The Harsh Truth About the GOAT Debate
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 14 окт 2024
- Who was better: Jack Nicklaus or Tiger Woods? A heated debate that people have very strong opinions about. Let’s break down the numbers so you can finally decide. The Greatest Of All Time.
🔴 WATCH NEXT: Gary Player LIFESTYLE Is NOT What You Think ▶️ • Gary Player LIFESTYLE ...
In the The Harsh Truth About the GOAT Debate video we take a closer look at Jack Nicklaus and Tiger Woods. How does the new equipment of today impact their play? Who would win in their prime? Is major victories on the PGA Tour the ONLY thing that matters?
Golf Plus delivers to you an insider’s look at the world’s greatest golfers. Top players from the PGA, PGA Tour Champions, LPGA, and legends of the game. We showcase lifestyle pieces, golf highlights, biographies, and documentaries not seen anywhere else.
#GolfPlus
🔴 WATCH NEXT: Gary Player LIFESTYLE Is NOT What You Think ▶ ruclips.net/video/zlmZkQp8DLo/видео.html
There is not as much competition during Jack's era (1960s-1980s), such that only a few of them (including Jack) were able to dominate in a field of more than one hundred players.
In Tiger's era, he is so ahead of his competition despite playing in a more competitive era which makes him GOAT.
Data from NGF shows that in 1950, there were approximately 4,900 18-hole equivalent golf courses (18-HEQ) in the United States. In 1970, there were 7,516 18-HEQ courses. At their peak in 2005, the number had almost doubled to 14,990.
The mistake you make in percentages is including all the years Jack continued to play when he was no longer the best - Tigers fall from the top has been steep with very few starts since his problems began.
Appreciate the feedback ⛳️
My thoughts precisely
Yes, cheating on your child's mother at his birth says a lot about you.
Yep. Including majors played after age 50 doesnt really make sense.
I’ve seen this logic fallacy over and over from them. It just shows their desperation when Tiger just couldn’t get it done. You also have to keep in mind that Jack really wasn’t pushing himself for a good part of his career when he didn’t have a goal to chase down. If you look at the number of second-place finishes in Majors, and the fact that he was taking it easy a good stretch, he really does outpace Tiger even further.
Let me be clear up front - Jack and Tiger are definitely the two greatest golfers of all time. For various reasons, some will favor Jack and some will favor Tiger. Having said that, I have trouble with some of the analysis in this post.
You can't compare Jack's lifetime percentages to Tiger's percentages to age 46. Jack played in so many tournaments after his prime that his percentages would certainly drop. A few years ago, I compared performance between the two to age 43 (meaning just before they turned 44). Tiger had the higher win percentage, 22.6% to 15.8%. Jack had a higher percentage of top 3 finishes, 37.8% to 36.6%. Jack had a significant lead in top 10 finishes, 65.5% to 55.0%. Both were phenomenal at making cuts, but to age 43, Jack's rate for making cuts was an astounding 95.2% while Tiger's was 90.5%.
I think changes in training methods and fitness regimes is irrelevant. In either time period all players had whatever resources were available in that era. As a result, we cannot say that Tiger's competition is tougher than the competition Jack faced. Tiger has the same access to resources as does his competition. The same is true of equipment. All players had access to whatever was available in the era.
Speaking of competition, in his career Jack regularly played against 3 golfers who were are in the top ten for career wins. Tiger played against two in the top twenty, Phil at #8 and Vijay at #14 (It must be noted that Vijay's last win was in 2008). However, I think that each week through all of Tiger's career, there were likely more competitors who had a realistic chance of winning than there were in Jack's career.
For Majors, we all know that Jack has 3 more wins that Tiger. For 2nds and 3rds, Jack's numbers are far higher than those of Tiger, 19 to 7 for 2nds and 9 to 4 for 3rds.
If we look at Majors to age 43, Jack played 96 events to Tiger's 83. Since Jack won at age 46, he had only 17 wins to age 43. Tiger had a slightly higher winning percentage, 18.0% to 17.7%. From then on, it is always Jack in the lead - for 2nds 19.8% to 8.4%, for 3rds 9.4% to 4.8%, for top five 57% to 40%, for top tens 69.8% to 49.4%.
In any consideration of greatness, the length of a career is important. Tiger accumulated more wins earlier in his career than did Jack. Jack had more staying power. I think that between ages 33 and 43, Jack had 20 wins and Tiger had 10. I can't conclude that one is better than the other.
In case you couldn't tell, overall, I favor Jack as the GOAT. Tiger has been better at winning outside of the Majors. In events overall, it is a tossup on top 3s, but Jack has a significant lead in top 10s. In the Majors, it is a tossup on wins but Jack has a dramatic lead in 2nds, 3rds, top 5s and top 10s.
Frankly, I have been blessed to have been alive to watch both of them as they proved they are the best, well ahead of those behind them.
Excellent points! Thanks for your comments!
great analysis...for me..the overwhelming decider besides 2nd place finishes is great hall of famers jack played against....the likes of Tom Watson..Hale Irwin..Billy Casper...gary player..arnold palmer..Tom weiskopf..Lanny wadkins..Lee trevino...Ray floyd..Tony Jacklin..young kite, ben crenshaw...Seve...Norman...all historic players and great putters(except weiskopf)....Woods,though great, had to beat mickelson and vijay(bad putter) and declining Els(bad putter)....because of the greatness of woods he would have gotten his majors..but probably no more than 8-9...and if u throw in Nicklaus into the field Woods would have gotten no more than 7(and reduce Jacks total to 15 or 16 when Tiger beats Jack)..
@@guyrestivo here is the thing, PED tiger only played courses he liked outside of the majors and of course tiger took PED's
along a similar thought..at least 5 guys folded like cheap suits at masters 2019 when Tiger won.....Tigers presence intimidated them and also tourn pressure...this was a common theme for those competing against tiger...Jack intimidated his lower competitors too but not the Hall of famers(yes some exceptions)...
and yes...i forgot Johnny Miller
Bobby Jones.....
Entered a total of 11 US Opens - 4 wins (tied with Nicklaus and Hogan), 4 seconds, one 5th, one 8th. Entered the Open Championship 4 times, won 3 (tied with Nicklaus and Woods).
The amateur championships were also considered majors in those days:
US Amateur - 13 entries, 5 wins, 2nd twice, lost in the semi-finals twice. Amateur Championship (aka British Amateur) - 3 entries, 1 win.
