In partnership with CBSSports.com
The place to talk about the Texas Longhorns
The place for off topic discussion on Hookem
You have no favorite boards.
The most viewed topics.
The most replied to topics.
The most up-voted topics.
The most down-voted topics.
The most up-voted posters.
The most down-voted posters.
The most followed posters.
I think the idea is there are more of them today. Still think Jack is the GOAT. You don't win 18 and finish 2nd in 19 and top 5 in 54 majors by chance. In other words he was in position to win 30 plus majors. That's big time
I would certainly say there are. Kite doesn't belong on that list. The issue with this argument for me is that Tiger's competition (and Tiger for that matter) aren't done playing like Jack's era. So if the end all be all is major totals, well we really don't have much to talk about. My argument against major totals are there are certainly more guys capable of winning them today so the numbers could be skewed. Jack didn't play against anywhere near the competition Tiger will have played against from across the pond. The top 3 players in the world aren't Americans.
Rory is as talented as they come but he's so young. He could be one of the all-time greats or he could flame out. Phil certainly belongs on any list. He's as good as anyone Jack played against. No question.
Jack falls into an interesting place as far as competition goes. He really didn't spend much time playing against Palmer in his prime. Nor Watson. They were bookends to his career.
Babe Dickerson Zaharias would work for me.
As would Bobby Jones, Byron Nelson, Ben Hogan, Sam Snead, and of course Arnold Palmer.
Thanks TX Stampede!
This post was edited by JFrankWebb 2 years ago
275-0 scoring margin
Dana X Bible's National Championship team
Total Majors won by runner up to Jack (37)
Total Majors won by runner up to Tiger (15)
9 of top 25 golfers of All Time finished 2nd to Jack in a major.
1 of top 25 golfers of all time finished 2nd to Tiger
The competition today is deeper and the players with better equipment and more refined courses hit the ball further and have a better chance to put well for the same reasons.
The game is played against your peers. Each player who has ever dominated the game as Tiger has done deserves the respect due a true winner on the course. Some have messed up their personal life but I will leave the non sinners among you to judge Tiger on that.
Lord Byron might, just might, get the nod ahead of Hogan. But I doubt it.
What is the significance of this stat?
SMH at the ESPN-like stats being brought to defend Jack. Right now Jack is on the mountain top, if TIger passes him in majors won then that goes to Tiger. It's really that simple.
It gives light to the quality of competition Jack and Tiger had to go against on Sunday.
You know Gerry is absent from this board when he's nowhere to be found 30+ posts into a TW thread.
that is just it, there wasn't much quality. These things are never looked at correctly. It's like people saying Jack is a better player because he came from behind more times to win a major. Oh really? Why is it so much better to blow leads like Jack did a bunch in majors rather than be the games greatest front runner like Tiger?
Take a look at this info compiled by someone other than me......
Just for fun, let’s look at this a different way. Ok, suppose Palmer, Player, Trevino, Watson, Miller, etc were ‘greater’ than today’s current players. I’m not sure I agree but we’ll go with it for this discussion.
The argument seems to be that Jack’s wins were greater because these guys were in the field, or that Jack had so many 2nd’s because these guys stepped up and took championships from him.
Let’s look at Jack’s victories and see what the ‘name’ players did to put pressure on Jack:
’62 US Open –Palmer had 10 3-putts in regulation, and took 38 putts on Saturday; with any kind of putting from Palmer there never would have been a playoff.
’63 Masters – Player bogeyed the last two holes to finish 3 shots back; Palmer shot 37 on the back 9 the last day and finished 5 shots out.
’63 PGA – Player was 7 shots back, Palmer 14 shots back, never in it.
’65 Masters – Jack blew the field away, just like Tiger did in ’97.
’66 Masters – Palmer shot 38 on the back 9, finishing 2 shots out of the Brewer – Nicklaus – Jacobs playoff; Player finished 11 shots back.
’67 US Open - Jack legitimately beat Palmer in this one, though by then he knew he could beat Palmer; unheard of Trevino finished 5th 8 shots back, Player was 11 shots back.
’70 Open – best known for Sanders blowing the 3-footer to give Jack a chance; nonetheless Trevino finished 2 shots back, Palmer 7 shots back, and Player missed the cut.
’71 PGA – Player was the only one close at 4 shots back, Trevino 7 shots back, Palmer 8; Player shot a final round 73 so he didn’t exactly put the pedal to the metal.
