I disagree with Gary's statement that Tiger was the better player. Prime vs prime is one thing. Career vs career determines which player is better. (Note: Pete Egoscue statements about Tiger's swing/health issues back in the 90s should be taken into consideration when talking about Tiger's Prime)
Nicklaus every time, no spitting, no swearing, no club throwing, no walking off the 18th before his opponent has holed out and no disgusting behaviour off course either.
That was a different time and era where this was a gentleman's game. That is not the same as their actual talent. You can see all of these guys on LIV and recently who's antics and swearing are WAY different than even Tiger!
Jack....Played a very limited schedule, wanted to be with his family. Allot less tournaments in his day. Majors are what they both said they cared about. Jack blows Tiger out of the water top 10's, 5's, 3's etc.. Jacks competition in his and rivals prime (first 16 years) was allot tougher than Tiger -For Jack: Player 9 majors, Watson 8 majors, Palmer 7 majors, Trevino 6 majors....For Tiger: Mickelson 6 majors, Els 4 majors, Vijay 3 majors
There were less golfers capable of winning a major in Jack’s day. Tiger plays Jack 100 times Tiger wins 60-65 times. Better through the bag by a mile. Watch Jack’s final round in the 1980 US open pretty mundane compared to Tiger. Jack would win by being better over the course of 4 rounds, Tiger could go lights out early , put the tournament away and cruise. I’m 65 watched both, Jack more limited than Tiger, but no one still plays close to the level that Tiger played at from 1999 to 2013.
@@tomretallick1719 You are wrong about the competition. Proof is in the numbers. Jacks competition in his and rivals prime (first 16 years) was allot tougher than Tiger -For Jack: Player 9 majors, Watson 8 majors, Palmer 7 majors, Trevino 6 majors....For Tiger: Mickelson 6 majors, Els 4 majors, Vijay 3 majors
That’s a fair point but look at that this way, Jack only played with a few capable of winning majors. They kind of handed them back and forth to each other. Might explain all the high finishes. Another point there was absolutely no money outside the top ten, pros kept their club jobs and played exhibition games to make a living making for weaker fields. No doubt Nicklaus was incredible but watch a rebroadcast on RUclips of his major wins you might be surprised at the level of play.
usually like Kindred but at about 6:40 utter nonsense. Jack had to beat more Hall of Famers but the 50th best golfer in his day worked in a club to make ends meet-----Tiger had only a couple Hall of Famers but the #200 player in the world could contend for majors----different time
There are no need for hypotheticals here. It’s strictly by the numbers and right now it’s Jack Nicklaus. There is no greater achievement than winning Major golf championships. Whoever has the most is the best.
Here are the numbers: Tiger vs. Jack Taken from the first 27 years of each player’s career. T-5 = Top 5 finishes including wins. T-10 = Top 10 finishes including Top 5 finishes & wins Tiger Jack Masters Wins 5 6 T-5 12 15 T-10 14 23 U.S. Open Wins 3 4 T-5 7 11 T-10 8 18 British Open Wins 3 3 T-5 6 16 T-10 10 18 PGA Wins 4 5 T-5 8 14 T-10 9 15 Totals Wins 15 18 T-5 33 56 T-10 41 74 Conclusion There is not one, NOT ONE, statistical category related to major championship finishes where Tiger Woods has beaten Jack Nicklaus. Considering that Tiger, before he ever started playing in majors, stated in his very own words that the standard for golf’s greats, especially Jack, was winning major championships. In virtually every category related to finishes in major championships, Jack has beaten Tiger, and in numerous cases, by huge margins. Jack has 3 more wins, 23 more Top 5 finishes, and 33 more Top 10 finishes. Yes, Tiger missed playing in 22 majors because of health related issues, but whose fault were those health issues? Every one of those injuries were caused by the way Tiger played the game with reckless abandon, putting so much stress on his body that it couldn’t withstand those stresses, or through his reckless behavior off the course that jeopardized not only his career, but his life. Are we supposed to hold that against Jack? Also, think about the condition of the golf courses Jack played early in his career, especially the greens. His results were so much more susceptible to the “rub of the green” than Tiger who played on virtual carpet-like surfaces. There are so many influences both inside and outside the ropes, that those should not even be considered. What matters are the facts, and they speak for themselves. Say what you want, but Jack Nicklaus record in golf’s major championships will never be matched, and in that realm, has to overwhelmingly be considered the greatest to ever play the game. There is one stat that is so overwhelmingly incredible that it defies logic. During the 20 year period between 1963 and 1982 at the British Open, Jack finished in the top 5 15 times , FIFTEEN TIMES in the major that was supposed to be the one he would have the most trouble with because he hit the ball so high and the winds would eat him alive. My question is this . . . Have none of these golf pundits looked at these stats? Or, do they just ignore them because it’s “old news”? Whatever the reason, no one will ever convince me that Tiger was better than Jack in the major championships during their first 27 years on tour. If there is anyone to blame for that fact, look in only one place, Tiger himself.
I’ve always said adjust for equipment. Persimmon woods, true blades, and a balata for those who haven’t played them, is pretty damn difficult. You cannot miss the ball - ever. That said, Tiger is a ball striker and would figure it out. BUT, he would not dominate the way he did in his era. Put the advanced equipment in Jacks hands and he gets even longer and straighter. And all of his high lofted clubs would perform better, oh and the ball is vastly different. So, who’s the best? Would be nice to see them head to head in their primes … but alas.
