ChiefsPlanet Mobile
Page 9 of 17
« First < 56789 10111213 > Last »
The Lounge>Tiger Woods
Hamwallet 04:13 PM 03-11-2018
Anyone else watch golf for the first time in a long time today? He seems to be getting back to form. He was right in it today, next week is Bay Hill, that dude lived on the course for a LONG time.
[Reply]
KC_Connection 10:08 PM 04-08-2018
Originally Posted by otherstar:
It was exceptional, but still not at the same level as Jack Nicklaus....and Nicklaus had MUCH tougher competition.
I don't want to diminish Jack Nicklaus' level of dominance which was similar, but the competition in Nicklaus' era wasn't even close to as good as it was in Tiger's. Nowhere near the same kind of depth/talent pool.
[Reply]
srvy 11:05 PM 04-08-2018
:-) Surely you were drunk when you posted this:-)
[Reply]
srvy 11:22 PM 04-08-2018
The shortlist of greats of the game Nicklaus played with Gary Player (nine majors), Tom Watson (eight), Arnold Palmer (seven), Lee Trevino (six) and Seve Ballesteros (five).
[Reply]
CoMoChief 01:07 AM 04-09-2018
It was nice to see Tiger play well the last rd.

When Tiger golfs, the world watches. Plain n simple.
[Reply]
Garcia Bronco 05:50 AM 04-09-2018
Originally Posted by KC_Connection:
I don't want to diminish Jack Nicklaus' level of dominance which was similar, but the competition in Nicklaus' era wasn't even close to as good as it was in Tiger's. Nowhere near the same kind of depth/talent pool.
what?...okay.
[Reply]
oldman 07:29 AM 04-09-2018
Originally Posted by srvy:
The shortlist of greats of the game Nicklaus played with Gary Player (nine majors), Tom Watson (eight), Arnold Palmer (seven), Lee Trevino (six) and Seve Ballesteros (five).
Yep, put Woods in with that group and he wouldn't have won so easily. I'm not saying he isn't great, but no one matches Jack.
[Reply]
Kman34 07:42 AM 04-09-2018
Originally Posted by oldman:
Yep, put Woods in with that group and he wouldn't have won so easily. I'm not saying he isn't great, but no one matches Jack.
It would be interesting to see Tiger and Jack play each other in their prime using the same equipment... either with todayís technology or yesterdayís...
[Reply]
srvy 07:45 AM 04-09-2018
Originally Posted by oldman:
Yep, put Woods in with that group and he wouldn't have won so easily. I'm not saying he isn't great, but no one matches Jack.
Yep and I didnt even include Raymond Floyd, Hale Irwin and Johhny Miller trying to show a little Mercy.
[Reply]
srvy 08:20 AM 04-09-2018
Another thing not mentioned here that needs noted Jack played the prime of his career without the aid of technological advance in clubs and balls. The huge metal woods and graphite drivers and fairway woods were in his twilight years. Yet as a young phenom he was driving 300 yards and hitting mid irons on his second to par 5's. Tiger was the greatist of his generation and and one of the greatest ever but Jack is the GOAT far and away.
[Reply]
ChiTown 08:37 AM 04-09-2018
Originally Posted by KC_Connection:
I don't want to diminish Jack Nicklaus' level of dominance which was similar, but the competition in Nicklaus' era wasn't even close to as good as it was in Tiger's. Nowhere near the same kind of depth/talent pool.
JFC, just stop
[Reply]
KC_Connection 09:32 AM 04-09-2018
Originally Posted by Garcia Bronco:
what?...okay.
How is this in any way controversial? The sport and its talent pool have evolved immensely since the Nicklaus era. It continues to. Many more countries play the sport and develop elite athletes than they used to in the 60s/70s.
[Reply]
KC_Connection 09:37 AM 04-09-2018
Originally Posted by srvy:
The shortlist of greats of the game Nicklaus played with Gary Player (nine majors), Tom Watson (eight), Arnold Palmer (seven), Lee Trevino (six) and Seve Ballesteros (five).
Thatís true but how good was the 20th ranked golfer then? The 40th? The 100th?

Thatís where the difference in the eras lies. There are always great golfers in any era, but the standard to even play at this level has risen significantly as more countries/athletes have begun playing the sport.
[Reply]
Garcia Bronco 10:32 AM 04-09-2018
Originally Posted by KC_Connection:
How is this in any way controversial? The sport and its talent pool have evolved immensely since the Nicklaus era. It continues to. Many more countries play the sport and develop elite athletes than they used to in the 60s/70s.
Tiger in his prime did not ever face the consistent great talent Jack had to face.

Look both guys had incredible careers, but if TW is a 10 then Jack is a 10.2.
[Reply]
fan4ever 10:48 AM 04-09-2018
https://ftw.usatoday.com/2014/08/jac...n-bubba-watson

I wonder how todays pros would have done with Jack's equipment...340 yard drive with a persimmon head and wound ball...1963
[Reply]
BWillie 11:00 AM 04-09-2018
Originally Posted by Garcia Bronco:
Tiger in his prime did not ever face the consistent great talent Jack had to face.

Look both guys had incredible careers, but if TW is a 10 then Jack is a 10.2.
I'd argue that neither of them did. Tiger created a whole new talent pool to golf. He increased popularity by at least 2x. Those kids Tiger brought to golf? Well they are in their prime now.

Tiger doesn't have to beat Mark O'Meara, Fuzzy Zoeller and David Duval anymore. He has to beat Dustin Johnson, Jordan Speith, Rory McIlroy, Ricky Fowler, Bubba Watson etc. That is the best talent pool in golf's history probably. It's just math. How many people played golf 60 years ago? How many played golf 30 years ago? How many play now? As the amount of people that play golf increases, the competition gets much more difficult.
[Reply]
Page 9 of 17
« First < 56789 10111213 > Last »
Up