- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
0
Posted on 4/9/12 at 5:28 pm to jcole4lsu
i'm saying there are 50 guys who could win any given week today. there were 5 in jack's era
Posted on 4/9/12 at 5:29 pm to dukke v
quote:
ARNIE to go against
Arnold Palmer was kind of on the end of his run when Jack was in his prime. Arnie only had 7 top 10's in majors the 70's with no wins.
Out of 40 majors in that same time period Jack was top 10 or won in 35 of the 40. Which holy shite is VERY impressive.
Posted on 4/9/12 at 5:30 pm to texastiger38
exactly, nobody ever mentions that. they act as if jack and arnie and player and watson were all born the same year 
Posted on 4/9/12 at 5:31 pm to tigerblood29
quote:
i'm saying there are 50 guys who could win any given week today. there were 5 in jack's era
this has nothing to do with quality of the top players and increased quality of equipment though, right?
Posted on 4/9/12 at 5:31 pm to dukke v
quote:
The money is irrelevant in this topic.
WHAT?
quote:
He doesn't have the Majors .
question is if he had them
quote:
Not clearly.
Ok. Who was better??? Sampras, Laver, Borg Or FED?????
clearly. if tiger gets to 19, there is no possible argument agianst him being the best. sorry.
i don't know enough about tennis to make that decision.
Posted on 4/9/12 at 5:32 pm to The Boat
quote:
The top golfers today are better than anybody in the past
And they should be.
quote:
Tougher courses and better equipment make for better players old man.
Not relevant. BUt its nice that you say tougher courses when BOTH JACK and Arnie have MADE those tougher courses. DO SOME HOMEWORK RODDICK.
quote:
Rory would take Jack to the woodshed.
Not with the equipment Jack played with.
Posted on 4/9/12 at 5:32 pm to tigerblood29
quote:
exactly, nobody ever mentions that. they act as if jack and arnie and player and watson were all born the same year
arnold palmer finished 2nd to jack in 3 majors.
Posted on 4/9/12 at 5:33 pm to tigerblood29
quote:
as are the courses.
which negates the argument that they didnt modify a course to hold jack off as opposed to tiger
quote:
have you ever seen what the greens looked like back then? looks like today's light rough
you could also argue that the ball rolls more true now (albeit faster)
Posted on 4/9/12 at 5:33 pm to tigerblood29
Gary Player is a much better representative as to what Jack has done, they are only 5 years apart.
Arnie is 11 years older than Jack
Tom Watson is 9 years younger
It's kind of Tough to say Jack got the best of both of those players.
I AM IN NO WAY SAYING WHAT JACK DID WAS NOT IMPRESSIVE.
In fact quite the opposite. Like I said in the 70's out of 40 Majors played in the Decade he won or got top 10 in 35 of them
Arnie is 11 years older than Jack
Tom Watson is 9 years younger
It's kind of Tough to say Jack got the best of both of those players.
I AM IN NO WAY SAYING WHAT JACK DID WAS NOT IMPRESSIVE.
In fact quite the opposite. Like I said in the 70's out of 40 Majors played in the Decade he won or got top 10 in 35 of them
This post was edited on 4/9/12 at 5:36 pm
Posted on 4/9/12 at 5:34 pm to jcole4lsu
the equipment argument is so ridiculous, the guys on tour are playing completely different course than they used to.look how much different the yardages are and the greens are not even close.and the point is, when jack played,he only had to worry about a few other guys. tiger has more guys to beat every week
Posted on 4/9/12 at 5:36 pm to tigerblood29
quote:
and the point is, when jack played,he only had to worry about a few other guys. tiger has more guys to beat every week
and my point is that the guys jack did have to beat, were better players than the ones tiger has to beat.
its a quality vs quantity argument.
Posted on 4/9/12 at 5:36 pm to tigerblood29
quote:
,he only had to worry about a few other guys. tiger has more guys to beat every week
the anti tiger people are arguing the same exact thing in that tiger only had a few people to beat also
Posted on 4/9/12 at 5:36 pm to texastiger38
quote:
Arnold Palmer was kind of on the end of his run when Jack was in his prime. Arnie only had 7 top 10's in majors the 70's with no wins.
Not really. Do some homework. You realize that Jack won his 1st Master in the early 60's????
quote:
Out of 40 majors in that same time period Jack was top 10 or won in 35 of the 40. Which holy shite is VERY impressive
Can Tiger say this?????
Posted on 4/9/12 at 5:37 pm to Deactived
faster, more severe breaks, harder to hold when hitting iron shots into. and i know you've heard the term"tiger-proofing". i've never heard of jack-proofing
Posted on 4/9/12 at 5:37 pm to lsugolf1105
quote:
clearly. if tiger gets to 19, there is no possible argument agianst him being the best. sorry.
And I will agree. ESP with his weak knees and temper tantrums.
Posted on 4/9/12 at 5:38 pm to jcole4lsu
quote:
arnold palmer finished 2nd to jack in 3 majors.
Okay, but he only got 2nd place once in the entire 70's decade. I'm just saying Arnold was on the end of his run when Jack took off in the Late 60's and 70's
Posted on 4/9/12 at 5:40 pm to dukke v
quote:
Not really. Do some homework. You realize that Jack won his 1st Master in the early 60's????
1962, and Arnold Palmer only won 2 more majors after Jack won his first.
I may get Railed for this but Palmer won all but one of his majors in a 5 year stretch (6). Is he somewhat overrated in the scheme of things? Not taking into account what he has done for the game since his golfing days were over?
This post was edited on 4/9/12 at 5:42 pm
Posted on 4/9/12 at 5:40 pm to jcole4lsu
i'm sorry,i'm not stating my point clearly,let me try again. i'm saying that the course eliminated 75% of the players in the field in jack's era,where today the course eliminates 30% of the field
Posted on 4/9/12 at 5:40 pm to tigerblood29
quote:
and i know you've heard the term"tiger-proofing".
Never said he didn't dominate. Jack-proofing???? Thats funny.
Page 6 of 10
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News