Never won the PGA because he was an amateur. Never won the Masters because he didn't start the tournament until after he retired from regular competition.
From 1923, when he was 21, until his retirement at 28, Jones entered the 4 tournaments he was eligible to play 21 times, winning 13 times and finishing second 4 times. That's what dominance really looks like.
Oh, yeah, he also won all 4 of them in 1930 - the Grand Slam. And for influence on the game, he founded Augusta National and started the Masters. Plus he issued a series of instructional films in the 1930s that helped spread the game.
This is really good Jim - Thank You!
And his competition all wore suits, were often overweight and smoked cigars, not even close the level of Tiger's competition. Tiger's competition all followed Tiger's blue print with fitness, diet, and well coached by the finest coaches on the planet.
@@CycleCruza
Jones also wore a suit and tie. And smoked. HIs competition included Walter Hagen and Gene Sarazen in the open championships. Perhaps you have heard of them?
Bobby did all as an amateur, while going to school, when you took a steamship or a train to get to a tournament and he won the grand slam.
agreed. as one open champion said of Mr. Jones, he plays a game with which I am not familiar. and he did it part time as an amateur.
Jack's 19 silver medals at the majors has to count for something and put him over the top as the greatest ever.
I'm old school! Jack was playing at Augusta National when I lived there and I am SUCH a fan! Jack all the way!
thanks Nempie
🤣🤣🤣🤣
With the same equipment / Ball hands down Jack !
Nope!
You just cannot get around the number of majors. Jack is the best golfer.
Jack finished first or second in 37 majors. Tiger Woods finished first or second in 22 majors. Sorry, but 37-22 is sort of a blowout. If you make it top 5 finishes Jack leads 56-31. Tiger was great but Jack was otherworldly.
Great point Harold - thanks ⛳️
@@golfplus_ As Tiger himself once responded to a reporter: “Second best golfer of all time…that’s pretty good, right?”
@@haroldfloyd5518jack would say the same thing about tiger. To relegate Tiger to “great” is laughable. His 2000 season alone puts him in otherworldly status.
@@167kinggam As Tiger himself once responded to “legacy” questions: “So you’re saying I’m the second best golfer ever. That’s pretty good, right?”. Peak Tiger probably edges peak Jack (except maybe at Augusta) but over time, Nicklaus lapped the field on everyone.
@@167kinggam Tiger had the best season ever. Jack had the best career ever.
In the world of golf - Tiger is admired but, Jack is truly loved. Jack was, by far, the best because his performances in the Majors far outweighs Tiger in terms of Top 3 finishes, the opposition Jack faced was far superior and the way Jack played the game was far more gentlemanly. For me Jack is one of a very small band of people who make up The Greatest Sportsmen EVER list and is a shining example of how sport should be played.
Pebble Beach....
Tiger was a better golfer than Jack but Jack is a greater man.
@@Beazle00 The record books says otherwise.
Tiger placed first or second 22 times in 87 majors or 25%, Jack placed first or second 38 times in 164 majors or 23%, but Jack played in his last major when he was 65 years old!!! Unless Tiger plays until he’s 65 and passes Jack I’d say we have to give the GOAT award to Jack.
Thanks for your comments ⛳️
This conversation starts when Tiger matches Jack’s major win record.
Tiger’s great and I thought he’d surpass Jack but his personal baggage hurt him.
Jack is still the GOAT.
Or maybe Young or Old Tom?
One cannot forget about Bobby Jones. He only golfed as an amateur, because professionals had an unsavory reputation at that time. But, had they all been professionals at the same time, with the same equipment, it would be a constant and very close battle for numbers 1A, 1B and 1C. Debating is always fun unfortunately we will never truly know.
Very valid point Steven - thanks ⛳️
Ben Hogan would have won more majors if not for a) WWII andb) bus crash......best ball striker ever
@@1362pc That would make a fantastic foursome!
I agree. If you just look at the length of tile playing no one can top Bobby Jones.
And Bobby beat all the professionals and amateurs while he was going Tom school, law school etc etc
Jack oozed considerably more class both as a golfer and a person.
Do you know what Jack did when he wasn’t in front of the cameras?
Do you know?
There simply is no debate. 18=GOAT.
Jack with those 19 2nd place finishes in majors is awesome. He could have won 37 majors! Tigers injuries and other self-inflicted life events cost him time and possibly more wins and majors. Jack, although not injury free, was able to continue playing and never really missed a beat. For me, it's Jack as the GOAT, but Tiger gets honorable mention with an asterisk....what could have been had he been healthy.
Thanks for your comments ⛳️
The thing is, Jack had to beat: Arnold Palmer, Tom Watson, Gary Player, Lee Trevino, Julius Boros, Billie Casper, Johnny Miller, Hale Irwin, Seve Ballesteros, Andy North, Dave Stockton, Lanny Wadkins, Tom Weiskopf, Ken Venturi, and bunches of other really good players. Tiger's list of noteworthy opponents is nothing like that.
yes Tiger had many SELF INFLICTED issues
@@georgesealy4706 are you sure ?? Check 1997-2023 opponents...and Jack was better for an inch but tiger in his prime noone was even close..my opinion..Jack is gentleman, great golfer, GOAT as overall golfer but when we go into his dominance is unmatched and maybe you think he didin't have opponents simply because he was so dominant but: Couples, Jimenez, Mickelson, Mediate, Duval, Els, Vijah, Rory, DJ,..
But i respect your view and opinion 100%
he didnt win 37 majors and he didnt win 82 times in the space of time tiger has and he didnt dominate the way tiger did!
Jack had more first, second and third place finishes in Majors than Tiger. Almost double when added together. Moreover you cannot compare Tiger's competition with Jack having to compete against Palmer, Player, Trevino, Watson and Ballesteros.
lol Tiger always said "Second place is first place loser." NOBODY cares about second place finishes in golf. I bet most of you can't recite who came in second place in the last major. lol As far as competition, Tiger had the BEST competition because they all followed his blueprint with exercising, elite high tech training and being coached by the very best coaches like Butch Harmon. During Jack's era many golfer were overweight, smoked cigars and self-taught players. The reason Tiger's competition looked weak is because Tiger was so extremely dominant and won so often and by large margin. The media coined the term "The Tiger effect," because when Tiger was in the lead the other players often wilted. Players used to get mad at Tiger after he won because sometimes he would say he won with his "C" game. lol
How many times Jack came in second is almost more amazing than his 18 major wins
His 19 times finishing in 2nd place is really a phenomenal stat! ⛳️
Indeed! Those 2nds don't show up in the win % they said Tiger is leading in, but with 19 second places finishes in majors it shows Jack not only won more majors-- he was within the tiniest whisker of blowing Tiger's major win record off the map! His major resumé is just that much better than Tiger's.
