Messages

Forum Index : Pro Golf : Messages Page 1 of 3  1 2 3  
Author: [Pro Golf] Topic: Jack would have 30 majors vs. Tigers competition
vegasj send a private message View Space | Friends | Playbook |
vegasj
Participation Meter
Veteran
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1100
Location: Nevada
#1
Posted: 4/9/2010 9:29:08 AM

I wish the media wouldn't spend 24/7 telling us how great Tiger is, but instead how pathetic his competition is.  WTF???  Tom and Fred Couples are leading?  The ONLY guy half the caliber of a Jack foe is Phil, and he sometimes goes postal.  Heck, Phil would have 18 majors against this decades group if not for Tiger. 

Every player that flashes some game, ends up going David Duval and falls off the earth.  Larry Holmes is scrathing his head saying "I got no respect, I beat better competition than Tiger".  When a 69/70 year old that Jack beat can go out there TWICE and SPANK the players the Godf Tiger is getting all the love for beating, it put EVERYTHING in perspective.  You can sleep with 5 ladies at the same time and beat this group of chumps.

quote
AJLightning
RSI Wagerline RSI Rating
send a private message View Space | Blog | Friends | Playbook |
AJLightning
Participation Meter
All-Star
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 12360
Location: Texas
#2
Posted: 4/9/2010 9:36:07 AM

Ya...ok!!

quote
lancer89074 send a private message View Space | Friends | Playbook |
lancer89074
Participation Meter
Veteran
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 1491
Location: Nevada
#3
Posted: 4/9/2010 9:58:14 PM
Yep, Nicklaus had to beat the likes of Palmer, Player, Trevino, Watson et.al.

Tiger gets to compete against an aging Vijay Singh, Ernie (the big choker) Els, a 60 year old Tom Watson, a 50 year old Couples, and Phil (the big choker) Mickelson and Sergio (Blue Balls) Garcia. Woods was beaten by Y.E. Yang because the cat doesn't speak a lick of English and did not know he was supposed to fold like a cheap suitcase. He could not read the script.

These two English people atop the leaderboard will crack tomorrow like a stale British scone in the midday sun.
quote
wallstreetcappers send a private message View Space | Friends | Playbook |
wallstreetcappers
Participation Meter
Covers Linesmen
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 49705
Location: United States
#4
Posted: 4/9/2010 10:03:54 PM
Consider not only the number of victories, but also runner ups for Jack in majors.

No doubt in my mind that he is superior in many aspects, that and the equipment and physical training now versus then is night versus day.

Tell me if back when Jack and Lee and Tom and Ray and Johnnie were playing that you would see 50-60 yr olds leading and  contending like we do know? No way.

Technology has really dumbed down the game and taken the pure luster off from what it was previously.
quote
mattbrot send a private message View Space | Friends | Playbook |
mattbrot
Participation Meter
Captain
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 5755
Location: United States
#5
Posted: 4/9/2010 10:34:46 PM
Wallstreet -the technology argument is true for any sport (or most atleast).  It goes beyond that as well -- knowledge of nutrition, weight training etc. is levels ahead.

But while that means players today could most likely beat players of 15 - 30 years ago it does not say anything about the level of each players respective competition.  All players today are playing on the same field technology wise just as they were in Arnie's time.

And the fact that 50 and 60 year olds are more competitive in the current era than in the past would actually suggest that it is harder to win a tourney now a days than in the past because of their abilities. 

 
quote
wallstreetcappers send a private message View Space | Friends | Playbook |
wallstreetcappers
Participation Meter
Covers Linesmen
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 49705
Location: United States
#6
Posted: 4/9/2010 10:46:00 PM
QUOTE Originally Posted by mattbrot:

Wallstreet -the technology argument is true for any sport (or most atleast).  It goes beyond that as well -- knowledge of nutrition, weight training etc. is levels ahead.

But while that means players today could most likely beat players of 15 - 30 years ago it does not say anything about the level of each players respective competition.  All players today are playing on the same field technology wise just as they were in Arnie's time.

And the fact that 50 and 60 year olds are more competitive in the current era than in the past would actually suggest that it is harder to win a tourney now a days than in the past because of their abilities. 

