Golf question- Jack vs Tiger

[Coach34]

I dont know the answer, this is more for the golf lovers:

Wasnt Jack a longer hitter than most of the field when he first came along, like Tiger? If so, had Jack had the modern technology Tiger has had, would he not won a few more majors? Jack drives the ball longer, gets to his short irons more often with which he was deadly, thus scoring lower.

Was just a thought

 

[DerHntr]

that everyone would have been scoring lower equally (in theory) if they all had the same technology available to them. so i don't think jack's advantage would have been as great as you put it. basically what i am saying is jack beat them with the same available clubs and nothing would have changed in my opinion of the clubs had changed for everyone.

of course, if you put 32 year old jack with tiger's current clubs and everyone else with wood drivers with small metal faces....then yeah...he would have killed them.

 

[patdog]

They play on longer courses now. If Jack had the same equipment that Tiger has, then all of his competitiors would also have that equipment and they'd be playing longer courses. I would think all of that would pretty much even out and Jack would have still won about the same.

 

[saddawg]

He may have been as long as Tiger off the tee with the old equipment. Tiger is longer with the irons. Give Hogan and Jack in their prime todays souped up crap and they would have been unreal.

 

[OneParticularHarbor]

Jack was very long off the tee when he came onto the scene compared to his fellow players. He overpowered golf courses, but he also had a short game like nobody else did. In short, he was a lot like Tiger. Also, Nicklaus had nearly as many seconds in majors as he had wins.

One reason he didn't win more majors is because he had better competition from players like Palmer and Player. Right now, if Tiger doesn't win a major, it's because he didn't play up to his potential. No other player steps up to challenge him when he brings the A-game like happened with Nicklaus.

 

[PineGroveBully]

nt

 

[YellowFeverDawg]

that is better than everyone else in the field. The thing that separates Jack and Tiger from everyone else is that once they both achieved the status of being that elite player they avoided a couple of pitfalls. 1. neither stopped working on their game, and 2. Jack never lost his nerve and Tiger is showing no sign of losing his. I concede that Jack had better competition, but Tiger has the luxury of knowing exactly how high the bar Jack set is. We will never know which one is better, and this argument will continue until another Jack/Tiger comes along, and my son and I argue which is better Tiger or Wonder Boy just like my dad I argue the better of Tiger and Jack.

 

[shaschboy]

That's what separates the two. That thing could be used in the NHL.

 

[RebelBruiser]

I think it's impossible to compare golfers from different ages, obviously because of technology, but also because of competition and the style of courses. There are a handful of greats, and any one of them could be argued to be the best. For all we know, Bobby Jones might have been the best ever. If I remember correctly, he retired at around the age of 29 to do other things besides golf, but while he played he dominated everyone. Had he played into his 50s, he might have set major records that Jack couldn't have touched.

People don't talk about him as much though because he retired so young and didn't set any real career records because of it.

I do think Tiger will shatter Jack's major mark. I expect he'll win around 25 before he retires, and he will likely throw in some 2nd places as well.

Edited to add: At this moment, Tiger has 13 major titles and 4 second place finishes at the age of 32. His 1st and 2nd place finishes have occurred over a period of 11 years, starting in 1997.

Jack had 18 major titles and I counted 19 second place finishes. Those 1st and 2nd place finishes occurred over a period of 27 seasons.

Jack's last major title (1986 Masters) came at the age of 46. Tiger has 15 more seasons (including this one) to play before he turns 47.

One other advantage Tiger has are the health and nutrition advances today. He'll probably be able to play well enough to compete for major titles into his 50s with the way he handles his body.

 

[Columbus Dawg]

the technology has allowed everyone else to catch up. If you made everyone play with the same equipment Jack used back in the day, the gap between Tiger and the field would be even larger.

One other point, Tiger has a much better short game than Jack ever did. Their putters are about equal, but Tiger is a much better chipper and pitcher of the ball.

 

[wpnetdawg]

I think one thing to consider when comparing Jack and Tiger's competition is population size. There are nearly twice as many people in the country now than when Jack was winning the bulk of his majors and I would guess an even larger percentage of those play golf. What this means is that there are likely twice as many professional-caliber players today than there were in the 60s. Going even one step further, there would be more than twice as many golfers capable of winning any given tournament.

Why is this important? Since golfers play against the field, the depth of the field becomes critically important. I dare say the reason that there is such a small group of legendary golfers from that era was impacted to some degree to the lack of field depth which drove up the mathematical probability of any elite golfer's probability of winning a tournament.

Having said all this, I think the key to comparing the two is the number 18. If Tiger goes above 18 then he deserves to be considered the greatest ever (or at least the greatest since Bobby Jones since his early retirement and lack of playing opportunity make any comparison between him and a modern golfer impossible).

Its not guaranteed, but I think Tiger will get into the 20s. Time will tell.

 

[RebelBruiser]

And for people that throw in Jack's 2nd place finishes, I think it's highly likely that Tiger finishes with as many combined 1st and 2nd place major finishes as Jack. He has 17 combined at the moment, compared to Jack's 37. He could easily end up with a similar number or even greater number of combined first and 2nd place finishes.

As for Jack's mark of 18 majors, I think it's only a matter of when, not if Tiger will break that mark. He gets 4 chances a year and only needs 6 more to get to 19 major wins. I think it's realistic to expect Tiger will win 6 majors in the next 4 years, which would put him at 19 majors by the age of 36. At the very least, he'll break that record before his 40th birthday. He has 32 majors to play between now and his 40th birthday. He'll win at least 6 of those.