We've launched the new forums! Read more here

Third Best Golfer Ever?

Northerner said:
For perspective on Jones:

He retired at age 27 with 13 majors
Tiger, at age 27, had 8 majors (11 if we are including his amateurs)
Jack at age 27 had 7 majors (9 if we are including his amateurs)

What would Jones have done if he had played another 20-30 years? He might have won 26 majors.
Click to expand...
Many were amateur majors. Impressive yes, but not comparable to the professional majors Tiger and Jack won.
 
LICC said:
Many were amateur majors. Impressive yes, but not comparable to the professional majors Tiger and Jack won.
Click to expand...


They were the "majors" of their day. They are considered majors in the record books. Jack is on record saying he considers his amateurs "majors" as well.


I don't know that those numbers are 100% accurate (all three of the players were winning majors around age 27 and I didn't get perfectly specific with their respective timelines) but they're generally close.


So bottom line for me: Jones had several more majors than both Jack and Tiger at the time of his retirement. We will never know how many more he would have won had he played another 27 years.
 
Northerner said:
They were the "majors" of their day. They are considered majors in the record books. Jack is on record saying he considers his amateurs "majors" as well.


I don't know that those numbers are 100% accurate (all three of the players were winning majors around age 27 and I didn't get perfectly specific with their respective timelines) but they're generally close.


So bottom line for me: Jones had several more majors than both Jack and Tiger at the time of his retirement. We will never know how many more he would have won had he played another 27 years.
Click to expand...
Right...but how many people go on incredible runs and then never do it again? You can't base history on what ifs. Because what if Tiger didn't get hurt or go through that rough patch personally? He could easily be past 20 right now. easily. So...kind of a moot point.
 
Northerner said:
They were the "majors" of their day. They are considered majors in the record books. Jack is on record saying he considers his amateurs "majors" as well.


I don't know that those numbers are 100% accurate (all three of the players were winning majors around age 27 and I didn't get perfectly specific with their respective timelines) but they're generally close.


So bottom line for me: Jones had several more majors than both Jack and Tiger at the time of his retirement. We will never know how many more he would have won had he played another 27 years.
Click to expand...
There were other tournaments considered "majors" back then. The Western Open. The North and South. The term was not as defined as it is now. Regardless of whether it was called a "major" or not, those amateur victories are not nearly as impressive as Tiger's professional major victories. You can't even compare them by level of competition.
 
Last edited:
cbaker2882 said:
Eh... Snead and Palmer have the same number of majors, and Palmer played 11 less years, and in arguably a tougher time on tour. Hogan has 2 more majors than Snead. Player has 2 more than Snead, and more total professional wins. Not sure how Snead is leaps and bounds above some of the others people have listed.
Click to expand...

More total “professional” wins!? Uhhh... okay sure, Gary had 160+ and Sam had 140+, but they were NOT all PGA wins. Slammin’ Sammy’s 82 PGA wins is of greater value than Player’s 24 PGA wins. As for the other “professional” wins on lesser tours... I don’t think they matter very much in a GOAT ranking.

For instance, who cares about wins on the Australasia Tour? Australia only has a population of 26M, compared to more than 300M in the USA. Winning a tournament on that tour is like winning a state tournament here (Texas has 27M) it doesn’t matter in a GOAT discussion.

But Player does have a career grand slam, whereas Sam only finished 2nd (4x) in the US Open.

82 is leaps and bounds above 24.

Palmer and Hogan are definitely respectable, but just looking at the records of wins and majors:

Nicklaus: 73/18
Woods: 82/15
Snead: 82/7
Hogan: 64/9
Palmer: 62/7
Player: 24/9

24/9 doesn’t even approach 3rd goat.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
BluesManDan said:
More total “professional” wins!? Uhhh... okay sure, Gary had 160+ and Sam had 140+, but they were NOT all PGA wins. Slammin’ Sammy’s 82 PGA wins is of greater value than Player’s 24 PGA wins. As for the other “professional” wins on lesser tours... I don’t think they matter very much in a GOAT ranking.

For instance, who cares about wins on the Australasia Tour? Australia only has a population of 26M, compared to more than 300M in the USA. Winning a tournament on that tour is like winning a state tournament here (Texas has 27M) it doesn’t matter in a GOAT discussion.

But Player does have a career grand slam, whereas Sam only finished 2nd (4x) in the US Open.

82 is leaps and bounds above 24.

Palmer and Hogan are definitely respectable, but just looking at the records of wins and majors:

Nicklaus: 73/18
Woods: 82/15
Snead: 82/7
Hogan: 64/9
Palmer: 62/7
Player: 24/9

24/9 doesn’t even approach 3rd goat.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
A few years ago someone analyzed Snead's 82 wins and more than a decent number were questionable to include as a tour win. Such as 4-person two round tournaments and things like that. From Golfweek: "His protestations aside, even the 82 wins accorded Snead is generous. A half-dozen were against fields of fewer than 15 players, some against fields so small that every competitor could have shared a ride to the course. There were a few 36-holers, an 18-holer, a smattering of team events. There are member-guests more competitive than some of the events Snead is credited with. In truth, Woods left the Slammer’s record in his rearview years ago."

