Tiger vs. Jack

[bscinstnct]

53 minutes ago, Guy In Lyon said:

Arnold Palmer. He had class that Jack and Tiger can only dream about.

 

You must not have heard, the press respected privacy back in APs day but...

 

TW and AP were “birds of a feather”

 

Can just imagine what they are discussing here ; )

 

 

Edited January 21, 2021 by bscinstnct

[Frankensteins Monster]

1 hour ago, Guy In Lyon said:

Arnold Palmer. He had class that Jack and Tiger can only dream about.

Only if you believe that being the "greatest" golfer is only about class, and only in a "class"  sort of way

[bscinstnct]

1 hour ago, bscinstnct said:

 

Y

 

 

 

 

 

Edited January 21, 2021 by bscinstnct

[hybrid25]

In every major sport, it's probably unfair to compare athletes from different eras. From era to era, there are so many things to consider that are different from then to now. Although the OP makes some very good points, Jack and Tiger are both greatest of all time. 

[jomatty]

2 hours ago, Guy In Lyon said:

Arnold Palmer. He had class that Jack and Tiger can only dream about.

but he isn’t even in the conversation as far as golfing goes.  If it were a “being classy” contest I would agree, but I’m not sure he is top 5 ever as far as golfing goes

[csh19792001]

38 minutes ago, hybrid25 said:

In every major sport, it's probably unfair to compare athletes from different eras. From era to era, there are so many things to consider that are different from then to now. Although the OP makes some very good points, Jack and Tiger are both greatest of all time. 

 

Ben Hogan may have been greater than either. Talent and skill wise? He has a VERY strong case. 

Edited January 21, 2021 by csh19792001

[cdnglf]

1 hour ago, csh19792001 said:

 

Ben Hogan may have been greater than either. Talent and skill wise? He has a VERY strong case. 

Hogan didn’t win a solo tournament until after his 27th birthday.

I don’t think I’ve ever heard anyone ever claim he was more talented than Nelson or Snead, let alone Tiger and Jack.

[csh19792001]

2 hours ago, cdnglf said:

Hogan didn’t win a solo tournament until after his 27th birthday.

I don’t think I’ve ever heard anyone ever claim he was more talented than Nelson or Snead, let alone Tiger and Jack.

For starters...

 

Between June 1948 and July of 1953, Hogan played in 11 Majors.  He won 8 of them. 

 

Prior to getting hit head on by a bus 2/2/49, Hogan played 80 events (from 1946-the accident). He won 32 of them.

[Hawkeye77]

40 minutes ago, csh19792001 said:

For starters...

 

Between June 1948 and July of 1953, Hogan played in 11 Majors.  He won 8 of them. 

 

Prior to getting hit head on by a bus 2/2/49, Hogan played 80 events (from 1946-the accident). He won 32 of them.

No way. 

[csh19792001]

Great article here!!

 

https://www.golfdigest.com/story/the-goat-jack-nicklaus-tiger-woods

[csh19792001]

Excellent article on Woods vs. Nicklaus with contemporaneous opinions about their skills. Attached. 

 

Jack vs TIger, Skills.htm

[csh19792001]

Does anyone know the final round scoring averages in Majors for Tiger and Nicklaus' playing partners?

I ask because nobody ever really beat Tiger besides Y.E. Yang, no? And how many people went out and beat Nicklaus? Many. 

 

Tiger's closest competitors always seemed to wilt and fade under the pressure. 

[csh19792001]

Amazing Tiger tribute here; his records and statistics are truly paranormal!!!

 

https://www.15thclub.com/2019/12/26/tiger-turns-44-woods-44-greatest-statistics/

[ebk]

There is no answer...

 

However, I truly believe that no one will beat 37 top two’s in majors.  JWN owns that.  

 

Similar to Cy Young’s (511-315) W-L record...

[csh19792001]

17 hours ago, jomatty said:

 To say it was Jack is a great insult to Tiger, and golf in general.  Sports evolve and to pretend that they don’t is silly.  Imagine what mike trout would have done in Babe Ruth’s era.  Imagine Max Sherzer pitching in 1930.  Imagine tiger competing in 1965.  All of those greats, and great they were, including Jack, would be in big trouble. 

Are you talking about time-machining players between eras? Because that method doesn't work. It isn't fair at all.  Of course Babe Ruth would struggle mightily today, time-machined into 2020 MLB.

 

Mike Trout would struggle mightily for different reasons in Honus Wagner's Era, also....consider ONE home run was hit over the fence in 10 years from 1900-mid 1909 in Wagner's home park. Trout relies on walks and home runs for most of his offensive value...(as does almost everyone in the 21st century.)