’72 Masters – Player finished 5 shots back, Trevino and Palmer both finished 14 shots back at +12; this tournament was similar to 2002 for Tiger in that absolutely no one challenged Jack the last day.
’72 US Open- Palmer shot 76 to finish 4 shots back; Trevino shot 78 to finish 5 shots back, and Player never contended, finishing 15 shots back.
’73 PGA – Watson finished 8 shots back, Trevino and Miller 9 shots back; Player 17 shots back; and Palmer missed the cut.
’75 Masters – Miller admits he chickened out shooting at the pin on 18 when he needed a birdie to tie Nicklaus; Watson was 9 shots back, Trevino 10 shots back; Palmer 11 back.
’75 PGA – Watson was 9 shots back; Palmer and Player 15 shots back; Trevino 21 shots back.
’78 Open – Watson closed with a 76 to finish 6 shots back; Trevino was 10 shots back; Player 11 shots back; Miller was cut.
’80 US Open – Watson was 4 shots back, Trevino 11 shots back.
’80 PGA – Trevino was 11 shots back, Watson 14 back in a Nicklaus runaway.
’86 Masters – great comeback by Jack, but Norman did bogey 18 to miss out playing off.
The inescapable conclusion that I came to looking at all this is that while these guys may have been great players and great champions, they pretty much stunk when it came to putting pressure on Nicklaus in his wins. The fact is guys like Bruce Crampton and Doug Sanders pushed Jack harder in his victories than these guys. Say what will about Di Marco, May, etc. – I contend they did more to force Tiger to play great shots and/or rounds than Palmer, Player, etc. ever did with Jack.
Same guy compiled some interesting info on Jack's second place finishes........
With all the hoopla about Tiger versus Jack, how Jack’s 19 seconds shows how much other players of his era stepped up, etc. it seemed like looking at Jack’s second place finishes warranted closer scrutiny.
After looking closer, they seemed to fit into 3 categories:
Runaways (6) – Jack was 2nd or T2 but never had a chance
Close but not that close (5) – Jack was 2nd or T2 but it wasn’t as close as it looked
Close calls (8) - either Jack blew it (which happened more often than many realize), the competitor made some great shots, or some combination thereof.
Before laying out the categories, a few observations:
o Trevino and Watson were the only players that fought Jack tooth and nail down the stretch and won.
o While some players clearly did step up against Jack, Jack did play his share of giveaway.
o Jack realistically could have won the close calls. Of these he gave away about half, so perhaps Jack lost 4-5 majors due to competitors really stepping up.
Here they are:
’64 Masters – Palmer won going away by 6 strokes; Jack was T2 with Dave Marr.
’64 Open – Tony Lema won going away by 5 strokes. Jack finished 2nd but was never in it.
’64 PGA – Bobby Nickols won by 3 strokes going wire-to-wire; Jack was T2 with Palmer.
’68 US Open – Trevino won going away by 4 strokes; first player to shoot four US Open rounds in the 60’s; Jack had to shoot a final round 67 to get within 4 strokes. Never close.
’76 Open – Johnny Miller won going away by 6 strokes. Jack shot 69 the last round to get a back-door T2 with Seve Ballesteros, who shot 74 the last round.
’79 Open – Seve Ballesteros won going away by 3 strokes and it wasn’t that close. Jack got a back-door T2, but Crenshaw was the only serious challenger until he double-bogeyed the 17th hole.
Close, but not that close:
’65 PGA – Dave Marr won by two – Jack tied second with Billy Casper. The pivotal hole was the par 5 11th where Jack bogeyed with two poor chips while Marr birdied.
’67 Open – Robert De Vicenzo beat Jack by two strokes – no one else was close. Can you say Rich Beem or Michael Campbell?
’68 Open – Gary Player beats Jack and Bob Charles by two strokes. Player actually battled all day with Charles and Billy Casper. Jack was the chaser all day and never could get closer than 2 shots.
’81 Masters – Jack and Johnny Miller were T2 behind Watson by 2 strokes. Jack had to birdie 15 and 16 to get within 2 shots of Watson, who played a conservative back 9 and cruised home.
’83 PGA – Jack lost by a stroke to Hal Sutton. Sutton had a 5-stroke lead with 7 to play. Sutton got a little sloppy and let Jack get close, but never let him close enough to tie for the lead.
’60 US Open – While Palmer ‘charged’ to victory by 2 shots, Jack had to work pretty hard to lose this one. With a one-shot lead, he missed an 18-inch putt on the 13th hole, 3-putted the 14th hole, missed a 3-footer on 16, then missed a 5-footer on 18. Ben Hogan was later quoted as saying he played with a kid 'who should have won by 10 shots’.
