Quote:
Originally Posted by MutuelClerk
Agree, it's not close. Jack was better. Tiger was more dominant in a shorter career span. Majors tell the story. Look at how many Jack won and how many times he was second. I believe he played against better competition also. And I respect the hell out of Tiger's career. Just think Jack was better.
|
We'll agree to disagree. Tiger's 24% winning percentage day in and day out against more and better international players than what was present in Jack's day tell the tale. Majors won is one measurement, but when you take a look at the depth of quality in tournament fields, it doesn't measure up at all. I'm a big Jack fan, but I'm not blind either.
