|
Replies: 96
| visibility 1
|
Commissioner [942]
TigerPulse: 59%
Posts: 2479
Joined: 6/2/11
|
Tiger Woods is no Jack Nicklaus.
Aug 12, 2012, 4:17 PM
|
|
I have never known Jack Nicklaus. He has never been a friend of mine. But, I'm old enough to have watched Jack Nicklaus in his prime. Tiger Woods is no Jack Nicklaus. There is no question that Woods is a great golfer, one of the best who has ever played the game. But I'm telling you, Jack was in a class of his own.
Now Tiger may charge back and win the PGA today or McIlroy may choke down the sttretch. And Woods can still break Jack's record of major championships. After all, Jack was 46 when he won his last major. Woods is only 4 behind and is only 36. Even if he does, it's going to take something for me to say Woods is the best of all time. Here is what people don't realize about Nicklaus: Yes, he has won 18 majors. But, he also finished 2nd 19 times (finished 3rd 9 times) in a major. Woods, in contrast, has finished 2nd 6 times. If Nicklaus had prevailed just 25% of the time that he finished 2nd in a major, there would be no talk about Woods breaking Jack's record.
This McIllroy kid might break Jack's record. But, I remember watching Nicklaus play when he was McIllroy's age. I think Jack was better. But, that's me.
|
|
|
|
 |
Orange Blooded [3257]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 7167
Joined: 7/27/99
|
Jack was more consistent.***
Aug 12, 2012, 4:19 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [14090]
TigerPulse: 78%
Posts: 25448
Joined: 7/28/05
|
Tiger Woods was more consistent in making golf more...
Aug 12, 2012, 4:29 PM
|
|
popular, and increasing the winnings earnings of other pga golfers
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commissioner [942]
TigerPulse: 59%
Posts: 2479
Joined: 6/2/11
|
Look up
Aug 12, 2012, 4:32 PM
|
|
Arnold Palmer.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [14090]
TigerPulse: 78%
Posts: 25448
Joined: 7/28/05
|
hahaha, Palmer comes no where close to Tiger Woods...
Aug 12, 2012, 4:35 PM
|
|
in making golf more popular. Arnold Palmer got plenty of endorsement deals, but he never made golf more popular. He never had a whole generation of kids become interested in golf. And he never helped increased the earnings of other PGA golfers. As many endorsement deals Arnold Palmer got, he never brought more viewers or increased the popularity of golf.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commissioner [942]
TigerPulse: 59%
Posts: 2479
Joined: 6/2/11
|
OK. Just curious. How old are you?***
Aug 12, 2012, 4:37 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [14090]
TigerPulse: 78%
Posts: 25448
Joined: 7/28/05
|
Ok, just curious. Can you comprehend facts?…..
Aug 12, 2012, 4:49 PM
|
|
No doubt Arnold Palmer got a ton of endorsement deals. But no golfer in the history of golf, love him or hate him, has made golf bigger than Tiger Woods. That's a fact. Arnold Palmer didn't attract a diverse generation of young kids to play golf. Arnold Palmer didn't increase the earnings of other golfers. Arnold Palmer came no where close to making golf more popular the way Tiger Woods did.
You may not agree with Tiger Woods morality as far as when it came to his infidelity with his wife, but there is no denying that no golfer has made a bigger impact on golf like Tiger Woods. Even the great Arnold Palmer comes nowhere close to what Tiger Woods has done for golf.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commissioner [942]
TigerPulse: 59%
Posts: 2479
Joined: 6/2/11
|
I was respectful in my response, not an a$$ like you.
Aug 12, 2012, 4:56 PM
|
|
I accepted your answer and was just curious as to whether you were around in Palmer's time. That's all. If there is a problem in comprehension, it is all on you, as I made not one comment about Wood's private life.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-Pro [682]
TigerPulse: 76%
Posts: 1197
Joined: 9/21/99
|
Re: Ok, just curious. Can you comprehend facts?…..
Aug 12, 2012, 4:57 PM
[ in reply to Ok, just curious. Can you comprehend facts?….. ] |
|
Answer his question. Anybody who starts a reply with "hahaha" probably isnt over 25, and therefore completely unqualified to comment on Arnie's contributions to the game.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4988]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 7962
Joined: 2/27/02
|
Actually you'd be 100% wrong on your OPINION
Aug 12, 2012, 5:10 PM
[ in reply to Ok, just curious. Can you comprehend facts?….. ] |
|
While I'm not old enough to be able to have watched Arnold Palmer play in his youthful days, I'm well aware of his contributions.
