Tiger

mEGG_My_Day

KennyLee said:

What a win....would have NEVER predicted this even 6 months ago.  Amazing comeback and will make Augusta that much more interesting. 

As far as the greatest ever, he's one of three in the conversation along with Nicklaus and Hogan.  A legitimate argument can be made for all three and no real right answer.

I agree - The Masters will be great theatre next year.  I’s gonna make the Ryder Cup much more interesting also!! (And I’d add Bobby Jones into that conversation) 

Markarm4119

Yea all Jack had to do was beat Watson, Palmer, Player , Miller, Trevino and Irwin, HOF guys. These current group always choke when Tiger is on the prowl. No way to compare the game they played versus today's withv advances in equipment and balls. Let's see these modern day guys use persimmon woods and a ball that goes 75-80% of what trackball does

DoubleEgger

Markarm4119 said:

Yea all Jack had to do was beat Watson, Palmer, Player , Miller, Trevino and Irwin, HOF guys. These current group always choke when Tiger is on the prowl. No way to compare the game they played versus today's withv advances in equipment and balls. Let's see these modern day guys use persimmon woods and a ball that goes 75-80% of what trackball does

Let’s shave 900 yards off of the golf course too... 

GrillSgt

Markarm4119 said:

Yea all Jack had to do was beat Watson, Palmer, Player , Miller, Trevino and Irwin, HOF guys. These current group always choke when Tiger is on the prowl. No way to compare the game they played versus today's withv advances in equipment and balls. Let's see these modern day guys use persimmon woods and a ball that goes 75-80% of what trackball does

Ridiculous. 

pgprescott

DoubleEgger said:

Markarm4119 said:

Yea all Jack had to do was beat Watson, Palmer, Player , Miller, Trevino and Irwin, HOF guys. These current group always choke when Tiger is on the prowl. No way to compare the game they played versus today's withv advances in equipment and balls. Let's see these modern day guys use persimmon woods and a ball that goes 75-80% of what trackball does

Let’s shave 900 yards off of the golf course too... 

what were the greens rolling at back then? 

lousubcap

@pgprescott- the time stamp on this post is because I'm in the UK.  Are you abroad or just up way too early??

pgprescott

lousubcap said:

@pgprescott- the time stamp on this post is because I'm in the UK.  Are you abroad or just up way too early??

Early riser. Got a lot on my plate

GATraveller

I found it was interesting to hear Tiger describe the crowds. He said the art of clapping is gone. One can't clap with a phone in their hand so they yell - loud.  I hadn't thought of that.

Legume

YEMTrey said:

Regardless of any opinions about Tiger, the crowd roars were amazing on Sunday.  Very Masters-esque. 

His walk up the 18th fairway speaks volumes.  What a scene!

I saw Trump play once at the AT&T in Carmel, crowds were larger.   They were the largest.

westernbbq

glad to see him back.  Nike has to be happy...

DoubleEgger

westernbbq said:

glad to see him back.  Nike has to be happy...

Except for clothes, Nike is out of the golf biz. 

GrillSgt

Tiger for POTUS. If you’re going to have a Pres that screws porn stars and plays golf you might as well have someone that’s good at it. 

frazzdaddy

GrillSgt said:

Tiger for POTUS. If you’re going to have a Pres that screws porn stars and plays golf you might as well have someone that’s good at it. 

No doubt all three,lol

MJG

The most impressive golf stat to me is not Jack’s major wins but his top 3 placements in majors. Take a gander at that.  I believe that Tiger getting his mental game back was just as big a deal as his physical challenges. That 3 iron thru his window brought life as he knew it crumbling down. To me Jack is the GOAT. One day Tiger may change my opinion. The Ryder Cup should be fun to watch. 

pgprescott

MJG said:

The most impressive golf stat to me is not Jack’s major wins but his top 3 placements in majors. Take a gander at that.  I believe that Tiger getting his mental game back was just as big a deal as his physical challenges. That 3 iron thru his window brought life as he knew it crumbling down. To me Jack is the GOAT. One day Tiger may change my opinion. The Ryder Cup should be fun to watch. 

Those who see Jack as the best disregard the strength of field and the popularity of the game now versus then. It’s akin to MMA in its infancy vs where we are now. Night and day. 

frazzdaddy

pgprescott said:

MJG said:

The most impressive golf stat to me is not Jack’s major wins but his top 3 placements in majors. Take a gander at that.  I believe that Tiger getting his mental game back was just as big a deal as his physical challenges. That 3 iron thru his window brought life as he knew it crumbling down. To me Jack is the GOAT. One day Tiger may change my opinion. The Ryder Cup should be fun to watch. 

