Jack vs Tiger

[Ferguson]

7 hours ago, bladehunter said:

Old Chevy. New ford.  Chevy interiors after 1972 are apparently designed by the same guy that designs dodge truck interiors.  He also designs bean bag chairs.  

 

All US carmakers struggled between 73-83.  This period marked a shift in demand (and cost) away from style, power and comfort to pollution control and gas mileage.   It also gave the Japanese a foot in the door.  Five years later, they kicked it open. 

 

 

 

[Anser3]

Jack was better than Tiger. I never saw Jack play  (except through archival footage).  Jack was insanely long with older equipment and his short game was impeccable.  His focus was unmatched.  He finished runner-up in Majors 19 times. He had 37 1 or 2 finishes in Majors.  No other two golfers combined match that. 

 

That said, the most dominant athlete of my lifetime (in my very early 40's) was Tiger Woods 1998-2002.  I will use the word "athlete" here in the sense that the game of golf is covered as a sport by reporting outlets.  Besides, if chess can be reported in sports almanacs, golf is certainly worthy to be considered "sport" .  My personal opinion is that golf, like bowling, is a game not a sport but I digress (if you can smoke while doing it, it is not a sport).

 

The two most influential (not to be confused with "greatest") golfers of the past 100 years were Arnold Palmer  and Tiger Woods.  Arnold brought golf to the masses.  He was golf's greatest ambassador and it is not close.  Tiger was its biggest influencer (not the same thing as ambassador).  Tiger made the game "cool".  Golf was not considered  cool  on a grand scale before Tiger.  Tiger was obviously a bigger influence on me than  Jack ever was.

 

In my opinion though, Jack was the greatest.

Edited January 12, 2023 by Anser3

[bladehunter]

As much as I love tiger. I believe that jack made tiger.  If that makes sense.  If you could teleport both to the same time at the same age.  Let’s say 27 years old.  I’d say jack gets him more often.  But it’s probably very close matches.  Jacks mental game is still the greatest there’s ever been.   Tiger relied on a few crutches.  Being aloof being one.  Jack didn’t have any mental crutches.  He was able to control while being a person.  If that makes sense.  Incredible talent. 

[Rapidcat]

1 hour ago, Anser3 said:

 and his short game was impeccable. 

 

Not entirely.

 

He was a great clutch putter but nothing special with partial wedges or chipping vs some of his rivals.

[TLUBulldogGolf]

1 hour ago, Ferguson said:

 

Two things:

1. You are wrong about Jack 

2. You are wrong about Phil

 

1. Jack was not just a golfer, he excelled at many sports.  He had a winning attitude and incredible focus.  He would have succeeded in any sport in any era.  

 

2. It's been discussed on several occasions here at WRX.  Most agree Phil is a top 20 player of all-time, parked somewhere between 15-20.

 

I don't see the relevance to the discussion. And idk how you define succeeded but that seems overstated a bit. 

[Anser3]

4 minutes ago, Rapidcat said:

 

Not entirely.

 

He was a great clutch putter but nothing special with partial wedges or chipping vs some of his rivals.

 

 

Fair point.  I more meant that he was very, very steady, not necessarily spectacular.

[Rapidcat]

2 minutes ago, Anser3 said:

 

 

Fair point.  I more meant that he was very, very steady, not necessarily spectacular.

 

Absolutely agree with you on this. He played his game plan relentlessly and often others fell away and sometimes they didn't, hence his 19 major's runners-up.

 

He'd make an excellent share trader of mechanical systems, just following the rules with no emotion clouding judgement. Very Germanic.

 

So talented, so practiced, so disciplined.

[Ferguson]

22 minutes ago, TLUBulldogGolf said:

 

I don't see the relevance to the discussion. And idk how you define succeeded but that seems overstated a bit. 

 

If it's irrelevant, why comment? 

 

Notwithstanding, my definition of Jack's success with modern equipment vs. the modern player is not overstated when you consider Jack's athleticism mixed with his uncanny ability to overcome tournament anxiety and nervousness with a tremendous focus.  It's well documented. That same focus was demonstrated by Tiger during his winning years.  It explains their success in the majors vs. other players in the respective eras.  Read the interviews of any major winner after the win - he or she claims in one way or another to have been in a good mental state of focus throughout the entire tournament.  

 

I am stating, not overstating, that both Jack and Tiger had an exceptional mental game that was innate and not inclusive of "health" and "life" coaches that you see tagging along with the modern player.  I am also stating that no current modern player has a mental game that measures up to either Jack or Tiger.  The modern player is too involved with their social media status and their online appearance.  Hands down, all things being equal, Jack would outplay and outthink any modern player with modern clubs.  

 

 

[TLUBulldogGolf]

6 minutes ago, Ferguson said:

 

If it's irrelevant, why comment? 

 

Notwithstanding, my definition of Jack's success with modern equipment vs. the modern player is not overstated when you consider Jack's athleticism mixed with his uncanny ability to overcome tournament anxiety and nervousness with a tremendous focus.  It's well documented. That same focus was demonstrated by Tiger during his winning years.  It explains their success in the majors vs. other players in the respective eras.  Read the interviews of any major winner after the win - he or she claims in one way or another to have been in a good mental state of focus throughout the entire tournament.  

