Greatest male player ever

[tstephen]

[quote name='rjp322' timestamp='1380477273' post='7928001']
[quote name='tstephen' timestamp='1380470663' post='7927595']
Rory was in the top 2 world golf rankings with Tiger longer than anyone else this year and he sure had a great year. Did he have the 6th best year? No, but his potential is still at least top 6 and Jack obviously proved his potential was top 2 in 1979 when he won 2 majors the following year setting the scoring record at The US Open and blowing away the field in The PGA.And thanks to gusmahler for saying wins are everything in majors since....you got it 18 > 14 and always will!
[/quote]

Then Tigers been in the top 2 for every single year of his career if you are going to try to play the "potential" card. He is still Tiger Woods.
[/quote]

In 2010 and 2011 there was way too much uncertainty regarding Tiger mentally and there is no way in those 2 years he was even in the top 10 potentially. But since he may have still been there in fact I will give you 2010. Not 2011. Let's get real, Rory is in a better place right now than Tiger was at that time by far.

Fact is Jack was #2 in the only established world ranking system in 1979.

[turtleback]

[quote name='tstephen' timestamp='1380465387' post='7927255']
Jack was rebuilding his game in '79 but still had 3 top 10's in majors with a 2nd at The Open. In Mark McCormack's world rankings he was still #2 and that is what I based my comment regarding consistent consecutive years at the very top. If you were to add his performance in the majors to your money list comparison with Tiger it would favor Jack quite a bit over Tiger.

So if Tiger's 2014 is Jack's 1980 will Tiger win his 4th US Open and runaway from the field in the PGA?

I also need to comment on Golfwrx latest story regarding Jack vs Tiger comparing their performance over the years at The Masters. I have all along said that Tiger will win 1-2 more majors at The Masters since it is a home field for him, and it was for Jack, too. But 6 > 4 and someone needs to remind the author of this story that fact.
[/quote]

11>5 (POYs)
10>8 (money titles)
9>0 (Vardon trophies)
1>0 (9 win seasons)
3>0 (8+ win seasons)
4>2 (7+ win seasons
5>2 (6+ win seasons)
10>7 (5+ win seasons)
12>8 (4+ win seasons)
13>12 (3+ win seasons)

You have to get to 2+ win seasons before Jack passes Tiger, 18 to 14.

I will spare you the comparisons between their respective consecutive win streaks, no-cut streaks, margin of victories, consecutive majors streaks, etc., because there is no real comparison.

[tstephen]

Golfer of The Century for Jack 1 > 0 since you threw in Vardons.

I will not spare you from the fact of majors after the age of 32:
Ben 9 > 0
Jack 7 > 0
Phil 5 > 0

At the age of 32: Jack 2 > 1

Other side of coin all majors by the age of 28:
Bobby 13
Tiger 11
Jack 9

This is another reference that Tiger has to win 5 more majors to be the greatest.

[tstephen]

[quote name='Brock Savage' timestamp='1380426113' post='7926191']
[quote name='tstephen' timestamp='1380410773' post='7925221']
Jack was #1 in the world from 1963 to 1977, #2 the following 2 years. A level of consistency Tiger will never achieve. And yes Brock there was not a world ranking from '63-'67 but a 2 year old would be able to determine Jack was #1 easily by the end of '63.
[/quote]

I defer to your superior knowledge of the 2 year old intellect, but an adult would say Arnie was still #1 in 1963. Jack did manage to beat Dave Ragan in the Club Pro Invitational (AKA the PGA), but Arnie had 7 wins in 1963 to go with his 8 in 1962. Arnie also beat Jack in a playoff to win the '63 Western Open, which had a much tougher field than the Masters, British Open, and PGA.

IMO Jack was the best player in the world in 1965, 67, 72-3, and 75. That's it. I used to give him 1976 when I was in a charitable mood, but I've changed my mind since I found out that his money title that year was bogus.