 


The reason the older players are playing longer and better is due to technology..that and conditioning.

I think that the mental aspect of the previous generation is much much stronger, the raw ability was also better.

It seems now that most players are cookie cutters, very few personalities and players with that raw talent who could win any tourney.

Trevino never had the greatest level of skill, he was a gritty, tough player who learned in difficult conditions and knew how to scramble.

I watch more golf now than I did as a kid but I have much more respect for the previous generation due to the increased difficulty of older courses, a lack of technology and less players made the monster bucks that the average player does now.

Jack hitting the big numbers with those old time woods and simple irons without the 10 swing trainers, perfect conditions is just amazing..same goes for Bobby Jones, Palmer, Player, etc etc.
quote
mattbrot send a private message View Space | Friends | Playbook |
mattbrot
Participation Meter
Captain
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 5755
Location: United States
#7
Posted: 4/9/2010 10:53:08 PM
I agree with all you say. 

you could insert most sports in for golf and get the same result.  The best examples in my opinion (other than golf) are tennis and basketball.

The players these days in both sports are better athletes in terms of strength, speed etc...  But from a pure technical skills standpoint are vastly inferior to the older generations. 
quote
BergeyJ06 send a private message View Space | Friends | Playbook |
BergeyJ06
Participation Meter
Veteran
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 1030
Location:
#8
Posted: 4/10/2010 12:37:47 AM
WTF is vegasj on?
quote
ArtSchlichterJr send a private message View Space | Blog | Friends | Playbook |
ArtSchlichterJr
Participation Meter
Rookie
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 928
Location: United States
#9
Posted: 4/10/2010 9:08:48 AM
QUOTE Originally Posted by wallstreetcappers:

Consider not only the number of victories, but also runner ups for Jack in majors.

No doubt in my mind that he is superior in many aspects, that and the equipment and physical training now versus then is night versus day.

Tell me if back when Jack and Lee and Tom and Ray and Johnnie were playing that you would see 50-60 yr olds leading and  contending like we do know? No way.

Technology has really dumbed down the game and taken the pure luster off from what it was previously.
Sorry to burst your bubble but the equipment has allowed the older players (to a certain extent) to compete with todays younger players not the talent of the compettition. But as far as the talent level today compared to Jack's talent level opposition it is not even close. First I will start by saying Jack was the man when I was growing up and I loved the guy.. But keeping it real todays fields are way, way, way ,way, more deep and talented then the fields od rummies and club pros that Arnie & Jack competed against.. Golf is now an International game.. Back in Jacks early years he beat fields where it may have been a little top heavy but after the top 20 the rest were rummies.. There were no Asian players.. Just a handful of Euro players that played over here for the majors only .. Jack was not even beating the best players in the USA back in the early years.. Many of the best USA players were amatuers not even getting their card as their was no money in golf before Arnie.. Could make more at a good job back then.. In 1965 Arnie got 5000 dollars for finishing 4th.. Not much endorsement money if any for lower placed golfers.. NOT even close my friend as todays golf tourneys (just not the majors) are filled from top to bottom with real golfers from every corner of the world not just 10 or so elite golfers, with a field then filled up with rummies and club pros.. Thats why you see so many first time winners as of late on the tour.. The good old days are fun to wax about but the truth is before he is done Tiger will shatter all of Jacks record because he is better by FAR.. Sit back and relax and enjoy we are watching the best man ever to pick up the sweet sticks in the history of golf.. Its not the competion it is his skill level.. Sorry but you could not be more wrong. not my take just a no brainer talent comparison between era's..
quote
TripleDouble send a private message View Space | Friends | Playbook |
TripleDouble
Participation Meter
Banned
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 1142
Location:
#10
Posted: 4/10/2010 9:38:39 AM

Fields are deeper now................... and much larger.

