|
Post by AFCTUJacko on Apr 16, 2019 14:51:08 GMT -5
I'll throw something into the mix - that the idea that Tiger "grew the game" is actually massively open to debate/complete bubkis.
There's no doubt he had a massive influence on the pro game, both in terms of how it's played, TV audiences and the prize money on offer.
But on both sides of the atlantic golf participation is at best flat over the past 15 years. And in reality is declining. Not entirely his fault of course (it's up to the relevant authorities to use having a major superstar to its advantage and it clearly didn't) but if his presence hasn't made significantly more people regularly pick up a golf club, has he really "grown the game"?
ps - 0/3 for me.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 16, 2019 15:09:29 GMT -5
Jack : 18 Majors + 73 Tour Wins Tiger: 15 Majors + 81 Tour Wins Factor in the fact that Jack never had the oppurtunity to play small field events like the WGC or FedEx where the chances of winning are greater. The two are totally comparable. Those smaller events would be arguably tougher to win than majors because they are the best of the best that season usually playing their best. 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. Voted for Jack in this poll. 41, I don't care about college sports (only been to Ohio maybe three times in my life), and the last statement is far, far from my world view, and view of Tiger in particular. I root for him if he is in the hunt to win, but can also recognize greatness elsewhere in different ways (consistently very good for a long, long time vs. dominant, then slipped off the map for a long while).
Edit for above: There are homers in any argument/spirited debate. They likely appear less frequently in a forum with members from around the world than they likely would in your own personal interactions if you are more likely to come into contact with any of those groups more often than appears here.
Tiger not winning a Major between the ages of 32 and 43, which covers a large, prime age for a golfer is too big of a hole for someone to be the "GOAT". He still can change the argument in my mind because the two are close, but achieved it in differing manners.
There is no doubt he is the most influential golfer and was massively dominant in his 20s and early 30s, but his 2010s should have been much better (1 Major win) for someone with his skill set, pedigree and age (34-43).
I look forward to the rest of this years' Majors, especially the next two, as he has won a Major at both in the past.
|
|
|
Post by paulus on Apr 16, 2019 16:07:37 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.... Same view for me with Mike Tyson, his A game was a level above any other heavyweight's A game in history imo... Who doesn't like snooker? I'd give GOAT status to Ronnie too - as does Hendry himself It's not really as close as this debate - Ronnie is ahead in quite a few of the key stats now - winning rate, centuries, 147's, he's only really down in the key one: World Championships. But in Ronnie's own words, he sees winning the biggies as a key metric... "You would have to equal Hendry’s record to be classified as the greatest of all time. I can’t put myself in that league yet. I’m happy that I’ve won it five times over a 13-year period. To be the greatest, I think anyone would have to win seven."It's a factor, but basing just on A game is not enough for GOAT status imho. The parallel with boxing is weaker - it's too managed on the if/who/when/where the best are matched. Not a pure sport imho - so the GOAT there is way more questionable (really tho? Tyson ahead of Sugar Ray, Ali, Marciano...??)
|
|
|
Post by hershalcrustofsk on Apr 16, 2019 17:31:31 GMT -5
I'll throw something into the mix - that the idea that Tiger "grew the game" is actually massively open to debate/complete bubkis.
There's no doubt he had a massive influence on the pro game, both in terms of how it's played, TV audiences and the prize money on offer.
But on both sides of the atlantic golf participation is at best flat over the past 15 years. And in reality is declining. Not entirely his fault of course (it's up to the relevant authorities to use having a major superstar to its advantage and it clearly didn't) but if his presence hasn't made significantly more people regularly pick up a golf club, has he really "grown the game"?
ps - 0/3 for me. Agree that golf has flattened, even declined over the past 15 years. But from 1996-2002/3 their was significant growth in the game, some of that natural I’m sure, but there’s no question Tiger had something to do with it. The decline of the game is due to numerous reasons, time, cost, recessions etc. It would’ve been interesting to see if Tiger didn’t fall off, if golf would’ve suffered the same decline. If only someone could go back in time and prevent Tiger from essentially sabatoging his own career and personal life. But we can’t do that, so it’s just speculation regardless of which side of the debate we come out on. I can’t speak for Europe, but I do think he grew the game in North America and think he had a big impact in other areas of the world. Just my opinion of course.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 16, 2019 17:35:48 GMT -5
How many Europeans voted for Jack? I bet more did than Americans. If Tiger was European I guarantee he gets the votes. I have never seen a video game forum with so many American haters . At least Ray admits it the rest just do it in a passive aggressive way. Ohh and if a American didn't like Tiger if he was European they would say that person was racist.