Arnold is widely credited with popularizing the game of golf, not only in America, but Worldwide. He was the one that broadened the appeal of golf and convinced TV to cover it mainstream and allowed for the purses in events to big enough to provide incomes for fellow golfers.
Heck if it wasn't for Arnie, the Open Championship might not even be considered a major in the United States. US golfers had all but stopped participating in the event. It was Arnie that started to go back and convinced other US players that the Open was not only a worthwhile event, but a profitable one as well. Doing this popularized golf even more and made it a worldwide sport.
There's no doubt that the game of golf today owes a lot to Tiger Woods. His popularity is unmatched. He single handedly put ratings and purses through the roof and we all know that ever golfer that prays Tiger keeps playing so they can keep making more money. None of that is deniable.
The fact is though, golf would never be where it is now without Arnold Palmer. He was the originator of popularizing golf worldwide. He was the first to make tournament purses substantial. He got golf on mainstream TV.
You obviously can't compare dollar figures b/c of the time period. The fact remains though that while Tiger has grown the sport by leaps and bounds financially in this booming age of sport and entertainment, what Arnie did for the game of golf was priceless!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [54]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4988]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 7962
Joined: 2/27/02
|
Who said anything about the European tour?
Aug 12, 2012, 6:53 PM
|
|
The FACT is that in 1959 the number of US Players to play in the Open Championship was 3. Arnie was the one who convinced US players that it was a worth while and endeared himself to many Europeans for that as well as people across the world.
Gary Player most certainly helped golf grow around the world though. He, Arnold Palmer, and Jack Nicklaus were all great ambassadors and took golf to great places. Gary was certainly the globetrotter of the group an unquestionably was the major player in its worldwide growth. We're not talking about growing it, we're talking about initially popularizing and putting it on the map.
Arnie though was the person that popularized it more and helped give Player the chance to play all over the world. In fact, Player mostly only played in the US and his home country until Palmer went over for the Open. Good try though Caddy with your Wikipedia reference lol.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [54]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5915]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8570
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: The point was influence on golf. Arnie was the first big
Aug 12, 2012, 7:05 PM
|
|
So the present decline in golf is due to the decline in Tiger?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [54]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4988]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 7962
Joined: 2/27/02
|
Your first point is wrong. Your second point is right.
Aug 12, 2012, 7:21 PM
[ in reply to The point was influence on golf. Arnie was the first big ] |
|
http://edition.cnn.com/2012/07/19/sport/golf/golf-palmer-legend-trailblazer/index.html
In this article Arnie is quoted as "in the 1960's, the most popular sportsman in the WORLD."
Arnie's also quoted in the article as saying
"I would like to be remembered for bringing golf to a worldwide audience,"
He did that, that's always going to be his legacy. Once golf then was brought to the worldwide audience, Player was responsible for growing it worldwide and he certainly was the first true international player and star. He might not have gotten that opportunity without Arnie though. Gary Player no doubt is one of the most influential and most popular golfers worldwide of all time, but it doesn't take away from Arnie's contributions first.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [54]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
LOL Yea that's Arnie tooting Arnie's own horn. He was the
Aug 12, 2012, 7:38 PM
|
|
man in America, but Player was the man internationally. The Big 3 was Arnie, Jack, and Player. Player was a FAR bigger influence internationally.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/08/sports/golf/08iht-srpgplayer08.html?pagewanted=all
And Palmer was nowhere nearly as well known worldwide in the 60s as Ali. Until Tiger came along Ali was not only the most famous and most well known athlete in the world, but person.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4988]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 7962
Joined: 2/27/02
|
What part of Arnie set the foundation don't you get?
