Very interesting (stupid) therory about golf and sports in general

[1972Apex]

I think it's impossible to compare golfers from different eras. Nicklaus had an incredible record, particularly with regard to performance in majors. It will be very tough for Tiger to equal Jack's record no matter how long he plays.
I think another factor for me is that for me, the competition was tougher for Jack, at least amongst elite players. Jack had the Big 3, himself, Gary Player and Arnold Palmer, then Tom Watson and many more.
Who has been Tiger's competition since he appeared on tour? A modern great... Phil?, Ernie?, Retief?, Vijay...? Puhleeze, none of those will be regarded alongside Player, Palmer and Watson.
What Tiger really needs to establish his greatness is a true challenger like Jack had... a great golfer for the ages. Until then he'll just be the best of a pretty mediocre lot IMHO.

[Andru]

I think it's impossible to compare golfers from different eras. Nicklaus had an incredible record, particularly with regard to performance in majors. It will be very tough for Tiger to equal Jack's record no matter how long he plays.
I think another factor for me is that for me, the competition was tougher for Jack, at least amongst elite players. Jack had the Big 3, himself, Gary Player and Arnold Palmer, then Tom Watson and many more.
Who has been Tiger's competition since he appeared on tour? A modern great... Phil?, Ernie?, Retief?, Vijay...? Puhleeze, none of those will be regarded alongside Player, Palmer and Watson.
What Tiger really needs to establish his greatness is a true challenger like Jack had... a great golfer for the ages. Until then he'll just be the best of a pretty mediocre lot IMHO.

Reid you're way off here. The field is MUCH deeper than when Jack played. It's not even a comparison.

1) The talent pool is deeper now. ( More international players )
2) Most people have access to good instruction and training.
3) Technology and the business of golf instruction has allowed a sharing of knowledge not seen in the past.

You can't assume because Tiger wins so much that the field just sucks, that makes no sense. Because we know the field is stronger. Tiger is just that good.

I know Jack and old guys like to tout how great they were but really. Ernie VJ goose and Phil are not chumps. They're championship players in tough against a guy who went through a period where he was invinsible. 1999-2002. 7 majors out of a possible 16. That's just bad timing.

[1972Apex]

Reid you're way off here. The field is MUCH deeper than when Jack played. It's not even a comparison.

1) The talent pool is deeper now. ( More international players )
2) Most people have access to good instruction and training.
3) Technology and the business of golf instruction has allowed a sharing of knowledge not seen in the past.

You can't assume because Tiger wins so much that the field just sucks, that makes no sense. Because we know the field is stronger. Tiger is just that good.

I know Jack and old guys like to tout how great they were but really. Ernie VJ goose and Phil are not chumps. They're championship players in tough against a guy who went through a period where he was invinsible. 1999-2002. 7 majors out of a possible 16. That's just bad timing.

Sorry, I disagree. Gary, Arnold or Tom in their prime would be a far better challenge to Tiger than the marshmellow softies who are choking their guts out today any time Tiger gets near the lead.
The field may be deeper overall, but the number of true champions at the top is pretty thin these days.

["Richard"]

Amazing but they always forget to mention that this happened at the end of a long war. The fields were not very strong.

Mike

A lot of people say this but the second and third best players that season only played in a few less tourneys than him. I think he played 31 and the next guy played 27 and then next 22...

[mberube]

A lot of people say this but the second and third best players that season only played in a few less tourneys than him. I think he played 31 and the next guy played 27 and then next 22...

Ya but who were those players? Most if not all great players were at war. A physical problem prevented Nelson from going to war.

[themob]

I think it's all irrelevant. You can never end a debate in the "who was better" arguments. Ali vs Tyson, Gretzky vs. Orr, Hogan vs. Tiger whatever.

The truth of it all was that they were the best when they were in the sport. Every sport has changed, and now with more and more money in sports there are bound to be more people trying to be the best at it. I think that just proves that modern athletes are probably physically superior to the athletes of old.

Argue it either way you want, but there is no such thing as a "golf IQ", in fact i havn't heard much more ludirous a thing in a while. Any pro golfer could easily be a pitcher, quarterback, hockey player or tennis playing if he or she wanted to do so and started training at a young enough age.

