Golf

[titansfan]

Voted for Tiger, but not really a fair question, Jack's career is over, where as, Tiger's career may just now be peaking. If one takes into consideration the accomplishments by the age of thirty and the caliber of competition that each had faced up until that time, I think hands down its Tiger.

The issue with the improvement of equipment is a valid one, however, golf courses are designed now to defend the long drive and the high spin wedges. If you watch older matches, courses were a lot shorter, fairways were a lot wider, and greens were ridicously slow. I think Arnold Palmer said it best, "Watch Tiger closely now, because there may never be another one like him."

[freddiehollie]

" The issue with the improvement of equipment is a valid one, however, golf courses are designed now to defend the long drive and the high spin wedges. If you watch older matches, courses were a lot shorter, fairways were a lot wider "

Todays golfers hit it as far as possible, because even if its in the rough its still easier to hit a green with a wedge than a 2 iron. One of the last of the shorter hitters to win more than 3 majors was Nick Faldo. Check out Muirfield in 1992 awesome controlled golf. He could'nt match others for distance, so played long iron running shots to perfection. How many times do todays pro's hit the ball into deep rough, for the commentator to say "he's dead from there", only to watch him knock it stiff?
Thank you 60deg wedge and Pro V1 ball[msnwink] of which Jack had neither

[Nielsen]

Jack wins in my book at the moment - but Tiger will probably take the honours once his carrer is closing. Then we can clearly see the stats. and make our final choice... [8D]


TOM