Aug 12, 2012, 8:11 PM
|
|
There is no argument of what Player did over his career internationally, but I've never heard any single respectable person in golf not say that Arnold Palmer opened the door for golf worldwide. Find me someone who says Palmer did it? Palmer took the opportunity and blew it up. You can't ever admit that you're wrong can you?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [54]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
you are getting an american perspective. player was better
Aug 12, 2012, 8:31 PM
|
|
known around the world than arnie. he played places arnie didnt. but yea in america of course people will say arnie was a bigger influence.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4988]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 7962
Joined: 2/27/02
|
Funny also you act like I only quoted Arnie and don't even
Aug 12, 2012, 8:18 PM
[ in reply to LOL Yea that's Arnie tooting Arnie's own horn. He was the ] |
|
mention the other quote. There's also no doubt in 1960 and 61 when Palmer was getting the Open more exposure and winning the Sportsman of the year award, Palmer was certainly more popular than Ali, who wasn't even 20 at the time. Heck Ali's 1st professional fight wasn't until late 1960. How bout sticking to the topics anyways. We're not talking about an international popularity contest over the course of a decade.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [54]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
ok so arnie was bigger for 2 or 3 years then forgotten and
Aug 12, 2012, 8:34 PM
|
|
dwarfed by Ali's fame. and arnie was winning sportsman of the year in america in american publications. god dude wake up.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4988]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 7962
Joined: 2/27/02
|
and btw, the European tour didn't even come around until '72
Aug 12, 2012, 6:56 PM
[ in reply to Wrong. He helped take golf from rich man to upper middle ] |
|
so how would that even impact Palmer or even Player for that matter. Palmer was 43 by then and player was in his late 30's. Were you expecting them to be near the top of that list or something?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [54]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Palmer barely played in Europe. Player played world wide but
Aug 12, 2012, 7:06 PM
|
|
player a lot in the states. And big freakin deal, even if you add Player that makes Tiger at worst the 4th winningest European Tour player, which sows how great his is given he doesn't even play that tour.
You make stupid irrational arguments because you don't like me but you are almost always off base. Stick to facts and know I'm your Daddy!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4988]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 7962
Joined: 2/27/02
|
Are you on crack?
Aug 12, 2012, 7:25 PM
|
|
I was trying to make sense of what your posting of the European tour meant. And how does Tiger fit into all of this? When did I ever make a comment about Tiger's greatness?
Seems like someone else is making the stupid and irrational arguments. If you want to reply to something I say, stick to what I was commenting on. If not, make some sense with it please. Thank you for the great laugh on your last sentence though.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [54]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
I was responding to the post above about international
Aug 12, 2012, 7:48 PM
|
|
influence on golf and comparing Arnie, Tiger, and Jack. They didn't even mention the biggest international influence, Gary Player. Arnie didn't play in Europe nearly as much as Tiger. Even if you count wins in Europe before the European PGA Tour Arnie is still well behind Tiger in European wins.
I'm not saying Arnie was not an influence. He was the first big golfer in America, and they loved him in the UK at the British Open, but his European and worldwide influence is nowhere near what Gary Players was then, nor Tigers today.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [7831]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 20489
Joined: 10/9/04
|
But the young guys don;t drive and play every tour event
Aug 12, 2012, 8:03 PM
|
|
either. In the days of old they made em all....and drove themselves
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [54]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
the top 125 play almost every week plus all kinds of other
Aug 12, 2012, 8:10 PM
|
|
guys that get in based on exemptions. and every one of them is talented enough to win a major. back in jacks day only 20 or 30 guys had the talent. there are far far far more pro players today all competing for x number of spots on each tour out of millions of players from around the world. the only regular foreign player back in jacks day was gary player. now there is an asian tour and many other tours and national programs to teach train and promote. look how thee koreans dominate the LPGA.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2245]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 2743
Joined: 1/26/12
|
Re: Ok, just curious. Can you comprehend facts?…..
Aug 12, 2012, 5:13 PM
[ in reply to Ok, just curious. Can you comprehend facts?….. ] |
|
Well opinions run rampart so mine begs to differ with ole number 79.
Arnie built golfer!
I am sure Johnny U., Ted Williams, Bill Russell and Arnie would love to be playing in these times of payouts.
Their retirements would have been much nicer. And Tiger would have done nothing for them, either. lol
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4098]
TigerPulse: 94%
Posts: 10336
Joined: 7/1/97
|
Re: hahaha, Palmer comes no where close to Tiger Woods...
Aug 12, 2012, 5:16 PM
[ in reply to hahaha, Palmer comes no where close to Tiger Woods... ] |
|
I absolutely do not agree with U on this! Palmer had a tremendous impact on golf!!he was THE ONE that first made golf everymans game.. then Jack came along and made @ least as much impact.. tiger was/is a whole another time!! all of them had their own impact on the game....