["Richard"]

Ya but who were those players? Most if not all great players were at war. A physical problem prevented Nelson from going to war.

"And Hogan and Snead were most definitely around. Hogan played 19 tournaments in 1945, while Snead played 27 (Nelson played 30 or 31 events, depending on who's doing the record-keeping). So Snead played essentially the full season, while Hogan played about two-thirds of it. Hogan and Snead both won multiple times in 1945. In fact, Hogan set a 72-hole scoring record in one tournament, only to have Nelson break it two weeks later."

[mberube]

"And Hogan and Snead were most definitely around. Hogan played 19 tournaments in 1945, while Snead played 27 (Nelson played 30 or 31 events, depending on who's doing the record-keeping). So Snead played essentially the full season, while Hogan played about two-thirds of it. Hogan and Snead both won multiple times in 1945. In fact, Hogan set a 72-hole scoring record in one tournament, only to have Nelson break it two weeks later."

Hogan missed a couple years on Tour due to World War II, but returned full-time in 1946 and won 13 times. He came back in August 1945 and from then to February 1949, Hogan won 37 times.

As for Snead, he has no stats between 1942 and 1945 that I ca find. He did serve in WWII but I can’t find the dates.

As for the fields being week, I saw a show on TV stating that his record, nothing short of amazing, was done in weaker fields. Hogan was angry that he was getting all the attention and nobody was noticing that the competition was weaker.

["Richard"]

I don't know much about the history of golf, only what ever I read but thats what I read

I do have a question.. why doesn't anyone ever talk about boby jones as the greatest golfer ever? Is it because he stayed amateur and played mostly against nobodies and actually had very few wins against the top players of his time? (compared to jack, tiger.. who won all the time against the best while they were playing)

HAD bobby jones turned pro would be talking abou him as the greatest golfer ever? Was he that much better than everyone else and not turning pro is what leaves him out of these discussions? Educate me

[Kilroy]

Excellent question. Bobby Jones was a lawyer and he played golf strictly for the pleasure of the game. Had he played professionally, he'd have played more, but he definately should be included in the list of greats.

Old Tom Morris?

[1972Apex]

I don't know much about the history of golf, only what ever I read but thats what I read

I do have a question.. why doesn't anyone ever talk about boby jones as the greatest golfer ever? Is it because he stayed amateur and played mostly against nobodies and actually had very few wins against the top players of his time? (compared to jack, tiger.. who won all the time against the best while they were playing)

HAD bobby jones turned pro would be talking abou him as the greatest golfer ever? Was he that much better than everyone else and not turning pro is what leaves him out of these discussions? Educate me

Bobby Jones is definitely on the list of the greatest golfers of all time. He may even in fact be the best ever. His career was cut short at age 28 due to illness or he would have been even greater. here's a brief bio FYI.

The game of golf has many legends: Tiger Woods, Jack Nicklaus, Arnold Palmer, just to name a few. One of the greatest golf legends was a man by the name of Bobby Jones. He is considered a true sports champion. He played in 52 tournaments in his career. He won 23 out of the 52 tournaments in which he played. He retired from golf when he was 28 years old. He was one half of the design team for the Augusta National Invitational Tournament, or as more commonly known, The Masters. He played in the Masters tournament until 1947, when he began to have health problems. Jones continued to attend the Masters tournament after he became paralyzed in his arms and in his legs in a wheelchair. He accomplished all this while playing with an Amateur status. He also achieved two college degrees; one in Engineering and another in English Literature. He also passed the Georgia Bar examination with only two years of studying at law school. He was the author of many articles for newspaper and magazine, as well as authoring four books and working in motion pictures.

["Richard"]

That bobby jones movie is really good. I really enjoyed it. If its accurate in all the details then what an amazing story. Now when they say he entered 50+ tourys does that include all the amateur events he played? Because if in fact he was the greatest player at that time, for him to go back and play in the amateur would be like tiger going back and playing it now owuldn't it? I doubt anyone could beat him. How many of his wins were where he got an invite to the tournment (like wie got last year) and how many of those did he win? That would be a more accurate stat.

