The Harsh Truth About the GOAT Debate

Who was better: Jack Nicklaus or Tiger Woods? A heated debate that people have very strong opinions about. Let’s break down the numbers so you can finally decide. The Greatest Of All Time.

In the The Harsh Truth About the GOAT Debate video we take a closer look at Jack Nicklaus and Tiger Woods. How does the new equipment of today impact their play? Who would win in their prime? Is major victories on the PGA Tour the ONLY thing that matters?

Golf Plus delivers to you an insider’s look at the world’s greatest golfers. Top players from the PGA, PGA Tour Champions, LPGA, and legends of the game. We showcase lifestyle pieces, golf highlights, biographies, and documentaries not seen anywhere else.

#GolfPlus

[jaredvaughan]

Jack's 19 silver medals at the majors has to count for something and put him over the top as the greatest ever.

[jimiverson]

Bobby
Entered a total of 11 US Opens - 4 wins (tied with Nicklaus and Hogan), 4 seconds, one 5th, one 8th. Entered the Open Championship 4 times, won 3 (tied with Nicklaus and Woods).

The amateur championships were also considered majors in those days:
US Amateur - 13 entries, 5 wins, 2nd twice, lost in the semi-finals twice. Amateur Championship (aka British Amateur) - 3 entries, 1 win.

Never won the PGA because he was an amateur. Never won the Masters because he didn't start the tournament until after he retired from regular competition.

From 1923, when he was 21, until his retirement at 28, Jones entered the 4 tournaments he was eligible to play 21 times, winning 13 times and finishing second 4 times. That's what dominance really looks like.

Oh, yeah, he also won all 4 of them in 1930 - the Grand Slam. And for influence on the game, he founded Augusta National and started the Masters. Plus he issued a series of instructional films in the 1930s that helped spread the game.

[haroldfloyd]

Jack finished first or second in 37 majors. Tiger Woods finished first or second in 22 majors. Sorry, but 37-22 is sort of a blowout. If you make it top 5 finishes Jack leads 56-31. Tiger was great but Jack was otherworldly.

[blehoo]

Jack oozed considerably more class both as a golfer and a person.

[mmcknight]

The mistake you make in percentages is including all the years Jack continued to play when he was no longer the best - Tigers fall from the top has been steep with very few starts since his problems began.

[jamestown]

This conversation starts when Tiger matches Jack’s major win record.

Tiger’s great and I thought he’d surpass Jack but his personal baggage hurt him.

Jack is still the GOAT.

Or maybe Young or Old Tom?

[mikeadler]

With the same equipment / Ball hands down Jack !

[OldSchoolBaptistInOslo]

You just cannot get around the number of majors. Jack is the best golfer.

[LeeMills-mljm]

In the world of golf - Tiger is admired but, Jack is truly loved. Jack was, by far, the best because his performances in the Majors far outweighs Tiger in terms of Top 3 finishes, the opposition Jack faced was far superior and the way Jack played the game was far more gentlemanly. For me Jack is one of a very small band of people who make up The Greatest Sportsmen EVER list and is a shining example of how sport should be played.

[psallen]

Tiger placed first or second 22 times in 87 majors or 25%, Jack placed first or second 38 times in 164 majors or 23%, but Jack played in his last major when he was 65 years old!!! Unless Tiger plays until he’s 65 and passes Jack I’d say we have to give the GOAT award to Jack.

[joekoz]

They are both equally great. Jack had serious competition from far greater players.

[garymay]

Tiger did not face a top 10 all time great, unless you count Phil. Jack faced the end of Hogan's career {and Snead who almost won the 1963 Masters that Jack ended up winning} Palmer in his prime, Player in his prime, Trevino in his prime, and Watson in his prime. Plus Casper, Floyd, Seve, and Faldo. Finally the comeback against all odds defiantly counts. Jacks 1986 Masters comeback was the greatest of all time. Tiger never came from behind to win a major and was chased down by Y E Yang. And for the final measure 18 beats 15. Jack is the

[donaldschmidt]

