The Best Putter?

[jkinney]

Yup. That's the level I suspect these guys deal in. I'll share one personal vignette with Nicklaus that illustrates his way of thinking. During the '86 Open at Shinny, Jack was watching his son, Jackie finish up a round at NGLA late in the afternoon. He was sitting in a cart, and I went up and introduced myself and we started chatting. His son had recently been put out in the first round of the British Amateur by the eventual winner. My comment to Jack, Sr. was to the effect that at least his son lost to the winner - at which point Nicklaus stared me down and said, with great clarity - "You don't ever want to lose."

This showed me a ferocity of competitiveness way beyond any I'd encountered as a good college athlete. He just flat stared right through me and set me straight. So yes, I suspect Nicklaus would demand that Tiger sink as many clutch putts to win as many majors and that Tiger would agree on those criteria.

[Scott Warren]

Who's keeping score on clutch putts?

[jkinney]

I would suspect that both Jack and Tiger are keeping score.

[JESII]

jkinney,

I think that might be the most nuanced logic I have heard in a debate full of nuance...

How could Tiger have the first clue how many clutch putts Jack holed in his major career?

12 footers for par on the 13th hole are every bit as "clutch" as the winning putts in their minds because they put equal effort into them...

[jkinney]

Jim - I suspect that Nicklaus and Woods remember every clutch putt they made in every major they won. Of course a putt made on the 13th hole counts equally to one made on the 18th. I never said they don't. How this is nuance is beyond me.

[jkinney]

Jim - Also, Tiger of course doesn't know every clutch putt Jacl made in Jack's major wins. But Nicklaus does. And I suspect Jack will admit it if and when Tiger passes him in that category.
No one was a more gracious second place finisher than Jack, the many times he found himself in that spot.

[JESII]

jkinney,

thanks for that...yes, I agree that they have a good idea in their minds as to their own successes, but I really doubt Tiger has any way to measure his current standing in the "clutch" putt tally...or that Jack has taken the time to review each putt Tiger makes and measure its "clutchness"...but you may be right.

One thing there is no question about is the degree of long-term focus these two have/had or their competitive nature.

[jkinney]

Jim - One of the reasons that I have my above stated theories is that Nicklaus once said that he remembered every competitive round  he played in the Masters in great detail. So it follows that he'd remember the clutch putts he made in the majors he won. IMO, it also follows that he's been tracking Tiger's wins in majors very carefully. One can also suppose that Tiger knows his own clutch putts. As to how many of Jack's clutch putts Tiger knows, I suspect it's a lot of them. After all, he's been dreaming about besting Jack's records since he was a kid. So he must have studied Jack's major wins in detail, with his Dad as mentor.

[Glenn Spencer]

Jim - I suspect that Nicklaus and Woods remember every clutch putt they made in every major they won. Of course a putt made on the 13th hole counts equally to one made on the 18th. I never said they don't. How this is nuance is beyond me.

Putts to stay alive or win on 18 are in a different category than ones that take place on 13. If you don't think so, then you aren't human and even though all evidence is to the contrary, Tiger is human.

13= Must, want, need, have to have

18= Lose or Playoff

[JESII]

Glenn,

To a certain degree, you are obviously correct, but golf tournaments are about momentum more than anything else. How often do we hear Tiger talk about how important a par or even bogey (54th hole at Bay Hill) putt is to maintaining position and putting your mind back in the proper focus?

I think the clarity of a do or die 18th hole putt can often make it easier to understand, while a 15 footer on #13 can have an impact not only on you, but on your competition as well.

[Mark Smolens]

I think Jim's point is well taken.  Do we think that Sean O'Hair happened to see Tiger's bogey putts on 16 and 18 on Saturday that night on Golf Central or Sports Center?  If either one of those putts doesn't go in (some 45'+ in total distance I would bet), Tiger is not playing in the last group with Sean -- which clearly must reduce the pressure he would have felt on Sunday.