There’s a video on RUclips from Vegas promotion with Butch Harmon and Tiger woods. About halfway through Tiger grabs a wooden wood, not sure if Persimmon, starts to hit every kind of shot in golf. Tiger would be able to master the equipment. I guess another argument one could make is your have to adjust for competition. Golf grew substantially from the start of Jack’s career all the way up to the beginning of Tiger’s, meaning the level of competition would have been greater at the start of Tiger’s career.
Technology is the biggest factor here - - - - - give Woods older clubs or vice versa, then start a debate. In my mind, no doubt Jack was the better player, Woods could create difficult shots when he got into trouble, but Jack never really got into trouble to be creative. Argue all you want, but Jack, hands down - - - Pebble Beach par 3, miraculous shot for the technology, nowadays, pretty easy shot for a pro golfer
Tiger Woods was given the "Golden Ticket" to the PGA tour when NIKE gave him that multi-million dollar endorsement fresh out of college. Woods never had to worry about making the cut. His bills were paid. Jack had to prove himself first before he got any endorsement help. That makes a huge difference. Jack Nicklaus will always be known as the greatest champion. Woods will be remembered for his circus shots.
Remembered for his circus shots? The man held all 4 majors at once. It’s fine if you think Jack is the greater champion, but saying Tiger will be remembered for “circus shots” is laughable.
Jack’s Dad was a member at Scioto country club. Not sure Jack had huge concerns about money. After 6 straight USGA titles Phil Knight knew Tiger was another Jordan so Mr. Knight punched another Golden Ticket. Monthly dues at Scioto present day 10600.
Bah! Absurd debate. Both have miraculous shots and made impossible putts. I’d have to give Tiger the nod as the better score maker but in their primes, either could win against the other. The record book will show Jack with more majors and that alone gives him the GOAT crown. Many comments retort, “if Tiger didn’t suffer injuries... “ and other such lame shoulda, woulda, coulda, tales, boo hoo, I shoulda been a billionaire and if Bobby didn’t suffer from syringomyelia, he may have been the GOAT. I was rooting for Tiger to take more majors too but his off-course behavior affected his chances. Probably would have made it if Earl was by his side for a few more years. The record shows: Major Victories Jack Nicklaus 18 Tiger Woods 15 The GOAT crown goes to Jack. But hey, if shoulda, woulda, coulda-s had any bearing, if not for the war years and that idiot bus driver, Hogan would have had more than 20 majors. GOAT ball striker? Hogan by far. If only he could putt like Tiger... or Jack. And before anyone thinks him a poor putter, Byron said he never saw Ben miss a 3 footer.
Jack Nicklaus was and will forever be The Greatest! He was the reason why I played golf! He made the game better than when he entered it! Chi Chi Rodriguez once said that “Jack Nicklaus became The Greatest of All Time in his spare time!” The comment was due to the fact that Jack Nicklaus valued being a father and husband more than being a professional golfer! His golf schedule revolved around his family’s schedule, not the other way around! The Greatest golfer, and a better human being! ☮️🖖🏽
Tiger is the best golfer I've seen but Jack is better more majors, more 2nd place finishes, tougher competition. Plus Tiger has only came back from behind 1 time in 15 majors Jack did it at 46 at Augusta when everyone thought he was done.
Jack Nicklaus in his autobiography My Way admits that the depth of field had tripled from the 1970s to 1996. When Jack had become a professional, if he wasn’t playing his best golf, he said there might be 30 people who could beat him. When Bobby Jones wasn’t playing his best golf in the 1930s, he said there might’ve been 10 people who could beat Jones he said. If you look at how many people were within 10 strokes of the winner of all four majors in the 2000s (23.2) and 2010s (22.95) it is significantly higher than what Jack had to face and his 60s (15.97) and 70s (19.3). If you think less people within 10 shots of the overall leader had better golfers as competition you can look at the British Open where it had 4.9 people within 10 shots of the leader in the 1900’s and in the 1920s where it was 10.1. In the 1960s that number was 12.1 for the British Open. In the 2000s it was 29.1. There were just fewer people who could compete with the best back then, and as time goes on, you’ll see a general uptick in amount of people who have a chance of winning any major as the game continues to grow.
Thank you, such an exclusionary game, but hey! Take off your shirt so we can see your muscles? Pass. The press is very self important. He doesn’t owe anyone anything.
People make it seem like Tiger was playing against himself! He had a lot of competitors, but he made it difficult for them to beat him. They could only win in his absence. Those days everyone was fighting for second place. Don't talk about Tiger not having second places, ask Strange what he told him! Second sucks and third is even worse! The guy is a jewel to say the least. By the way, why undress someone? Tiger is not a wrestler, he is a golfer!
You have to wonder what Tiger would have accomplished over his 82 PGS Tour wins and 15 majors not including his incredible amateur career if he had stayed reasonably healthy. He was surely on track to eclipse Nicklaus’s records, but they were both dominate players in their time. It reasonable to say that Jack played against superior talent with Weiskopf, Watson, Trevino and Seve, but Tiger had Mickleson, Els, Faldo and the rest. No easy answers here.
Everything physical and Emotional that Tiger suffered was self inflicted. Tigers demise was inevitable. One has to wonder, if Tiger never stepped into the weight room or got married, would he just found some other way to sabotage himself.
@@MP-tf7cc I agree. Years ago we had a golf tournament and for the longest drive everyone used one of Johnny Miller’s old persimmon woods and it’s hard to believe how long the pros were back then with that equipment.