Who is this TOM guy you speak of the guy from old course in scotland? name sounds very familiar

[Kilroy]

The first pro golfers rose from the ranks of early greenskeepers. Alan Robertson is often referred to as the first real professional. The first Open Championship, "The British Open", was played in 1861, 2 years after his death. Tom Morris won the event. Morris was Robertson's apprentice. The Open was really the only tournament that was played in those days and the idea of actually playing golf for a living was still a long way away. Tom Morris was appointed greenskeeper at St Andrews in 1865.

[Golfbum]

I don't know much about the history of golf, only what ever I read but thats what I read

I do have a question.. why doesn't anyone ever talk about boby jones as the greatest golfer ever? Is it because he stayed amateur and played mostly against nobodies and actually had very few wins against the top players of his time? (compared to jack, tiger.. who won all the time against the best while they were playing)

HAD bobby jones turned pro would be talking abou him as the greatest golfer ever? Was he that much better than everyone else and not turning pro is what leaves him out of these discussions? Educate me

Read and learn about the history of golf, there are so many avenues you can venture down to find out more about the game of golf.

Here are some that are available on the internet, if you use SEARCH and History of Golf you would find these.

http://golf.about.com/od/historyofgolf/

http://www.golfeurope.com/almanac/history/history1.htm

http://www.golfing-scotland.com/history.asp

http://www.thegolfchannel.com/30300/2402

http://www.worldgolf.com/wglibrary/history/

http://www.worldbook.com/features/golf/html/history.htm

http://athleticscholarships.net/history-of-golf.htm

[BC MIST]

I have to disagree. Many including some of the legends have said Tiger is by far one of the best ball strikers the world has every seen. He's on par with Hogan from people who have seen both. Only Gary PLayer has said Hogan would eat Tiger for lunch. That I have a hard time believing. Seeing that Tiger holds a scoring record in all 4 majors.

By everything that I have read about Hogan, which is a lot, he and Moe Norman, are considered to be the best ball strikers ever. In his prime, Hogan missed very few fairways and very few greens. Tiger hits very few fairways.

Hogan was a good putter in his prime, but Tiger is a great putter, and that, along with his wedge game, makes him an excellent player. Hogan's putting prowess diminished greatly as he had difficulty seeing the ball because of some damage done to his eyes during his accident, a little known fact that was revealed in "Afternoons With Mr. Hogan," by Jody Vasquez.

In one of Hogan's books he described his maximum distance with the driver at 300 yards. This was in the 1950's. Imagine him hitting it straight with ProV1X distance. Untouchable. I am old enough to have seen Nicklaus, Miller, Trevino, Weiskop in their prime, and they were amazing. Moe Norman was better than all of these and if Hogan was close to Norman, Gary Player is right. With equal putting, Hogan has Tiger for lunch.

[Andru]

By everything that I have read about Hogan, which is a lot, he and Moe Norman, are considered to be the best ball strikers ever. In his prime, Hogan missed very few fairways and very few greens. Tiger hits very few fairways.

Hogan was a good putter in his prime, but Tiger is a great putter, and that, along with his wedge game, makes him an excellent player. Hogan's putting prowess diminished greatly as he had difficulty seeing the ball because of some damage done to his eyes during his accident, a little known fact that was revealed in "Afternoons With Mr. Hogan," by Jody Vasquez.

In one of Hogan's books he described his maximum distance with the driver at 300 yards. This was in the 1950's. Imagine him hitting it straight with ProV1X distance. Untouchable. I am old enough to have seen Nicklaus, Miller, Trevino, Weiskop in their prime, and they were amazing. Moe Norman was better than all of these and if Hogan was close to Norman, Gary Player is right. With equal putting, Hogan has Tiger for lunch.

There's no way Hogan carried the ball 300 yards which is what Tiger does. Just for the record. Tiger woods was driving the ball 300 yards with a steel headed, steel shafted 43 inch driver. and using a wound titleist. There's was no pro v1 here. Eveyone forgets that. He was one of the last to acutally add a graphite shaft to his bag.

We have yet to see Tiger's prime. That will be frightening and the bandwagon will be wide open for all to join us.

[Andru]

Sorry, I disagree. Gary, Arnold or Tom in their prime would be a far better challenge to Tiger than the marshmellow softies who are choking their guts out today any time Tiger gets near the lead.
The field may be deeper overall, but the number of true champions at the top is pretty thin these days.

It's called intimidation

I did a little research on your "True Champions"

Arnold Palmer. 7 majors. 4 won with no Jack Nicklaus (Joined the tour in 62). and 2 in the great 1962 when he won 2 and Nicklaus was a rookie. so 6 majors before Nicklaus was the Head Sheriff in town. 1 major in the true Nicklaus era. That's not much competition for Jack.

Gary Player. 9 majors 2 before Nicklaus came aliong so 7 majors in the Nickalus era. He was a champion no argument from me.

Tom Watson. 8 majors. 4 of them after 1980 when Nicklaus's career was on a down turn. Nicklaus did pull out a surprise at the 86 masters. but his domination had faded after 1980 when he won his last in his prime. So Watson put it to Jack 4 times. Wow!

So of the 24 majors won by the 3 guys you mentioned. 12 were either before Jack was on tour or in his prime.

That's 12 majors. From 1962-1980 18 years.

VJ(3) Phil(2) and Ernie(2) have 7 during the Tiger era from 1997-2005 9 years.

[jonf]

There's no way Hogan carried the ball 300 yards which is what Tiger does. Just for the record. Tiger woods was driving the ball 300 yards with a steel headed, steel shafted 43 inch driver. and using a wound titleist. There's was no pro v1 here. Eveyone forgets that. He was one of the last to acutally add a graphite shaft to his bag.

We have yet to see Tiger's prime. That will be frightening and the bandwagon will be wide open for all to join us.

I think we already have seen tiger's prime, to be honest. This is just opinion, but I don't see him attaining dominance again. As for the equipment, there's still no way you can compare the equipment Tiger was using to the stuff that Hogan was using. Even if Tiger wasn't playing the best stuff available at the time, it was definitely far better than anything Hogan was playing. And, at least from what I read, it didn't sound like he meant a 300 yard carry, but a 300 yard drive...I could be wrong here.

[BC MIST]

There's no way Hogan carried the ball 300 yards which is what Tiger does.

Neat little manipulation to try to "prove" your seculation. Hogan's regular, maximum and minimum distances with the driver were 265, 300 and 235 respectively. "The preceeding table is my graded list of distances for the various clubs. You will have to find your own distances, of course, .... Naturally, weather conditions will alter all maximums and minimums." Page 23, "Power Golf." 1948.

Just for the record. Tiger woods was driving the ball 300 yards with a steel headed, steel shafted 43 inch driver. and using a wound titleist.

Hogan was playing a persimmon driver and a wound ball. The first ball that I ever played was a Titleist in 1960 and of one thing I am sure. The difference in distance that a PROV1 flies compared to Tiger's wound Titleist is very, very small, relative to the difference in distance between my 1960 Titleist and Tiger's late 90's Titleist. Move Hogan's Titleist back another 12 years and to carry a ball even 265 yards in those days would at least be comparable to Tiger's 300 yard carry of today.

Tiger may not have reached his prime yet because HH has flattened his swing and he is close to be on proper plane in his downswing. Until he gets there, and until he consistently plays subconscious golf, his level of play will stay where it is, as long as he continues his superior putting. If he starts missing some crucial putts and he develops a mode of fear, which can only be controlled and not eliminated, he will bring his competitors to his level.

[1972Apex]

It's called intimidation

I did a little research on your "True Champions"

Arnold Palmer. 7 majors. 4 won with no Jack Nicklaus (Joined the tour in 62). and 2 in the great 1962 when he won 2 and Nicklaus was a rookie. so 6 majors before Nicklaus was the Head Sheriff in town. 1 major in the true Nicklaus era. That's not much competition for Jack.

Gary Player. 9 majors 2 before Nicklaus came aliong so 7 majors in the Nickalus era. He was a champion no argument from me.

