| View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
webdesign
Joined: 17 Jul 2007
Posts: 2
|
 Posted: Tue Jul 17, 2007 5:42 pm Post subject: Tiger Woods |
|
|
The best in the history of GOLF.
|
|
 |
Kickntrue
Joined: 27 Jun 2006
Posts: 394
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 19, 2007 5:13 pm Post subject: maybe.. but |
|
|
i want to see tiger do it with the same equip that jack had then. not with jack in his prime using today's.
if they play old equip I give the edge to Jack. _________________ Kickntrue-
Duffing since 1993
|
|
|
touchdown
Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Posts: 1
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 31, 2007 7:16 am Post subject: tiger woods |
|
|
Tiger would win by a large margin!
|
|
|
allin
Joined: 04 Dec 2007
Posts: 1
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2007 4:52 pm Post subject: equalized conditions |
|
|
Compare Tiger without the fitness regimine to Jack or Jack with modern equipment and fitness training to Tiger and what do you get? Jack would probably be longer, make fewer big mistakes, Tiger better short game except putting. I think they would be pretty equal, I think people tend to favor their own eras.
|
|
|
chipotle mg
Joined: 19 Sep 2007
Posts: 90
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 24, 2008 8:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
whenever these "best of all time" competitions come up i think why does anyone care? the who's better right here right now question is the only one that matters. one of the big problems with winning is that it only lasts for a short time, basically until the next competition. out of all the pro sports (basketball, baseball, football, hockey) golf does one of the better jobs in celebrating their winners with x number of year exemptions and in many cases comming back and playing that specific tournament for life. once you win, you are supposed to mate and then die which leaves following generations to continue to compete amongst themselves to see who is the most fit.
besides that, it's impossible play out this competition.
cheers
|
|
|
RocketSauce
Joined: 14 Dec 2007
Posts: 53
|
| Posted: Wed May 14, 2008 8:48 pm Post subject: Re: tiger woods |
|
|
| touchdown wrote: |
| Tiger would win by a large margin! |
i seriously doubt it if Tiger would win by a large margin. if they were both playing the same equipment, i dont really know, but i think it would be a toss-up. they are both pretty freaking awesome
|
|
|
Pipeliner
Joined: 10 Mar 2008
Posts: 40
|
| Posted: Thu May 15, 2008 9:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ben Crane
Joined: 14 May 2008
Posts: 4
|
| Posted: Tue May 27, 2008 7:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jack got his victories playing against competition using the same equipment technology. Tiger isn't playing today against competition with Jack's technology - Tiger's competition has better equipment too.
|
|
|
jezskates
Joined: 27 May 2008
Posts: 6
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 23, 2008 7:13 pm Post subject: Too close to call |
|
|
Not getting into the debate between eras of competition, they are both clearly the finest players of their generation. Both revolutionized the game in regards to length and gritty determination. Having seen both, I've witnessed more big putts/chips from Tiger than from Jack; however, Tiger also has an edge with that in regards to course conditioning compared to what Jack played in the past.
Here's what's more interesting to me .... who would win in a staring competition!
|
|
|
Pipeliner
Joined: 10 Mar 2008
Posts: 40
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 23, 2008 7:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Tiger would win the stare down.
|
|
|
kidputter
Joined: 04 Feb 2008
Posts: 390
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 30, 2008 12:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Nicklaus got his wins against some of the best players of all time. Tiger is winning against guys who would barely be caddies in Jack's day.
What would happen if Tiger played every tourney against a Tiger-esque field?
Probably be a great golfer but not a superior, standout, best of all time type of golfer.
That's what makes Nicklaus the best ever. He played the best in the game and beat them consistently.
|
|
|
DeeZee
Joined: 12 May 2008
Posts: 1
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 16, 2009 7:58 am Post subject: Re: maybe.. but |
|
|
| Kickntrue wrote: |
i want to see tiger do it with the same equip that jack had then. not with jack in his prime using today's.
if they play old equip I give the edge to Jack. |
Amen. Old equipment, Jack wins 8 of 10 times.
I think it's safe to say that 99.75% of people younger than 40 years old have never played a round with equipment like Nicklaus played in the 60s and 70s. Until you've tried to hit a persimmon driver 270 yards or a blade 5 iron 175 yards with a balata ball, you can't tell me Tiger would dominate. New equipment, both in their primes, Tiger wins 60% of the time.
|
|
|
Jake Bogardus
Joined: 03 Jul 2008
Posts: 29
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 16, 2009 9:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
| kidave wrote: |
Nicklaus got his wins against some of the best players of all time. Tiger is winning against guys who would barely be caddies in Jack's day.
What would happen if Tiger played every tourney against a Tiger-esque field?
Probably be a great golfer but not a superior, standout, best of all time type of golfer.
That's what makes Nicklaus the best ever. He played the best in the game and beat them consistently. |
I disagree here, while the top 10 of Jack's era were most definitely stronger than the top 10 now, with Player Arnie Watson Weiskopf Miller all those guys, the overall fields were much weaker. Right now on any given week pretty much anyone can win. Jack had to be 10 or 15 really good players, Tiger has to beat 3 or 4 really good players but then another 140 very capable ones
|
|
|
kidputter
Joined: 04 Feb 2008
Posts: 390
|
| Posted: Thu May 07, 2009 3:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
If Tiger merely plays his game, he beats 98% of the field. The final 2% can win if he slips up or has outings like he has so far this year.
Jack had to be at the top of his game EVERY tourney or he went home out of the top 5.
|
|
|
N-THE-RUFF
Joined: 28 Nov 2008
Posts: 27
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 13, 2009 5:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Tiger did it again today.
Tiger 71
Jack 73
Tiger---years ahead of Jack's total. Tiger will finish his career with over 100 wins.
|
|
|
|