Very easily Jack is better. Why? I don't care what people say, I believe that Tiger did take performance drugs. But let's leave that out. Jack played in a time that the competition respected him but they were mentally tougher than Tiger's competitors. Plus, Tiger only came from behind to win one major. Jack, 7. Not to mention second place finishers in majors. Let's not forget how much better course conditions are today than 50 years ago
If you could put them in their prime, at Augusta, St. Andrews or Pebble -- it would be even money. Flip of a coin. Tiger does have 3 less Majors, but Jack didn't have the international presence of today; I think that kind of levels things. Mental toughness, ability to putt under pressure--equal. Driver; Jack (more consistent, and just as long if you control for equipment). Irons--slight advantage to Tiger, very slight. Short game Tiger. We've had both of them, and we are so fortunate. Now, we are going to be left with earthlings that will win the occasional Major etc...domination appears to be somewhere far away in the future.
Jack was a better driver than Tiger. Jack never got drugged up and drove across an island medium and crashed into the woods. Tiger would have killed someone if they were in those driving lanes. Jack never did that.
Tiger is better. I wouldn't say I like Tiger but he faced stiffer competition than Jack. In Jack's era, many players had to work another job to get by.
That was because they didn’t pay anything back then. Nicklaus made $5 million in Golf winnings his entire career. Tiger made $120 million. Thats 25 times as much. Lower purses made you more competitive because you had to get to the top 10% to make any money.
I don't know if I'd say Ernie Els, Vijay Singh, or Phil Mickelson (all great golfers don't get me wrong) are stiffer competition than the likes of Arnold Palmer, Gary Player, Lee Trevino, Tom Watson or Seve Ballersteros.
Wrong. Like all the other Fathers of Golf Legends Earl Woods was a good father to Tiger. No history of Child abuse, and you'll never find a video of Earl berating Tiger for playing poorly. If fact, Tiger use to say Earl Woods was his bestfriend.
Tiger would have smoked Jack if both were in their prime. Tiger changed the entire game. Jack didn't do that by himself. There was the big 3. There was no big 3 with Tiger.
It was his mother not his father who instilled in Tiger the aggressive golfing attitude, step on their throat on the golf course, when the tournament is over, then shake their hands. Her exact words. It’s on the internet. Look it up.
Tiger won 9 Vardon trophies - best scoring average over a whole season. Jack won 1. Tiger won 23% of all tournaments he entered. Jack won 12%. Jack played against greats like Arnie, Seve, Trevino, Tom Watson… The overall talent pool in Tiger’s generation was better, though (and it gets better every generation). Like Michael Jordan, Tiger Woods sold his soul to be the best, and he succeeded.
I think it really comes down to equipment, if Jack had equipment that Tiger use he have way more wins. If any of who who played Golf back in the 60s, 70s you know what i'm talking about.
That's nonsense because every competitor had the same equipment and that's what count. Jack was of sure a great champion, but he matched with only some of the international guys, and then in the 80s much more of the European players came to USA and from this moment Jack's career was finished - he has only won one major (1986 masters) after 1980. They field was from this moment dominated by Ballesteros, Langer (still is! Jack by far wasn't as successful on the champions tour as Langer is...) and for all Faldo. Jack's worstest major are the open - the reason is simple, the competitor field was much stronger there! And if Tom Watson would have been 10 years older, jack would have had a really strong competitor in him. Tiger won his first 14 majors in a extrem short time - and there were hole seasons in this period he was injured (2004.. Knees.) too. Without his injures Tiger would have won 20 majors or more... But i think maybe Jack was a much more great sportsman, a greater champion! And i like the old traditions in the golfsport. By the way : i played with persimmon woods and balata balls as s young man and short course records with this equipment. I know the differences - but tigers also learned golf with such equipment and the club head's of the metal Wood in 1997 for example had the same size as the old persimmon ones.
With all that said the greatest golfers of all time pro or amateur are Bobby Jones and Tiger Woods. Bobby won all 4 majors (2-amateur 2-professinal) tournaments in a row and Tiger is the only" professional" golfer to win all 4 professional majors in a row. Jack played in over 160 majors and won 18 and Tiger played in about 85 and won 15. Mmmmmm? If Tiger was not hurt half his career, Tiger would have 30 plus majors. He's hurt right now and we can't count him out today.Tiger Woods the GOAT. Bobby Jones, Jack Nicklaus, Tiger Woods, just not in this order
Of course Tiger is a lot better than Jack because during Jack's days there was handful good players nothing like nowadays if Tiger would played Jack's times he would have more than 30 majors
You can not judge a golfer on one round.It takes four.It would depend on the week.Jack at 22 years old with the equipment and ball of today would hit it 400 yards.Jack was only 5.10 at that age.
Jack faced better completion during his career and beat them all. By contrast Tiger faced a bunch of aging baby boomers during his prime. Both would still be the best even in today’s highly competitive PGA Tour. Jack is the best of all time with 18 majors and 117 world wide wins while playing part time - his season ended in late August so he could pursue his other interests.
Not only aging boomers, but in my opinion, not athletic (accept for Gary Player). I feel that the Athlete golfer era started with Tiger. I wasn't necessarily started by Tiger but that was the timeframe.
Tiger was the best at every level. He was the best child golfer, he was the best Jr. Amateur, the best Amateur, the best NCAA golfer, and the best Pro.