[George Pazin]

This showed me a ferocity of competitiveness way beyond any I'd encountered as a good college athlete. He just flat stared right through me and set me straight. So yes, I suspect Nicklaus would demand that Tiger sink as many clutch putts to win as many majors and that Tiger would agree on those criteria.

Again, not trying to be rude, but how many college athletes have you interacted with? I've only interacted with a few, and ALL of them were this competitive. The difference is, Jack (and Tiger) actually did it; everyone talks the talk, few walk the walk. But I've never met a big time successful athlete that just coasted by on talent. I think they are the exception rather than the rule; the coasters get weeded out early on.

Tiger has already broken most of Jack's (or anyone else's) records; the total majors one is one of the least significant to me personally, and instituting a caveat judging clutch putts is way too subjective for me personally.

[David_Tepper]

Greg Norman's comments on Tiger's clutch putting:

http://sports.yahoo.com/golf/pga/news?slug=ap-normancouples&prov=ap&type=lgns

[Craig Van Egmond]

George,

        Obviously majors are what Tiger thinks are important, it wasn't Ryder cup championships that he had hanging on his wall growing up. Jack, Tiger and most of the top tier players gear their whole seasons around the Majors.

[George Pazin]

I understand that, and Tiger can certainly use whatever he chooses to drive him to greater and greater heights. I just can't exclude literally everything else when evaluating the two players. There seems to be a general consensus that the only record that will definitively establish Tiger as "better" is the total majors record, and I just don't understand that line of thinking (even that will likely be rejected by Jack's fans as having been established against inferior competition - I don't recall anyone saying that about Jack when he passed Hogan, Jones, etc.).

[Mark Smolens]

My buddy, the golf coach at Brown, was at the tournament held at Pasatiempo last weekend.  He was sitting next to Casey Martin in a large group watching the end of the round at Bay Hill.  When the last putt went in, the crowd erupted.  Martin stood up and commented, "I don't know why you guys are so surprised he made that putt.  The only surprise would have been if he had missed."

I do not believe that there have been many players in history for whom that type of comment would or could be made.

[jkinney]

This showed me a ferocity of competitiveness way beyond any I'd encountered as a good college athlete. He just flat stared right through me and set me straight. So yes, I suspect Nicklaus would demand that Tiger sink as many clutch putts to win as many majors and that Tiger would agree on those criteria.

Again, not trying to be rude, but how many college athletes have you interacted with? I've only interacted with a few, and ALL of them were this competitive. The difference is, Jack (and Tiger) actually did it; everyone talks the talk, few walk the walk. But I've never met a big time successful athlete that just coasted by on talent. I think they are the exception rather than the rule; the coasters get weeded out early on.

Tiger has already broken most of Jack's (or anyone else's) records; the total majors one is one of the least significant to me personally, and instituting a caveat judging clutch putts is way too subjective for me personally.

George - I've interacted with a great number of college athletes, having played both football and hockey at the intercollegiate level. Of course we were all highly competitive. Of course no one skated by on talent for any length of time. Therefore, I'm perfectly entitled to say that Nicklaus' stare was at a whole different level, much higher than any I'd played against, including future profesional athletes who made it big. The stare was ferocious - not menacing - just riveting in its intensity.
And watch Tiger when he makes a clutch putt. The intensity of emotion is much higher than with any great shot tee to green. That shows me the importance Tiger attaches to holing these putts. And as to Jack's and Tiger's ability to remember them, I can't imagine a better way to set oneself up mentally for an important putt than to recall those I'd holed before.

[PThomas]

I was a kid back in those days and didn’t give a hoot about golf.  About the only thing I remember about Jack’s putting (besides making some huge ones) is that he seemed to have a different putter in use from week to week, year to year.  Maybe it was simply to sell more putters or a tactic to improve, but in this Woods seems more confident of his tools.