Five POTYs is very, very good. In fact, it's the third best in history, which should thrill someone who likes thirds as much as you do. But it pales next to Tiger's 11 POTYs. And it would have been 12 if he hadn't had to sit out half of 2008.
[/quote]

So Tiger is the Barry Bonds of golf. Bonds has 7 MVPs and the next best is 3. Does this mean Barry is the greatest MLB player ever? And 3rd is the best Tiger has done in a major since his "incident" knowing how you are such a big fan of 3rd place finishes Brock.

The best stat of all is top 2s in majors(forget 3rd place Brock) and we have Jack 37, Tiger 20.

[gusmahler]

[quote name='tstephen' timestamp='1380490953' post='7928785']
[quote name='Brock Savage' timestamp='1380426113' post='7926191']
[quote name='tstephen' timestamp='1380410773' post='7925221']
Jack was #1 in the world from 1963 to 1977, #2 the following 2 years. A level of consistency Tiger will never achieve. And yes Brock there was not a world ranking from '63-'67 but a 2 year old would be able to determine Jack was #1 easily by the end of '63.
[/quote]

I defer to your superior knowledge of the 2 year old intellect, but an adult would say Arnie was still #1 in 1963. Jack did manage to beat Dave Ragan in the Club Pro Invitational (AKA the PGA), but Arnie had 7 wins in 1963 to go with his 8 in 1962. Arnie also beat Jack in a playoff to win the '63 Western Open, which had a much tougher field than the Masters, British Open, and PGA.

IMO Jack was the best player in the world in 1965, 67, 72-3, and 75. That's it. I used to give him 1976 when I was in a charitable mood, but I've changed my mind since I found out that his money title that year was bogus.

Five POTYs is very, very good. In fact, it's the third best in history, which should thrill someone who likes thirds as much as you do. But it pales next to Tiger's 11 POTYs. And it would have been 12 if he hadn't had to sit out half of 2008.
[/quote]

So Tiger is the Barry Bonds of golf. Bonds has 7 MVPs and the next best is 3. Does this mean Barry is the greatest MLB player ever?
[/quote]Actually, Bonds is the greatest MLB player of all-time, Though the reasoning has nothing to do with MVPs. Just like Tiger or Jack being the Greatest has nothing to do with POYs. But you'll never understand either concept.

[Finbarr Saunders]

[quote name='rjp322' timestamp='1380466798' post='7927345']
I seriously have no idea how you guys keep arguing here. It is very clear that some people are going to ignore the facts since their opinion is so strong, probably wrong, but nonetheless very strong. Just let time play out and see what Tiger does. As of right now at ages of 37 in their career, I think you would have to have something seriously wrong with you to argue that Tiger isnt the GOAT. Every single stat of his is better than Jacks and they are tied in majors. Besides that hes got more wins more money titles more POTYs, just more everything. So if somebody won't admit to that, there is 0 point in arguing with them since it is very very clear they struggle with understanding basic logic
[/quote]
What about simple arithmetic, 18 is bigger than 14

[tstephen]

[quote name='gusmahler' timestamp='1380491972' post='7928861']
[quote name='tstephen' timestamp='1380490953' post='7928785']
[quote name='Brock Savage' timestamp='1380426113' post='7926191']
[quote name='tstephen' timestamp='1380410773' post='7925221']
Jack was #1 in the world from 1963 to 1977, #2 the following 2 years. A level of consistency Tiger will never achieve. And yes Brock there was not a world ranking from '63-'67 but a 2 year old would be able to determine Jack was #1 easily by the end of '63.
[/quote]

I defer to your superior knowledge of the 2 year old intellect, but an adult would say Arnie was still #1 in 1963. Jack did manage to beat Dave Ragan in the Club Pro Invitational (AKA the PGA), but Arnie had 7 wins in 1963 to go with his 8 in 1962. Arnie also beat Jack in a playoff to win the '63 Western Open, which had a much tougher field than the Masters, British Open, and PGA.

IMO Jack was the best player in the world in 1965, 67, 72-3, and 75. That's it. I used to give him 1976 when I was in a charitable mood, but I've changed my mind since I found out that his money title that year was bogus.

Five POTYs is very, very good. In fact, it's the third best in history, which should thrill someone who likes thirds as much as you do. But it pales next to Tiger's 11 POTYs. And it would have been 12 if he hadn't had to sit out half of 2008.
[/quote]

So Tiger is the Barry Bonds of golf. Bonds has 7 MVPs and the next best is 3. Does this mean Barry is the greatest MLB player ever?
[/quote]Actually, Bonds is the greatest MLB player of all-time, Though the reasoning has nothing to do with MVPs. Just like Tiger or Jack being the Greatest has nothing to do with POYs. But you'll never understand either concept.
[/quote]

Bonds did not make The All Century Team in his 14th season among 10 outfielders chosen. Junior, in his 11th season made the team. If there was another vote today, no way Bonds is in the top 5 or 6 outfielders of all-time even allowing his cheating in his few great years and I am a big Mays and Giants fan. McGuire made the team, but something tells me he would be removed with an updated vote.

If Tiger keeps up with his rules violation antics and no majors we may see him put firmly into the #4 spot of both the classic & modern eras behind Jack, Bobby, & Ben. My opinion and Brock & co are free to say whatever they want as long as they believe what they write. I am still waiting on Brock to say something to the affect that Jack's 37 top 2's in majors is the greatest single career achievement in golf. I know golf's greatest player/historian Ben Crenshaw has said something to that fact.

[Brock Savage]

[quote name='tstephen' timestamp='1380481024' post='7928233']
Golfer of The Century for Jack 1 > 0 since you threw in Vardons.
[/quote]

Yeah, I guess it's fair to compare one of the great traditions of the PGA with a made-up magazine stunt.

But if memory serves, Duncan MacLeod has 3 Golfer of the Century awards.

[gusmahler]

[quote name='tstephen' timestamp='1380498284' post='7929231']
Bonds did not make The All Century Team in his 14th season among 10 outfielders chosen. Junior, in his 11th season made the team. If there was another vote today, no way Bonds is in the top 5 or 6 outfielders of all-time even allowing his cheating in his few great years and I am a big Mays and Giants fan. McGuire made the team, but something tells me he would be removed with an updated vote.

If Tiger keeps up with his rules violation antics and no majors we may see him put firmly into the #4 spot of both the classic & modern eras behind Jack, Bobby, & Ben. My opinion and Brock & co are free to say whatever they want as long as they believe what they write. I am still waiting on Brock to say something to the affect that Jack's 37 top 2's in majors is the greatest single career achievement in golf.
[/quote]So a bunch of sportswriters are stupid, so what? No one who actually understands baseball stats would put Griffey anywhere close to Bonds, even if you completely ignore the 2000s. If you include the 2000s, only Ruth is even in the same sentence as Bonds.


As for golf, I don't know why people keep harping on 2nd places. Golfers don't play for 2nd, they play for first. Jack's 18 wins are much more impressive than this this 37 achievement.

[Brock Savage]

[quote name='tstephen' timestamp='1380498284' post='7929231']
I am still waiting on Brock to say something to the affect that Jack's 37 top 2's in majors is the greatest single career achievement in golf.[/quote]

All I have to say about that is, I strongly disagree. Given Tiger's strength of schedule, I'd say his total of 79 individual PGA victories is the greatest single career achievement in golf. So far.

[Bellyhungry]

Just saw on Wiki that Bobby Jones only won 9 PGA Tour events - 7 of which were majors.

That is some serious big game hunter right there.

Faldo and Sever are not that far behind at 9-6 and 9-5.

[turtleback]

[quote name='gusmahler' timestamp='1380500347' post='7929371']

As for golf, I don't know why people keep harping on 2nd places. Golfers don't play for 2nd, they play for first. Jack's 18 wins are much more impressive than this this 37 achievement.
[/quote]

"People" don't, tsteph does.