You can hate on tiger for many things but if you don’t consider him the greatest golfer of all time you are lying to yourself … it’s like the Lebron vs Jordan argument and you tell me bill russel was the best because he had the most titles but all the outside factors show the competition wasn’t the same … during jacks era no one was an athlete they simply were playing a game tiger played a sport … he was so much better in a more impressive field than jack played against sorry all the legends from jacks time period we’re just playing a different game idk if it’s even fair to compare
Peak Tiger was better, but Jsck was the best in the game for twice as long. Very different people with very different objectives and lifestyles. I concede that Tiger's the GOAT, but he behaved like one as well. Golf was way better pre-Tiger, both as a spectator and player. He turned golf ugly.
Two things that makes Tiger the best player and the GOAT. During Jack Nicklaus time and era, the players during that time were very good, and there were rivalries but Jack wasn't up against the whole field where they could hit 300 yard drives. In the last Masters won by Tiger there were 14 former and current #1 ranked golfers in the field. How many #1 ranked players during Jack's time? They didn't start it yet but there were just a handful during Jack's time. Tiger's first Master's win by 12 strokes blew away the field, they had to Tiger proof courses. Tiger's 15 stroke win at the US OPEN, he blew away the pros making them look like amateurs. Tiger was the ONLY player UNDER PAR for those 4 rounds! If Tiger didn't get injured, he'd already have 18 Major wins. Tiger was #1 for years, not just weeks. He Dominated golf for years, twice! One only needs to watch the par 3 hole where Tiger holed the Chip in to win the Memorial where it was Jack Nicklaus who was commenting "that is one of most incredible shots that i think you will ever see played" ruclips.net/video/F3x674i6aRU/видео.html Nor will anyone forget the 16th hole at the Masters where he chips in. ruclips.net/video/WJEysanOT7w/видео.html Many of Tiger's shots were the difference in winning, tying, or staying in contention. Can Jack do this? ruclips.net/video/2iAH1J1SMLQ/видео.html
Sort of disagree in a way about your argument. Jack competed more against others who had won multiple majors, therefore able to handle the pressure down the stretch than Tiger ever went up against. Look at top 3 in majors, not even close between Nicklaus and Tiger. If Tiger was not injured…well he was, maybe Nicklaus did not push too hard, to keep injury free. However, even though I am a massive Nicklaus fan, saw him in his pomp, Tiger is actually a better player. He had more shots, invented some to an extent. I agree with this video in that I am certain Jack would say, if they played their absolute best for 4 rounds, at their absolute pomp, Tiger would win.
If Tiger took care of his body, he wouldn’t have been injured. Who’s fault is that. Tiger had a couple nice chip Ins. Jack had a famous 1 iron. Which is harder to hit? Jack played against Arnold, Watson, Seve, Norman, Trevino, Miller, Player. That’s 40 majors right there. BOOM goes your argument!
@@Macattack11639 Oh please!! Tiger's exercised more than any other golfer before him! Why do you think golfers like Dechambeau, Koepka, Mcilroy, Woodland, Dustin Johnson, Day all work out because they wanted to be like Tiger? Why do you think some of them already got injuries because they don't take care of themselves? No, it's because they are hitting the ball so hard the torque is putting a lot of stress on their body to do so! Don't give me that BS! Could Jack beat any of these guys who can hit and reach par 4's from the tee?
@@michaeltoner7523 Many of the golfers who now play say they started to lift weights like Tiger, Dechambeau, McIlroy, Day, Johnson, Woodland, etc. Dechambeau and Mcilroy will try to reach the par 4 greens from the tee. The holes are too short for them still. It used to be where Tiger could do that, but his injuries prevents him from doing so and I also predict in the future that eventually some of these players will also get hurt from the immense stress and pressure they are putting on their bodies especially their backs and knees from all that torque they are trying to hit with.
I always liked what Gary McCord said in a interview…….Tiger was the better golfer…..Jack was a greater Champion
I disagree with Gary's statement that Tiger was the better player. Prime vs prime is one thing. Career vs career determines which player is better.
(Note: Pete Egoscue statements about Tiger's swing/health issues back in the 90s should be taken into consideration when talking about Tiger's Prime)
Nicklaus every time, no spitting, no swearing, no club throwing, no walking off the 18th before his opponent has holed out and no disgusting behaviour off course either.
That was a different time and era where this was a gentleman's game. That is not the same as their actual talent. You can see all of these guys on LIV and recently who's antics and swearing are WAY different than even Tiger!
The who was better debate look into off course situations too? Hmm
Has nothing to do with who was a better golfer.
Jack never dominated like Tiger did💯
Who changed the game? Who?
Jack....Played a very limited schedule, wanted to be with his family. Allot less tournaments in his day. Majors are what they both said they cared about. Jack blows Tiger out of the water top 10's, 5's, 3's etc.. Jacks competition in his and rivals prime (first 16 years) was allot tougher than Tiger -For Jack: Player 9 majors, Watson 8 majors, Palmer 7 majors, Trevino 6 majors....For Tiger: Mickelson 6 majors, Els 4 majors, Vijay 3 majors
There were less golfers capable of winning a major in Jack’s day. Tiger plays Jack 100 times Tiger wins 60-65 times. Better through the bag by a mile. Watch Jack’s final round in the 1980 US open pretty mundane compared to Tiger. Jack would win by being better over the course of 4 rounds, Tiger could go lights out early , put the tournament away and cruise. I’m 65 watched both, Jack more limited than Tiger, but no one still plays close to the level that Tiger played at from 1999 to 2013.
@@tomretallick1719 You are wrong about the competition. Proof is in the numbers. Jacks competition in his and rivals prime (first 16 years) was allot tougher than Tiger -For Jack: Player 9 majors, Watson 8 majors, Palmer 7 majors, Trevino 6 majors....For Tiger: Mickelson 6 majors, Els 4 majors, Vijay 3 majors
@@tomretallick1719 Jack played against much more consistent hungry players, not the soft chokers of today.