Not saying Tiger isn't the 🐐 tho', it's too close to call.
(Jack would've controlled his game better in important competitions with his tee-to-green game (Tiger had the occasional errant drive), but Tiger had the better overall short game inside of 120 yards.
Both could win sinking putts on the final holes. Tiger's were even more dramatic as his energy and storyline sizzled on TV.
Jack vs. Tiger would've been so much fun to watch. Their different approaches to the game would've provided momentum shifts and tense moments. Great stuff!
With almost double the major appearances than Tiger,I'd say Tiger had better percentages.
@@dnnyshdy5189 😂 We're not counting all Jack's major appearances after (Tiger's current age of) 46. That was a ton of "appearance only's". From 20 yrs old to 46 they both pretty much played all 4 majors each year. Tiger played 1 or 2 less. But in the same number of legit appearances (not 75 yrs old and waving 🤣) Jack's Major record dominated Tiger's. Not saying that means 🐐 necessarily, but true
Jack played against more golf legends....which is why he has so many 2nds and 3rds.....Tiger played against.......Phil
The topic that seems to come up the most is the number of Majors. In that regard, not only does Jack have the most major wins, but he has the most 2nd place finishes in majors with 19. The next from there is Mickelson with 11. Tiger is down the list a bit with 7. So if Jack would have won just a few of those, we would not be having this discussion.
Thanks for tuning in Alan ⛳️
But he didn't. Peak Tiger is the most dominant golfer ever imo
@@tonybleau6219 Okay it's your opinion although based on being somewhat dismissive to a very important piece of data...and I won't even go into the equipment Jack played with during the majority of his career in the PGA compared to Tiger. Well at least we agree on one and two right.
@@Alan_Edwards meh. Tiger with no injuries wins 20 majors + easily. His peak is easily better than Jack's. Jack played with the best equipment they had at the time like his peers. Just look at them play and the eye test never disappoints either.
Woods's best performances are much more iconic and impressive if you ask me. Perfection at Pebble Beach, the 2000 season with the completion of the Tiger Slam in 2001 and then the unreal 2019 Masters.
I think Jack only really has longevity and peak length on his side but Tiger at his best was definitely better
@@tonybleau6219 so what? it did not bring more majors to his resume anyway.
Personally I'd say Jack. Although the numbers do favor Tiger most of the time. I loved Jack for his conduct and sportsmanship. He would be the one I'd want my kid to aspire to.
Jack is such a gentleman
I agree. I'm 66 and I'll take Jack all day every day. For me it's a character thing. Jack again takes the win. I believe Tiger's days are numbered, just my opinion.
Roger that!!
I'll go with Jack as well, better results in majors, more total worldwide wins than Tiger, and generally a better person on and off the course
I think Jack had the greatest career, but Tiger played the best golf. 19 seconds and 54 plus top 5s in majors is something Tiger hasn’t. One close to.
So, it depends on how you define the GOAT. If it’s who played the best, it’d have to be Tiger. If you compare careers, it would have to be Jack.
Another factor not considered is that Jack had a full family life, and only played some 15 tournaments a year in his prime. Tiger played much more per year.
Jack is the GOAT and Tiger has no chance to catch him. It's not just about wins. Where did you finish when you didn't win? Were you still right there? Jack usually was. Tiger was not, and it's not close. Jack's major record just dwarfs Tiger's overall. And then you have to remember Jack faced a who's who of HoF players in his careers, legends. How many of those did Tiger face? A few, but really...is that close at all?
Look at the Major record for both:
Jack: 18 wins, 19 Seconds, 9 Thirds, 56 Top 5's, 73 Top 10's, 85 Top 25's 131 Cuts Made
Tiger: 15 wins, 7 Seconds, 4 Thirds, 33 Top 5's, 41 Top 10's 59 Top 25's 75 Cuts Made
If you brought back Tiger of 10 years ago and let him play 5 more years in good health, he still wouldn't come close to that.
Tiger would have shattered Jack’s major record with 5 more years. Injuries stopped him from winning 20+
@@samclark3370 Jack had lots of injuries, too. He already had major back problems as an amateur, that bothered him throughout his career. He hurt his hip in the early 60's.
Still the GOAT, and it's not close.
Jack was nearly always in contention, even when he didn't win. Tiger usually either dominated, or wasn't even a factor.
Jack has more 2nds than Tiger has 2nds and 3rds combined.
Tiger won the same amount of majors after 35 that Jack did.
You can't really do the "if he didn't have injuries", because everyone has them at that age range in professional sports.
What if Jack didn't have all his back issues? Dude absolutely dominated despite having them his whole career.
Jack is the GOAT, and it'll never be close
Jack was the best in his era and Tiger in his. Jacks character was and is the finest. It would have been wonderful if the same could be said about Tiger.
thanks
@@richardromero6193 Very true.
Every human being on the face of the earth has done something they don't want anyone to know about. Including Jack Nicklaus.
Mr g o, well said. A goat is one without integrity. INTEGRITY is priceless & TIME-less. John 3.3, 33-34-
He’s a F’ing Trump supporter which means he has NO integrity
19 runner up and 18 Majors there's no comparison regardless of what ever narrative you try to build. Jack is miles ahead of him
He only had to battle 5 other good players. And played a lot longer. Tiger has all the meaningful records. Majors won is a cheap statistic
@@FlameofUdun9 Player, Watson, Trevino, and Ballesteros, et. al. didn't crumble under pressure and hit bogey after bogey on the back nine on Major Sundays the way Lefty, VJ, Spieth, and McIlroy and company have - even when Tiger was not the one they were competing against for the win.
Tiger won more, look it up and in a lot less time
@@ChrisSteward-wd5mh We keep score with Majors around here. But nice try
So by your logic Gary Player was a better golfer than Arnold Palmer and Sam Snead
Nice try.