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [54]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Wrong. Tiger has the highest winning percentage of all time
Aug 12, 2012, 6:41 PM
[ in reply to Jack was more consistent.*** ] |
|
by a mile. He has won at 27%, no one else even comes close to that. He has by far the longest streak of cuts made. He has only missed 11 cut in his career while playing only the hardest events on the toughest courses against the deepest toughest fields.
Here are the facts. Jack is in Tigers rear view mirror except for Majors, but Tiger is ahead of his pace and has had far tougher competition.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_career_achievements_by_Tiger_Woods
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5915]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8570
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: Tiger Woods is no Jack Nicklaus.
Aug 12, 2012, 4:23 PM
|
|
Jack's major rivals won many more majors than Tiger's. I guess you could argue Tiger has more competition, but I don't see an Arnold Palmer, Gary Player, Lee Trevino or Tom Watson out there now.
I guess the closest would be Phil?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [54]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
there were far far fewer golfers then and very few
Aug 12, 2012, 6:46 PM
|
|
international players. there are almost a dozen tours around the world now and everyone is trying to be on the PGA Tour. when Jack played there were maybe 20 guys that could consistently challenge for a major. now anyone in the top 250 world rankings can get hot an win. there is far more competition now and better course maintenance and modern equipment has greatly reduced the gap between the best and the rest.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5915]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8570
Joined: 11/30/98
|
So the equipment is better?
Aug 12, 2012, 6:54 PM
|
|
Then Tiger has an equipment advantage?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [54]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
No. Everyone is playing with the same equipment but if you
Aug 12, 2012, 7:22 PM
|
|
listen to pro golfers they will tell you technology has made the gap between the best and the marginal much narrower. A lot of it is the ball. And clubs have far bigger sweet spots and are more forgiving of miss hits.
In each era there is no advantage because everyone has the same equipment, but as technology improves it helps make players better such that the gap between a marginal PGA player and the top players is smaller.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5915]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8570
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: No. Everyone is playing with the same equipment but if you
Aug 12, 2012, 7:28 PM
|
|
So it takes more skill to play with bad equipment?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [54]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
They didn't have bad equipment in the 60s & 70s but there
Aug 12, 2012, 7:58 PM
|
|
was less margin of error. So you take less competition, less media attention less money, less participation, and less advanced equipment and the better players are much farther ahead than the pack. Today there is far more money, participation, competition from around the world, and technology has improved such that that gap in skill has been somewhat narrowed.
As an analogy. The best players prefer bad weather and harder course conditions because it separates the best from the rest and narrows the potential pool of winners.
The top 20 players today would be better than the top 20 players 50 years ago even using the equipment from 50 years ago because the top 20 then were the best 20 out of say 250, whereas the top 20 today are the top 20 out of 5,000.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [14090]
TigerPulse: 78%
Posts: 25448
Joined: 7/28/05
|
Tiger Woods got more booty than Nicklaus….
Aug 12, 2012, 4:27 PM
|
|
so no Tiger Woods is not Jack Nicklaus.  And Tiger Woods made the game of golf more popular than ever, he got people who were never interested in golf into the game of golf, his popularity increased the number of young kids who play the game, and increased the amount of money PGA golfers make. Jack Nicklaus didn't have this effect on golf. So Tiger Woods is no Jack Nicklaus. Whether he ties or breaks Nicklaus' major's record, doesn't change the fact that Tiger Woods has made a bigger impact on golf than any other golfer in the history of golf.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [83232]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 80202
Joined: 11/29/99
|
Apples and oranges. When Jack played, there were only
Aug 12, 2012, 4:30 PM
|
|
12 to 15 guys capable of winning a major, now there are 30 or 40.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [14090]
TigerPulse: 78%
Posts: 25448
Joined: 7/28/05
|
plus Jack got to play against a bunch of fatties...
Aug 12, 2012, 4:32 PM
|
|
who got drunk at the club house.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5915]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8570
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Please tell that to Gary Player.
