- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- 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 4/2/25 at 11:21 am to lsupride87
quote:
Tiger would have been more dominant if the equipment was dated when he played
People forget (or never knew) Tiger played with old Cobra woods with steel shafts.
Posted on 4/2/25 at 11:30 am to _Hurricane_
I’ll agree that Tiger made a huge impact on the sport. He was must see tv like golf had never really had before. And the sport is still viewed close to that way to this day. But golf needs a flashy emotional type player that is exciting for fans. Rory is somewhat there but needs to win more majors. Scottie is great but rarely shows emotion the fans want to see.
Posted on 4/2/25 at 11:36 am to _Hurricane_
quote:
There’s an entire contingent who only got into golf because Tiger led them to it.
Yeah and you still see them out there fricking up the play and course ever since.
Posted on 4/2/25 at 11:37 am to dblwall
Jack says Tiger is better fwiw.
Posted on 4/2/25 at 11:38 am to Mingo Was His NameO
This is very true.
Posted on 4/2/25 at 11:44 am to lsupride87
quote:
Tiger would have been more dominant if the equipment was dated when he played
Instead of talking about boring shite like sustainability this should be the talking point for the equipment rollback people. The Tour’s best chance of creating another version of Tiger is by removing all the equal footing. It’s been said plenty of times before but if they fixed the technology Rory would absolutely dominate
Posted on 4/2/25 at 11:48 am to _Hurricane_
From what we know, yes, jack has had a much less tumultuous personal life.
I will say that in his heyday, we obviously didn’t have 24 hour media, socials, etc.
The guys that covered golf were drinking buddies with the players and wouldn’t have put their business out there like today’s scandal chasers.
This does not mean I think Jack had some shadow life, just we don’t know every single thing he ever did like we do about Tiger and todays players.
I will say that in his heyday, we obviously didn’t have 24 hour media, socials, etc.
The guys that covered golf were drinking buddies with the players and wouldn’t have put their business out there like today’s scandal chasers.
This does not mean I think Jack had some shadow life, just we don’t know every single thing he ever did like we do about Tiger and todays players.
Posted on 4/2/25 at 12:07 pm to dblwall
I never understood comparisons like these when golf majors are based on how well you do compared to what competitors did. Why are more comparisons not just solely score by score how good the golfer was?
Posted on 4/2/25 at 12:10 pm to SuckerPunch
quote:Yeah. Overcoming all that knowledge and wealth at Stanford shows what a true boot-strap guy Tiger really was.
Where is the box for tiger had to win even tho he was black or asian or mixed…when he first came on the scene he had to deal with it AND win…jack never had to deal with those pressures
Posted on 4/2/25 at 12:40 pm to iwyLSUiwy
quote:18 vs 15 is a bullet. It’s not a resume
One has the better resume
That 15 occurred in a much tighter timeframe and if not for a decaying body ends up somewhere in the 20’s
There really isn’t a comparison unless you’re a salty fossil
Posted on 4/2/25 at 12:53 pm to SuckerPunch
BS
He experienced nothing.
He experienced nothing.
Posted on 4/2/25 at 12:55 pm to ctiger69
quote:This is just as stupid as the original post
He experienced nothing.
Posted on 4/2/25 at 12:56 pm to beaverfever
Think about the technology Tiger had over Jack. Ball technology advances alone put Jack as the best pure golfer imo.
Posted on 4/2/25 at 12:58 pm to Raging Tiger
quote:This is always so dumb. Do you think Tiger was the only one with the technology?
Think about the technology Tiger had over Jack. Ball technology advances alone put Jack as the best pure golfer imo.
Technology helps lesser players and makes greater parity. It’s a disadvantage to the elite
Posted on 4/2/25 at 12:59 pm to RemouladeSawce
quote:
18 vs 15 is a bullet. It’s not a resume
I realize that. But in a sport like golf, it's a pretty heavy caliber bullet. Just majors in general. The 19 to 7 in runner ups and 55 to 26 in top 10's.
Tiger has 110 professional wins to Jacks 100 so Tiger has him there.
If you put stock in Ryder Cups, which I do, Jack has him by a lot there. 5 team wins and one tie compared to Tigers 1 win in 8 tries. Jacks overall record was 17-8-3 to Tigers 13-12-3.
People talk about Tigers amateur career but Jacks was equally as impressive.
quote:
Both Tiger and Jack had excellent careers in the amateur ranks. Woods won the US Junior Amateur three years running and then claimed the US Amateur Championship three years consecutively after that. He is the only man to win the US Amateur three years in a row. He played in the Eisenhower Trophy and the Walker Cup (although on a losing US team in 1995.) In addition, Woods was a six-time Junior World Golf Champion.
Nicklaus won the US Amateur Championship twice and played in winning Walker Cup sides on two occasions. He was also both a team and individual winner in the Eisenhower Trophy. As already mentioned, Nicklaus finished runner-up in the 1960 US Open while he was still an amateur.
When it comes to amateur achievements, we can probably say it was a hard fought half between the two greatest male players in our sport.
quote:
That 15 occurred in a much tighter timeframe and if not for a decaying body ends up somewhere in the 20’s
I agree but also don't care about what ifs.
quote:
There really isn’t a comparison unless you’re a salty fossil
I'm 38 and an avid golfer. Started playing golf in part because of Tiger and have been a Tiger fan for a long time. Watched Tiger his whole career and never really got to watch any of Jacks. But I'm not going to ignore history and that certainly doesn't make you a salty dinosaur if you do. It is however extremely dumb to think that there isn't a comparison.
Posted on 4/2/25 at 1:06 pm to Raging Tiger
The different equipment each had has nothing to do with comparison. Both players peers had the same clubs as them. A lot of people just don’t understand how hard it is to play at an elite level week after week and year after year. You have to have a special work ethic and desire to be that good. I don’t care what anyone says, golf is way more a mental game than it is physical.
Posted on 4/2/25 at 1:08 pm to dukke v
quote:
The different equipment each had has nothing to do with comparison. Both players peers had the same clubs as them.
It absolutely matters if you understand what modern equipment has done to golf
Posted on 4/2/25 at 1:21 pm to lsupride87
How can you discount that technology doesn’t help? All the video review, data collection, and advances in clubs/balls didn’t help Tiger at all?
Posted on 4/2/25 at 1:22 pm to Mingo Was His NameO
You missed my
Point. Jack played in his era and Tiger played in his.the clubs were different for both. And the players in jacks era played with the same clubs. Tigers era played with the same clubs he was using.
Point. Jack played in his era and Tiger played in his.the clubs were different for both. And the players in jacks era played with the same clubs. Tigers era played with the same clubs he was using.
Page 3 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News