That’s a fair point but look at that this way, Jack only played with a few capable of winning majors. They kind of handed them back and forth to each other. Might explain all the high finishes. Another point there was absolutely no money outside the top ten, pros kept their club jobs and played exhibition games to make a living making for weaker fields. No doubt Nicklaus was incredible but watch a rebroadcast on RUclips of his major wins you might be surprised at the level of play.
Save the 1986 Masters in which he went lights out.
usually like Kindred but at about 6:40 utter nonsense. Jack had to beat more Hall of Famers but the 50th best golfer in his day worked in a club to make ends meet-----Tiger had only a couple Hall of Famers but the #200 player in the world could contend for majors----different time
There are no need for hypotheticals here. It’s strictly by the numbers and right now it’s Jack Nicklaus. There is no greater achievement than winning Major golf championships. Whoever has the most is the best.
Here are the numbers:
Tiger vs. Jack
Taken from the first 27 years of each player’s career.
T-5 = Top 5 finishes including wins.
T-10 = Top 10 finishes including Top 5 finishes & wins
Tiger Jack
Masters
Wins 5 6
T-5 12 15
T-10 14 23
U.S. Open
Wins 3 4
T-5 7 11
T-10 8 18
British Open
Wins 3 3
T-5 6 16
T-10 10 18
PGA
Wins 4 5
T-5 8 14
T-10 9 15
Totals
Wins 15 18
T-5 33 56
T-10 41 74
Conclusion
There is not one, NOT ONE, statistical category related to major championship finishes where Tiger Woods has beaten Jack Nicklaus. Considering that Tiger, before he ever started playing in majors, stated in his very own words that the standard for golf’s greats, especially Jack, was winning major championships. In virtually every category related to finishes in major championships, Jack has beaten Tiger, and in numerous cases, by huge margins. Jack has 3 more wins, 23 more Top 5 finishes, and 33 more Top 10 finishes. Yes, Tiger missed playing in 22 majors because of health related issues, but whose fault were those health issues? Every one of those injuries were caused by the way Tiger played the game with reckless abandon, putting so much stress on his body that it couldn’t withstand those stresses, or through his reckless behavior off the course that jeopardized not only his career, but his life. Are we supposed to hold that against Jack? Also, think about the condition of the golf courses Jack played early in his career, especially the greens. His results were so much more susceptible to the “rub of the green” than Tiger who played on virtual carpet-like surfaces. There are so many influences both inside and outside the ropes, that those should not even be considered. What matters are the facts, and they speak for themselves. Say what you want, but Jack Nicklaus record in golf’s major championships will never be matched, and in that realm, has to overwhelmingly be considered the greatest to ever play the game. There is one stat that is so overwhelmingly incredible that it defies logic. During the 20 year period between 1963 and 1982 at the British Open, Jack finished in the top 5 15 times , FIFTEEN TIMES in the major that was supposed to be the one he would have the most trouble with because he hit the ball so high and the winds would eat him alive. My question is this . . . Have none of these golf pundits looked at these stats? Or, do they just ignore them because it’s “old news”? Whatever the reason, no one will ever convince me that Tiger was better than Jack in the major championships during their first 27 years on tour. If there is anyone to blame for that fact, look in only one place, Tiger himself.
I’ve always said adjust for equipment. Persimmon woods, true blades, and a balata for those who haven’t played them, is pretty damn difficult. You cannot miss the ball - ever.
That said, Tiger is a ball striker and would figure it out. BUT, he would not dominate the way he did in his era. Put the advanced equipment in Jacks hands and he gets even longer and straighter. And all of his high lofted clubs would perform better, oh and the ball is vastly different. So, who’s the best? Would be nice to see them head to head in their primes … but alas.
There’s a video on RUclips from Vegas promotion with Butch Harmon and Tiger woods. About halfway through Tiger grabs a wooden wood, not sure if Persimmon, starts to hit every kind of shot in golf. Tiger would be able to master the equipment.
I guess another argument one could make is your have to adjust for competition. Golf grew substantially from the start of Jack’s career all the way up to the beginning of Tiger’s, meaning the level of competition would have been greater at the start of Tiger’s career.
Technology is the biggest factor here - - - - - give Woods older clubs or vice versa, then start a debate. In my mind, no doubt Jack was the better player, Woods could create difficult shots when he got into trouble, but Jack never really got into trouble to be creative.
Argue all you want, but Jack, hands down - - - Pebble Beach par 3, miraculous shot for the technology, nowadays, pretty easy shot for a pro golfer
Jack played against much better competition where players were hungry.
18 Majors, 19 second place finishes. Just a few more putts and Nicklaus would have won 30 Majors.
He never changed the game. He left it the same as he found it.
@@3am_3am_You can't change the game. Unless you make everyone want to swing cross handed?
Tiger Woods was given the "Golden Ticket" to the PGA tour when NIKE gave him that multi-million dollar endorsement fresh out of college.
Woods never had to worry about making the cut. His bills were paid. Jack had to prove himself first before he got any endorsement help. That
makes a huge difference. Jack Nicklaus will always be known as the greatest champion. Woods will be remembered for his circus shots.
Remembered for his circus shots? The man held all 4 majors at once. It’s fine if you think Jack is the greater champion, but saying Tiger will be remembered for “circus shots” is laughable.