Largest 4 day crowd to watch Jack win a Major is approx 120,000. Largest for Tiger approx 295,000. Tiger and Jack played golf under different conditions
Jack is the GOAT. It's not only that he won more Majors. It's he finished Second even more times!
valid points John
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Nah
Tiger timed his tournaments so he could take steroids. I`m sure you noticed Tiger went down with injury just before mandatory testing began. How convenient.
@@joeyojoeyo3613 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Both are/were amazing. One piece of the puzzle not touched on are the purses in the Tiger years. The money he made through winnings and endorsements allowed him to pick and choose when to play. Jack had to play more often to make a living. I wonder if Tiger had been forced to play as much as Jack, if his body would have broken down quicker. Also, I don’t think we can discount the differences in equipment. This is an impossible debate. Both are great champions.
Very valid points Tom -- thank you!
I dont think equipment matters at all, because all of the other players in Tigers era had the equipment as well, and if Jack played at that time he would have too.
@@gasperm3 Point taken. I also wonder about the psychological part of the different eras. Todays top players are making ridiculous amounts of money. Whether they take 1st or 15th is still a lot of money. Was the pressure different when the purses were much smaller and making enough to live was your first concern?
A small aside. Nicklaus 18 major wins. 19 runners up. Tiger 15 wins, runners up 7. I don’t think anyone was better at playing with a lead than Tiger, but coming from behind seems to favor Nicklaus.
@@tombjorkman6425 Nicklaus got a lot of his wins by playing conservative, and letting people like Isao Aoki, Doug Sanders, Greg Norman, and Bruce Crampton choke up. When Jack had to really go head to head against a gutsy player, like Tom Watson and Lee Trevino, he usually lost out to them.
They are both equally great. Jack had serious competition from far greater players.
Appreciate it Joe ⛳️
You're kidding yourself. Palmer, Player, Watson, Trevino, Hogan, and many others..The present age is in no way superior to yesteryear..Toni's husband
Tiger did not face a top 10 all time great, unless you count Phil. Jack faced the end of Hogan's career {and Snead who almost won the 1963 Masters that Jack ended up winning} Palmer in his prime, Player in his prime, Trevino in his prime, and Watson in his prime. Plus Casper, Floyd, Seve, and Faldo. Finally the comeback against all odds defiantly counts. Jacks 1986 Masters comeback was the greatest of all time. Tiger never came from behind to win a major and was chased down by Y E Yang. And for the final measure 18 beats 15. Jack is the best!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I think Butch Harmon said it best when he said "Nicklaus is the greatest champion, but when he was playing his best, I think Tiger was the best golfer I’ve ever seen."
Well said!
The qualifier “when playing his best”. An excuse. Otherwise, we would find somebody that played the very best round ever and shot a 57 or 58 and crown them the greatest of all time. Jack obviously played better more often. That is, after all, what we are talking about. Forget the 18 wins, Jack also destroys Tiger with 19 runner-ups in Majors. The only thing that even allows for Tiger apologists to create a debate is the fact that there’s so little video of Jack due to technology. If we had the same coverage of Nicklaus during his prime, people could truly appreciate his length, precision, and ability. Jack is the GOAT!
@@HoboJoe1416 cry
@@HoboJoe1416Tiger played his best for over a decade straight. Best decade of golf ever played.
Jack’s record in majors speaks for itself…he finished in the top 5 an astounding 56 times!!!
This is ridiculous when you are including tournaments Jack has entered over the past 30 plus years when discussing winning percentages! When you are as great as these guys you have life-time invitations to all major and other tournaments! Also, when you play against the likes of Palmer, Trevino, Player and Watson I think that is tougher than a bunch of one-time winners!
Thanks for watching ⛳️
@@golfplus_ You’re welcome.
Exactly - and idiots in the comments haven't even grasped that obvious fact. Of course playing way past your prime lowers your winning percentages, plus Tiger has missed the past few years with injury. Obviously if Tiger played consistently as a pro from 40 to 50 or whatever his winning percentages would drop a lot.
There’s an argument either way concerning majors and the like. Whats is needed is a tie breaker.
Jack in Ryder Cups is 6 Ryder Cups, 17-8-3, 18.5 points.
Tiger is 13-21-3.
Jack wins.
Very good analysis. The one thing to consider is Tiger could’ve done it with the equipment from Jack time. Tiger would’ve had to play a more controlled game with that equipment.
that is a very valid point Al - the equipment changes have been significant
Maybe, but his competition would be using similar equipment which probably still gives him the edge? I just say Jack was the best before Tiger and Tiger is the best since Jack.
Correct. Take a look at a driver from the 60s and realize that Jack pounded 300+ yard drives with that kind of club - and shaped his shots. Tiger was never as good off the tee. Woods was definitely better with irons. Both were legendary putters, but on very different greens. Greens in the 60s were like fairways today.
Equipment doesn't matter at all, all of the other players in Tigers era had that equipment as well, Tiger didn't compete against Jack he competed against those other players with that equipment.
Tiger was hesitant to update his old school equipment. He was out driving guys by 50 yards using the same equipment they were.
Everybody leaves out the fact that Woods had a several shot lead every time he stepped on the course: The super-praising Announcers and hordes of people who came only to see Woods play. After he hit or putted, they ran to the next shot. He used that, too!
Woods won at least 13 of his majors using the crowd to bury his opponents. Not one person ever said anything about it!!! Had it not been for that, he would have been about a 3 to six major winner.
Nicklaus did not, nor would he use the crowds to beat an opponent. In fact, it was about 1967 before they quit booing him and calling him terrible names. Nobody said a word about it! He took it! And won anyway!
Jack large!!
William Ben Hogan gets my vote as Golf's greatest player ever. In his wonderful Biography Hogan, author Curt Sampson wrote that "Hogan failed miserably. Then succeeded beyond imagining." Hogan didn't win his first major until the age of 34. Then he won nine in the next seven years!! This after enduring the most horrific accident any human being ever lived through, on Groundhogs Day in 1949. A head on collision with a Greyhound bus in Van Horn, Texas. Through an unparalleled drive to succeed, Hogan created the greatest control of a golf ball of all time. As a striker of the ball Hogan made Jack and Tiger look like comparative HACKS. When Hogan died in 1997 Jack himself stated, "Golf has lost its greatest shotmaker." Look at these numbers. Hogan never finished outside the top ten in 15 straight United States US Opens and Masters tournaments. From 1946-1948 he won 37 times in 99 tournaments! He played in only one British Open at Carnoustie in 1953. And won it!! The PGA was in Match Play until the latter portion of his career. Far more difficult to win. Tiger and Jack were spoiled Country Club kids compared to Hogan. Driving hundreds of miles a week to tournaments. Playing for peanuts on poorly manicured courses. Hogan's Achilles Heel was his putting. As the famous instructor Butch Harmons father Claude stated, "If Hogan could have putted, he would have made ever record in the book look silly." HERE IS THE MOST UNREAL NUMBER I HAVE EVER HEARD RELATING TO GOLF. In 1940 Hogan won three straight tournaments in North Carolina. He missed two greens in 216 holes!! There is no one, THEN OR NOW that could do that. Any debate over the greatest player ever, that doesn't include Ben Hogan is a typographical misprint.