Tom Watson. 8 majors. 4 of them after 1980 when Nicklaus's career was on a down turn. Nicklaus did pull out a surprise at the 86 masters. but his domination had faded after 1980 when he won his last in his prime. So Watson put it to Jack 4 times. Wow!

So of the 24 majors won by the 3 guys you mentioned. 12 were either before Jack was on tour or in his prime.

That's 12 majors. From 1962-1980 18 years.

VJ(3) Phil(2) and Ernie(2) have 7 during the Tiger era from 1997-2005 9 years.

That's pretty sad Andru... It's nice how one can manupulate statistics....
I'll only address Arnold... so who was on top of golf when Tiger came along? Greg Norman? Man, that is killer competition.
Jack was so good that he basically ended Arnie's reign. Tiger was so good he ended Greg Norman's reign (if there ever really was one). Anyway we could debate this forever but I don't have a time machine available to show you how much better golf was back then when men were men, irons were blades, woods were wooden, balls were dead, fairways weren't manicured and rough really was rough...

[Golfpeasant]

Yawn. Does it really really really matter whos #1 ?

[Andru]

That's pretty sad Andru... It's nice how one can manupulate statistics....
I'll only address Arnold... so who was on top of golf when Tiger came along? Greg Norman? Man, that is killer competition.
Jack was so good that he basically ended Arnie's reign. Tiger was so good he ended Greg Norman's reign (if there ever really was one). Anyway we could debate this forever but I don't have a time machine available to show you how much better golf was back then when men were men, irons were blades, woods were wooden, balls were dead, fairways weren't manicured and rough really was rough...

Yeah yeah and Jack did it bare feet in the snow. whatever man. I didn't manipulate anything the facts there.

Finally!!!! one you guys finally admits it. This is simply generational protection. It doesn't matter how good Tiger gets. You will NEVER see him as the best ever.

So what is it Reid? Did Jack put Arnold out of buisiness or was he just a cream puff competitor that benefitted from good timing? I realize he's like a god in golf. I've said it before Tiger brought me to golf and Arnold made me stay. I have the utmost respect for the King. But which one is it?

We all go through phases as we age. We have a phase in our youth when we're very impressionable. Like Tiger is doing to the youth of today. Jack did in the past. Jack did it for you and now that you're probably more mature( allegedly ) You see things that happen now, for what they are.

No doubt when Tiger ages and new young star comes along. I'll be tempted to say the same things. Hopefully, I have the vision to overlook my bias and analyze the situation for what it is. I'd hate to think I'd end up so closed minded.

[1972Apex]

Don't worry Andru, I think your bias is clear to everyone already...

[Big Johnny69]

Yeah yeah and Jack did it bare feet in the snow. whatever man.

That's a mature response.

Finally!!!! one you guys finally admits it. This is simply generational protection. It doesn't matter how good Tiger gets. You will NEVER see him as the best ever.

So what is it Reid? Did Jack put Arnold out of buisiness or was he just a cream puff competitor that benefitted from good timing? I realize he's like a god in golf. I've said it before Tiger brought me to golf and Arnold made me stay. I have the utmost respect for the King. But which one is it?

We all go through phases as we age. We have a phase in our youth when we're very impressionable. Like Tiger is doing to the youth of today. Jack did in the past. Jack did it for you and now that you're probably more mature( allegedly ) You see things that happen now, for what they are.

No doubt when Tiger ages and new young star comes along. I'll be tempted to say the same things. Hopefully, I have the vision to overlook my bias and analyze the situation for what it is. I'd hate to think I'd end up so closed minded.

And you talk about being closed minded. Why push the "Tiger is the greatest ever" to no end.

I'm still relatively new to this sport (been playing for five/six years) and I do watch the old highlight shows on the TGC. I'm with Golfpeasant on this one, what does it really matter. We can all agree that all the above mentioned golfers rank up there as some of the best of all time. And I don't think the "phases of age" has anything to do with people's opinion, its the passing of time. As much as we and the media try to compare athletes from different decades you just really can't do it. Each sport has evolved through the years along with the equipment, training methods etc. So one person's best ever is not another's. Agree to disagree and leave it at that.