William Ben Hogan gets my vote as Golf's greatest player ever. In his wonderful Biography Hogan, author Curt Sampson wrote that "Hogan failed miserably. Then succeeded beyond imagining." Hogan didn't win his first major until the age of 34. Then he won nine in the next seven years!! This after enduring the most horrific accident any human being ever lived through, on Groundhogs Day in 1949. A head on collision with a Greyhound bus in Van Horn, Texas. Through an unparalleled drive to succeed, Hogan created the greatest control of a golf ball of all time. As a striker of the ball Hogan made Jack and Tiger look like comparative HACKS. When Hogan died in 1997 Jack himself stated, "Golf has lost its greatest shotmaker." Look at these numbers. Hogan never finished outside the top ten in 15 straight United States US Opens and Masters tournaments. From 1946-1948 he won 37 times in 99 tournaments! He played in only one British Open at Carnoustie in 1953. And won it!! The PGA was in Match Play until the latter portion of his career. Far more difficult to win. Tiger and Jack were spoiled Country Club kids compared to Hogan. Driving hundreds of miles a week to tournaments. Playing for peanuts on poorly manicured courses. Hogan's Achilles Heel was his putting. As the famous instructor Butch Harmons father Claude stated, "If Hogan could have putted, he would have made ever record in the book look silly." HERE IS THE MOST UNREAL NUMBER I HAVE EVER HEARD RELATING TO GOLF. In 1940 Hogan won three straight tournaments in North Carolina. He missed two greens in 216 holes!! There is no one, THEN OR NOW that could do that. Any debate over the greatest player ever, that doesn't include Ben Hogan is a typographical misprint.

[brianmorton]

19 runner up and 18 Majors there's no comparison regardless of what ever narrative you try to build. Jack is miles ahead of him

[lawyeredup]

Let me be clear up front - Jack and Tiger are definitely the two greatest golfers of all time. For various reasons, some will favor Jack and some will favor Tiger. Having said that, I have trouble with some of the analysis in this post.

You can't compare Jack's lifetime percentages to Tiger's percentages to age 46. Jack played in so many tournaments after his prime that his percentages would certainly drop. A few years ago, I compared performance between the two to age 43 (meaning just before they turned 44). Tiger had the higher win percentage, 22.6% to 15.8%. Jack had a higher percentage of top 3 finishes, 37.8% to 36.6%. Jack had a significant lead in top 10 finishes, 65.5% to 55.0%. Both were phenomenal at making cuts, but to age 43, Jack's rate for making cuts was an astounding 95.2% while Tiger's was 90.5%.

I think changes in training methods and fitness regimes is irrelevant. In either time period all players had whatever resources were available in that era. As a result, we cannot say that Tiger's competition is tougher than the competition Jack faced. Tiger has the same access to resources as does his competition. The same is true of equipment. All players had access to whatever was available in the era.

Speaking of competition, in his career Jack regularly played against 3 golfers who were are in the top ten for career wins. Tiger played against two in the top twenty, Phil at #8 and Vijay at #14 (It must be noted that Vijay's last win was in 2008). However, I think that each week through all of Tiger's career, there were likely more competitors who had a realistic chance of winning than there were in Jack's career.

For Majors, we all know that Jack has 3 more wins that Tiger. For 2nds and 3rds, Jack's numbers are far higher than those of Tiger, 19 to 7 for 2nds and 9 to 4 for 3rds.

If we look at Majors to age 43, Jack played 96 events to Tiger's 83. Since Jack won at age 46, he had only 17 wins to age 43. Tiger had a slightly higher winning percentage, 18.0% to 17.7%. From then on, it is always Jack in the lead - for 2nds 19.8% to 8.4%, for 3rds 9.4% to 4.8%, for top five 57% to 40%, for top tens 69.8% to 49.4%.

In any consideration of greatness, the length of a career is important. Tiger accumulated more wins earlier in his career than did Jack. Jack had more staying power. I think that between ages 33 and 43, Jack had 20 wins and Tiger had 10. I can't conclude that one is better than the other.

In case you couldn't tell, overall, I favor Jack as the GOAT. Tiger has been better at winning outside of the Majors. In events overall, it is a tossup on top 3s, but Jack has a significant lead in top 10s. In the Majors, it is a tossup on wins but Jack has a dramatic lead in 2nds, 3rds, top 5s and top 10s.

Frankly, I have been blessed to have been alive to watch both of them as they proved they are the best, well ahead of those behind them.

[ShooterSanoff]

How many times Jack came in second is almost more amazing than his 18 major wins

[ThePinkSpider]

I'm old school! Jack was playing at Augusta National when I lived there and I am SUCH a fan! Jack all the way!

[theboringbull]

It's Jack. You can't change the definition of GOAT because you want someone else at the top. It's all about the Majors. When Tiger ties or passes Jack then he will be the GOAT.

[TeacherLegendary]

Jack had better competition and more consistent. Tiger has the higher peak but Jack is still goat

[jimfarrell]

Jack played against a far superior level of competition than Tiger faced during his career, 18 majors and 19 seconds gives the nod to Jack.