I will take Bobby Jones before Hogan
Bobby Jones won the grand slam; won 13 majors and quit at 28 as an amateur. And just to be a nice guy, he helped manage but did not play on the team at Harvard as he was already the best golfer in the world, winning majors.
@rlkinnard Jones was a true Renaissance man. Including golf!! The only flaw in his resume was that most of his wins were against amateur competition. When Hogan won three majors in 1953, he was unable to play in the PGA because it overlapped with the Open Championship. Much like Lee Trevino, Hogan had a hardscrabble childhood if ever there was one. Nobody ever faced a tougher road to the top than Ben Hogan.
@@donaldschmidt2990 The one thing that besmirched his stellar reputation was not allowing blacks as members of Augusta during his lifetime.
There is still unironically an entire hall of fame career that Tiger still has to have to get level with Nicklaus. Tiger's peak may have been just as good, if not a little better than Jack's, but that can only get you so far. Jack did more against better competition with worse equipment over a much larger portion of his career than Tiger did. Jack is the GOAT, and it's as simple as that
Tiger's winning percentage only goes south from here as he is pushing 50 years old. Jack was rarely competitive at the same age, and you've already baked this into Jack's numbers but have yet to include it in Tiger's numbers. It's likely Tiger will not have another top 5 at a major, and this makes Jack's dominance in most wins at majors, most top 2s, most top 3s, most top 5s and most top 10s at majors will not be challenged. Jack's the man!
Also Tiger has missed the last few out of prime years injured so his percentage hasn't really strarted to dip yet. It will if he keeps playing consistently. Which he probably wont.
Thanks for your comments
THX
Tiger was great....but nicklaus is the man...18 majors and 19 second and many more top10 in majors..that's the telling point..Nicklaus blows away tiger in that regard..it's about the majors.oh and Jack has 6 green jackets. Tiger doesnt
It's Jack. You can't change the definition of GOAT because you want someone else at the top. It's all about the Majors. When Tiger ties or passes Jack then he will be the GOAT.
Thanks for tuning in!
So Walter Hagen is the 4th best player of all time because of majors? You may want to rethink that strategy.
NO debate. Jack period! Family man and good morals separates them. And it is not even close'
Jack had better competition and more consistent. Tiger has the higher peak but Jack is still goat
The all time GOAT cannot be discerned. Two different eras 35 years aparrt. Tiger had much better golf course conditions, much better equipment tweeked to his swing, a Navy pyschologist on his bag as an am, much better availability of athletic equipment to get in shape. the financial ability to concentrate solely on golf, mutiple coaches to tweek his swing and to guide him in his workouts. Jack on the other hand was a part time PGA player. His season ended in late August and didn't start again until early January because he had to earn income by running numerous businessess. He couldn't rely on his on course earnings to sustain himself. Jack earned 5 million dollars for 35 years of winning on the PGA Tour. Guys today can earn that by having a good couple of weeks. Jack's the GOAT imo.
Jack is the GOAT. Many reasons. Everyone knows he has more majors, but he also finished 2nd many more times - playing against Hall of Fame guys Palmer, Player, Watson, Trevino, etc. The man’s personal character counts, too, for me. Jack was a great sportsman and role model on and off the course. Don’t get me started on Mr. Woods character!
I agree. I think Nicklaus' record is superior to Woods but as a man, there is no comparison. I think that should have some bearing on any match up.
Very valid points David - thanks ⛳️
⛳️⛳️⛳️
You mean Tigers character that brought Millions of new players to the game? The character that changed how the game is played and by far had the largest impact of any golfer ever? I’m not saying his personal failures as a role model are to be overseen but people make mistakes and we forgive and forget. But come on….
lol. Jack didn’t play in the social media era. Arnie bedded women at every tournament stop. If you think Jack was a saint, you’re very very wrong. Tiger has passed Jack in basically every category except majors. Playing fields MUCH deeper during Tiger’s era.
It is difficult to compare sports performances from different eras....too many variables. Woods is a wonerful golfer who domjnated his era and deserves acolades, but Nicklaus won 3 more majors and many senior titles....he also had 12 more 2nd place finishes in majors, 23 more top fives in majors, and 32 more top 10s in majors. Given Tiger's physical challeges it is very doubtful that he will be competetive for very much longer. Jack remains the most dominant in any given era....if that's a "goat" , then Jack's the goat😊😊
Golf will always be remembered through Tiger Woods and Jack Nicklaus, they're two superb players who emphasize excellence in the sport. In my eyes, they're both great and I don't think anyone should declare one over the other.
thanks George
18 vs. 15 = clearcut GOAT
There's only one GOAT.
Until he wins three more majors, it's not Tiger.
Totally flawed analysis in terms of percentage of major wins per major tournament. Each Golfer was major force for 25 yrs. Simple math tells you there are 4 majors per yr times 25 or 100 major tournaments that matter. Jack won 18 in between 1962 and 1986, Tiger 15 between 1997 and 2019. The fact Jack played Masters as amateur/ teenager 3 times or played it well beyond 50 yrs old is irrelevant and of course reduces his winning percentage. The only numbers that matter are 18 versus 15 over a 25 yr period.
Jack also had the most second place finishes which means he was alway in it for a good chunk of his career.
Excellent point Rich - thanks ⛳️
Jack beat Tiger in 1998 at Masters at 58 years old months before a hip surgery. He beat him and all 1997 major winners (Woods, LoveIII, Leonard and ELs). Here's your era comparison, now who is the GOAT?
