Jack is now catching up with Tiger

[Doug Siebert]

Before Tiger, there was legitimate argument about who the greatest golfer ever was.

- some backed Jones, who dominated and retired at the peak of his career - he certainly could have won more majors but he'd set a bar in his final season that would never be exceeded, and it hasn't.  He didn't see the point of padding the record book.

- some backed Hogan, who got off to a bit of a late start but what he accomplished even after an accident that nearly killed him was amazing - without the physical aftereffects of that accident who knows how much more he could have won?

- some backed Snead, who set the mark for the most PGA tour wins, and was playing tournament quality golf decades after his peers had left the game, and before today's fitness focus caused by the availability of all that senior tour money

- most backed Nicklaus, who set the bar for major wins, and his major record showed not only the most wins, but an incredible number of second, third and top 10 finishes, along with by far the longest career span where he was able to play at a level sufficient to win major tournaments

When Tiger came along, many thought he'd obliterate all these records, and finally put an end to the question of "who is the greatest golfer of all time?"  Some predicted 30+ major wins, and many were already annointing him as the greatest ever in his 4th season as a pro.  For most it was a question of not if but when he'd beat the records of Snead and Nicklaus, and by how much.

Let's suppose 2010 was not a fluke and he is never the Tiger of old.  Maybe he wins a couple more majors, but he falls short of Nicklaus' record.  How much of an argument will there be that he is the greatest golfer ever?  After all, he would have failed at the main goal he and his fans defined his career by.  I suspect that the same people who were calling him the greatest ever and wondering whether he'd win 25 or 30 majors will still consider him the greatest, while the skeptics who took a wait and see attitude and said they'd concede that only once he'd beaten Nicklaus' record since he'd always acknowedged that as the main focus of his career will have a difficult time agreeing with that position.

At least if Tiger falls short golf fans will still be able to have this discussion.  It would be pretty boring if everyone agreed that Tiger was the greatest ever and no one could put forth a realistic argument to the contrary.  There's a reason why no one argues which country is the greatest military power in the world today, or who the greatest cyclist of all time is...

[Pat Burke]

Very much IMO 
1   Tiger's rookie year.  From 120 yards in (not including putting) I felt Tiger was, by Tour standards, not very good.
      His distance control was not great, and he had little control on "shorties" (30-50 yards).
         Basically, around a year later, he was in the top % of players on these shots, and a year later, one of the best.
2   I'm from socal, and it was pretty well known that Tiger was always a great putter.  He did make an adjustment after turning pro
      by "softening" the speed he used.  Was hyper aggressive as a kid, and adjusted to where it looked like the ball was being pulled
      in the hole
3   Used a ridiculously short driver as a rookie.  Tipped to the bottom step steel shaft, less than 44 inches.  Watched him hit Calcs PING
     about 30 past his own driver while messing around on the range. 

So, what the hell am I getting to??  I don't know really.  I was friendly with Tiger, but certainly would say we were friends.  He was very nice to me, and donated items to charities I was involved with each time I asked.  So, given that, how can I know what is going on in his head?

I do know, that points 1 and 2 above, indicate a special ability to not only identify a game weakness, but to make it a strength.
And I learned a long time ago, that guys that can work that hard, tend to figure things out.
Even without the current mess, getting closer to Jacks number was going to heap a lot of stress, but now, Tiger is the "bad guy" for many
and that road will be pretty hostile at times if he gets close

[Martin Toal]

Phil:

Let's be real shall we.

I never said all of those who espouse a view that Tiger can't surpass Jack's record as Tiger-haters. But let's be a bit more candid shall we -- there are more than a few here who just can't stand the guy and all the fluff being said is really a smoke screen for it.

Funnily enough, Tiger never set out to be liked. Others have set out with this objective, to various degrees of plausibility and success.

The recent revelations about Tiger have changed the attitude of many, including myself, from indifference to disrespect. Not because of the behaviour, per se, but the cynical response put in place to manage it. If he had stood up and taken personal responsibility, rather than blaming it on a non-existent illness, it may have had more of a humanising effect, and in the long run, brought his more support.