 

"Transposing" superstars (e.g., making Babe Ruth born and raised in 1991 (ala Mike Trout) instead of 1895 doesn't really "work" either)..

 

Imagine Babe Ruth on steroids and PED's? Imagine him with sophisticated weight training and strength and fitness coaches for 22 years? Imagine him with a coterie of trainers and nutritionists and hitting coaches and experts behind him? Imagine Babe playing in today's (total) bandbox parks, which are 40 feet shorter to the power alleys and 60 feet shorter to center, on average? Imagine Babe growing up with all the kinks worked out of his swing and approach? Imagine him in an era where athletes were entirely discouraged from drinking, smoking, cavorting, and carousing? 

 

The list goes on.

 

All we can do is speculate and assess skills and relative dominance.

 

Tiger and Jack didn't miss each other by that much, in fact, they played together a few times, and played against the same players, extensively (Norman, Kite, etc. etc. including contention in many Majors).

 

To me, this makes the comparison fairly valid and worthy of discussion. 

[csh19792001]

2 hours ago, ebk said:

There is no answer...

 

However, I truly believe that no one will beat 37 top two’s in majors.  JWN owns that.  

 

Similar to Cy Young’s (511-315) W-L record...

Nicklaus' 48 top 3's in Majors is arguably the greatest record in the entire history of s ports. 

 

It's like Wilt Chamberlain's records. Impossible. I don't care if the fields weren't as deep in Jack's era versus Tiger's. Jack has TWICE as many top 3's as Mickelson and Tiger, COMBINED. 

 

 

 

[csh19792001]

On 1/19/2021 at 9:59 PM, deadsolid...shank said:

Did anyone ever throw up a 64 or 65 against Tiger in the final round?  

 

How many players playing with Woods, or right there with him, played like this? 

 

How many players who played with Nicklaus, or right there with him, played lights out in the final round? 

 

[csh19792001]

On 1/19/2021 at 8:33 PM, bscinstnct said:

 

Jack won the 1966 Open

 

90% of the players were from the UK. And 4 amateurs finished in the top-30

 

Tigers first Open win was in 2000

 

The field reflected a far higher percentage of US players as well as international participation.
No amateurs even made the cut. 

 

 

 

 

Can you please cite your source re: "90% of the players were from the UK in 1966"? 

 

Thanks!

[Sean2]

15 hours ago, hybrid25 said:

In every major sport, it's probably unfair to compare athletes from different eras. From era to era, there are so many things to consider that are different from then to now. Although the OP makes some very good points, Jack and Tiger are both greatest of all time. 

I was thinking the same thing...different eras. Though I give the nod to Jack if pressed. He also had 19 runner up finishes in majors. 

[Ferguson]

1 hour ago, csh19792001 said:

Nicklaus' 48 top 3's in Majors is arguably the greatest record in the entire history of s ports. 

 

It's like Wilt Chamberlain's records. Impossible. I don't care if the fields weren't as deep in Jack's era versus Tiger's. Jack has TWICE as many top 3's as Mickelson and Tiger, COMBINED. 

 

 

 

 

 

Love both Jack and Tiger, but would like to offer a different perspective on the TOP THREE argument for "greatness." 

Contending doesn't mean anything.  All golfers that tee it up on Thursday have the ability to "contend."  

 

 

Down the stretch, I would argue Jack left 12 wins on the table for not "outplaying" his opponents and that Tiger left fewer than 6. 

 

 

 

 

[BombinJim]

2 hours ago, csh19792001 said:

Nicklaus' 48 top 3's in Majors is arguably the greatest record in the entire history of s ports.

The chart you share is impressive. Does this factor in how many majors one has played? I think Tiger played many less than Jack.

[Hawkeye77]

2 hours ago, csh19792001 said:

Nicklaus' 48 top 3's in Majors is arguably the greatest record in the entire history of s ports. 

 

It's like Wilt Chamberlain's records. Impossible. I don't care if the fields weren't as deep in Jack's era versus Tiger's. Jack has TWICE as many top 3's as Mickelson and Tiger, COMBINED. 

 

 

 

 

You're pretty much talking to yourself here, and you've covered this top 3 part at least a couple of times with the claim of 48, so please tell yourself that Nicklaus had 9 third place finishes in Majors.  18+19+9 = 46 top 3 finishes. 

 

Need to be accurate.