Jack’s Dad was a member at Scioto country club. Not sure Jack had huge concerns about money. After 6 straight USGA titles Phil Knight knew Tiger was another Jordan so Mr. Knight punched another Golden Ticket. Monthly dues at Scioto present day 10600.
Bah! Absurd debate.
Both have miraculous shots and made impossible putts. I’d have to give Tiger the nod as the better score maker but in their primes, either could win against the other.
The record book will show Jack with more majors and that alone gives him the GOAT crown.
Many comments retort, “if Tiger didn’t suffer injuries... “ and other such lame shoulda, woulda, coulda, tales, boo hoo, I shoulda been a billionaire and if Bobby didn’t suffer from syringomyelia, he may have been the GOAT.
I was rooting for Tiger to take more majors too but his off-course behavior affected his chances. Probably would have made it if Earl was by his side for a few more years.
The record shows:
Major Victories
Jack Nicklaus 18
Tiger Woods 15
The GOAT crown goes to Jack.
But hey, if shoulda, woulda, coulda-s had any bearing, if not for the war years and that idiot bus driver, Hogan would have had more than 20 majors.
GOAT ball striker? Hogan by far.
If only he could putt like Tiger... or Jack.
And before anyone thinks him a poor putter, Byron said he never saw Ben miss a 3 footer.
Jack Nicklaus was and will forever be The Greatest! He was the reason why I played golf! He made the game better than when he entered it! Chi Chi Rodriguez once said that “Jack Nicklaus became The Greatest of All Time in his spare time!” The comment was due to the fact that Jack Nicklaus valued being a father and husband more than being a professional golfer! His golf schedule revolved around his family’s schedule, not the other way around! The Greatest golfer, and a better human being! ☮️🖖🏽
Boomer alert 👆will we ever be this lame when we get old? I don’t see how that’s possible
Tiger is the best golfer I've seen but Jack is better more majors, more 2nd place finishes, tougher competition. Plus Tiger has only came back from behind 1 time in 15 majors Jack did it at 46 at Augusta when everyone thought he was done.
Jack Nicklaus in his autobiography My Way admits that the depth of field had tripled from the 1970s to 1996. When Jack had become a professional, if he wasn’t playing his best golf, he said there might be 30 people who could beat him. When Bobby Jones wasn’t playing his best golf in the 1930s, he said there might’ve been 10 people who could beat Jones he said.
If you look at how many people were within 10 strokes of the winner of all four majors in the 2000s (23.2) and 2010s (22.95) it is significantly higher than what Jack had to face and his 60s (15.97) and 70s (19.3).
If you think less people within 10 shots of the overall leader had better golfers as competition you can look at the British Open where it had 4.9 people within 10 shots of the leader in the 1900’s and in the 1920s where it was 10.1. In the 1960s that number was 12.1 for the British Open. In the 2000s it was 29.1.
There were just fewer people who could compete with the best back then, and as time goes on, you’ll see a general uptick in amount of people who have a chance of winning any major as the game continues to grow.
Tiger never let anyone in or get close to him because he was always up to some nasty stuff in his personal life.
Who is wondering why Tiger stayed away from everyone else!?
They made it hard for him to join them!
What would you have done if you were the one?
Thank you, such an exclusionary game, but hey! Take off your shirt so we can see your muscles? Pass. The press is very self important. He doesn’t owe anyone anything.
Who changed the game?
Stats doesnt matter.
All race, age and color.
And the price money in millions USD.
People make it seem like Tiger was playing against himself!
He had a lot of competitors, but he made it difficult for them to beat him.
They could only win in his absence.
Those days everyone was fighting for second place.
Don't talk about Tiger not having second places, ask Strange what he told him!
Second sucks and third is even worse!
The guy is a jewel to say the least.
By the way, why undress someone?
Tiger is not a wrestler, he is a golfer!
You have to wonder what Tiger would have accomplished over his 82 PGS Tour wins and 15 majors not including his incredible amateur career if he had stayed reasonably healthy. He was surely on track to eclipse Nicklaus’s records, but they were both dominate players in their time. It reasonable to say that Jack played against superior talent with Weiskopf, Watson, Trevino and Seve, but Tiger had Mickleson, Els, Faldo and the rest. No easy answers here.
Everything physical and Emotional that Tiger suffered was self inflicted. Tigers demise was inevitable. One has to wonder, if Tiger never stepped into the weight room or got married, would he just found some other way to sabotage himself.
Nicklaus' era was tougher and more competitive.
Actually Faldo never won a Major after Tiger went Pro. Tiger's main rivals were Phil, Ernie and Vijay.
@@MP-tf7cc I agree. Years ago we had a golf tournament and for the longest drive everyone used one of Johnny Miller’s old persimmon woods and it’s hard to believe how long the pros were back then with that equipment.
Thanks to everyone for listening to the clip. I'm enjoying the comments. Everyone is making great points, which makes this a fun debate.
Very easily Jack is better. Why? I don't care what people say, I believe that Tiger did take performance drugs. But let's leave that out. Jack played in a time that the competition respected him but they were mentally tougher than Tiger's competitors. Plus, Tiger only came from behind to win one major. Jack, 7. Not to mention second place finishers in majors. Let's not forget how much better course conditions are today than 50 years ago
If you could put them in their prime, at Augusta, St. Andrews or Pebble -- it would be even money. Flip of a coin. Tiger does have 3 less Majors, but Jack didn't have the international presence of today; I think that kind of levels things. Mental toughness, ability to putt under pressure--equal. Driver; Jack (more consistent, and just as long if you control for equipment). Irons--slight advantage to Tiger, very slight. Short game Tiger. We've had both of them, and we are so fortunate. Now, we are going to be left with earthlings that will win the occasional Major etc...domination appears to be somewhere far away in the future.