Aug 12, 2012, 6:13 PM
|
|
He is possibly in better shape than you today and he's 76.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commissioner [942]
TigerPulse: 59%
Posts: 2479
Joined: 6/2/11
|
They said the same thing when Jack played, compared to Bobby
Aug 12, 2012, 4:36 PM
[ in reply to Apples and oranges. When Jack played, there were only ] |
|
Jones, saying there were more great players in Nicklaus' time than when Jones played. I don't know how to measure that. I do know that Jack beat the competition to overtake Jones' majors record. Someone is going to have to beat the competition to overtake Jack.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [83232]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 80202
Joined: 11/29/99
|
Very true***
Aug 12, 2012, 4:53 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [54]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
when jones played there were probably less than 20 golf
Aug 12, 2012, 6:49 PM
[ in reply to They said the same thing when Jack played, compared to Bobby ] |
|
courses in sc and ga combined. today there are probably 20 courses just in the charleston and over 100 in myrtle beach. there are more golf courses on the sc coast per mile, per acre, and per capita than anywhere in the world.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [17431]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 14347
Joined: 12/14/98
|
Jack played against better "money" players ...
Aug 12, 2012, 7:16 PM
[ in reply to Apples and oranges. When Jack played, there were only ] |
|
Tigers competed against better ball strickers but who wilt under pressure.
Too much money now - guys don't have to win to make millions. Old school golfers were much better gamblers and more clutch. Often more pressure on side games during the week than on Sunday on tour.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [54]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
no, jack only had to beat maybe 20 guys to win a major, now
Aug 12, 2012, 8:06 PM
|
|
Tiger has to beat every guy in the field because those are the best out of almost a dozen tours and over 5,000 pro golfers. those guys were tougher because there were only a handful that could consistently compete at a high level. now you have 18 year old kids that can go out and set course records. golf is not tennis, you aren't playing the man, you are playing the course. but those guys were mentally tougher because its easier to beat 20 guys week in and week out than 100 guys. they had more chances to win. now even if you play well you can still lose because a guy ranked number 250 in the world can get hot and has the talent to win.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5915]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8570
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: no, jack only had to beat maybe 20 guys to win a major, now
Aug 12, 2012, 8:09 PM
|
|
And Tiger is still behind Jack in Majors.
When he's even I'll discuss it. When he goes ahead, I'll grudgingly say - OK.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [54]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
LOL he is ahead of jacks pace despite his slump. less majors
Aug 12, 2012, 8:13 PM
|
|
and far harder competition. he already has more wins in far less years and at least 200 less events.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5915]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8570
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: LOL he is ahead of jacks pace despite his slump. less majors
Aug 12, 2012, 8:23 PM
|
|
Pace my Big Fat ###!
Then lets say Young Tom Morris is the greatest golfer - he won the British Open at 17
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [54]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
fyi just because someone doesnt break the prior guys records
Aug 12, 2012, 8:16 PM
[ in reply to Re: no, jack only had to beat maybe 20 guys to win a major, now ] |
|
doesnt mean the guy isn't better. look at baseball. pitchers today are far better than pitchers 50 years ago, but they won't break those records because they have a lower mound, hitters are far better now, and they pitch less games. it all has to be put into perspective/context.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5915]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8570
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: fyi just because someone doesnt break the prior guys records
Aug 12, 2012, 8:27 PM
|
|
Golf greatness is close to universally measured by Majors.
Get back to me when it is tied.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [54]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Tiger has more majors for his age at a faster pace than Jack***
Aug 12, 2012, 8:29 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commissioner [908]
TigerPulse: 95%
Posts: 2247
Joined: 11/27/07
|
Same reason you can't compare a football team from even 15
Aug 12, 2012, 4:34 PM
|
|
years ago with one today. The game changes in so many ways. You can only say who was dominant during a given period.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [14090]
TigerPulse: 78%
Posts: 25448
Joined: 7/28/05
|
The '72 Dolphins are the only undefeated NFL team...
Aug 12, 2012, 4:36 PM
|
|
yet nobody considers them as one of the best single season teams ever.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [83232]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 80202
Joined: 11/29/99
|
Most consider 85 Bears or one of the Steeler teams from
Aug 12, 2012, 4:55 PM
|
|
the late 79s the best.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commissioner [942]
TigerPulse: 59%
Posts: 2479
Joined: 6/2/11
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [54]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
how? Tiger won faster in less events at a far higher winning
Aug 12, 2012, 6:53 PM
|
|
percentage vs. better competition.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5915]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8570
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Poor Tiger
Aug 12, 2012, 6:58 PM
|
|
still behind Jack.