Tiger all the way. If he didn't have all the knee and back problems he would have passed up Jack a while ago. He won the US Open with a broken knee for God's sake. Guess what that was his last Major. Hmmmmmmmm
His impact on golf is huge. Not even debatable. I remember watching golf in bars with my buddies in my 20s and 30s. Like that would have happened if it wasn't for Tiger. My Aunt who was in her 70s when Tiger was in his prime called me and asked for the rules on golf. Ask any tour pro the impact on their bank accounts because of Tiger.
I can't wait for Bethpage. NY crowds are awesome. Some hardcore American energy ! 😎😁
|
|
|
Post by hershalcrustofsk on Apr 16, 2019 17:36:44 GMT -5
As great as Jack was I still believe Tiger though. Tiger has 81 (I believe) tour wins, 15 majors and dominated the game unlike anyone before or after him.I don't think this is true. Jack’s contemporaries included Arnold Palmer, Gary Player, Tom Watson and Lee Trevino, each of whom won six or more majors. Tiger’s biggest rival during his golden period was Phil Mickelson - a man Tiger pretty much had in his pocket on major Sunday's. Phil won five majors but none with Tiger in the picture. Aside from him, there are just two other players with three major wins during the Tiger golden era: Ernie Els and Vijay Singh. The evidence suggests Tiger was beating up on inferior competition. Interesting point about the competition. Do these players have less majors because they’re inferior or because in their best years they had to deal with Tiger in his best (I dont know). My dominance comment had more to do with some of his margins of victory, his win percentage and obscene amount of records he set in a short period of time. But that is a great point about who Jack had to beat.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 16, 2019 17:49:49 GMT -5
And who voted other? Lmao
|
|
|
Post by paulus on Apr 16, 2019 17:50:53 GMT -5
Just to point out to those that seek to polarise the debate - the people that voted for Jack, can also love watching Tiger too. The two are not mutually exclusive. Last time I checked Jack was American too
|
|
|
Post by titaneddie on Apr 16, 2019 17:55:55 GMT -5
And who voted other? Lmao I did. I support the underdog on any internet poll!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 16, 2019 18:02:30 GMT -5
Just to point out to those that seek to polarise the debate - the people that voted for Jack, can also love watching Tiger too. The two are not mutually exclusive. Last time I checked Jack was American too Yeah but what is more American than Tiger? Apple pie? He also is a Trump supporter. Uhhhh ohh! And...POLLS are divisive 🤔
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 16, 2019 18:03:27 GMT -5
And who voted other? Lmao I did. I support the underdog on any internet poll! Awesome! Maybe other is a golf ball or the putter!
|
|
|
Post by titaneddie on Apr 16, 2019 18:28:34 GMT -5
I did. I support the underdog on any internet poll! Awesome! Maybe other is a golf ball or the putter! Was thinking more along the lines of Canadian icon Mike Weir. He's inspired hundreds of Canadians alone to pick up the sport.
|
|
|
Post by boffo on Apr 16, 2019 18:29:30 GMT -5
Just here to show my support for the concept that a European would choose the American golfer over the American golfer because they're anti-American. These are the kind of things that keep the internet great after so many years.
|
|
|
Post by jacobkessler on Apr 16, 2019 18:42:02 GMT -5
Just to point out to those that seek to polarise the debate - the people that voted for Jack, can also love watching Tiger too. The two are not mutually exclusive. Last time I checked Jack was American too Yeah but what is more American than Tiger? Apple pie? He also is a Trump supporter. Uhhhh ohh! And...POLLS are divisive 🤔 Going along with what I said earlier about race, age, etc. politics has nothing to do with this. This is simply a comparison of two great golfers.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 16, 2019 18:43:26 GMT -5
Just here to show my support for the concept that a European would choose the American golfer over the American golfer because they're anti-American. These are the kind of things that keep the internet great after so many years. Thanks I try to keep the internet going. I bet you can't wait to see what dumb sh%$ I'll say next! You should see my non existent Twitter and Facebook accounts.
|
|