Well said.
Good points but I just don’t see anyone ever beating the 2000 Pebble Beach US Open Tiger.
Jack is the GOAT
Jack was a better driver than Tiger. Jack never got drugged up and drove across an island medium and crashed into the woods. Tiger would have killed someone if they were in those driving lanes. Jack never did that.
18 majors to 15.. Got to go with Jack.
97-06 Tiger won 22% of all tournaments he played. That dwarfs any stat Jack has.
We will never see anything like Tiger Woods or Michael Jordan again. They're the two greatest athletes their sports have ever produced.
Those two will be hard to top, but you'll never know . . .
In his prime it is tiger. Overall Jack with the 18 majors. It is a simple discussion.
Tiger is better. I wouldn't say I like Tiger but he faced stiffer competition than Jack. In Jack's era, many players had to work another job to get by.
That was because they didn’t pay anything back then. Nicklaus made $5 million in Golf winnings his entire career. Tiger made $120 million. Thats 25 times as much. Lower purses made you more competitive because you had to get to the top 10% to make any money.
I don't know if I'd say Ernie Els, Vijay Singh, or Phil Mickelson (all great golfers don't get me wrong) are stiffer competition than the likes of Arnold Palmer, Gary Player, Lee Trevino, Tom Watson or Seve Ballersteros.
Wrong. Like all the other Fathers of Golf Legends Earl Woods was a good father to Tiger. No history of Child abuse, and you'll never find a video of Earl berating Tiger for playing poorly. If fact, Tiger use to say Earl Woods was his bestfriend.
i disagree with dave.. NICKLAUS ALL THE WAY,,
It's the 19 second place finishes in the major's that separates' Jack from Tiger.
Jack
18 majors
19 seconds
56 third
73 top tens(that’s 18 years of majors)
A major resume that will never be equaled!
Tiger would have smoked Jack if both were in their prime. Tiger changed the entire game. Jack didn't do that by himself. There was the big 3. There was no big 3 with Tiger.
It was his mother not his father who instilled in Tiger the aggressive golfing attitude, step on their throat on the golf course, when the tournament is over, then shake their hands. Her exact words. It’s on the internet. Look it up.
Tiger won 9 Vardon trophies - best scoring average over a whole season. Jack won 1. Tiger won 23% of all tournaments he entered. Jack won 12%. Jack played against greats like Arnie, Seve, Trevino, Tom Watson… The overall talent pool in Tiger’s generation was better, though (and it gets better every generation). Like Michael Jordan, Tiger Woods sold his soul to be the best, and he succeeded.
I think it really comes down to equipment, if Jack had equipment that Tiger use he have way more wins. If any of who who played Golf back in the 60s, 70s you know what i'm talking about.
That's nonsense because every competitor had the same equipment and that's what count. Jack was of sure a great champion, but he matched with only some of the international guys, and then in the 80s much more of the European players came to USA and from this moment Jack's career was finished - he has only won one major (1986 masters) after 1980. They field was from this moment dominated by Ballesteros, Langer (still is! Jack by far wasn't as successful on the champions tour as Langer is...) and for all Faldo. Jack's worstest major are the open - the reason is simple, the competitor field was much stronger there! And if Tom Watson would have been 10 years older, jack would have had a really strong competitor in him. Tiger won his first 14 majors in a extrem short time - and there were hole seasons in this period he was injured (2004.. Knees.) too. Without his injures Tiger would have won 20 majors or more...
But i think maybe Jack was a much more great sportsman, a greater champion! And i like the old traditions in the golfsport. By the way : i played with persimmon woods and balata balls as s young man and short course records with this equipment. I know the differences - but tigers also learned golf with such equipment and the club head's of the metal Wood in 1997 for example had the same size as the old persimmon ones.
The guys jack was playing against had the same equipment as jack.
By the time that Tiger had won his second major, Jack, Tiger and everyone else said the metric is number of major victories.
Good analysis. Tiger at his best was probably better. Overall, Jack had the better career.
With all that said the greatest golfers of all time pro or amateur are Bobby Jones and Tiger Woods. Bobby won all 4 majors (2-amateur 2-professinal) tournaments in a row and Tiger is the only" professional" golfer to win all 4 professional majors in a row. Jack played in over 160 majors and won 18 and Tiger played in about 85 and won 15. Mmmmmm? If Tiger was not hurt half his career, Tiger would have 30 plus majors. He's hurt right now and we can't count him out today.Tiger Woods the GOAT. Bobby Jones, Jack Nicklaus, Tiger Woods, just not in this order
Of course Tiger is a lot better than Jack because during Jack's days there was handful good players nothing like nowadays if Tiger would played Jack's times he would have more than 30 majors
Jack Nicklaus is the greatest ever, Tiger is second best. Jack had 18 majors, Tiger has 15 majors. 73 wins, 82 wins.❤😊🎉
Jack for sure but Tiger was definitely a better putter. Tiger has even said that Jack is the GOAT.
You can not judge a golfer on one round.It takes four.It would depend on the week.Jack at 22 years old with the equipment and ball of today would hit it 400 yards.Jack was only 5.10 at that age.
The 3 in a row US jr amateurs and the 3 In a row US amateur championships? Tiger was more dominant
Nicklaus has played in far more tournaments over his career. Tiger has won a higher pct. of events entered.