Hasn't won a major in 4 years.
Get back to me when they are tied.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [54]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2245]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 2743
Joined: 1/26/12
|
Re: Tiger Woods is no Jack Nicklaus.
Aug 12, 2012, 4:57 PM
|
|
Well I have never believed in comparing any athlete with another of a different time. Doing so is strictly opnion and we all have one of those as we know. lol
However, in my humble opinion, Tiger will fail to top Jack's record if he doesnt get back to what has gotten him this far.
That is a "hooker" after every round!!! If he gets back to his game plan, he will set and increase the records.
As for me, it's still Arnie's army!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-American [580]
TigerPulse: 25%
Posts: 4271
Joined: 8/7/99
|
Re: Tiger Woods is no Jack Nicklaus.
Aug 12, 2012, 5:08 PM
|
|
I think the world of Arnie, a great golfer and ambassador of the game. He is probably the most loved golfer ever, as "Arnie's Army" implies. Having said that, the Golden Bear, Jack Nicklaus, is the greatest golfer of all time; and that includes greater than Tiger Woods.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Letterman [290]
TigerPulse: 83%
Posts: 273
Joined: 1/15/11
|
Re: Tiger Woods is no Jack Nicklaus.
Aug 12, 2012, 5:05 PM
|
|
Tiger Woods played in an era with more high level competitors. It's hard to compare between generations, but I think today's players would be better and more consistent than players of old, if they were playing along side each other.
That's just me though, like I said, it's hard to compare between generations. All we can really look at is major wins, and Tiger is hot on Jack's tail.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commissioner [942]
TigerPulse: 59%
Posts: 2479
Joined: 6/2/11
|
Re: Tiger Woods is no Jack Nicklaus.
Aug 12, 2012, 5:14 PM
|
|
All we can really look
> at is major wins, and Tiger is hot on Jack's tail.
Yes he is. And like I said, it would not surprise me if he breaks it. He is only 36. Having said that, I like Tiger Woods. And I agree with what you say when you say that "all we can really look at is major wins". I think that's why BOTH Nicklaus and Woods made/make winning "majors" their focus.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [54]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Majors are the biggest key but Tiger already has more
Aug 12, 2012, 6:56 PM
|
|
total wins in far less time and in far less events versus far better competition.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Scout Team [171]
TigerPulse: 42%
Posts: 615
Joined: 9/24/01
|
If Jckplayed against Tigers competitors
Aug 12, 2012, 5:55 PM
|
|
He would have won twenty five majors.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [54]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Before his problems and injuries Tiger was better than Jack
Aug 12, 2012, 6:28 PM
|
|
ever dreamed. Jack has said so himself. Rory blew a huge lead in a major last year. He already has more missed cuts at 23 than Tiger in his career. Tiger went 15-0 with either the lead or share of the lead after 36 or 54 holes. Tiger has won majors with double digits under par when everyone else is over par. He has the margin of victory in all 4 majors. He's the only one to win all 4 majors consecutively.
No one even compares, but Jack. And even Jack admits Tiger is the best!!
Anyone that knows golf and all the experts know Tiger is the best to ever pick up a club. He has been the best player this year on the PGA tour. Once he gets over the mental block he has right now he will easily break Jack's record. He already has more wins in far less events against far harder competition.
The folks that deny Tiger's greatness are folks that don't like him personally.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Heisman Winner [108390]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 64974
Joined: 2/25/06
|
tiger***
Aug 12, 2012, 6:31 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5915]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8570
Joined: 11/30/98
|
|
|
|
|
|
Heisman Winner [108390]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 64974
Joined: 2/25/06
|
tiger's competition is no where close to nicklaus and palmer
Aug 12, 2012, 6:34 PM
[ in reply to Before his problems and injuries Tiger was better than Jack ] |
|
said so; the elite golfers nicklaus faced would feast on this tour. like taking candy from a baby. all those stats prove just how soft this tour is/was when tiger came. just fluff.
nicklaus be greats of the game, legends. woods beat pretenders in comparison.