[Brock Savage]

[quote name='Bellyhungry' timestamp='1380505256' post='7929821']
Just saw on Wiki that Bobby Jones only won 9 PGA Tour events - 7 of which were majors.

That is some serious big game hunter right there.

Faldo and Sever are not that far behind at 9-6 and 9-5.
[/quote]

??? Jones is an all-time great, don't get me wrong, but that stat has nothing to do with it.

In the case of Jones, it just reflects the fact that he played very few non-major PGA events. In the case of an Orville Moody, or a Shaun Micheel, both of whom had 100% of their PGA wins be majors (one for one), it just means that even mediocre golfers can win majors, if they have the week of their lives.

Yet another reason why it's dumb to say majors are everything. They're important, but they're not everything.

[Brock Savage]

[quote name='turtleback' timestamp='1380506176' post='7929911']
[quote name='gusmahler' timestamp='1380500347' post='7929371']
As for golf, I don't know why people keep harping on 2nd places. Golfers don't play for 2nd, they play for first. Jack's 18 wins are much more impressive than this this 37 achievement.
[/quote]

"People" don't, tsteph does.
[/quote]

To be fair, he's not fixated on second place. He also likes third place.

[tstephen]

[quote name='Brock Savage' timestamp='1380506344' post='7929919']
[quote name='turtleback' timestamp='1380506176' post='7929911']
[quote name='gusmahler' timestamp='1380500347' post='7929371']
As for golf, I don't know why people keep harping on 2nd places. Golfers don't play for 2nd, they play for first. Jack's 18 wins are much more impressive than this this 37 achievement. One of the big stats every year on tour is top 10s. Top 3's, 5's and 10's are all important stats in majors. But I guess my last name must be Wiki, or the PGA tour.com or may any other golf media source that bothers tracking stats. Maybe we should live in a world where only Tiger stats count. It is certainly the world in which the Tiger guys live.
[/quote]

"People" don't, tsteph does.
[/quote]

To be fair, he's not fixated on second place. He also likes third place.
[/quote]

So I guess I am just hallucinating every time Jack vs Tiger comes up and pretty much any or all past and present players go to the Jack has 37 major top 2s to end the argument. Then they usually follow that up with that fact that they wished they had or could just play in that many majors during their careers. It is the Tiger guys hallucinating that they are Tiger and winning is the only thing. That worked for him until his little wake up call to the real world. It is all about being on top of the leader board and then you win some and you lose some. That's life. And nobody has had a greater golf life than Jack and I will be rolling on the ground laughing the rest of the night to think that Tiger's had the greater golf life. He has potential for that to happen but no way, not yet.

Furthermore, anyone who thinks Jones and Seve are not 2 of the greatest because of 9 tour wins and that is the extent of there golf knowledge may want to find a pre-school golf chat line to post their comments.

[gusmahler]

[quote name='Bellyhungry' timestamp='1380505256' post='7929821']
Just saw on Wiki that Bobby Jones only won 9 PGA Tour events - 7 of which were majors.

That is some serious big game hunter right there.

Faldo and Sever are not that far behind at 9-6 and 9-5.
[/quote]Jack only won 10 Senior events--8 of them majors. That scrub Tiger has 0 senior majors.

[gusmahler]

tstephen: Who do you think had the better peak, Tiger or Jack?

[Guia]

Lets not get into Senior Majors.........there is no such thing! Just hype by the PGA.

[tstephen]

[quote name='gusmahler' timestamp='1380511160' post='7930237']
tstephen: Who do you think had the better peak, Tiger or Jack?
[/quote]

Tiger without a doubt. I would have to say Jones and Hogan had better peaks as well. Jack had the greatest career and Tiger's career is not over. But other great athletes have lessened their career totals by a second 1/2 career being nowhere close to the 1/2 half. That is happening to Tiger although his 8 wins, including 1 Players, 2 WGCs are good the last 4 years to any normal player without a major and just 2 wins per season on the average is way short of the old Tiger.

