We "experts" knew this all along

[BenSeattle]

Jack's competition was better than Tiger's

First of all the link to the evidence:

http://sports.espn.go.com/golf/masters07/news/story?id=2814780

Sorry, with the charts presented, you won't get a cut 'n' paste job this time, just directions to an article from ESPN that says, despite today's deeper fields, tougher courses, better fitness and all the other valid and convincing arguements, perhaps ONE factor has made today's talented competition tend to fold against the very thought of Tiger on Sunday afternoons. That factor is money.

Read and report.

Oh, and happy golfing.


PS... just wondering... is this the kind of stuff that gets you banned from discussion boards run by Bloated Silly Golfers?

[BenSeattle]

One overlooked factor that skews the "winning percentage" in Tiger's favor is that the calculations include ALL of Jack's major entries -- even those posted when he was LONG past his prime. One more thing for all of you who believe that Tiger will surpass Jack by an even dozen: Jack won three majors AFTER THE AGE OF 40. Obviously, no-one can predict Tiger's game, health or competition when he's 40, but let's just say the chance of him duplicating this effort are... well, unlikely. Better win'em soon, TW!

 

Happy golfing

[dpwrx]

Chicken or the egg -- does worse competition make Tiger look better, or does Tiger being better just make everyone look that much worse.

 

Els gutted out his first US open win, so it's not that the guy can't stand tall and tough in a major. But, I'd be willing to admit money has probably made most tour players less concerned with victories over top 10s.

 

I'm happy to wait 20 years and find out the final answer as to who "the Greatest" is, though, and enjoy good golf from everyone on tour in the meantime.

 

p.s. I did read the article this morning well before I saw this thread. I'm leery of using pure stats to favor either player, Woods or Nicklaus, because while numbers don't lie, stats can easily be used to do so.

[AltusBeliever]

Impossible to compare. Equipment difference is huge. Course conditions are much, much better. Wedges are no comparison.

That said, Jack drove it as long as Tiger does now and hit long irons better (mainly because he hit them). Jack was probably a better mid iron player, and certainly a better driver is terms of accuracy. However, except for putting, where it may be a toss up, Tiger is heads and tails better than Jack in all short game categories.

I am biased. I want to think Jack was and will always be the greatest. I have thought it since I was 14 in 1970. Unfortunately, or fortunately, I am coming around to admit that Tiger is the best. I would like to see Jack play with this equipment at his prime. Remember, back in 1958 or so he broke the insert out of 3 (at least) drivers in one summer! He absolutely jackhammered the ball.

Ah, what gifted players. Lucky to have been alive to watch them both.

[Xt1ncT]

Ah, what gifted players. Lucky to have been alive to watch them both.

THis is exactly the right sentiment.

 

I wasn't lucky enough to see Jack play in his prime, and I feel extremely lucky to be able to watch golf in the "Tiger Era" as there is no doubt that we are witnessing greatness.

 

As for the stats, they can be misleading. As one person rightly put it, they contain all of Jack's from when he was past his best - and they don't include all of Tiger's future victories.

 

We will only really be able to tell in 15 or 20 years when Tiger has finished playing. I for one believe he will surpass Jack's record, and will watch enthralled as he does so.

[DemolitionMan]

I've been known to have a cynical bug once in a while, but I am not so cynical as to believe that money is the reason why TW has no challengers. It seems to me that money is the very reason why there should be more challengers and they are coming up short. Think about it, you could be John Rollins and be having a very good year, over $1.7M in earnings so far and no wins...do you think for a second that every time John Rollins tees it up he's not trying to win but just settle for a good paycheck. I don't believe it. He has enough money this year, he's stoked. If anything, the money to be made not winning, but playing well frees him up to start going for wins. I don't see the complacency, I see other players giving it their all and coming up short vs TW. Let's face it, TW is that good and all the reasoning we use to excuse other players for not winning is just 20-20 hindsight.

[chingali]

Some of the very early champions may have had major counts approaching Nicklaus if travel had of been easier, if money had of been more plentiful and also if healthcare was the same as in the modern era. For example Vardon struggled with tuberculosis for much of his career, not something players of the modern era have had to deal with.

 

I honestly believe that Woods, Nicklaus, Hogan, Vardon, Hagen, Snead, Jones etc would all have been the dominant players of any era they played in. You can forget about equipment differences, course maintenance issues and whatever else you want to throw up they would have adapted and developed to make the most of whatever was available to them. For example if you look at the old time players they are all relatively small compared to the likes of Woods, but you can put that down to diet and training regimes, they didn't lift weights or eat as well as we do.

 

None of this is going to matter much in 150 years, people will still be playing golf and arguing about whether their modern champion is better than the "old timer" who hasn't been born yet and Mr Woods and Mr Nicklaus will just be the guys in the old faded photos and video archives, they'll talk about them never having any real competition in the same way we are doing with our current heroes.

 

Time moves on so just accept the great players for what they are, great players.

[villa]

Great post.

 

If Tiger does beat Jacks record of 18 majors, is that PROOF that he's a better player? the argument could go on forever. Personally I think Ben Hogan was as good as both of them but again we'll never ever know.

 

The first Tournament I ever watched was Jacks final Masters win so I didn't get to see him during his prime.

 

I count my self as privileged to be witnessing the current greatest player in the world plying his trade.