anyone that says any different has bought into the fluff. doesn't surprise me you're one of them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [83232]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 80202
Joined: 11/29/99
|
Many more guys can win today, 30 or 40 each week compared
Aug 12, 2012, 6:53 PM
|
|
to 15 or 20 in Jack's day.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Heisman Winner [108390]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 64974
Joined: 2/25/06
|
someone is named champion each week. just because there
Aug 12, 2012, 7:00 PM
|
|
are more golfers doesn't mean there are more predators/winners. h3ll, the great tiger woods has come from behind in how many majors now? none?
staring down the competition is different then what goes on today. it doesn't happen often at all. even today they were talking about who could 'hold on' or who would throw it away this time. hated to see what happened at the british, but that's more the norm. speaking of norm, a la norman a number of years ago.
as has been said, a 59 year old tom watson embarrassed this tour in 2009.
very few lions, a lot of lambs.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [83232]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 80202
Joined: 11/29/99
|
Much easier to appear to be a lion with so much
Aug 12, 2012, 7:17 PM
|
|
less competition.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commissioner [942]
TigerPulse: 59%
Posts: 2479
Joined: 6/2/11
|
There's no way that Jack had less competition.
Aug 12, 2012, 7:22 PM
|
|
The Woods' era is marked by mediocre competition. Great players in this era are few. There are a lot more "lucky" players who are one shot wonders, win a major and are never heard from again. The numbers prove that. Now you can downplay the numbers all you want. But that won't change the record books.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [54]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
omg are you biased and misguided. and flat wrong.***
Aug 12, 2012, 8:19 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [83232]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 80202
Joined: 11/29/99
|
|
|
|
|
|
Heisman Winner [108390]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 64974
Joined: 2/25/06
|
i agree and woods has feasted on mutton since joining the
Aug 12, 2012, 7:27 PM
[ in reply to Much easier to appear to be a lion with so much ] |
|
tour.
tom watson proved it as the best the tour had to offer needed a playoff to best a 60 year old?
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [50635]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 43019
Joined: 12/3/98
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5915]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8570
Joined: 11/30/98
|
The King is dead.
Aug 12, 2012, 7:03 PM
|
|
Long live the king.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commissioner [942]
TigerPulse: 59%
Posts: 2479
Joined: 6/2/11
|
Nicklaus' competition vs Woods' competition.
Aug 12, 2012, 6:53 PM
|
|
This thread got me wondering about whether Nicklaus or Woods' had/has the tougher competition, therefore keeping down their "majors" win totals.
Let me say that I think Woods is a great golfer, one of the greatest of all time. I googled to find a list of all golfers who have won majors. I looked for the golfers who have won more than one major. I feel that everyone gets lucky once and catches lightening in a bottle (ex: Larry Mize, Rick Astley, George Lazenby). But if you do it twice, it takes more than luck. What I found was that during Nicklaus' time, there were 22 golfers who won more than one major. In Woods'time, there are 10 golfers who have won more than one major. Based on that data, Jack Nickklaus has had much tougher competition than Tiger Woods has had.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1535]
TigerPulse: 59%
Posts: 1370
Joined: 6/3/06
|
Or that stat means it was easier to win a major then.
Aug 12, 2012, 7:11 PM
|
|
If you have a conference where every team has an equal shot at a championship that could just as easily mean that the conference is stacked. It may mean they're all terrible, too, but the point is, you don't know. From what I see, golfers today are FAR better, FAR more prepared, and in FAR better shape than they were in Nicklaus's prime.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5915]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8570
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: Or that stat means it was easier to win a major then.
