Comments on: 0 for 29… http://www.oscargamblesociety.com/0-for-29/ People don't think it be like it is, but it do. Sun, 20 May 2012 06:46:25 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.7 by: Cliffy http://www.oscargamblesociety.com/0-for-29/#comment-541 Tue, 19 Jun 2007 14:27:17 +0000 http://www.oscargamblesociety.com/0-for-29/#comment-541 Consensus is that the discussion of "greatest golfer ever" is now limited to Tiger and Jack - and I believe most, at this point, still have Jack #1 (and I include myself in that group). Now, when all's said and done, I doubt many would be surprised if/when Tiger has the career numbers to merit pushing Jack out of the throne. But he's still got some work to do - and we all know about ass-uming (see Griffey, Jr and 756, for starters). The number is 18 - the number of majors that Jack won. Tiger's around 12 or 13 (too lazy to confirm). But count me in the group that's equally as impressed with Jack's *19* second-place finishes. Yes - I understand it means he wasn't quite good enough to win those 19 majors... but this guy was 1st or 2nd in the field in *37* majors. That is an impressive career. And I'm not sure how to check how many of Jack's 18 major victories were of the trailing-after-three category, though it'd be interesting to note - in order to compare with Tiger. If/when Tiger wins his 19th major, even if he never wins one when trailing after three rounds, the consensus will likely be that he becomes "the best golfer ever"... understandable. But I'd like to see him get close (if not pass) Nicklaus's record 19 second-place finishes... i.e. he's legitimately in the hunt for at least 37 majors. Just consider that in these terms: Given the four majors per year, Jack won or finished second in every major for the equivalent of almost ten straight years. C'mon people, *that* is a great/dominant golfer. Consensus is that the discussion of “greatest golfer ever” is now limited to Tiger and Jack - and I believe most, at this point, still have Jack #1 (and I include myself in that group). Now, when all’s said and done, I doubt many would be surprised if/when Tiger has the career numbers to merit pushing Jack out of the throne. But he’s still got some work to do - and we all know about ass-uming (see Griffey, Jr and 756, for starters).

The number is 18 - the number of majors that Jack won. Tiger’s around 12 or 13 (too lazy to confirm). But count me in the group that’s equally as impressed with Jack’s *19* second-place finishes. Yes - I understand it means he wasn’t quite good enough to win those 19 majors… but this guy was 1st or 2nd in the field in *37* majors. That is an impressive career. And I’m not sure how to check how many of Jack’s 18 major victories were of the trailing-after-three category, though it’d be interesting to note - in order to compare with Tiger.

If/when Tiger wins his 19th major, even if he never wins one when trailing after three rounds, the consensus will likely be that he becomes “the best golfer ever”… understandable. But I’d like to see him get close (if not pass) Nicklaus’s record 19 second-place finishes… i.e. he’s legitimately in the hunt for at least 37 majors.

Just consider that in these terms: Given the four majors per year, Jack won or finished second in every major for the equivalent of almost ten straight years. C’mon people, *that* is a great/dominant golfer.

]]>