Tiger is going to win the PGA....
- Thread starter Coach34
- Start date
Jack Nicklaus at age 34 had won 12 majors. Tiger at age 33 has won 14 majors. Sam Snead at age 41 had 70 wins. Tiger at age 33 has 70 wins. Also of note, Jack Nicklaus was quoted as saying that when he played there were about 10 - 15 players that usually had a legitimate shot to win a major when play began. In Tiger's era he says there are about 30 - 35 players with a legitimate shot to win. This is coming from Jack himself. He says that there are more good players to distribute the wins. I think that pretty much says it all.
Just like every other sport. If you are on pace to hit 500 homers, is that by age or number of years played? If you are on pace to break the HR record, is that by how old the season is, or how many at bats you have had?
If you are on pace to break the NFL rushing record, is that by age, or number of seasons played?
According to your logic, if someone went pro at 45 and won a major, they would be way ahead of pace to break Jack's record.
If you are on pace to break the NFL rushing record, is that by age, or number of seasons played?
According to your logic, if someone went pro at 45 and won a major, they would be way ahead of pace to break Jack's record.
at the same point in their careers- they are tied...thats a fact...
Tiger is going to win the PGA though...and put himself 1 ahead at the same point in their career...
Baseball is a ****** comparision- guys enter pro ball at very different ages by the way</p>
I've never said tiger wouldnt break Jack's majors record- I just dont think he plays as good top competition as Jack did. They are without a doubt the 2 best golfers ever to play.</p>
Tiger is going to win the PGA though...and put himself 1 ahead at the same point in their career...
Baseball is a ****** comparision- guys enter pro ball at very different ages by the way</p>
I've never said tiger wouldnt break Jack's majors record- I just dont think he plays as good top competition as Jack did. They are without a doubt the 2 best golfers ever to play.</p>
and guys make the PGA tour at different ages too. That's the whole point. Pace is determined by how long he'll probably play, which is determined by how old he is. Not how many years either has been pro. Tiger, even without winning this one, is already ahead of Jack's pace.
You don't get penalized for being good enough and being a pro earlier.
You don't get penalized for being good enough and being a pro earlier.
I fully realize that Tiger as well as others consider the major achievement and record to be most majors in a career but he is also on a video game pace to win the most tournaments in a career. He's 12 behind Snead and he hasn't even hit his "prime" yet. He could possibly win into the 120's. Yes he's on a similar pace of majors at this point of his career but his general tournament win percentage is retarded. And I know you could argue that the competition back then was much better with Snead, Nicklaus, Hogan, Palmer, etc. but beating Snead's record by 30+ is incredible, which he's very likely to do.
especially when you consider the limited schedule Tiger plays.
If you look at his percentage of starts won in comparison to the other greatest golfers ever, I'll bet he's No. 1 by a wide margin.
If you look at his percentage of starts won in comparison to the other greatest golfers ever, I'll bet he's No. 1 by a wide margin.
The Bear really took off in the mid '60s.
Palmer, for all practical purposes, was done by then(last major was in '64).
Snead was on the senior tour by then
Hogan was retired by then
Watson's prime was '77-'85 which was when Jack was slowing down
The only player that this era of golfers really can't match is Gary Player. He is, without a doubt, a better #2 guy than anyone that Tiger has ever faced. That said, Jack said it himself when he stated that there were really only around 15 guys that could have won a major during his day. Now, there are probably over 30 so long as Tiger gives them a chance.
When people say that Jack had to play against the game's greats, they usually just throw out a bunch of old names while not even realizing that the primes of their careers didn't even coincide.
Palmer, for all practical purposes, was done by then(last major was in '64).
Snead was on the senior tour by then
Hogan was retired by then
Watson's prime was '77-'85 which was when Jack was slowing down
The only player that this era of golfers really can't match is Gary Player. He is, without a doubt, a better #2 guy than anyone that Tiger has ever faced. That said, Jack said it himself when he stated that there were really only around 15 guys that could have won a major during his day. Now, there are probably over 30 so long as Tiger gives them a chance.
When people say that Jack had to play against the game's greats, they usually just throw out a bunch of old names while not even realizing that the primes of their careers didn't even coincide.
Jack's first year on tour was 1962 and Tiger's first FULL year on tour was 1997. You can't count 1996 for majors as he didn't even turn pro until after the majors had already been contested. With that said, he concluded his 13th year on tour with the 2009 season with a total of 14 majors. Nicklaus had 12 majors after 13 (1962-74) years on tour, which puts Tiger (1997-2009) ahead of Jack in majors won. Plus, Woods missed two major chances last year due to injury. Also, he already has 70 PGA Tour wins in 13 years, whereas Nicklaus had only 53 after his first 13 years.