|
Post by paulus on Apr 16, 2019 11:38:03 GMT -5
Anyone that thinks Nicklaus is better than Tiger is usually north of age 45, loves Ohio State, or doesn't feel "a black man should dominate a white man's game". This isn't throwing shade on any person in this discussion but rather an observation that I've gathered from discussions I've had and things I've read. Wow, quite a way to debase the debate. One out of 3 for me (I'll leave you to guess which one of those completely unrelated to the debate categories applies to me). You should probably get out more and try to meet some sensible non-racist people. Anyone of the 10 Jack voters here racist? Or an old fart? Or randomly from Ohio?
|
|
|
Post by Ashton Fox on Apr 16, 2019 11:49:41 GMT -5
Anyone that thinks Nicklaus is better than Tiger is usually north of age 45, loves Ohio State, or doesn't feel "a black man should dominate a white man's game". This isn't throwing shade on any person in this discussion but rather an observation that I've gathered from discussions I've had and things I've read. Wow, quite a way to debase the debate. One out of 3 for me (I'll leave you to guess which one of those completely unrelated to the debate categories applies to me). You should probably get out more and try to meet some sensible non-racist people. Anyone of the 10 Jack voters here racist? Or an old fart? Or randomly from Ohio? I wouldn't say it debases the debate. I would bet that 90% of people that think Jack is better has at least one of those 3 attributes. Begrudgingly, people who don't like Tiger know that he has done for the PGA what MJ did for the NBA (whether they like it or not). Jack just didn't. Jack was good but IMO, he didn't have golf working against him. Tiger had courses being altered to make them tougher for him. He also is playing against competition that he created because he moved the needle in such a way. Most people that don't see or respect that are usually blinded by one of those 3 attributes I listed.
|
|
|
Post by Ashton Fox on Apr 16, 2019 11:52:06 GMT -5
Plus: we are talking about this on a golf video game forum. Who blazed that trail?
Not Jack Nicklaus golf....
|
|
|
Post by paulus on Apr 16, 2019 11:55:16 GMT -5
I usually find that people that reference the term usually, usually have no real clue about what the real state of other people's motivations at an aggregate level. They usually just make it up to fit their world view FWIW - I think Tiger is the most important golfer of all time for some of the reasons you state. Not the greatest tho.
|
|
|
Post by Ashton Fox on Apr 16, 2019 11:57:06 GMT -5
I usually find that people that reference the term usually, usually have no real clue about what the real state of other people's motivations at an aggregate level. They usually just make it up to fit their world view FWIW - I think Tiger is the most important golfer of all time for some of the reasons you state. Not the greatest tho. I'm gonna guess you fit in the north of 45 bracket....
|
|
|
Post by stokie1947 on Apr 16, 2019 12:12:22 GMT -5
Jack without any doubt
|
|
|
Post by donkeypuncherben on Apr 16, 2019 12:22:28 GMT -5
Tiger winning the US Open by 15 shots and the Masters by 12 trumps Jacks best achievements. Tiger's era was tougher, the lack of guys winning multiple majors is not evidence of weak competition but evidence of deeper fields. Tiger's ability to make cuts even when he's at his worst is also amazing.
|
|
|
Post by ErixonStone on Apr 16, 2019 12:43:40 GMT -5
In fairness, you have to be north of 45 to have experienced Jack in his heyday. Nicklaus was 46 when we won the Masters in 1986. Someone who is 45 today would have been 12. Nicklaus did most of his winning in the 60s and 70s. If you were 10 when he won his first major in 1962, you would be 57 now.
By contrast, if you were 10 when Tiger won his first major in 1997, you would be 32 today.