 

And thanks for the reminder that Tiger also failed to conquer one of Wilt Chamberlain's records, but gave it a good try. 😉

 

Edited January 22, 2021 by Hawkeye77

[Ferguson]

13 minutes ago, Hawkeye77 said:

 

You're pretty much talking to yourself here, and you've covered this top 3 part at least a couple of times with the claim of 48, so please tell yourself that Nicklaus had 9 third place finishes in Majors.  18+19+9 = 46 top 3 finishes. 

 

Need to be accurate.

 

And thanks for the reminder that Tiger also failed to conquer one of Wilt Chamberlain's records, but gave it a good try. 😉

 

 

Tiger played in more threesomes.

 

[BNGL]

https://owl.purdue.edu/owl/research_and_citation/resources.html
 

Here is a link that will help posters create citations.

[MtlJeff]

1 hour ago, Ferguson said:

 

Tiger played in more threesomes.

 

 

Fair point, but i've seen some old footage....Let's just say this, Wilt went 1 on 5 a lot.

[Frostfield]

Can I kill this thread?  What we think really doesn’t matter.  What the greats think does.  They have said Tiger is the greatest.  Jack, Tom, Trevino (said he had to bite his lip), Palmer.  Look it up.  They said Tiger is the greatest.  That’s enough for me.  I agree with them.

[Hawkeye77]

1 hour ago, Frostfield said:

Can I kill this thread?  What we think really doesn’t matter.  What the greats think does.  They have said Tiger is the greatest.  Jack, Tom, Trevino (said he had to bite his lip), Palmer.  Look it up.  They said Tiger is the greatest.  That’s enough for me.  I agree with them.

You just said what you think doesn't matter!

 

Pick 1 or the other, pick both, any side of it is defensible, IMO.  

[Ferguson]

2 hours ago, MtlJeff said:

 

Fair point, but i've seen some old footage....Let's just say this, Wilt went 1 on 5 a lot.

 

 

 

Similar footage was found at the Winfield Place Condos.

 

 

PS. Google Bob Crane 

[jomatty]

8 hours ago, csh19792001 said:

Are you talking about time-machining players between eras? Because that method doesn't work. It isn't fair at all.  Of course Babe Ruth would struggle mightily today, time-machined into 2020 MLB.

 

Mike Trout would struggle mightily for different reasons in Honus Wagner's Era, also....consider ONE home run was hit over the fence in 10 years from 1900-mid 1909 in Wagner's home park. Trout relies on walks and home runs for most of his offensive value...(as does almost everyone in the 21st century.)

 

"Transposing" superstars (e.g., making Babe Ruth born and raised in 1991 (ala Mike Trout) instead of 1895 doesn't really "work" either)..

 

Imagine Babe Ruth on steroids and PED's? Imagine him with sophisticated weight training and strength and fitness coaches for 22 years? Imagine him with a coterie of trainers and nutritionists and hitting coaches and experts behind him? Imagine Babe playing in today's (total) bandbox parks, which are 40 feet shorter to the power alleys and 60 feet shorter to center, on average? Imagine Babe growing up with all the kinks worked out of his swing and approach? Imagine him in an era where athletes were entirely discouraged from drinking, smoking, cavorting, and carousing? 

 

The list goes on.

 

All we can do is speculate and assess skills and relative dominance.

 

Tiger and Jack didn't miss each other by that much, in fact, they played together a few times, and played against the same players, extensively (Norman, Kite, etc. etc. including contention in many Majors).

 

To me, this makes the comparison fairly valid and worthy of discussion. 

My point was kind of that time machine-I got players doesn’t work. Because the modern player would always win.  I agree that their eras were close enough that it is worthy of discussion, but that’s all it is, people giving their opinions based on their biases. While they were close enough to be worth discussion they also were very different fields of competition. It would be interesting to ask players that actually played against both of them who they would be more afraid of in their prime. The only one I’ve ever heard weigh in on this that played a lot with both of them was Mark O’meara and he came down on the side of Tiger. I’d be interested to see what others thought. My guess is that if tiger played in the 60s and 70s that he would have been so much more dominant than he was. The equipment advances hurt him a lot.  But it’s all just opinions and guesswork...

for what it’s worth I strongly disagree that Mike Trout or any other high-level player modern player would struggle in the dead ball era.  They would not rely on walks and homeruns the way they do now but they would change their game and still be dominant. Bigger, stronger and faster wins in sports whether we like it or not...

Edited January 22, 2021 by jomatty

[Ferguson]

I got one.   

 

 

Thornton Melon vs. Al Czervik

 

 

Got to admit, it's a toss up.   The triple lindy and the Mr. Wang friendship have me at a tie.