Great post - 22 year old Tiger beaten by 58 year old Bear - love it!!! 😅😅😅
I think if you focus on the Majors (forgetting Ryder Cup and regular Tour events), it's easy to make the case for Jack. Consider it like the Olympics in terms of medal counts for the Majors: Gold, Silver and Bronze. In the professional Majors, Jack has 18 Gold, 19 Silver and 9 Bronze for a total of 46. Tiger in comparison has 15 Gold, 7 Silver and 3 Bronze for a total of 25. By this one metric, it's not even close.
Thanks for your comments Manyu ⛳️⛳️
One point and a big one too, Tiger had around $60 million in the bank, from Nike and Titleist BEFORE he hit his first shot as a pro, Jack had nothing as such. Now knowing that your mortgage is sorted take a lot of pressure off you.
Since this is a solo sport we can only judge GOAT by majors, nothing else. Jack has18 with 77 top 10 majors finishes and not only that never went more than 5 years without winning a major up until his final one in 1986. Tiger is the greatest of this generation but Jack is the greatest of all time.
thanks for watching ⛳️⛳️⛳️
Tiger Woods is the better golfer. You know you’d put money on him if him and Jack did a playoff😂
@@167kinggam Look at the majors stats of both players. That's how we judge who's had a better career.
@@RepriseFan jack was great over a long period of time. But Tiger’s peak was on a level that even Jack would never touch.
@@167kinggam Right, the most dominant over 1 decade but 1 major in the last 15 years. It's a marathon not a sprint. Jack has proven to be the career GOAT because of that.
15 consecutive years finishing inside the Top 6 at the Open - 37 1st and 2nd place finishes at Majors - these 2 stats alone are enough to finish any debate
I leaned toward Jack because of his 19 second place finishes. After seeing this video the numbers don't lie. Tiger beats you on percentages and more often than not straight up numbers. I still tell people that he ruined all of my excuses for not being good at the game. I would hit my ball in the woods just like Tiger. But that meant a double bogey if I was lucky. Tiger was still making birdies.
Yeah, the 2nd place finishes stat is a pretty remarkable achievement.
Jack Nicklaus won 18 majors to Woods 15. There is no debate.
Thank You John ⛳️
Jack was good. Tiger was great. This is a hard choice but I would choose Tiger any day. At least he was in the golf era I know of. Not too bad 😁
Thanks
To me, Jack is better because of the other top 10 golfers that he faced, were mentally tougher. If Jack had the medical knowledge back then that they have today, his leg most likely wouldn't have been as big a problem.
Jack and Tiger are definitely the two best golfer legends of all time. Enjoyed how this video compared their golfing careers and accomplishments.
appreciate it Jill ⛳️
Yeah me personally on the balances of pluses and minuses I see them both equal on top of the pyramid.
Jacks 2 US Amateur titles were Majors when he won them.
Also if you didn't Win when Jack played you didn't make a living on tour. So he played against players who needed to win not just wanting to win.
Tiger played against more good players.
Jack played against more great players.
Great video outlining all the angles - gotta go with Jack Nicklaus
Thanks Drew
Eh. I take tiger all day and twice on Sunday.
Wrong.
When you look at Jack's top 3's 5's and 10's in majors it not even close. Not as many tournaments in Jack's prime days (no world golf championships), and he played a very limited schedule (family first!) I believe Jack's competition in his prime (20 to 36 years of age) was tougher than Tiger's in his prime. Jack is by far the GOAT.
So hard to choose a GOAT, especially when it's hard to compare the periods of history. With better equipment, it makes it even harder
excellent point
Jack didn’t use HGH, gotta go with Jack on this one.
Jack is the GOAT. He didn't chase after anybody's records. He set out to win as many majors as his mind and body would allow. Tiger has chased Jack's records his entire life and has not reached them. In his current condition, it is extremely unlikely that he will win ANY more majors - much less four more that he would need to surpass Jack.
Jack did not chase Sneed's tournament wins record; he was focused exclusively on winning the majors. Imagine how many tournaments Jack would have won if he had prioritized chasing Sneed's record rather than on winning as many majors as humanly possible!
If you ask Tiger about this - even in private where you're more likely to get an honest answer - I am sure that he would name Jack as golf's GOAT.
He was sorry when he broke Bobby’s record. No one will ever be equal to Bobby Jones
Compared to today, Tiger's era was very weak. The rookies coming on tour now are better than the average veteran pro in the 90's. I'd love to see what all the previous greats could achieve if only they had Trackman.
Jack played against a far superior level of competition than Tiger faced during his career, 18 majors and 19 seconds gives the nod to Jack.
Good points Jim - thanks
disagree.
Only 5 different foreign players won majors in the US during Jack's career (1962 to 1986)
19 different foreign players won majors in the US during Tiger's career (1997 to 2019)
Tiger a better player in all categories IMO.
@@bjohnson515 Yeah but Jack had tougher Rivals like Arnie, Player, Trevino and Watson who had around 25 Majors between them. Whereas Tiger's main rivals were basically Phil, Ernie and VJ. Who only had maybe 13 Majors between them? The comment seems to be correct. Jack had tougher Rivals at least in the Majors.
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Are you kidding me? The fields TW played against were far deeper than anything Jack ever faced. Jack literally had three guys overseas he had to beat.
The scoring average is a joke. Better ball, better conditions, better clubs.
Here's the difference, Tiger has the 3rd most wins in the history of the European Tour. He won 42 tournaments on that tour, Jack won events 9 in Europe. In most other measures, they are close with maybe Jack holding a slight edge. Tiger's dominance in Europe shifts the balance for me. He's the GOAT.
Thanks Steve ⛳️
I am pretty certain the large majority of those European wins are also counted as PGA wins. The European tour counts many PGA tournaments as European tournaments.
Nobody cares about that. Tiger himself literally said to judge him by his majors - Tigers goal and every other pros goal is to win majors because they know that's what greats are judged by. Nobody cares about Europe and Jack never even played much or cared for it. What an obvious fanboy argument for tiger lol
I'd say Jack wins. He didn't play every tournament cause he cared about spending time with his family.
Thanks for tuning in Michael! ⛳️⛳️
Tiger Woods turned par 5's into par 3's... He was raised and groomed from a young age to do what he has done, Mr. Clutch in his day... Close but I think Tiger has an edge.
thx!
He did not turn par 5's into par 3's, he'd be driving the green's on par 5's if that was the case. And generally most of the pro's have been playing par 5's as par 4's forever anyway. But yes, Woods is Mr Clutch. There is one stat that supports that and puts him in a league of his own with that - now tell us what that stat is.