[archie_struthers]

   

Hey Pat Burke , good stuff.  As a player , what's your spin on my ( and others ) theory that the age of 35 is kind of the wall for lots of putting strokes , and why is that.  It's certainly not true for some guys on the Senior Tour , as they putt pretty good.  However , the pressure isn't quite the same to be perfect as the courses tend to be easier.

But , and it's pretty eerie .  Jack .....Watson.....Arnie.....Snead......Byron ( forced early retirement ) .......Hogan ........all stopped putting as good at that time of their lives  ...some a little older , some younger .....why did  these great champions lose it on the greens   ?

[PThomas]

 

Hey Pat Burke , good stuff.  As a player , what's your spin on my ( and others ) theory that the age of 35 is kind of the wall for lots of putting strokes , and why is that.  It's certainly not true for some guys on the Senior Tour , as they putt pretty good.  However , the pressure isn't quite the same to be perfect as the courses tend to be easier.

But , and it's pretty eerie .  Jack .....Watson.....Arnie.....Snead......Byron ( forced early retirement ) .......Hogan ........all stopped putting as good at that time of their lives  ...some a little older , some younger .....why did  these great champions lose it on the greens   ?

Archie - do you really think Jack's putting went downhill after 35?  i strongly disagree...he won 6 more majors

[archie_struthers]

 

Paul , I did qualify it twice about Jack , as his started a little later in life. However if we look at this strictly in Jack  vs Tiger perspective Jack hit is a lot better than TIger by almost all accounts. He was far longer than most of his contemporaries , hit tons of greens , and managed the golf course better than all save maybe Hogan.

Tiger's short game leaves you with a lot of knee knockers and to date he has made more of these than anybody , ever!  I'd venture that Jack had far more tap-ins for par than Tiger , given his ball striking superiority. Thus over time their was less pressure on his stroke, which was equally awesome . Just a theory though...yet to prove out !

[Pat Burke]

 

Hey Pat Burke , good stuff.  As a player , what's your spin on my ( and others ) theory that the age of 35 is kind of the wall for lots of putting strokes , and why is that.  It's certainly not true for some guys on the Senior Tour , as they putt pretty good.  However , the pressure isn't quite the same to be perfect as the courses tend to be easier.

But , and it's pretty eerie .  Jack .....Watson.....Arnie.....Snead......Byron ( forced early retirement ) .......Hogan ........all stopped putting as good at that time of their lives  ...some a little older , some younger .....why did  these great champions lose it on the greens   ?

So much that would be speculation, and I thought we didn't do that on these boards!
But, what the hell. 
JAck was not a renowned practicer.  Probably at best an "efficient one"  Would decide what he needed to work on and do it.  It seemed to me, he started missing some shorties later than 35, but still not as glaring as others.
Watson.  Well, he hits it better now that he did when he dominated.  He was stupid good with the putter, and frighteningly aggressive.
Left so many comebackers, that it wore on him.  His self admitted drinking issues in his 40's probably were a contributer, but that is speculation
Snead,  I just wish he could have putted croquet style
Tiger.  Clearly, not exactly of clear mind the past couple of years.  Lost focus on the golf for his other "pusuits".  Still believe that his core mechanics are damn good, and if he can refocus, will likely get back to it IMO

[archie_struthers]

 

 Pat I ceddied for (aren't I lucky) lots of rounds with Watson in the late 70,s early 80's for at Pine Valley and I can tell you that Watson at 30-33 years  reallly hit it awesome , he may have hit it better at 40 but by then couldn't putt very good anymore, certainly given his ball striking he could have won multiple majors in those years (34-40)  Hiis play to this day is really amazing , given the issues you related and not making putts like his contemporaries.

I thinkTiger plays a better , yet similar game to Tom and has to make an inordinate amount of putts relative to Jack , how many times can a man get out of jail like he does , I wonder   For this reason it looks like the certainty of Woods winning 19 or more has receded dramatically.