average of 304 yards contrasted with his max carry of 271 with the old club. Of his 10 drives, most flew in the low 260s.

I'll specify- Jack would average 360+ with his driver. The longest PGA Tour pros are up near that distance. The off-the-tee stats the PGA Tour puts out don't distinguish when players don't use driver off the tee. Jack sure was a physical freak with his driving distance. A few years ago 8 pros hit a persimmon driver at Cherry Hill to recreate Arnold Palmer's famous tee shot and Rory had the longest drive. He reached the front bunker, short of the green. Last year Dustin Johnson hit an old club at a range session and his drive went 290. I recall another long hitting pro (Jason Day maybe?) measuring his stats with old equipment and his drives were around 270 or so. Why would you say that one of the longest drivers relative to his peers in history would only be top 10 if he played in his prime today?

The first time Jack had his clubhead speed measured, he was 58 years old and he was at 118 mph. From 1995-1998, aged 55-58, Jack made 11 cuts out of 14 majors, finished in the top 50 in seven of them, and finished 6th at the 1998 Masters. A 25 year-old Jack Nicklaus playing today with today's equipment would average 360+ in driving distance. And would be winning majors and be one of the best players in the game.

I think George Wright is overrated. It’s a decent course and good muni. Nothing to get excited about. It has a handful of very good holes, a handful of ok holes, and a few quirky holes (not in a good way) with routings that feel forced through too severe elevations. Cool 1930s era clubhouse.

Pound Ridge is 40 miles from NYC. Well over a 1 hour drive at most times. Golf Digest considers it Metro NY: Sneaking in a Little Golf... in Metro New York - Golf Digest New York City's five boroughs—Manhattan, the Bronx, Queens, Brooklyn and Staten Island—are home to 8.5 million people and 13 municipal golf courses.

@saevel25Direct quote from Tom Doak on a forum asking about proposed changes to the 1st and 18th holes on Bethpage Black: "In general, I don't see any need to redesign any holes at Bethpage Black. I'd maybe take out some of the bunkers that aren't original. But mostly I'd just mow it differently."

If you are going to talk about New York area courses, meaning the New York City area, it makes no sense to only limit this to courses within the 5 boroughs. If you live in NYC, you have the option to play courses in Long Island, Westchester, and North Jersey. The Golf Guides, which has been around for decades and pre-internet published guides, lists all courses it considers in the NY Metro area. That is a third-party source. Why can't you just accept that? If you live in Queens, it makes no difference to drive to a course in Long Island compared to a course in Brooklyn. If you live in the Bronx, you can drive to a course in Westchester or New Jersey easier than getting to a course in Staten Island. These are all NY area courses. http://golfguidesusa.com/

That was almost useful except I never once said NY has superior courses to Orlando. Actually I am looking forward to golfing in Orlando within the next couple of years. Which courses would you recommend? I’ve had friends play Grand Cypress, Crooked Cat (I think that was the name), and some others. More inaccurate posting. I dismissed Pinehurst? I agreed it has better golf than NY. And I’m not trying to advocate any position other than NY stacks up well compared to most of the country. Not that it beats every place. And I asked for people’s views, not magazine articles. In my opinion your harping on the 30 minutes from NYC boundary is silly. Golfers in NYC travel over an hour plenty for good golf options from time to time. You seem to just want to attack my posts for no reason.

Ok now you are not even making sense. You pay tolls traveling within NYC. The midtown tunnel. The Whitestone Bridge. And it’s seamless- put EZPass in your car and that’s it. Disregard federal designations, the Golf Guides site, common sense, and just nitpick what is considered the NY area. Which adds nothing to the discussion. Why not give your view of the courses compared to what you have seen elsewhere? Contribute something useful to the discussion, please.