Jack also had 1 more players championship win than Tiger and 10 more wins worldwide at 117.
Jack was more prolific, however, Tiger won in more dynamic fashion and had millions of eyes on him for every shot. Tiger also has had to deal with multiple injuries Jack never had.
Appreciate you watching ⛳️
Yeah because he was on roids lol
I feel no one is looking at the era! Yes skill level is important and mindset. Biggest example is the obvious, golf clubs. Clubs are now made to have golfers hit further,spin ECT...
Being a person of color, it's a beautiful thing to see another person of color doing anything that is positive. Tiger definitely changed the game, but so did Nicklaus.
Just like comparing Tom Brady to Joe Montana. Totally different era and game. I feel Joe Montana is the best quarterback of all time. Playing the game when football was football no holds barred, no oh he did this or did that, just play the game.
Jack Nicklaus and Tiger Woods are both great golfers. However the game back then was different, so were the rules. I would love to see Tiger woods play with the golf clubs that Jack had to play with then! No doubt they would be like foreign objects in his hands.
So to me who is better, Jack Nicklaus! HANDS DOWN...
No different than Edison with the light bulb or Bell with a phone. Change the equipment you change the game. Common sense and it's fact.
Honestly, I can't make this decision. I truly love them both, they are both amazing at the sport. They both gave it all and had extremely successful careers. But they both had their time to shine, and they definitely did when given the chance! Although, If I absolutely had to choose, I would most likely side with Tiger this time. Thanks for sharing!
Thanks Harley
Jack played with better top players
Player 9 majors
Watson 6
Palmer 7
Seve 6
Trevino 6
Tiger has played at a little higher level imo but it's also a different era. They're both great and won when they had to more times than not.i think jack is the goat
Would love too have seen these guys playing each other in their prime. It's all about the majors. Jack's got the edge.
Thanks Joe ⛳️
Its not about majos, they mader you think its about majors. I'ts about wins. 82 wins in way less starts. Tiger at his best vs. Jack at his best. Tiger wins. Killer mentality. never looses a lead. and loves the big moment. oh, 2nd does't count. losers talk about 2nd. Tiger plays to win.
@@jimmy19139 PREACH.
Jack is the best hands down… his character, class, family…… your gift will get you there but your character will keep you there…… tiger looks very lost these days because he failed in his character
Tiger stated himself when he was younger , "Judge me by my majors" , thats what matters in the end. If Tiger had 18 and they were tied, you can give it to Tiger, but as long as Jack has more majors, hes the Goat. No body remembers your regular tournaments, they remember how many majors you won.
Excellent point - thanks Richard ⛳️
Exactly.
We should just let the majors speak for themselves. Even Tiger wouldve said this in his past. Tiger may have been a better player at one point, but Jack had the better career.
Both GOATs from different generations 👍🏼
Thanks 🐐
If you're the GOAT, it's the greatest of ALL time, not a given generation.
If only they could have played together. ......wait.
They did. In 1998. They were tied at the Masters after 3 rounds. The year after Tiger's 12 shot victory. They were paired together on Sunday and guess who won.
Jack.
Jack was faithful to his wife, had class, didn't get car crashes or use prostitutes.
Just say Jack is white and Tiger is not… you’d be more believable
You don’t know what tf Jack Nicklaus did in his spare time
@@jaycurry5593 Yes but we know what Woods did and probably still. does
Ignorance
@@jaycurry5593 Race baiter.
Jack has been married to Barbara for 65 years. Tiger has been in more holes than swiss cheese. Plus 3 more majors. Why is this even a debate?
Numbers are one thing, but who you are on and off the course are another. Jack triumphs over Tiger in so many respects, especially when it comes to conduct (Jack was not running around on his wife with multiple women). Tiger also bent to rules on more than one occasion to his advantage. Jack also played with far inferior equipment, course conditions, and traveling conditions to get too and from events. There is more to being the GOAT than numbers.
Thanks for your comments and tuning in Roger ⛳️
If you look at the top major champions, Jack had far more in his era than did Tiger. Watson and Trevino alone stole a carload of majors from Jack, and Jack could have had his own "slam" of sorts in 1972 but for Trevino chipping in at the Open (Jack was already the US Open, Masters and PGA champion at the time). Jack's dominance in the 1965 Masters was up there with any of Tiger's dominant wins, and that was over Player and Palmer, 2 more all time greats. All that said, the sport advances and Tiger is the best of his era and the better golfer of the 2, but I rate Jack's record overall over Tiger given so many great champions Jack was up against.
Great points Berry - Thank You ⛳️
Tiger will always be the greatest of all time.
Thank you Steve
Wrong
....if he wins more than jacks 18 majors
Don’t forget 19 runner ups in majors
Hold up, around 2:45 you start comparing win percentages. I’m completely fine doing this, but Jack’s major appearances continued as his “privilege” LONG after he was a viable competitor. And Tiger’s will as well. Much more fair to measure win percentage through each’ s age 48. Just my opinion, I haven’t done the math, but Jack was playing his last “masters” and “The Open Championship” at 65 in 2005. That’s nearly 35 rounds where he wasn’t a competitor in the field but played because he had a lifetime exemption to both majors.
The record says it all! Jack is the man! Tiger moved the needle unlike ever before. Sam Snead and Byron Nelson have some incredible records in that group too.
Don’t forget Ben Hogan! How many golfers can claim they survived a head on crash of a Greyhound Bus, and proceed with an amazing career? (Steering wheel into the back seat and the engine into the front seat!)
Thanks Cole ⛳️
Appreciate that Jim - thanks
@@jimzielinski3871 I know Ben fantastic comeback from the wreck.
@@colejones212 For 40 years, I had the great pleasure to teach the Greatest Game ever! (Kids, teenagers, adults) Additionally, I have played many great golf courses. A number in Scotland. (St. Andrews & Carnoustie in particular. Speaking of these two great venues, kudos to the folks at St. Andrews. You did a fantastic job hosting The Open! In 1980 I enjoyed playing all the great courses in Scotland, with the exception of Muirfield.
I am deeply thankful to the Scott’s for developing this great game! What fantastic purveyors of Golf! Incidentally Cole, Mr. Hogan said Carnoustie was the toughest course he ever played!)
Thanks Cole for your comments. Additionally, my thanks to all who have expressed their opinions!