Aug 12, 2012, 7:15 PM
|
|
How do you explain a 49 year old tied for the lead today and a 59 year old Tom Watson was in a playoff two years ago in the British Open?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [54]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
golf is not tennis. you arent playing a younger faster guy
Aug 12, 2012, 8:28 PM
|
|
you are playing a course. if an old man races a teenager through a maze and the kid has only been in the maze a few times but the old man 50 times who has the advantage? golf is not about strength, its about strategy skill knowledge experience.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [54]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
lol now put that in context. how many guys were capable of
Aug 12, 2012, 8:24 PM
[ in reply to Nicklaus' competition vs Woods' competition. ] |
|
winning a major 30 years ago versus now. if there are more people playing and more talent top to bottom it makes the odds of winning smaller. just go ask the pros nd experts. ask jack. he has said tiger is better.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5915]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8570
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: lol now put that in context. how many guys were capable of
Aug 12, 2012, 8:29 PM
|
|
Publicly.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1535]
TigerPulse: 59%
Posts: 1370
Joined: 6/3/06
|
You're right--he's no Jack Nickalaus. He's better.***
Aug 12, 2012, 7:08 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4098]
TigerPulse: 94%
Posts: 10336
Joined: 7/1/97
|
Re: You're right--he's no Jack Nickalaus. He's better.***
Aug 12, 2012, 7:10 PM
|
|
no way!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1535]
TigerPulse: 59%
Posts: 1370
Joined: 6/3/06
|
Tiger in his prime would smoke Jack in his prime...no doubt.***
Aug 12, 2012, 7:11 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4098]
TigerPulse: 94%
Posts: 10336
Joined: 7/1/97
|
Re: Tiger in his prime would smoke Jack in his prime...no doubt.***
Aug 12, 2012, 7:12 PM
|
|
U people are dreaming
!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1535]
TigerPulse: 59%
Posts: 1370
Joined: 6/3/06
|
Tiger-better shape, more power, better short game.***
Aug 12, 2012, 7:14 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5915]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8570
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: Tiger-better shape, more power, better short game.***
Aug 12, 2012, 7:22 PM
|
|
Better equipment.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [54]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
lol better talent is better talent period.***
Aug 12, 2012, 8:36 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [60277]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 42582
Joined: 11/30/98
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commissioner [942]
TigerPulse: 59%
Posts: 2479
Joined: 6/2/11
|
Palmer, Player, Watson, Norman, Trevino, Ballesteros,
Aug 12, 2012, 7:14 PM
|
|
Peter Thompson, Raymond Floyd, Casper, David Stockton, Hubie Green, David Graham, Johnny Miller, Tony Jacklin, Hale Irwin, Julius Boros, Larry Nelson, Ben Crenshaw, Bernard Lahnger, Fuzzy Zoeller, Sandy Lyle and Andy North.
The above were Nicklaus' competition.
Mickelson, Els, Singh, Payne Stewarrt,McIllroy, Padrig Harrington, Jose Maria O, Mark O'Meara, Reitef Goosen, Angel Carbrera, and Lee Janszen.
The above have been Woods' competition. I added McIllroy as number 11 of players who have won multiple majors in Woods' era.
Which group will have more making it into the Hall Of Fame?
I don't think people should be downgrading Nicklaus competition.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-Pro [682]
TigerPulse: 76%
Posts: 1197
Joined: 9/21/99
|
Re: Palmer, Player, Watson, Norman, Trevino, Ballesteros,
Aug 12, 2012, 7:40 PM
|
|
Quit trying to reason with these idiots. If Jack and Arnie hadn't done what they did from the late 50's through 1986, Tiger would have inherited a far less popular sport. Hell, his father may never have gotten him into it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-Pro [682]
TigerPulse: 76%
Posts: 1197
Joined: 9/21/99
|
Re: Palmer, Player, Watson, Norman, Trevino, Ballesteros,
Aug 12, 2012, 7:43 PM
[ in reply to Palmer, Player, Watson, Norman, Trevino, Ballesteros, ] |
|
Weiskopf
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fan [51]
TigerPulse: 25%
Posts: 157
Joined: 6/24/12
|
Re: Tiger Woods got more booty than Nicklaus….
Aug 12, 2012, 8:07 PM
|
|
...biggest impact...
You underestimate Bobby Jones. During the Golden Age of Sport he WAS golf. He made insanely popular instructional movies that played in every movie house in the country. Then there was that little tournament he started. Maybe you heard of it. The Master?
And he did it as an amateur.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [54]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
lol you peple are so clueless and look at things in such
Aug 12, 2012, 8:39 PM
|
|
narrow minded ways with bias and blinders.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [60277]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 42582
Joined: 11/30/98
|
you can tell the who the close-minded folks are by counting
Aug 12, 2012, 10:10 PM
|
|
the number of posts they make repeating the same point over and over. That is the surest sign of who is most unwilling to be open to other opinions.
Looking at your own post history -you have 30+ (mostly angry) retorts in this thread alone - and also your extended habit of picking fights and arguments, you are the perfect example of a biased, close-minded sort.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 96
| visibility 1
|
|
|
50