Very hard to win a golf tournament.

quote
TripleDouble send a private message View Space | Friends | Playbook |
TripleDouble
Participation Meter
Banned
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 1142
Location:
#11
Posted: 4/10/2010 9:41:20 AM

As far as the older guys hanging............. mental is important in golf and the older guys have an advantage with that, as well as more course knowledge.

quote
coloradobuff send a private message View Space | Blog | Friends | Playbook |
coloradobuff
Participation Meter
Veteran
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 2092
Location:
#12
Posted: 4/10/2010 9:46:38 AM
can compare all you want, but you will never know so no reason to get all worked up on it.
quote
TripleDouble send a private message View Space | Friends | Playbook |
TripleDouble
Participation Meter
Banned
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 1142
Location:
#13
Posted: 4/10/2010 9:53:46 AM
In terms of technology...... I think I saw somewhere that the average scores today are actually higher than when they used wooden clubs
quote
wallstreetcappers send a private message View Space | Friends | Playbook |
wallstreetcappers
Participation Meter
Covers Linesmen
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 49705
Location: United States
#14
Posted: 4/10/2010 10:13:36 AM
Art,

Of course you are entitled to your opinion but I could not disagree with you more,especially given the reasoning you listed.

Fields are deeper..of course they are deeper, why are they deeper?

The technology has enabled more people to achieve the playing skill to qualify, the money pool is enormous and attractive to more people and like you say the foreign golf influence is much larger.

That does not make current players better in my mind, it means that there are more players because more players can make a living (exactly as you mentioned) not that the talent pool is any deeper.

I think the best players now are not equal to the best players back then and that is with their increased strength conditioning, the numerous swing coaches and team they have supporting them, the conditions of courses are so much more pristine. Of course the distances are often longer because the technology has made the average courses useless and have turned the game of golf into a distance chasing endeavor.

Tiger probably should win more majors, the field does not have as many competitive players that can challenge on any given weekend, but I would be interested to see his overall results over his career, if he will not only win more but also finish in the top 2 as many times.

We also havent discussed how Jack pretty much took off regular golf in his middle to late 30s and spent more time with his family. Tiger wont be doing that, he has a nanny to watch his kids.


quote
TripleDouble send a private message View Space | Friends | Playbook |
TripleDouble
Participation Meter
Banned
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 1142
Location:
#15
Posted: 4/10/2010 10:45:44 AM
They measure their landing spots in "feet" now instead of yards
quote
vegasj send a private message View Space | Friends | Playbook |
vegasj
Participation Meter
Veteran
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1100
Location: Nevada
#16
Posted: 4/10/2010 10:48:44 AM
It's the weekend, time for all of the choke artist to pinch their cheeks and hand over another green jacket to Tiger.  This argument will be decided on the course.  Watch and learn as Tiger once again shows the world how easy it is to take candy from the babies of today.  Jack or Tiger easily win against this bunch of losers in todays golf. 
quote
TripleDouble send a private message View Space | Friends | Playbook |
TripleDouble
Participation Meter
Banned
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 1142
Location:
#17
Posted: 4/10/2010 10:52:58 AM

Don't be making fun of Couples now....... He has to give Sergio strokes these days.

 

quote
winner2 send a private message View Space | Friends | Playbook |
winner2
Participation Meter
Rookie
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 902
Location:
#18
Posted: 4/10/2010 11:16:45 AM
i agree with you vegasj i posted this a while ago.. not doubting how good tiger is just saying the competition is not as good at the top with him like jack had. and lancer.... westwood and poulter arent going anywhere
quote
lancer89074 send a private message View Space | Friends | Playbook |
lancer89074
Participation Meter
Veteran
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 1491
Location: Nevada
#19
Posted: 4/10/2010 12:39:52 PM
Here is Lee Trevino's take on who would win if Woods and Nicklaus played against each other using the same equipment. He is asked the question towards the end of the interview.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S0gUdUfTdLo
quote
JumboDaddy send a private message View Space | Friends | Playbook | My Sportsbook: 5Dimes |
JumboDaddy
Participation Meter
Banned
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 1515
Location: Arizona
#20
Posted: 4/10/2010 1:53:33 PM
QUOTE Originally Posted by wallstreetcappers:

Art,

Of course you are entitled to your opinion but I could not disagree with you more,especially given the reasoning you listed.