[tstephen]

[quote name='Guia' timestamp='1380511463' post='7930257']
Lets not get into Senior Majors.........there is no such thing! Just hype by the PGA.
[/quote]

The Senior PGA and US Senior Open and now The Senior British should all be legit or there is no legitimate Champions Tour.
The LPGA Should only have basically the same 3 as well. It is a joke for both tours to have 5 when they should only have 3.
This would make The Masters stand alone as the only unique 4th major - Not PGA, US or British Opens.
The Masters is Bobby Jones, Ben Hogan, Arnold Palmer, Jack Nicklaus, Seve Ballesteros, & Tiger Woods.

[Guia]

I don't think that the Champions Tour is legit. These guys are past their prime, to most of the players
it is just a buddies tour. Their Majors materialized out of the clear blue sky with no tradition.
I watched these players in their prime, now they are a shadow.
I enjoy watching the LPGA more.

[Guia]

I can't follow your reason that something-something makes the Masters stand alone as the only Major.

[tstephen]

[quote name='Guia' timestamp='1380512735' post='7930315']
I don't think that the Champions Tour is legit. These guys are past their prime, to most of the players
it is just a buddies tour. Their Majors materialized out of the clear blue sky with no tradition.
I watched these players in their prime, now they are a shadow.
I enjoy watching the LPGA more.
[/quote]

Tom Watson was 2 putts from winning The 2009 British Open.
Tiger may never be that close to a major ever again.

[tstephen]

[quote name='Guia' timestamp='1380513261' post='7930331']
I can't follow your reason that something-something makes the Masters stand alone as the only Major.
[/quote]

The Masters is the 4th major historically. The LPGA has moved around to many events as majors and The Champions Tour has The Tradition and their Players as majors before adding The Senior British. This does make them a little less legitimate.

[Guia]

Tom Watson is an outlier. A great performance, and it was on the PGA not the Champions tour.

[rjp322]

[quote name='tstephen' timestamp='1380508774' post='7930071']
[quote name='Brock Savage' timestamp='1380506344' post='7929919']
[quote name='turtleback' timestamp='1380506176' post='7929911']
[quote name='gusmahler' timestamp='1380500347' post='7929371']
As for golf, I don't know why people keep harping on 2nd places. Golfers don't play for 2nd, they play for first. Jack's 18 wins are much more impressive than this this 37 achievement. One of the big stats every year on tour is top 10s. Top 3's, 5's and 10's are all important stats in majors. But I guess my last name must be Wiki, or the PGA tour.com or may any other golf media source that bothers tracking stats. Maybe we should live in a world where only Tiger stats count. It is certainly the world in which the Tiger guys live.
[/quote]

"People" don't, tsteph does.
[/quote]

To be fair, he's not fixated on second place. He also likes third place.
[/quote]

So I guess I am just hallucinating every time Jack vs Tiger comes up and pretty much any or all past and present players go to the Jack has 37 major top 2s to end the argument. Then they usually follow that up with that fact that they wished they had or could just play in that many majors during their careers. It is the Tiger guys hallucinating that they are Tiger and winning is the only thing. That worked for him until his little wake up call to the real world. It is all about being on top of the leader board and then you win some and you lose some. That's life. And nobody has had a greater golf life than Jack and I will be rolling on the ground laughing the rest of the night to think that Tiger's had the greater golf life. He has potential for that to happen but no way, not yet.

[b]Furthermore, anyone who thinks Jones and Seve are not 2 of the greatest because of 9 tour wins and that is the extent of there golf knowledge may want to find a pre-school golf chat line to post their comments.[/b]
[/quote]

This clearly goes to show you have no intentions of ever giving guys from this era credit. Sure these guys were great golfers but Seve certainly was not one of the greatest of all time if we are specifically looking at golf accomplishments.

[gusmahler]

tstephen: Who do you think had the better peak, Tiger or Jack?

 

Tiger without a doubt.

OK, I'll just explain my reasoning for considering Tiger to be the greatest.