71 Masters – Tied for the lead after 3 rounds, Jack 3-putted 4 greens in route to an indifferent 72 and lost by two shots to Charles Coody; Johnny Miller was T2 with Nicklaus.
’71 US Open – Trevino caught Jack with a final-round 69 and won the playoff the next day by 3. Remember that in the playoff Jack gave away the lead early by failing to get out of bunkers on both #2 and #3.
’72 Open – Well chronicled end to the Grand Slam hopes as Jack lost by one to Trevino. Tied for the lead the last round, Jack bogeyed the 16th hole and then failed to birdie the par 5 17th. Trevino of course did hit the miracle chip on 17 to stay one ahead, while Tony Jacklin fell apart and finished 3rd..
’74 PGA – Jack missed a makeable putt on 18 that would have tied Trevino (even though according to legend Jack never missed a putt he needed on 18), thus losing by a shot.
’77 Masters – Watson birdied 17 to take the lead. Jack, playing the group ahead of Watson, then bogeyed 18 and Watson cruised home with a 2-shot victory.
’77 Open – Well chronicled duel in the sun between Nicklaus and Watson. Remember though, that Jack missed a 4-foot birdie putt on 17 that would have kept him tied for the lead, as Watson did birdie 17.
’82 US Open – Well chronicled loss to Watson when Watson chipped in on 17, then also birdied 18 to win by 2.
You can look back and see the times where Jack did come back and win it. Does it make him worse of a golfer because he had to come back from a deficit he created or does it make him better because of it? I submit neither. He was great because he won no matter how, he won. For those older than I am, you can answer this question. Did Jack pout and pitch a fit and cuss when the game did not go his way? I do not know the answer to that, but Tiger does. Yes this is part of the game. Tiger is much more the physical specimen Jack was, but what would have Jack looked like. Tiger is a physically talented and great golfer. No if and or buts about it. For my money give me Jack. Time will tell if he is the sportsman Jack is. Will he be as gracious to the next phenom as Jack is to him? You can have Tiger. I'll take Jack. Where I live I can see the fingerprints of Jack on the courses here. Will Tiger carry on his greatness after his playing days are over?
I don't really care about any of the secondary stuff in terms of this discussion. Does Tiger seem like a gentleman on the golf course? Not to my eye but I'm not inside the ropes walking with him either. When you are on tv more than anyone else, everything will be public. Did Jack cuss after bad shots or take some turf out of the ground? I'd wager he did.
I'll never understand why people care so much about an athletes character or personal life when it comes to watching sports.
He can sleep with as many Denny's waitresses as he wants to and I won't care one way or the other, but when he throws clubs I find it somewhat embarrassing. I grew up playing in my Dad's Sunday group at the local club and I would've gotten my butt whipped for acting like that, so keeping my temper in check has been ingrained in me since then.
Some people are just more emotional than others, I'd rather see an athlete show passion than be stoic all the time.
If he wasn't that emotional, he would be a completely different player. I don't think it's possible to bottle up this outburst or that outburst and keep the "good ones" for live tv. An outburst is exactly that. Good and bad. I'm not telling anyone they have to like it or agree with it. I'm simply saying I understand the situation. For the record, my dad was a hardass when it came to stuff like that. I knew it, knew I'd get in trouble for it. But guess what, they still come out to this day.
I'm definitely not suggesting that he shouldn't have the occasional outburst because we're all guilty of that. I was allowed some leeway growing up and heard a lot of four letter words on the course. But throwing my clubs and acting like a child was frowned upon and I learned that lesson early on. If I wanted to play with the adults, I had to act like one. I don't want to watch a bunch of statues out there either, but there is an unspoken rule on far you let your emotions run. Maybe I'm just old school though.
Are you going to criticize Ernie Els for throwing his clubs?
Or how about Sergio for destroying a bunker...but he didn't actually throw a club, so this must be ok by you? But if Tiger would do this, he's a POS, right?
Yes, I will.
That was a very embarrassing moment for Sergio and I'm betting he would take it back if he could. My only issue with Tiger is that this is a recurring theme with him. That said, it's not like I turn off the TV in disgust when he acts immature. Never suggested he was a POS either, so not sure where that came from.
Then let's see it...let's see if you can find as much criticism for Ernie Els as you have for Tiger...or are you gonna make another excuse for Els the same way you made an excuse for Sergio
This post has been edited 3 times, most recently by mcb0703 2 years ago
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports