- 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 9/28/16 at 8:01 pm to RegisteredPharmacist
Golfer at his peak: TW
Overall career as a golfer: JN
Overall career as a golfer: JN
Posted on 9/28/16 at 8:31 pm to RegisteredPharmacist
I am an Arnie fan but Jack came in 2nd 19 times in majors. Give him half of those wins & his record in majors would be off the charts & TW would never come close.
Posted on 9/28/16 at 8:55 pm to Keltic Tiger
quote:
but Jack came in 2nd 19 times in majors
Nothing else needs to be said.....................
Posted on 9/28/16 at 9:07 pm to dukke v
quote:
Nothing else needs to be said.....................
This. 19 times.
Also, I believe he was relevant going into a Sunday Masters in 1998!!!
He of course wilted but was in top 10 or so.
Posted on 9/28/16 at 10:22 pm to RegisteredPharmacist
Just to put a fine point on this:
Tiger Woods is a grade-A wimp who is/was not man enough to bite his tongue instead of dropping F-bombs at the drop of a hat, or keep his dick in is pants, or show enough courage to exercise even the minuscule amount of self-examination needed to look in the mirror and know who was staring back at him (which, granted was a quality that allowed him to milk sponsors for so very long on the basis a demonstrably phony, self-serving image of wholesome goodness).
He won a bunch of tournaments, made a lot of money, and screwed every IHOP waitress from Jupiter, FL to Pebble Beach -and surely didn't kick out any geisha girls for eating crispy noodles on the bamboo mat, either. For all that, there are some sycophantic sword-swallowers that think all that BS is some kind of resume for greatness. Fine, your metrics are your metrics, however craven and devoid of soul they are.
Numbers: 18>14 and whatever measure you want to conjure regarding 2nds, 3rds, and top-10s, Jack wins on that score, too.
And for you Nimrods that can't follow the argument regarding differences in competition, equipment, personal responsibilities, and supplemental support, the point is a very simple one: Creep-oid Woods had it much, much easier than the greatest golfer of all time, Jack Nicklaus.
Tiger Woods is a grade-A wimp who is/was not man enough to bite his tongue instead of dropping F-bombs at the drop of a hat, or keep his dick in is pants, or show enough courage to exercise even the minuscule amount of self-examination needed to look in the mirror and know who was staring back at him (which, granted was a quality that allowed him to milk sponsors for so very long on the basis a demonstrably phony, self-serving image of wholesome goodness).
He won a bunch of tournaments, made a lot of money, and screwed every IHOP waitress from Jupiter, FL to Pebble Beach -and surely didn't kick out any geisha girls for eating crispy noodles on the bamboo mat, either. For all that, there are some sycophantic sword-swallowers that think all that BS is some kind of resume for greatness. Fine, your metrics are your metrics, however craven and devoid of soul they are.
Numbers: 18>14 and whatever measure you want to conjure regarding 2nds, 3rds, and top-10s, Jack wins on that score, too.
And for you Nimrods that can't follow the argument regarding differences in competition, equipment, personal responsibilities, and supplemental support, the point is a very simple one: Creep-oid Woods had it much, much easier than the greatest golfer of all time, Jack Nicklaus.
Posted on 9/28/16 at 10:47 pm to crazycubes
quote:
Golfer at his peak: TW
Overall career as a golfer: JN
Why do a lot put Jack into this "lifer" category...and it's only his longevity that made him great?
Dude dominated. Period.
In the 1960's in the majors -
He won 7 majors
Finished in 2nd 8 times
Finished in 3rd 4 times
And finished 4th, 5th and 6th once each.
And he didn't play in two majors as an amatuer in the early 60's - twice.
So Jacks decade of 8 years...was 7 majors wins, 2nd 8 times, 3rd 4 times and 4th, 5th and 6th.
And that was just the 60's - he did better in the 70's with 8 majors wins...a bunch of 2nds and 3rds and 4ths.
I'd say Jack's 20 year reign was more impressive than 10 years of Tigers lightening.
Tigers 1 decade of dominance doesn't overcome Jack's two decades back to back of dominance.
Posted on 9/29/16 at 5:10 am to Knight of Old
quote:Thanks. Your post gave me AIDS.
Tiger Woods is a grade-A wimp who is/was not man enough to bite his tongue instead of dropping F-bombs at the drop of a hat
Posted on 9/29/16 at 5:12 am to dukke v
quote:Do not make me go find your posts when Spieth finishes 2nd in his majors.
Nothing else needs to be said.....................
That goes for all you other old bastards.
This post was edited on 9/29/16 at 5:13 am
Posted on 9/29/16 at 9:00 am to udtiger
quote:
And Jack was playing against: Gary Player (nine major wins), Tom Watson (eight), Arnold Palmer (seven), Lee Trevino (six) and Seve Ballesteros (five). Hell, Johnny Miller had 2 majors and three runners up at the Masters in a 10 year period (71-81).
This argument is so dumb. So Nicklaus was playing against better players because fewer people won Majors during his time?
This all goes back to the equipment argument. Old clubs/balls were terribly unforgiving. As a result, the elite golfers of the time had a distinct edge because their consistency as players meant they'd always be in contention. A lesser player had so little room for error with that equipment that a run to a major victory was incredibly unlikely.
In today's game, equipment is the great equalizer. Mishits aren't as costly. Players are more consistent. Nearly anyone in the field is capable of winning a tournament each week.
Tiger's dominance in that context is unmatched.
Posted on 9/29/16 at 9:02 am to slackster
So players overall are worse now? That seems to be what you're saying.
Posted on 9/29/16 at 9:05 am to ReauxlTide222
It's pretty simple. Given the body of work over their careers Jack Nicklaus was a superior golfer and easily a superior human being.
Tiger was a great golfer for a decade, Jack was a great golfer for almost 3 decades. More majors, better record in the majors by more than a factor of 2.
Jack was/is the GOAT. Tiger was the greatest of his generation, much like Spieth might be for his if he continues to play at a high level. McElroy as well.
Not even sure how this is being debated.
Tiger was a great golfer for a decade, Jack was a great golfer for almost 3 decades. More majors, better record in the majors by more than a factor of 2.
Jack was/is the GOAT. Tiger was the greatest of his generation, much like Spieth might be for his if he continues to play at a high level. McElroy as well.
Not even sure how this is being debated.
Posted on 9/29/16 at 9:15 am to kywildcatfanone
Have an up vote.
Isn't this about the 5th time this topic has been discussed on this board in the last year or so?
Isn't this about the 5th time this topic has been discussed on this board in the last year or so?
Posted on 9/29/16 at 9:56 am to VABuckeye
quote:
So players overall are worse now? That seems to be what you're saying.
No, I'm saying the equipment is a great equalizer. There are more contenders and the elite guys don't have the same advantage they used to have when the equipment provided an built-in barrier to entry so to speak.
The good/elite players are still good. The point is that the whole field legitimately has a shot at a win now. To dominate the way Tiger used to do is more impressive, IMO, as a result.
Posted on 9/29/16 at 9:57 am to kywildcatfanone
quote:
Not even sure how this is being debated.
I think the debate is really only about who was the best at their peak at this point. The career argument is all but over.
Posted on 9/29/16 at 10:28 am to Knight of Old
quote:okay
he was man enough to keep his dick out of the news.
quote:okay
Besides, much of the money Woods made was for his phony smile and his 'family values' - which is utter horse shite
quote:okay
didn't know how to keep his wick dry
quote:okay
for one very simple reason: he was not and will never be even half the man Nicklaus was
Posted on 9/29/16 at 11:10 am to kywildcatfanone
Jack Nicklaus is horribly overrated in comparison to The Tiger.
The logic behind certain points is horrible, so I'll do it too.
Jack couldn't putt on today's greens with that busted arse broke back looking putting stroke.
He looks like a table with a putter.
Ole hunch back of notre dame lookin arse
The logic behind certain points is horrible, so I'll do it too.
Jack couldn't putt on today's greens with that busted arse broke back looking putting stroke.
He looks like a table with a putter.
Ole hunch back of notre dame lookin arse
Posted on 9/29/16 at 11:14 am to ElTigresBack
You are stupid......
Posted on 9/29/16 at 11:15 am to RegisteredPharmacist
Posted on 9/29/16 at 11:25 am to dukke v
Watson is at least in the top 6ish.
Page 5 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News