I don't recall Nicklaus switching putters often, but I do remember that he used a new putter for the '86 Masters that he credited with helping him regain some of old putting magic.  My dad and probably a million other people went out and bought that putter or a clone in the next month or two.  I don't remember the model, but it had a larger head that was common at the time.  Of course compared to the bizarro putters many use now, it was positively traditionalist by comparison

yea, as far as i know Jack used the George Low model for almost every major except the 86 Masters and the 67 US Open (he used "White Fang" there)

course maybe Dave is a young man and when he was a kid Jack was past his prime/ the 80's and 90s and then started using different putters!

[PThomas]

I don't want to argue for either Nicklaus, Woods or Locke for that matter.

But, two shots that I remember to this day that show the fighting quality of both players.

Nicklaus, Turnberry, 72nd hole, Watson in the fairway, Jack in a bush.  Jack hacks it out unbelievably to 30 feet or so from the hole.  Watson hits it to 2 feet.  Game over?  Nicklaus holes the putt, and Watson JUST gets his in.  Watson wins, but the battle was epic, and had gone on and on and on.  Perhaps the greatest 72 holes strokeplay/matchplay event ever held.  I wonder where Watson ranks this victory in his memoires.

that Turnberry Open may very well the best golf tournament of all time...those two paired head to head for the last 36, shooting 65, 65, 65, 66....lapping the field by 10 or so shots/pushing themselves to greater and greater heights...in the Open...Watson miraculoulsy holing from way off the green to tie thing sup.....

and yes what a perfect finish:  if Jack had missed that long putt Watson could simply have had to 2 putt...but incredibly Jack ran it in , which meant both birdied the last

here's how special that was:  some of their fellow pros got out of the locker room and went out on the course to follow them!

Paul Thomas

I was under the impression that Watson and Nicklaus also played the first 36 holes together, so they played all 72 holes together.  I am right there?

James B

James , they definitely did not play together the first two rounds...

a trivia question:  in 1 of his major wins Jack did play with someone all 4 rounds...who and which major?

[Bill Shamleffer]

I don't want to argue for either Nicklaus, Woods or Locke for that matter.

But, two shots that I remember to this day that show the fighting quality of both players.

Nicklaus, Turnberry, 72nd hole, Watson in the fairway, Jack in a bush.  Jack hacks it out unbelievably to 30 feet or so from the hole.  Watson hits it to 2 feet.  Game over?  Nicklaus holes the putt, and Watson JUST gets his in.  Watson wins, but the battle was epic, and had gone on and on and on.  Perhaps the greatest 72 holes strokeplay/matchplay event ever held.  I wonder where Watson ranks this victory in his memoires.

that Turnberry Open may very well the best golf tournament of all time...those two paired head to head for the last 36, shooting 65, 65, 65, 66....lapping the field by 10 or so shots/pushing themselves to greater and greater heights...in the Open...Watson miraculoulsy holing from way off the green to tie thing sup.....

and yes what a perfect finish:  if Jack had missed that long putt Watson could simply have had to 2 putt...but incredibly Jack ran it in , which meant both birdied the last

here's how special that was:  some of their fellow pros got out of the locker room and went out on the course to follow them!

Paul Thomas

I was under the impression that Watson and Nicklaus also played the first 36 holes together, so they played all 72 holes together.  I am right there?

James B

James , they definitely did not play together the first two rounds...

a trivia question:  in 1 of his major wins Jack did play with someone all 4 rounds...who and which major?

Did the scoreboard at 18 read JACK IS BACK.
(Not really a question, a clue actually to any one who does not know the answer.)

[jkinney]

The Japanese fellow who held his bullseye butter at address with the toe in the air. It was '80 at Baltusrol.

[PThomas]

The Japanese fellow who held his bullseye butter at address with the toe in the air. It was '80 at Baltusrol.

well done...Isao Aoki, who i believe broke the scoring record for the US Open during the tournament...of course Jack did too!

[jkinney]

Thank you for remembering Aoki's name for me. His battle with Nicklaus lasted all four rounds, and Aoki took Jack all the way to the 72nd hole before Jack, in a supreme effort, holed birdie putts on both the 71st and 72nd holes to claim the title. What a match-up that was, about on par with the Watson/Nicklaus brawl at Turnberry.