 

I am stating, not overstating, that both Jack and Tiger had an exceptional mental game that was innate and not inclusive of "health" and "life" coaches that you see tagging along with the modern player.  I am also stating that no current modern player has a mental game that measures up to either Jack or Tiger.  The modern player is too involved with their social media status and their online appearance.  Hands down, all things being equal, Jack would outplay and outthink any modern player with modern clubs.  

 

 

 

Because I imagine we come down on different sides of the argument. I don't see why anyone should care about other sports in a discussion of the best golfer. The overstatement part was any sport in any era, come on. 

[bladehunter]

55 minutes ago, Rapidcat said:

 

Absolutely agree with you on this. He played his game plan relentlessly and often others fell away and sometimes they didn't, hence his 19 major's runners-up.

 

He'd make an excellent share trader of mechanical systems, just following the rules with no emotion clouding judgement. Very Germanic.

 

So talented, so practiced, so disciplined.

Deep comment there with some avenues popping to mind that I can’t go into here.  I prefer his mindset and admit to struggling with implementing it. But I’m getting better. For an example. Phil is the anti jack.  Emotion absolutely rules his life.  

[Ferguson]

2 hours ago, TLUBulldogGolf said:

 

Because I imagine we come down on different sides of the argument. I don't see why anyone should care about other sports in a discussion of the best golfer. The overstatement part was any sport in any era, come on. 

 

Greatness transcends sports.  

[TiScape]

6 hours ago, Ferguson said:

 

Two things:

1. You are wrong about Jack 

2. You are wrong about Phil

 

1. Jack was not just a golfer, he excelled at many sports.  He had a winning attitude and incredible focus.  He would have succeeded in any sport in any era.  

 

2. It's been discussed on several occasions here at WRX.  Most agree Phil is a top 20 player of all-time, parked somewhere between 15-20.

Depends on your definition of succeed. Current era of basketball and football what is that? Make the HS team and contribute or make a living doing it?? Big difference. He was what, ‘honorable mention’ in Ohio HS basketball in the late 1950s? 

[Ferguson]

52 minutes ago, TiScape said:

Depends on your definition of succeed. Current era of basketball and football what is that? Make the HS team and contribute or make a living doing it?? Big difference. He was what, ‘honorable mention’ in Ohio HS basketball in the late 1950s? 

 

From our conversation I now understand one thing.  Your speculation differs little from my speculation.    

[Golfnutgalen]

Jack Nicklaus has the majors record which is undeniably amazing. I mean he finished 1st or 2nd 37 times compared to Tiger's 22! If you are someone who is persuaded by longevity and major performance as opposed to overall dominance, then Jack has it and nobody's going to beat his numbers.

 

With Tiger he had a stretch from 1996 to 2009 which was so dominant that that alone was enough to consider him the greatest of all time. That's my opinion and nobody has to share it. He won in 71 events (in 245 starts) and 14 majors. An absolutely unbelievable 29% win rate up to age 33. For comparison Jack's peak was also the same age and he had won 52/275 events including 12 majors, that's a 19% win rate if you tally up the numbers. Tiger since then has of course tied the overall win record with Snead at 82. It makes you think that Jack's 73 isn't that impressive except that is also 9 more than the next in the list Ben Hogan. And Hogan's and Snead's wins are padded with small field team wins. I once did the math and in the modern age you need to have at least 20 players in the field to count as an official victory. Snead would lose 8 of his wins (that I know of) and Hogan 10 with that qualification.

[smeal818]

I'll put it in football terms.

 

Jack = Jerry Rice - the guy with the records, longevity, 'easy choice'

 

Tiger = Randy Moss - most talented, could've broken all of the records, highest peak

 

To me, Jack is the best of all time (by definition), but Tiger is the most talented. 

[mosesgolf]

AND......................................as per usual threads like these doesn't solve the enigma.  Albeit it's been entertaining though.  😁

[Shilgy]

3 hours ago, Golfnutgalen said:

Jack Nicklaus has the majors record which is undeniably amazing. I mean he finished 1st or 2nd 37 times compared to Tiger's 22! If you are someone who is persuaded by longevity and major performance as opposed to overall dominance, then Jack has it and nobody's going to beat his numbers.

 

With Tiger he had a stretch from 1996 to 2009 which was so dominant that that alone was enough to consider him the greatest of all time. That's my opinion and nobody has to share it. He won in 71 events (in 245 starts) and 14 majors. An absolutely unbelievable 29% win rate up to age 33. For comparison Jack's peak was also the same age and he had won 52/275 events including 12 majors, that's a 19% win rate if you tally up the numbers. Tiger since then has of course tied the overall win record with Snead at 82. It makes you think that Jack's 73 isn't that impressive except that is also 9 more than the next in the list Ben Hogan. And Hogan's and Snead's wins are padded with small field team wins. I once did the math and in the modern age you need to have at least 20 players in the field to count as an official victory. Snead would lose 8 of his wins (that I know of) and Hogan 10 with that qualification.