In closing here Cole, may you and anyone regarding my comments here, enjoy the best of health, safety, and golf scores!
God Bless!
Not even close. It's all about the majors and the level of competition, or the number of great, and I mean great players you play against. Jack: 18 major wins, 19x in 2nd place, and 8x in 3rd place finishes. That's 45 top 3 finishes in majors!! Tiger: 15 x major wins, 7x 2nd place, and 4 x 3rd place finished. That's 26 top 3 finishes in majors. Jack competed against and lost many times to the likes of Arnold Palmer (7 majors), Gary Player (9 majors), Lee Trevino (6 majors), and Tom Watson (8 majors) - all legends and 30 majors total between them. Jack was A+ level and 4 players who were A- level (Arnie, Gary, Lee and Tom). A level (and other major winners would be: Billy Casper, Johnny Miller, Tom Weiskopf and Seve Ballesteros to name a few). Jack came in 2nd to Arnie, Gary, Lee, and Tom 11 x in majors. Regular (non-major) tournaments pale in comparison.
Excellent points made Gary!! Thank you ⛳️⛳️⛳️
Pretty biased especially when it comes to competition. Tiger's main competition was Phil. Jack's was Palmer, Trevino and Watson. If you could magically even things up, with things like equipment and time is there anyone out there that thinks Phil could beat Watson? Palmer? Trevino?
Appreciate your comments Mike ⛳️
Jack's competition during the 60s and 70s was primarily from Americans. Yes, Watson Palmer, Trevino were great but the level of competition broadened as we moved into the 90s and beyond. Just look at the Ryder Cup results. And yes I do think Phil would have help up just fine against Watson, Palmer and Trevino. 54 wins and 5 majors ain't bad.
@@mark41157 And yet he beat Seve and Norman
Don't forget Player.
Phil used to choke on 3 footers in tight moments, and dont forget Wingfoot, had the US Open and choked with a terrible slice on 18! Against Watson, Palmer, and Trevino with Nicklaus in the mix there would have been 'more' !
Jack played against better golfers who won multiple majors. During his run, how many players did Tiger play who two or more majors?
Tiger won more in less time with many more injuries. I think that says a lot. Bobby Jones only played a few years and won percentage wise much more. Plus the grand slam, that no one has ever matched, before retiring from golf.
nicklaus didn't start out his career with a target of winning the most majors, it was barely even a thing back then. tiger had a target to aim at.
on first seeing tiger nickalus said that if he was still swinging like at at 30 he would barely make it to 35, tiger never learned to reign his swing in, that why he had all those injuries.
I'd have to go with Tiger, Jack had a great career but Tiger really pushed it to the limits
thx Lang
let me guess..... you are under 35...?
What limits?
jack nicklaus because he have 18 majors
I think Jack held himself to a higher standard in his personal life which for me, puts him over the top. Nicholas is the overall 🐐.
Thank You John ⛳️
What Tiger does off the course has nothing to do what he does on the course. He made a mistake and he apologized about it. Tiger changed the game. He made golf a cool game to play. Golf was always considered a rich white man sport but once Tiger woods hit the scene, every kid, grown up , and race wanted to play. The money got better because of Tiger…. So if I had to put my money on who is the Goat…. I will say Tiger !!
We mention all of the surgeries that Tiger has had as evidence of his health issues, but another way to look at it is modern medicine helping to provide an advantage where players from earlier eras may not have had that luxury at any price. The irony of Woods' dominance is that it was primarily his unprecedented work ethic. He was so much better because he worked so much harder, and it was interesting to see him drag a large chunk of the field, especially up-and-coming players way closer to his level over several years until it wasn't quite as easy for him to win as it had been early on. He has the ability and has maintained physical fitness to win majors into his 50s. (Even Watson came within a putt of an open at 59). The question is if he can match his own standard of effort, just to close that 3-major gap. I predict he'll win one more in the next couple of years but that will be it.
Jack won 18 majors. Tiger won 15 majors. Jack has finished second 19 times at majors. Tiger finished second 7 times. Jack had much tougher competition than Tiger did when he played. The measure of a true goat is the most championships in really big events. Result. JACK IS THE GOAT. END OF STORY👏👏👏
Thats insulting to players like Phil, Ernie, Duval, Sighn and many other greats during his time. Also, does performance in regular pga events mean anything to you?
@@gasperm3 nope, not for the GOAT. Now count the majors won by Faldo, Watson, Trevino,Byron Nelson, Seve, Palmer et Al. Tiger had nowhere near that caliber of competition when he was playing.
Oops, I forgot Player, he won 9.
@@skiperw I would rather you use any other argument than "tougher competition" because its just insulting and completely bias
@@gasperm3 no bias. The aforementioned golfers Nicklaus competed against were all great. They all had several majors to their credit. They were tough competitors one and all. How many people that Tiger competed against besides Phil had more Than two majors to their credit. My guys all had 4 or more. That is some tough competition. Also why Jack finished second 19 times and Tiger only 7. Jack has more top 5’s in majors than any man in history. CASE CLOSED. Tiger is the greatest golfer in history not named JACK
No debate a bunch of young people that think only tiger exist …jack is better but like everything they refuse to watch any old film tiger played against no competition better equipment so …
Who do you think is the GOAT? Jack Nicklaus -or- Tiger Woods Let us know below ⬇️
Without dought TW even jack admids it, no disrespect to Jack, they played in diffrent eras and the current times where Tiger played it's way harder and more competitors. Jack is like thr Federer of tennis before Nadal/Novak arrived.
@ゆみす魔王 yeah but Tigers competition was weak compared to who Jack played against
My vote goes to Tiger! I dont think 3 more majors overshadows all the other things Tiger beats Jacks in, So my vote goes to Tiger! Majors might be the most important metric, but it is not the only metric to measure a GOAT. There is no doubt that its only these two int he conversation, and its a very close run, but in my opinion Tiger edges Jack as the GOAT!
One thing tho which is certain is that Tiger's best was better than Jacks best! We know so, because of the lowest scoring average in Tour history and for how he won the 2000 US Open!!! The 150 best player in the world, trying to peak at the majors, and that week only one guy was under par!!
@@maxcaysey2844 it’s all about the competition. In Jacks era 18 players won 17 or more PGA titles, now that’s competition.
In Tigers era only 6 players won 17 or more PGA titles…that’s all you need to know
@@garyroberts3859 No wonder... Tiger won them all! Btw, who were the 17 players?