re: Tiger's majors career is done. Nicklaus is, and always will be, the GOAT..

quote:

---

You can argue jack's era was more top heavy,

---

I guess it was with the names he listed. If I remember highlights, wasn't Watson around when Jack was playing?

quote:

---

, but today's fields are much deeper making it more difficult to win today.

---

Describe deep? IMO deep means more and more golfers have caught up with Tiger. That's not deep.

quote:

---

wasn't Watson around when Jack was playing?

---

Good catch. He was and I messed up not including him.

quote:

---

Good catch. He was and I messed up not including him.

---

Thanks. I don't get this Tiger lovers beef. He seems to get upset when anyone says something negative about Tiger. The dude was a beast in his prime. IMO he doesn't have what it takes to be dominant anymore. However looking at the top heavy part of this thread. I would say Jack has been more impressive with those names going against him every week. Tiger has had nobody like that to compete with on a weekly basis. Just saying. I could be wrong though.

I am not knocking jack at all. Clearly the 2nd GOAT. I just think tiger is the greatest golfer of all time. Trying to give you evidence that backs up my opinion.

quote:

---

To catch the only number that means anything in these arguments

---

This is the problem,that's not the only number that means anything
I wish Tiger had never said that because now it's the only number anyone wants to judge him by
Overall body of work,he's already surpassed Jack imo

quote:

---

Five majors is a "Nick Faldo" or a "Mickelson" on top of what he has already done.

---

Thats been my point all along with this "will Tiger catch Jack" debate. There is absolutely no way. He needs to have a hall of fame career from here on out for him to catch Jack .. NO WAY !!!

Now as far as GOAT, If Tiger had hung up the spikes four years ago, the argument would have been more fair. But the more majors Tiger plays and the more he loses his winning % will plummet and he will never catch Jack in the most important category - majors won ...

Why would you compare tiger to Faldo or Mickelson? Compare him to jack. He's still on jack's pace.

quote:

---

Jack faced stiffer competition

---

I don't think it's fair to Tiger to say this. You can't say Tiger's competition sucked just because he kicked all of their asses in his prime. Mayber Tiger really was that much better than all of them.

The fact that Jack faced more HOFers speaks to the fact that fields weren't as deep back then, hence the better players won more majors. There weren't Rich Beems, Shaun Micheels, Bob Mays, YE Yangs, Todd Hamiltons, Paul Lawries, etc. who were good enough to rise up and challenge Jack at any given major. Something like 18 of the last 20 majors have been won by different players. It's not because the best players suck today; it's because there are so many more players capable.

Having said that, Tiger has made it clear that getting to 18 is the reason he plays the game. I can't call him the GOAT because of that statement. If he hadn't been hurt so much, I think we'd be having a different conversation today; but injuries are part of sports and can't be ignored. Tiger has done more for golf than anyone in history, IMO, but Jack is the GOAT.

quote:

---

Why would you compare tiger to Faldo or Mickelson?

---

I'm not. I said that he has to have a hall of fame career from here on out to catch Jack. That is not happening. NO WAY NO HOW ..

Tiger is a victim of his own success. He has raised the bar of all the young players (and the older ones too) out there. You have to play better now to win majors than you did win Tiger was winning them. He is just not good enough to win five more. I am not sure anyone is right now but I can assure you at 38 - he has no chance.

Y.E. Yang let the golfing world know that he is beatable and from this moment on Tiger was done (Its like a kid trying to beat his father - it may take a long time to do it but once it happens once - it happens a lot):

quote:

---

But were top heavy which means he played against better players every week. Am I right here?

---

No, I don't think you are right. Of course, we have no way of knowing who's right, but my opinion is that the players of today are better than the players of Jack's era. I think Ernie Els is at least as talented as Gary Player, but Player has him beat by 5 majors because he didn't have to face as deep of fields as Ernie had to face. I have no way of proving that; it's just my opinion. Jack faced other HOFers so often because the difference between the top of the field and the bottom of the field was astronomical compared to today's fields.

quote:

---

If Tiger is/was so good why are these guys even in the same sentence as Tiger? Reason. Its not Depth.

---

You're wrong. It is depth. The fields are deeper, and by deeper, I mean that there are about 80 guys in a field, maybe more, capable of wining a given tournament. So, Tiger has such a small margin of error because it's very unlikely that all 80 of them won't play up to their potential. In Jack's day, there were probably half as many or less players good enough to compete with him even if he was off his game. As Stash said above, he's a victim of his own success, and it'll probably cost him his ultimate goal.