 

1) he has, as you agree, the best peak of any golfer ever. 4 consecutive majors. 9 wins in a year. 5 consecutive victories, not once, not twice, but three separate times.

 

2) he has come close to matching Jack's consistency. While I personally think Tiger's consistency is better, I suppose it's close enough that you can consider Jack to be more consistent or at least a tie. But it's darn close. For a summary of the consistency argument, see the chart below posted last page about their respective placement on the money rankings. Remember that Tiger's low ranking in 1996 was because he only turned pro in September of that year.

 

So if you combine a better peak with equal consistency, you have, in my opinion at least, a solid case for Tiger being considered the Greatest of All Time.

 

I know the above reasoning will never satisfy the 18 > 14 crowd (or the 20 > 17 crowd), just thought I'd explain my thought process.

 

[tstephen]

[quote name='gusmahler' timestamp='1380491972' post='7928861']
[quote name='tstephen' timestamp='1380490953' post='7928785']
[quote name='Brock Savage' timestamp='1380426113' post='7926191']
[quote name='tstephen' timestamp='1380410773' post='7925221']
Jack was #1 in the world from 1963 to 1977, #2 the following 2 years. A level of consistency Tiger will never achieve. And yes Brock there was not a world ranking from '63-'67 but a 2 year old would be able to determine Jack was #1 easily by the end of '63.
[/quote]

I defer to your superior knowledge of the 2 year old intellect, but an adult would say Arnie was still #1 in 1963. Jack did manage to beat Dave Ragan in the Club Pro Invitational (AKA the PGA), but Arnie had 7 wins in 1963 to go with his 8 in 1962. Arnie also beat Jack in a playoff to win the '63 Western Open, which had a much tougher field than the Masters, British Open, and PGA.

IMO Jack was the best player in the world in 1965, 67, 72-3, and 75. That's it. I used to give him 1976 when I was in a charitable mood, but I've changed my mind since I found out that his money title that year was bogus.

Five POTYs is very, very good. In fact, it's the third best in history, which should thrill someone who likes thirds as much as you do. But it pales next to Tiger's 11 POTYs. And it would have been 12 if he hadn't had to sit out half of 2008.
[/quote]

So Tiger is the Barry Bonds of golf. Bonds has 7 MVPs and the next best is 3. Does this mean Barry is the greatest MLB player ever?
[/quote]Actually, Bonds is the greatest MLB player of all-time, Though the reasoning has nothing to do with MVPs. Just like Tiger or Jack being the Greatest has nothing to do with POYs. But you'll never understand either concept.
[/quote]

THANK YOU SO VERY MUCH FOR PROVING MY POINT

People jump to conclusions when an athlete has an incredible run that has never been seen.

Bonds has less than 3000 career hits and below a .300 lifetime batting average. His peak was the greatest ever, but he is no way the greatest ever in MLB.

[Wknd_Warrior]

I don't feel the fields deeper today, and I really doubt it was even close for the first half of Tiger's career.

I can't remember where I read it, but it sent something like...

pit the top 50 today against the top 50 yesterday. Today would win.

pit the top 10 today against the top 10 yesterday, it would be a masacre, today wouldn't come close.

[Brock Savage]

[quote name='tstephen' timestamp='1380559342' post='7932151']
THANK YOU SO VERY MUCH FOR PROVING MY POINT

People jump to conclusions when an athlete has an incredible run that has never been seen.

Bonds has less than 3000 career hits and below a .300 lifetime batting average. His peak was the greatest ever, but he is no way the greatest ever in MLB.
[/quote]

But... but... but... I thought you were only supposed to look at one number. Bonds has the most home runs. Babe Ruth was the greatest of all time because he had 714 home runs. When kids in Little League had Babe Ruth's poster on their wall, they dreamed of breaking his home run record, not his strikeout record. Now Barry Bonds has the most home runs.

But you say he's not the GOAT. You say you need to look at his career hits, and batting average.

But aren't you the guy who says he rolls on the floor laughing when we bring up Tiger's career wins, and scoring average (i.e., Vardon Trophies)?