Why does anyone give the nod to Jack based on longevity?  If player A wins fewer times in a longer career than did Player B in a shorter career how does anyone pick A?

[shoot4par]

On 12/21/2022 at 4:27 PM, Ferguson said:

 

Bobby Jones was a bigot and a jerk. 

 

Knew him personally? 

[Chunkitgood]

On 1/12/2023 at 11:24 AM, Ferguson said:

 

Greatness transcends sports.  

Well, not really.  Sports transforms people with feet of clay into paragons…in the eyes of those who lack understanding of human nature and themselves.

[iBanesto]

On 1/13/2023 at 1:25 AM, Rapidcat said:

 

Absolutely agree with you on this. He played his game plan relentlessly and often others fell away and sometimes they didn't, hence his 19 major's runners-up.

 

He'd make an excellent share trader of mechanical systems, just following the rules with no emotion clouding judgement. Very Germanic.

 

So talented, so practiced, so disciplined.

 

Nicklaus on knowing his strengths and weaknesses.

 

 

Nicklaus on how he could have worked harder on his game.

 

 

[Ferguson]

16 hours ago, shoot4par said:

Knew him personally? 

Any fool can know.  The point is to understand.

- A. Einstein 

 

 

[Ferguson]

14 hours ago, Chunkitgood said:

Well, not really.  Sports transforms people with feet of clay into paragons…in the eyes of those who lack understanding of human nature and themselves.

 

Judge only when you're perfect. 

[Shilgy]

4 hours ago, Ferguson said:

 

Judge only when you're perfect. 

Well gee Fergie……whatever will we talk about if we can’t judge?😏

[TiScape]

6 hours ago, Ferguson said:

 

Judge only when you're perfect. 

If we all lived by that rule social media would be like…

LOL

Edited January 15, 2023 by TiScape

[bscinstnct]

22 hours ago, Chunkitgood said:

Well, not really.  Sports transforms people with feet of clay into paragons…in the eyes of those who lack understanding of human nature and themselves.

 

Greatness is sports is often the *result of a “character flaw”

 

Obsession with winning at all costs and never say die. 
 

Although you could argue that many “paragons” across a spectrum of stages were deeply flawed.
 

Winston Churchill. Obstinate, refusal to take counsel resulting in disastrous and tragic results on multiple levels, extremely bigoted. Yet, you could argue he practically saved Western Civilization lol

 

As far as you thinking that grown men idolize sports stars in ignorance of their own natures. You underestimate the ability of most to compartmentalize their awe struck giddiness at an individuals performance on the field from any actual idolizing the individual and their character (or lack therof) on the whole. 

Edited January 15, 2023 by bscinstnct

[Shilgy]

1 hour ago, bscinstnct said:

 

Greatness is sports is often the *result of a “character flaw”

 

Obsession with winning at all costs and never say die. 
 

Although you could argue that many “paragons” across a spectrum of stages were deeply flawed.
 

Winston Churchill. Obstinate, refusal to take counsel resulting in disastrous and tragic results on multiple levels, extremely bigoted. Yet, you could argue he practically saved Western Civilization lol

 

As far as you thinking that grown men idolize sports stars in ignorance of their own natures. You underestimate the ability of most to compartmentalize their awe struck giddiness at an individuals performance on the field from any actual idolizing the individual and their character (or lack therof) on the whole. 

Awesome post!  But really….tell the truth on Sunday….

 

 

who wrote that post for you? 🤣 Mrs Instnct?

[bscinstnct]

3 minutes ago, Shilgy said:

Awesome post!  But really….tell the truth on Sunday….

 

 

who wrote that post for you? 🤣 Mrs Instnct?

Ha! Me busted! I actually be like 

 

Tiger character up there with Gandhi yo!

 

Plus is this Jack vs Tiger actually a real debate?! All Jacks rivals like 5’4!

 

Tigerrrrr! 

 

 

Happy 2023 to all my friends ; )

[TiScape]

2 hours ago, Shilgy said:

Awesome post!  But really….tell the truth on Sunday….

 

 

who wrote that post for you? 🤣 Mrs Instnct?

Felt to me like it was written by one of those AI programs mentioned in a post in the ‘19th hole’ sub. Lol

[Ferguson]

4 hours ago, TiScape said:

If we all lived by that rule social media would be like…

/cdn-cgi/mirage/b7f191181fde5eb9bdfa969a408a6c907171b0b013dfe1d48ef33faffa57b0d3/1280/cdn-cgi/mirage/b7f191181fde5eb9bdfa969a408a6c907171b0b013dfe1d48ef33faffa57b0d3/1280/https://wrxcdn.golfwrx.com/uploads/monthly_2023_01/image.gif.9f2b6f1be0d8be98ab10b9dc20051de6.gif

LOL

 

Without rules, we live with the animals. 

 

[Ferguson]

6 hours ago, Shilgy said:

Well gee Fergie……whatever will we talk about if we can’t judge?😏

 

Dammit.  Not sure.  

 

I will get back to you.