Those who see Jack as the best disregard the strength of field and the popularity of the game now versus then. It’s akin to MMA in its infancy vs where we are now. Night and day. 

Agree, the level and competitors with which all sports are played now is exponentially higher than previous years. Jack was an amazing golfer and true champion, but would find things a lot tougher with just the overall competition these days. Just the athleticism and fitness of the competitors is very obvious. It's apples and oranges.

GrillSgt

I can't remember courses being changed to Jack proof them but a lot of courses were altered to make things more difficult for Tiger. 

oldgeezeystax

I definitely enjoy the excitement he brings to the game but I can't bring myself to root for the guy.

DoubleEgger

Make Golf Great Again

Legume

frazzdaddy said:

pgprescott said:

MJG said:

The most impressive golf stat to me is not Jack’s major wins but his top 3 placements in majors. Take a gander at that.  I believe that Tiger getting his mental game back was just as big a deal as his physical challenges. That 3 iron thru his window brought life as he knew it crumbling down. To me Jack is the GOAT. One day Tiger may change my opinion. The Ryder Cup should be fun to watch. 

Those who see Jack as the best disregard the strength of field and the popularity of the game now versus then. It’s akin to MMA in its infancy vs where we are now. Night and day. 

Agree, the level and competitors with which all sports are played now is exponentially higher than previous years. Jack was an amazing golfer and true champion, but would find things a lot tougher with just the overall competition these days. Just the athleticism and fitness of the competitors is very obvious. It's apples and oranges.

Any comparison beyond how they competed in their peer group, their contemporaries, may not be worth the oxygen.  If Jack had been Tiger’s contemporary, do you think his level of performance would have been the same as it was 40-50 years ago?  Both gifted, fierce competitors that elevated their games to excel against the level of competition they faced.  To say Jack didn’t face the same level of competition is naive(IMO), he faced the best of his era and elevated to dominate them.  There is no reason to believe he wouldn’t have done the same in Tiger’s era.  Performance is relative to conditions, including level of competition and you can’t control for that across eras.

That would’ve been a much better pay per view 1:1, Jack vs Tiger instead of Phil.

pgprescott

Legume said:

frazzdaddy said:

pgprescott said:

MJG said:

The most impressive golf stat to me is not Jack’s major wins but his top 3 placements in majors. Take a gander at that.  I believe that Tiger getting his mental game back was just as big a deal as his physical challenges. That 3 iron thru his window brought life as he knew it crumbling down. To me Jack is the GOAT. One day Tiger may change my opinion. The Ryder Cup should be fun to watch. 

Those who see Jack as the best disregard the strength of field and the popularity of the game now versus then. It’s akin to MMA in its infancy vs where we are now. Night and day. 

Agree, the level and competitors with which all sports are played now is exponentially higher than previous years. Jack was an amazing golfer and true champion, but would find things a lot tougher with just the overall competition these days. Just the athleticism and fitness of the competitors is very obvious. It's apples and oranges.

Any comparison beyond how they competed in their peer group, their contemporaries, may not be worth the oxygen.  If Jack had been Tiger’s contemporary, do you think his level of performance would have been the same as it was 40-50 years ago?  Both gifted, fierce competitors that elevated their games to excel against the level of competition they faced.  To say Jack didn’t face the same level of competition is naive(IMO), he faced the best of his era and elevated to dominate them.  There is no reason to believe he wouldn’t have done the same in Tiger’s era.  Performance is relative to conditions, including level of competition and you can’t control for that across eras.

That would’ve been a much better pay per view 1:1, Jack vs Tiger instead of Phil.

I somewhat agree, however It’s a fact that the level and depth of competition is exponentially greater in this era. I get that he can only beat those he faced. What is naive is believing he would have won at the same or similar rate as you suggest. No way. If he could have raised his game to that level, he would have won all of the tournaments in his era. All of them. It’s simply a numbers game. In fact, the limited field last week, while an impressive level of competition, increased Tigers chances of winning. 

Either way, they are both great. Ask a tour pro what they think. 