[Golfbum]

As far as I am concerned until Woods or anyone else for that matter wins EIGHTEEN MAJORS then Jack Nicklaus was and still is the greatest golfer that played Mens Golf.

Technology has made huge advancements in the way the game is played. Woods bombs it off the tee, and offline quite often. If he was using the balls that Nicklaus and others used back in the 60's and 70's, (more side spin) some of his drives would be in another county

Courses are better conditioned. The PGA sets the standards for bunkers now, every course bacically has to have the same texture of sand, depth of sand etc. The Tour sends someone out far in advance to make sure this happens. Fairways are now cut shorter than greens were back in Arnie and Jack's days.

Players are better conditioned than they were back in Jack's days. I doubt there was a Fitness Trailer following every PGA Event back then. Most players today visit Mind Doctors.
There is no comparison, there never will be. It is like comparing a Nascar race from the 60's to one held this year.

As for Woods winning 18 Majors. It is possible, but until he does JACK IS THE GREATEST. You can not argue was past success.

[Andru]

Neat little manipulation to try to "prove" your seculation. Hogan's regular, maximum and minimum distances with the driver were 265, 300 and 235 respectively. "The preceeding table is my graded list of distances for the various clubs. You will have to find your own distances, of course, .... Naturally, weather conditions will alter all maximums and minimums." Page 23, "Power Golf." 1948.

If that is all we have to go by then so be it.

Hogan was playing a persimmon driver and a wound ball. The first ball that I ever played was a Titleist in 1960 and of one thing I am sure. The difference in distance that a PROV1 flies compared to Tiger's wound Titleist is very, very small, relative to the difference in distance between my 1960 Titleist and Tiger's late 90's Titleist. Move Hogan's Titleist back another 12 years and to carry a ball even 265 yards in those days would at least be comparable to Tiger's 300 yard carry of today.

Tiger may not have reached his prime yet because HH has flattened his swing and he is close to be on proper plane in his downswing. Until he gets there, and until he consistently plays subconscious golf, his level of play will stay where it is, as long as he continues his superior putting. If he starts missing some crucial putts and he develops a mode of fear, which can only be controlled and not eliminated, he will bring his competitors to his level.

Regardless BC. you're the one who brought up the pro v1 and the titanium headed driver not me. I was simply pointing out he played with wound balls as well.

I tried to find some tour statistics from 1946-50 to support Power Golfs claim about Driving distance and yours about his fariways hit and greens in reg etc. and could not find any.

That doesn't mean I believe it's false, it just means I can't find it anywhere else right now. But I did find one impressive stat.

Between 1946 to 1953, Hogan won 9 of the 16 majors he played.

That's pretty frightening.

[Andru]

And you talk about being closed minded. Why push the "Tiger is the greatest ever" to no end.

I'm still relatively new to this sport (been playing for five/six years) and I do watch the old highlight shows on the TGC. I'm with Golfpeasant on this one, what does it really matter. We can all agree that all the above mentioned golfers rank up there as some of the best of all time. And I don't think the "phases of age" has anything to do with people's opinion, its the passing of time. As much as we and the media try to compare athletes from different decades you just really can't do it. Each sport has evolved through the years along with the equipment, training methods etc. So one person's best ever is not another's. Agree to disagree and leave it at that.

You see you guys don't READ. I said the best it Jack becasue of his 18 majors!!

[Andru]

Don't worry Andru, I think your bias is clear to everyone already...

You also don't read. I think Jack is the best right now until Tiger beats his 18. It's in writing above.

[Andru]

Don't worry Andru, I think your bias is clear to everyone already...

At least I have the onions and the maturity to admit it.......

[1972Apex]

You also don't read. I think Jack is the best right now until Tiger beats his 18. It's in writing above.

Apparently we all missed it. Must have been buried in all the Tiger tributes in your posts .
Anyway, I don't really care who is No. 1 of all time. To me, all that's clear at this point is that Jack and Tiger are probably 1 and 2 of all time. They are unquestionably both the best of their eras. I'd put Hogan, Snead and Jones up there too for their eras, but that's just me. And I'm an admitted Ben Hogan freak .