Jack faced better completion during his career and beat them all. By contrast Tiger faced a bunch of aging baby boomers during his prime. Both would still be the best even in today’s highly competitive PGA Tour. Jack is the best of all time with 18 majors and 117 world wide wins while playing part time - his season ended in late August so he could pursue his other interests.
Not only aging boomers, but in my opinion, not athletic (accept for Gary Player). I feel that the Athlete golfer era started with Tiger. I wasn't necessarily started by Tiger but that was the timeframe.
@@bsmith4u2 You are correct. However Gary Player was not a contemporary as he was 60 y.o. When Woods came on tour.
@@jherl8307 You're right. Gary Player was pre Boomer. Born in '35.
Jack no contest.
Just like Jenkins vs. Kindred 😂
Tiger was the best at every level. He was the best child golfer, he was the best Jr. Amateur, the best Amateur, the best NCAA golfer, and the best Pro.
Tiger had more talent than Jack by a little. But Jack had more class and decorum by a mile.
Tiger was a way better golfer, not even close. Jack was great back when golf was an easier game and much less popular.
You can hate on tiger for many things but if you don’t consider him the greatest golfer of all time you are lying to yourself … it’s like the Lebron vs Jordan argument and you tell me bill russel was the best because he had the most titles but all the outside factors show the competition wasn’t the same … during jacks era no one was an athlete they simply were playing a game tiger played a sport … he was so much better in a more impressive field than jack played against sorry all the legends from jacks time period we’re just playing a different game idk if it’s even fair to compare
Peak Tiger was better, but Jsck was the best in the game for twice as long. Very different people with very different objectives and lifestyles. I concede that Tiger's the GOAT, but he behaved like one as well. Golf was way better pre-Tiger, both as a spectator and player. He turned golf ugly.
Flip a coin. But Tiger's winning pct. is higher.
Why does everything always have to come down to strictly majors? Tiger had by far more talent than Jack did.
Right, at some point winning regular events has to mean something. He won 18 Wold Golf Championships, an underrated accomplishment.
Tiger 82 wins. Jack 18 majors you be the judge
I will be the judge. Majors are king. Ask Brooks Koepka. Nicklaus was better
I thought Woods was an android for years 😆
Tiger woods
Tiger Woods
Tiger all day
Two things that makes Tiger the best player and the GOAT. During Jack Nicklaus time and era, the players during that time were very good, and there were rivalries but Jack wasn't up against the whole field where they could hit 300 yard drives. In the last Masters won by Tiger there were 14 former and current #1 ranked golfers in the field. How many #1 ranked players during Jack's time? They didn't start it yet but there were just a handful during Jack's time. Tiger's first Master's win by 12 strokes blew away the field, they had to Tiger proof courses. Tiger's 15 stroke win at the US OPEN, he blew away the pros making them look like amateurs. Tiger was the ONLY player UNDER PAR for those 4 rounds! If Tiger didn't get injured, he'd already have 18 Major wins. Tiger was #1 for years, not just weeks. He Dominated golf for years, twice!
One only needs to watch the par 3 hole where Tiger holed the Chip in to win the Memorial where it was Jack Nicklaus who was commenting "that is one of most incredible shots that i think you will ever see played"
ruclips.net/video/F3x674i6aRU/видео.html
Nor will anyone forget the 16th hole at the Masters where he chips in. ruclips.net/video/WJEysanOT7w/видео.html
Many of Tiger's shots were the difference in winning, tying, or staying in contention.
Can Jack do this? ruclips.net/video/2iAH1J1SMLQ/видео.html
Sort of disagree in a way about your argument. Jack competed more against others who had won multiple majors, therefore able to handle the pressure down the stretch than Tiger ever went up against. Look at top 3 in majors, not even close between Nicklaus and Tiger. If Tiger was not injured…well he was, maybe Nicklaus did not push too hard, to keep injury free. However, even though I am a massive Nicklaus fan, saw him in his pomp, Tiger is actually a better player. He had more shots, invented some to an extent. I agree with this video in that I am certain Jack would say, if they played their absolute best for 4 rounds, at their absolute pomp, Tiger would win.
If Tiger took care of his body, he wouldn’t have been injured. Who’s fault is that. Tiger had a couple nice chip Ins. Jack had a famous 1 iron. Which is harder to hit? Jack played against Arnold, Watson, Seve, Norman, Trevino, Miller, Player. That’s 40 majors right there. BOOM goes your argument!
@@Macattack11639 Oh please!! Tiger's exercised more than any other golfer before him! Why do you think golfers like Dechambeau, Koepka, Mcilroy, Woodland, Dustin Johnson, Day all work out because they wanted to be like Tiger?
Why do you think some of them already got injuries because they don't take care of themselves? No, it's because they are hitting the ball so hard the torque is putting a lot of stress on their body to do so! Don't give me that BS! Could Jack beat any of these guys who can hit and reach par 4's from the tee?
When they tried to tiger proof they played into his game he was long so tiger proofing made the holes longer made it tougher for everyone else
@@michaeltoner7523 Many of the golfers who now play say they started to lift weights like Tiger, Dechambeau, McIlroy, Day, Johnson, Woodland, etc. Dechambeau and Mcilroy will try to reach the par 4 greens from the tee. The holes are too short for them still. It used to be where Tiger could do that, but his injuries prevents him from doing so and I also predict in the future that eventually some of these players will also get hurt from the immense stress and pressure they are putting on their bodies especially their backs and knees from all that torque they are trying to hit with.
Tiger no question. Tiger is the 3rd most winning player on the European tour all time.