StillH2OEgger

pgprescott said:

I somewhat agree, however It’s a fact that the level and depth of competition is exponentially greater in this era. I get that he can only beat those he faced. What is naive is believing he would have won at the same or similar rate as you suggest. No way. If he could have raised his game to that level, he would have won all of the tournaments in his era. All of them. It’s simply a numbers game. In fact, the limited field last week, while an impressive level of competition, increased Tigers chances of winning. 

Either way, they are both great. Ask a tour pro what they think. 

I think you significantly overestimate the strength of competition during the first 6-7 years of Tiger's career (after winning the Masters in 1997). Golf today has never been stronger, but in those days it was Duval, Love III, Furyk, O'Meara, Singh, Lehman, Sutton, Goosen and made a few others. Good, but not exactly the golden age of great players. Plus, Jack never had the benefit of using a Canadian doctor known for dispensing PEDs.

Photo Egg

StillH2OEgger said:

 Plus, Jack never had the benefit of using a Canadian doctor known for dispensing PEDs.

That's because there was no drug testing at all in Jack's time. Why would he need to go to Canada. You could buy what ever you wanted on the street corner with no worries about being tested.

REB17

I somewhat agree, however It’s a fact that the level and depth of competition is exponentially greater in this era. I get that he can only beat those he faced. What is naive is believing he would have won at the same or similar rate as you suggest. No way. If he could have raised his game to that level, he would have won all of the tournaments in his era. All of them. It’s simply a numbers game. In fact, the limited field last week, while an impressive level of competition, increased Tigers chances of winning. 

Either way, they are both great. Ask a tour pro what they think. 

Do you have a quote from a player or anyone with any knowledge of the game that says Tiger is without a doubt the GOAT? I've certainly never seen or heard it. I'm an avid golfer and golf fan and can see arguments for several players, Jones, Nicklaus, Woods, and that's why most analysts don't compare eras. 

StillH2OEgger

Photo Egg said:

StillH2OEgger said:

 Plus, Jack never had the benefit of using a Canadian doctor known for dispensing PEDs.

That's because there was no drug testing at all in Jack's time. Why would he need to go to Canada. You could buy what ever you wanted on the street corner with no worries about being tested.

I don't think professional sports should have to have a rule banning something that is already illegal under the law. I'm sure the beta blockers were a gray area for Jack's generation. Plus, I know it's not like making an offer on a chiminea, but golf is a gentlemen's game.

pgprescott

REB17 said:

I somewhat agree, however It’s a fact that the level and depth of competition is exponentially greater in this era. I get that he can only beat those he faced. What is naive is believing he would have won at the same or similar rate as you suggest. No way. If he could have raised his game to that level, he would have won all of the tournaments in his era. All of them. It’s simply a numbers game. In fact, the limited field last week, while an impressive level of competition, increased Tigers chances of winning. 

Either way, they are both great. Ask a tour pro what they think. 

Do you have a quote from a player or anyone with any knowledge of the game that says Tiger is without a doubt the GOAT? I've certainly never seen or heard it. I'm an avid golfer and golf fan and can see arguments for several players, Jones, Nicklaus, Woods, and that's why most analysts don't compare eras. 

A noted Tiger detractor Brandel Chamblee said so last weekend. 

Whatever, it’s an argument that cannot be resolved. You believe what you want and I’ll believe the truth. JKOC😜

Photo Egg

StillH2OEgger said:

Photo Egg said:

StillH2OEgger said:

 Plus, Jack never had the benefit of using a Canadian doctor known for dispensing PEDs.

That's because there was no drug testing at all in Jack's time. Why would he need to go to Canada. You could buy what ever you wanted on the street corner with no worries about being tested.

I don't think professional sports should have to have a rule banning something that is already illegal under the law. I'm sure the beta blockers were a gray area for Jack's generation. Plus, I know it's not like making an offer on a chiminea, but golf is a gentlemen's game.

I agree with you. But with all the money involved in Golf today, it’s fooling to think players would abide by all the enhancement drug rules as gentlemen and honor system. Similar to the Tour de France, or Baseball. 
But I also fail to see the importance of trying to label just one golfer as the best ever. Can we not just accept every great  athlete for what they accomplished?

frazzdaddy

Having spent a number of years and $ trying to get good at the game, I have a great deal of respect for both and all of the other players mentioned. What they accomplished is nothing short of amazing. Jacks win at the 1986 Masters, was one of my top 5 sports moments. There really is no wrong answer to this debate.