Fields are deeper..of course they are deeper, why are they deeper?

The technology has enabled more people to achieve the playing skill to qualify, the money pool is enormous and attractive to more people and like you say the foreign golf influence is much larger.

That does not make current players better in my mind, it means that there are more players because more players can make a living (exactly as you mentioned) not that the talent pool is any deeper.

I think the best players now are not equal to the best players back then and that is with their increased strength conditioning, the numerous swing coaches and team they have supporting them, the conditions of courses are so much more pristine. Of course the distances are often longer because the technology has made the average courses useless and have turned the game of golf into a distance chasing endeavor.

Tiger probably should win more majors, the field does not have as many competitive players that can challenge on any given weekend, but I would be interested to see his overall results over his career, if he will not only win more but also finish in the top 2 as many times.

We also havent discussed how Jack pretty much took off regular golf in his middle to late 30s and spent more time with his family. Tiger wont be doing that, he has a nanny to watch his kids.




You're just viewing the past through rose-colored glasses, longing for the good 'ole days of yesteryear. The grass is always greener, my man.
quote
wallstreetcappers send a private message View Space | Friends | Playbook |
wallstreetcappers
Participation Meter
Covers Linesmen
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 49705
Location: United States
#21
Posted: 4/10/2010 2:08:15 PM
QUOTE Originally Posted by lancer89074:

Here is Lee Trevino's take on who would win if Woods and Nicklaus played against each other using the same equipment. He is asked the question towards the end of the interview.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S0gUdUfTdLo


I think he is exaggerating a bit of course..said that with Tigers equipment in his prime that Jack would hit the ball 400 yds. Thats a bit of a stretch but I do agree with his conclusion that prime vs prime, with equal equipment and either with all the swing coaches or without (for both) that Jack would beat Woods.

To me having lived through both players in their prime I dont even see it to be a tight race. Tiger wont finish first or second in about 40 majors by the time he stops playing the main tour, Jack did.

End of story.
quote
DanielPlainview send a private message View Space | Friends | Playbook | My Sportsbook: 5Dimes |
DanielPlainview
Participation Meter
Prospect
Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 208
Location: United States
#22
Posted: 4/10/2010 2:53:51 PM
This thread is ridiculous.  The fields and the talent level of yesterday cannot compare with today's PGA Tour. It's not even close.  Jack would not beat Tiger.

 Jack would probably win 5 majors if he had to play today.
quote
JumboDaddy send a private message View Space | Friends | Playbook | My Sportsbook: 5Dimes |
JumboDaddy
Participation Meter
Banned
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 1515
Location: Arizona
#23
Posted: 4/10/2010 3:03:36 PM
QUOTE Originally Posted by DanielPlainview:

This thread is ridiculous.  The fields and the talent level of yesterday cannot compare with today's PGA Tour. It's not even close.  Jack would not beat Tiger.

 Jack would probably win 5 majors if he had to play today.


I totally agree. One of the reasons we arent seeing players winning more consistently isnt due to the fact they are inferior in talent to the golfers of decades past, it's just that, as others have been saying, the talent pools is significantly deeper and more varied today than it has ever been.
quote
JumboDaddy send a private message View Space | Friends | Playbook | My Sportsbook: 5Dimes |
JumboDaddy
Participation Meter
Banned
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 1515
Location: Arizona
#24
Posted: 4/10/2010 3:13:09 PM
QUOTE Originally Posted by winner2:

i agree with you vegasj i posted this a while ago.. not doubting how good tiger is just saying the competition is not as good at the top with him like jack had. and lancer.... westwood and poulter arent going anywhere


Exactly, the Tour was top-heavy back in the day. What do you think allowed those few to stand out so greatly? There wasnt much talent anywhere else but the top.
quote
clepto
RSI Wagerline RSI Rating
send a private message View Space | Friends | Playbook |
clepto
Participation Meter
Legend
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 32692
Location: Ontario
#25
Posted: 4/10/2010 3:14:09 PM
quote
Forum Index : Pro Golf : Messages Page 1 of 3  1 2 3  
You have entered the forum as a GUEST. 
You must login/register to post or reply.