Styleforum › Forums › General › Entertainment and Culture › Tiger or Jack?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Tiger or Jack?

post #1 of 63
10/14/09 at 1:45pm
Thread Starter 
Continuing the "who was the greatest?" threads, this is another good one, with excellent points on both sides. Obviously, it would be hard to argue that some third name belongs, but if you think it does, explain why. I would pick Tiger, for a few reasons, but I will explain them later.
Reply
Reply
post #2 of 63
10/14/09 at 1:46pm
Tiger, and I don't think it's really that close.
Reply
Reply
post #3 of 63
10/14/09 at 1:46pm
Listening to golf should be forbidden by the Law.
Reply
Reply
post #4 of 63
10/14/09 at 1:48pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by BDC2823 View Post
Tiger, and I don't think it's really that close.

I think it is closer than you think.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fuuma View Post
Listening to golf should be forbidden by the Law.

Listening to golf would be boring. Watching and playing, on the other had, are very fun.
Reply
Reply
post #5 of 63
10/14/09 at 1:49pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fuuma View Post
Listening to golf should be forbidden by the Law.

.... ...
Reply
Reply
post #6 of 63
10/14/09 at 1:50pm
What? Is there a more boring game (can't say sport) to watch? Even if you like playing it you have to admit it is not made for televised diffusion.
Reply
Reply
post #7 of 63
10/14/09 at 1:50pm
Hard to top Nicklaus' performance in '86. He went to my school, so I'm kind of biased.
Reply
Reply
post #8 of 63
10/14/09 at 1:51pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by iammatt View Post
I think it is closer than you think.



Listening to golf would be boring. Watching and playing, on the other had, are very fun.

haha, yeah I say "listening to the television", makes people laugh but I can't get rid of that quirk.
Reply
Reply
post #9 of 63
10/14/09 at 1:56pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fuuma View Post
What? Is there a more boring game (can't say sport) to watch? Even if you like playing it you have to admit it is not made for televised diffusion.
It actually makes for great television. Shows the thrill of victory and the agony of defeat better than almost any other sport.
Reply
Reply
post #10 of 63
10/14/09 at 2:09pm
Tiger, but it is close, at least for the moment. Tiger's hit the major milestones earlier in his career and has done so in more dominating fashion. The more you love golf and understand it's nuances the more interesting it is to watch, especially the majors--you gain an appreciation for the strategy and degree or difficulty involved. It is not for the casual fan for the most part. Major championships can have a lot of drama if the right storylines/matchups/performances develop.
Reply
Reply
post #11 of 63
10/14/09 at 2:20pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Connemara View Post
Hard to top Nicklaus' performance in '86. He went to my school, so I'm kind of biased.

which school? saratoga high? syracuse? ohio? i'm not sure transfers are allowed to use the phrase 'my school'....
Reply
Reply
post #12 of 63
10/14/09 at 2:23pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by iammatt View Post
It actually makes for great television. Shows the thrill of victory and the agony of defeat better than almost any other sport.

I would say that tennis does that better but anyway, I have never really seen Nicklaus play and only seen Tiger in bits and pieces. Not sure where they stand head to head in terms of green jackets but I would assume that in the wins category, Tiger will be ahead of everyone by the time he is done.
Reply
Reply
post #13 of 63
10/14/09 at 2:23pm
Tiger
Reply
Reply
post #14 of 63
10/14/09 at 2:30pm
Well, then I'd like to say Hogan. Here's why, briefly:

Before Ben Hogan became BEN HOGAN, he served in WWII during most pros' prime years (early 30's), got hit by a bus at 36, and after that reeled off most of his victories, at a time when Sam Snead was still dominant. In 1953 he won all three majors he entered (the PGA was played at the same time as the British), and five of the six tournaments he played. He was 41.
Reply
Reply
post #15 of 63
10/14/09 at 2:31pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by edmorel View Post
I would say that tennis does that better but anyway, I have never really seen Nicklaus play and only seen Tiger in bits and pieces. Not sure where they stand head to head in terms of green jackets but I would assume that in the wins category, Tiger will be ahead of everyone by the time he is done.
Jack still has more Masters. Also, his competition was arguably better, at least on the top end. He was really a pretty remarkable athlete*, but I think Tiger is, eventually, a better overall player. Nicklaus drove the ball much better than Tiger, and was probably a better long iron player. Tiger is better with everything else, other than putting and thinking, where they are very even. At least, that is how I see it. *sorry fuuma, but true.
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Entertainment and Culture
Styleforum › Forums › General › Entertainment and Culture › Tiger or Jack?