- 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
re: Jack Nicklaus -vs- Tiger Woods
Posted on 9/28/16 at 1:53 pm to Hook Em Horns
Posted on 9/28/16 at 1:53 pm to Hook Em Horns
quote:Let us for a second pretend Jack was better than Tiger(puke). The way you put it is just ridiculous.
seriously? like you are serious?
no. tiger fricking woods was not better than jack fricking nicklaus. get off my lawn
0
Posted on 9/28/16 at 1:57 pm to Knight of Old
quote:Oh, well in that case
When Nicklaus took the stage, he credited his wife with most of his success.
"Were it not for Barbara, I would have been just another golfer," Nicklaus said. "People have asked me to quantify Barbara's importance in my career. I'd have to say she's responsible for at least 15 major championships. I'll give myself credit for three."
Posted on 9/28/16 at 2:10 pm to ReauxlTide222
quote:
Oh, well in that case
Hah. By this guy's line of thinking, Tim Tebowe is a better NFL QB than Michael Vick.
Posted on 9/28/16 at 2:12 pm to Tiger Ugly
Jack all day everyday. Jack never had a meltdown like this. He had slow stretches but never lost the game totally until Father Time took it.
Tiger can't putt, can't chip, was always a streaky driver so right now he can't drive.
You could say it's physical and his body broke down, but also his head broke down. He was physically well enough to swing the club without collapsing, but lost his putter? And shanking chips?
Tigers "book" is not closed yet. I hope he can get a sniff at majors again, but I in no way see it happening. To win one more would be like Jacks 86' Masters. But Tiger has to tack on another HOF pedigree to beat Jack. He basically has to be Phil. (5 majors). Oh the irony. He has to catch Phils number. Does anybody else have 5? Faldo has 6. Hogan?
Tiger can't putt, can't chip, was always a streaky driver so right now he can't drive.
You could say it's physical and his body broke down, but also his head broke down. He was physically well enough to swing the club without collapsing, but lost his putter? And shanking chips?
Tigers "book" is not closed yet. I hope he can get a sniff at majors again, but I in no way see it happening. To win one more would be like Jacks 86' Masters. But Tiger has to tack on another HOF pedigree to beat Jack. He basically has to be Phil. (5 majors). Oh the irony. He has to catch Phils number. Does anybody else have 5? Faldo has 6. Hogan?
Posted on 9/28/16 at 2:15 pm to COTiger
quote:
He faced stiffer competition and played with inferior equipment compared to what Woods played with
I'm not sure why you guys keep bringing up the equipment Nicklaus played with. Everyone in that era played with the same type of equipment. It's not like Palmer was using metal shafts and Nicklaus used wood.
All of Tiger's peers were using the same type of equipment he used also... It's not like he was using titanium and everyone else is using aluminum.
You can compare their relative scores to par based solely on the equipment they used on the golf courses but that argument is pretty weak too. The courses have changed so much over the years. Greens are better, holes are longer, etc.
Jack has a slight edge with a greater career and sustained his greatness over a longer period of time. I like to think about who I would bet on if they were playing face to face in their prime with the same equipment... I'm betting on Tiger.
Posted on 9/28/16 at 3:20 pm to RegisteredPharmacist
Woods in his prime is the greatest golfer to ever walk this planet.
This post was edited on 9/28/16 at 10:56 pm
Posted on 9/28/16 at 3:24 pm to tigerpimpbot
18 majors against fields of 30 golfers isn't nearly as impressive as 14 majors with fields of 150. Tiger is better in every other metric by leaps and bounds. The only thing jack supporters have is the number 18, but I just shite on that. So yeah Eldrick for days.
Plus jack putts like the hunchback of notre dame. That shite wouldn't fly with today's competition.
Plus jack putts like the hunchback of notre dame. That shite wouldn't fly with today's competition.
Posted on 9/28/16 at 3:26 pm to gthog61
quote:
If Tiger hadn't taken the shite that helped him be good he wouldn't have had the injuries.
Link?
And of Nicklaus hadnt taken testosterone shots he wouldnt have been good either.
See. Anyone can make bullshite paosts4 that are not backed up by stats.
Posted on 9/28/16 at 3:27 pm to ElTigresBack
Yeah but he almost won more than Tiger almost won!