If you use that lax criteria for win totals, Woods is close to 100.
 
LICC said:
A few years ago someone analyzed Snead's 82 wins and more than a decent number were questionable to include as a tour win. Such as 4-person two round tournaments and things like that. From Golfweek: "His protestations aside, even the 82 wins accorded Snead is generous. A half-dozen were against fields of fewer than 15 players, some against fields so small that every competitor could have shared a ride to the course. There were a few 36-holers, an 18-holer, a smattering of team events. There are member-guests more competitive than some of the events Snead is credited with. In truth, Woods left the Slammer’s record in his rearview years ago."

If you use that lax criteria for win totals, Woods is close to 100.
Click to expand...

Redirect Notice

www.google.com

This goes over it and it is suggested his total wins might be in the 70’s, which is still amazing.

But his 1950 season with 11 wins is remarkable and certainly dominant! His 69.23 scoring average that year held for 50 years.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
BluesManDan said:

Redirect Notice

www.google.com

This goes over it and it is suggested his total wins might be in the 70’s, which is still amazing.

But his 1950 season with 11 wins is remarkable and certainly dominant! His 69.23 scoring average that year held for 50 years.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
But Hogan was just returning from his injuries in 1950. Who knows if Snead wins that much if a healthy Hogan were playing.
 
Picking #3 isn't that difficult for me. I'd go with Mr Hogan hands down. Impossible for me to choose the 4th face on Mt Rushmore though. Player, Snead, Hagen, and Palmer are each incredibly deserving.
 
Hummm, what about Byron Nelson.
From 1947-1955 he was either 1st or 2nd in scoring average
Not a bad average.
 
Golf Ghost said:
I'm going to say Player. 9 Majors, career Grand Slam and did it all with Jack in his prime.
Click to expand...

Player definitely has a significant claim to it at this point. He and Hogan both have 9 and the Grand Slam, but Player won his over a spread of 20 years. Hogan's Major wins where limited to 8 years.
 
OGputtnfool said:
Player definitely has a significant claim to it at this point. He and Hogan both have 9 and the Grand Slam, but Player won his over a spread of 20 years. Hogan's Major wins where limited to 8 years.
Click to expand...
To me, that fact favors Hogan. You can't hold the lost WWII years against him. And the bus accident could have cost him another 5 major wins, considering the year lost to recovery (right in his prime) and that he wouldn't play the PGA Championship after it because his legs condition wouldn't get him through all the matches. Also, his vision problems later in his career that affected his putting were attributable to the circulatory problems from his accident.
 
LICC said:
To me, that fact favors Hogan. You can't hold the lost WWII years against him. And the bus accident could have cost him another 5 major wins, considering the year lost to recovery (right in his prime) and that he wouldn't play the PGA Championship after it because his legs condition wouldn't get him through all the matches. Also, his vision problems later in his career that affected his putting were attributable to the circulatory problems from his accident.
Click to expand...

By this logic, Ted Williams is probably the greatest baseball player.
Gayle Sayers has claim to the best RB
And the list goes on.

Hogan was one of the best, but saying he could have won or might have won or if this didn't happen, he maybe did this is exactly why there is a debate.
Tiger might have won 10 more if he didn't have injuries or have "personal issues"
Phil might have won 3-4 more if he didn't have joint issues.
Larry Bird might have won 3 more if he didn't have back issues.
 
JB said:
By this logic, Ted Williams is probably the greatest baseball player.
Gayle Sayers has claim to the best RB
And the list goes on.

Hogan was one of the best, but saying he could have won or might have won or if this didn't happen, he maybe did this is exactly why there is a debate.
Tiger might have won 10 more if he didn't have injuries or have "personal issues"
Phil might have won 3-4 more if he didn't have joint issues.
Larry Bird might have won 3 more if he didn't have back issues.
Click to expand...
It is perfectly valid to say that Ted Williams was the greatest hitter of all time.

Gale Sayers played 3-1/2 seasons and never came close to breaking any records. Now if you said Jim Brown, then yes that is another perfectly valid position.

Inherent wear and tear injuries are not the same as being crushed in a bus accident or losing years to a massive world war.
 
JB said:
Tiger might have won 10 more if he didn't have injuries or have "personal issues"
Click to expand...

That's more than likely accurate and probably a bit conservative.
 
LICC said:
It is perfectly valid to say that Ted Williams was the greatest hitter of all time.

Gale Sayers played 3-1/2 seasons and never came close to breaking any records. Now if you said Jim Brown, then yes that is another perfectly valid position.

Inherent wear and tear injuries are not the same as being crushed in a bus accident or losing years to a massive world war.
Click to expand...
Sure they are. Because the result is pure speculation regardless.
 
JB said:
Sure they are. Because the result is pure speculation regardless.
Click to expand...
They are not comparable because wear and tear are inherent to the person. Losing years to reasons completely extraneous to the person isn't any reflection on that person's long-term ability.

And the original argument is silly. Hogan won as many majors as Player in less than half the time. He had the better accomplishments in a shorter time period. That favors Hogan's accomplishments over Player's. I don't think you are going to find many people agreeing that Gary Player was a better golfer than Ben Hogan.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top