Without having experienced Jack in his prime, it is really hard to compare. The best we can do is look at the statistics while understanding the flaws in a direct comparison.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 16, 2019 13:09:42 GMT -5
Not sure how many Brits / snooker lovers there are here but I'd liken this debate to the one about Stephen Hendry vs Ronnie O'Sullivan. If you look at the raw winning stats then Hendry is undoubtedly the best ever. But most - rightfully so in my view - confer GOAT status onto Ronnie without hesitation. My take is that GOATs require something special in their A game, something that produces powerful emotions in people watching - as in holy crap, this is game-changing stuff, you don't see others playing like this. Stephen Hendry's B Game was far superior, he was a gritty competitor and was able to force out win after win to a level that may never be equaled, but at his best he couldn't hold a candle to Ronnie in full flow. Same view for me with Mike Tyson, his A game was a level above any other heavyweight's A game in history imo, I'm a hardcore stats guy but I don't care what win/loss stats you show me, watching prime Tyson is breathtaking, he had the art, science, power, defence and aggression sliders maxed out all at once, no other heavyweight could match that peak performance imo. A highly-flawed sporting genius no doubt, just like Ronnie and just like Tiger, but that often comes with GOAT territory. Long story short, my vote goes to Tiger
|
|
AngusMoses
Caddy
Posts: 41
TGCT Name: Angus Moses
Tour: CC-Pro
|
Post by AngusMoses on Apr 16, 2019 13:25:26 GMT -5
Plus: we are talking about this on a golf video game forum. Who blazed that trail? Not Jack Nicklaus golf.... Actually..
|
|
|
Post by Ashton Fox on Apr 16, 2019 13:41:04 GMT -5
Plus: we are talking about this on a golf video game forum. Who blazed that trail? Not Jack Nicklaus golf.... Actually.. I did love me some Mario Golf
|
|
|
Post by jacobkessler on Apr 16, 2019 13:45:31 GMT -5
Anyone that thinks Nicklaus is better than Tiger is usually north of age 45, loves Ohio State, or doesn't feel "a black man should dominate a white man's game". This isn't throwing shade on any person in this discussion but rather an observation that I've gathered from discussions I've had and things I've read. Wow, quite a way to debase the debate. One out of 3 for me (I'll leave you to guess which one of those completely unrelated to the debate categories applies to me). You should probably get out more and try to meet some sensible non-racist people. Anyone of the 10 Jack voters here racist? Or an old fart? Or randomly from Ohio? I’m (not so randomly) from Ohio and did not vote for Jack. I love Jack Nicklaus for what he’s done in the game, but Tiger is even better and has done even more for spreading the game. Also side note, I’m really not sure what race or location has to do with it... it’s just people’s opinions.
|
|
|
Post by paulus on Apr 16, 2019 13:55:40 GMT -5
Also side note, I’m really not sure what race or location has to do with it... it’s just people’s opinions. Correct - race, location, age... hair colour, inside leg measurement... have absolutely nothing to do with the debate. Why they were brought up in the first place as a (thinly veiled) attack on those plumping for Jack is what I was pushing back against.
|
|
|
Post by evh5150 on Apr 16, 2019 14:20:12 GMT -5
I'd like to debunk a myth. Tigerproofing only solidified his hold on certain courses. If you hit it longer than everyone else making the course longer doesn't benefit the shorter hitters.
|
|
|
Post by Ashton Fox on Apr 16, 2019 14:29:09 GMT -5
Also side note, I’m really not sure what race or location has to do with it... it’s just people’s opinions. Correct - race, location, age... hair colour, inside leg measurement... have absolutely nothing to do with the debate. Why they were brought up in the first place as a (thinly veiled) attack on those plumping for Jack is what I was pushing back against. It is incredibly ignorant to think someone does like Tiger or respect his accomplishments based on his skin color. For crying out loud, Sergio made a racist comment about Tiger how many years ago. Also, I've actually had conversations with Buckeye homers that say Nicklaus is better and simply contended it because of university ties. So I see your passive-aggressive attempts to belittle my comments 😉😉 Oh wait, add a few usuallys throughout my post to give it character.
|
|