Posted on 9/28/16 at 3:31 pm to udtiger
Do you know why those guys had so many majors? It's because they were playing 10 somes against each other and all of them won a few. Majors were a joke compared to what they are now.
Posted on 9/28/16 at 3:35 pm to ElTigresBack
Judging by what you've posted in 2 posts, it's apparent that you've been watching golf for what? 2 weeks?
Posted on 9/28/16 at 3:36 pm to Knight of Old
quote:
"Were it not for Barbara, I would have been just another golfer," Nicklaus said. "People have asked me to quantify Barbara's importance in my career. I'd have to say she's responsible for at least 15 major championships. I'll give myself credit for three."
Top 3 golfers:
Tiger
Barbara
Jack
Posted on 9/28/16 at 3:37 pm to ElTigresBack
quote:
The only thing jack supporters have is the number 18, but I just shite on that. So yeah Eldrick for days.
I'd love to say the 2009 Saints were a better team than the 1990's Cowboys. Doesn't make it so.
Majors are Super Bowls. And when you reach Tiger and Jacks level of greatness, that's all they cared about. You think either of them gave a shite about a Milwaukee Open? Jack, maybe? Because winners checks weren't what they are now.
And Tiger had a physical and mental breakdown in the tail end of his prime. Jack did not have that. He slowly lost his ability as he aged. Tiger fell off a fricking cliff. At 35 or so.
Even injuries? They matter. You can point to tigers injuries as an excuse. It's not. It's not his fault either. This is where Jack just got lucky over Tiger.
I do agree that 2000-2004 Tiger probably beats 1970-1973 Jack. But that's pissing in the wind.
GOAT over totality of a career is Jack as they stand now.
Posted on 9/28/16 at 3:38 pm to COTiger
Yeah, there's been a shite ton of majors these last couple weeks
Posted on 9/28/16 at 3:38 pm to COTiger
The fields were normal size when Jack played, but how watered down were them things compared to today? I don't think the list of names Jack went against is as impressive as most people do.
Posted on 9/28/16 at 3:47 pm to ReauxlTide222
Probably because I'm an old fart, but I believe the fields were deeper in Jack's era than today.
Posted on 9/28/16 at 3:48 pm to tigerpimpbot
quote:Given the era difference, and the massive amount of majors between them...the 18 vs 14 argument is the single dumbest argument in sports.
18>14
5 vs 1? Sure, the 4 major difference is huge. There is nothing definitive in the in 18 vs 14 shite.
Posted on 9/28/16 at 3:53 pm to LSU alum wannabe
You say all they cared about was majors then end it with totality of career.
Totality?
Jack:
Wins-73
Top 10-286
Events played-595
El Tigre:
Wins-79
Top10-186
Events played- 327
These numbers are insanity for Tiger. It's not even close. WITH harder competition.
And I'll say it again... Jack was playing in majors with half the amount of people in them as Tiger. It is much easier it is to beat a field of 80 than 150.
And for Tigers mental collapse? He came back and won player of the year.
Totality?
Jack:
Wins-73
Top 10-286
Events played-595
El Tigre:
Wins-79
Top10-186
Events played- 327
These numbers are insanity for Tiger. It's not even close. WITH harder competition.
And I'll say it again... Jack was playing in majors with half the amount of people in them as Tiger. It is much easier it is to beat a field of 80 than 150.
And for Tigers mental collapse? He came back and won player of the year.
Posted on 9/28/16 at 3:56 pm to COTiger
quote:I think today's are deeper than Jack's and even Tiger's. And I think the tidal wave of information in maximizing the body's potential brings fields closer together than ever. IMO, professional athletes can maximize what that they can do as an individual now more than ever. Fields back in the day were filled with guys who would never make it in today's game.
Probably because I'm an old fart, but I believe the fields were deeper in Jack's era than today.
The argument against that is if guys back in the day had the info and technology of today, they'd be better. And it's true. Some/most/idk how many of them would be better. It would change the landscape of their game for sure. But not all of them would take advantage. Almost 100% of the guys now do. And that increase year by year.
Posted on 9/28/16 at 3:58 pm to ElTigresBack
quote:I'm pretty sure Jack was playing against normal sized fields my man.
And I'll say it again... Jack was playing in majors with half the amount of people in them as Tiger. It is much easier it is to beat a field of 80 than 150
Page 3 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News