Question:
You give Bobby Jones, Jack and Arnie the same equipment, access to slow motion video review and course conditions that players have today and you would have a good match with Tiger. Better yet, give Tiger the same course conditions and equipment those guys had and he wouldn’t break par at Augusta.
What is your rational for saying that Tiger would do nothing under the older conditions? I would hazard a guess that given his athletic ability he would most likely do rather well. Michael
Response:
You give Bobby Jones, Jack and Arnie the same equipment, access to slow motion video review and course conditions that players have today and you would have a good match with Tiger. Better yet, give Tiger the same course conditions and equipment those guys had and he wouldn’t break par at Augusta. What is your rational for saying that Tiger would do nothing under the older conditions? I would hazard a guess that given his athletic ability he would most likely do rather well.
Didn’t Tiger try out an ancient ball and club in a practice round somewhere and hit a gutta-percha (or whatever he was hitting) some 290 yards? I mean honestly, what would give anyone the impression that Tiger would suddenly start slicing the ball all over the lot and three-putting every green if you gave him older clubs? The things he’d still have would be his determination, his creativity, and — oh yeah — that wonderful swing. Doug — ___, Doug Massey, ASIC Digital Logic Designer o IBM Microelectronics Division, Burlington, Vermont | | Phone: (802)769-7095 t/l: 446-7095 fax: x6752 | / | . My homepage: http://doug.obscurestuff.com (|)
Response:
Bobby Jones, overrated??!!?? By the baffy of Vardon! Do you realize that BJ that is the only man in history to have been honored by TWO tickertape parades? That at St. Andrew’s his dour Scottish caddy, a man of a race not prone to easy enthusiasm, was heard to utter, "My, sir, you are a wonder."? Only a near-miracle could have wrest such from his lips. On the other hand, it certainly is absurd to compare his competitors to the modern-day tour.
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – You give Bobby Jones, Jack and Arnie the same equipment, access to slow motion video review and course conditions that players have today and you would have a good match with Tiger. Better yet, give Tiger the same course conditions and equipment those guys had and he wouldn’t break par at Augusta. You’re joking, right? excuse me but didnt Tom Morris score a 74 or something on the Old Course using equipment that was like an old bent stick and a "ball" made of feathers and old leather. Er no. In its early years of the Open Championship was a 36 hole competition (3×12 at Prestwick, 2×18 at St Andrews and Musselburgh). YoungTom Morriss set the "gutty ball" record with 149 for 36 holes at Prestwick. Crispin Roche Crispin Roche Er, I dispute your refute 
He most certainly did set a course record over the Old Course which was 70 something, I thougt 74 but may have been 77 remarkable either way.
Yes you are correct Young Tom Morris set the course record of 77 for the Old Course in 1869 although it wasn’t in the Open Championship. Freddie Tait, as an amateur, equalled the 77 in 1885 and at sometime in the remaining 15 years of his life lowered it to 72. Both of Tait’s record scores would have been set with the gutta percha ball. Speaking of fantastic golfing feats with old equipment in 1870 Young Tom Morris completed the 578 1st hole at Prestwick in just 3 shots. I think it is quite easy for people to dismiss the old player in their quaint little hats, waistcoats and plus fours/twos and forget that actually they were damn fine golfers. And yes maybe some of them weren’t up to the standard of Woods and Nicklaus, and we shall never know whether that is that case, but they were the great golfers of their time and the players by which everybody else measured themselves. Crispin Roche
Response:
[stuff cut] No kidding. When reading coverage of the 2000 British Open there was a lot of talk about Tiger. Nicklaus admitted that at his age Tiger was playing better than he ever did. One long-time friend of Nicklaus said that is the first time Jack ever admitted that anyone was better. And as far as Jack compared to Jones, it was Jones who said "Jack Nicklaus plays a game with which I am not familiar".
Of course Bobby Jones had a reputation as a gentleman so he would be unlikely to have said "Jack Nicklaus plays a good game but he is not as good as I was." Crispin Roche
Response:
I think the main point of the original post of this thread is being overlooked. There was simply not the competition there was today in Bobby Jones’s day. Everybody on the PGA Tour or Buy.com or Canadian, or European, or Austraila-Asian Tours has strong games. Bobby Jones was the best of his time. Tiger I think is the best of all time. I hope I’m around for another 40 years to see what develops. tim – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – You give Bobby Jones, Jack and Arnie the same equipment, access to slow motion video review and course conditions that players have today and you would have a good match with Tiger. Better yet, give Tiger the same course conditions and equipment those guys had and he wouldn’t break par at Augusta. You’re joking, right? excuse me but didnt Tom Morris score a 74 or something on the Old Course using equipment that was like an old bent stick and a "ball" made of feathers and old leather. Er no. In its early years of the Open Championship was a 36 hole competition (3×12 at Prestwick, 2×18 at St Andrews and Musselburgh). YoungTom Morriss set the "gutty ball" record with 149 for 36 holes at Prestwick. Crispin Roche Crispin Roche
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – You give Bobby Jones, Jack and Arnie the same equipment, access to slow motion video review and course conditions that players have today and you would have a good match with Tiger. Better yet, give Tiger the same course conditions and equipment those guys had and he wouldn’t break par at Augusta. You’re joking, right? excuse me but didnt Tom Morris score a 74 or something on the Old Course using equipment that was like an old bent stick and a "ball" made of feathers and old leather. Er no. In its early years of the Open Championship was a 36 hole competition (3×12 at Prestwick, 2×18 at St Andrews and Musselburgh). YoungTom Morriss set the "gutty ball" record with 149 for 36 holes at Prestwick. Crispin Roche Crispin Roche
Er, I dispute your refute He most certainly did set a course record over the Old Course which was 70 something, I thougt 74 but may have been 77 remarkable either way. — Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Response:
I don’t know what Jones’ stroke average was. But I know that the difference between Tiger Woods and Byron Nelson (at his peak) is pretty slight. Would Nelson have won 11 straight in today’s fields? Probably not.
I think it’s safe to say DEFINITELY not. Nelson’s best years (26 wins in two years) were 1944 and 1945. I don’t know how he stayed out of the war, but most able-bodied men didn’t, so he had very little competition. The war’s effects on the talent pool probably took ten years to dissipate. In fact, there are only two people who exceeded Tiger’s mark of 17 wins in two years, and both did it during or right after WWII: Nelson (26, 1944-45) and Hogan (20, 1946-47). The only people to tie him (Hogan and Snead) also did it in the five years following the war. It will probably never be done again. Except, of course, by Tiger.
Response:
: I think the main point of the original post of this thread is being : overlooked. There was simply not the competition there was today in Bobby : Jones’s day. Lacking proof — which you do, as one cannot prove a negative — one would have to resort to stroke averages as a basis for comparison. I don’t know what Jones’ stroke average was. But I know that the difference between Tiger Woods and Byron Nelson (at his peak) is pretty slight. Would Nelson have won 11 straight in today’s fields? Probably not. But he still would have won enough to steal much of Tiger’s thunder. It’s in the scores. cb
Response:
Yes, Jones was a great golfer. But so is Tiger, and yet lots of people say he’s overrated. Bobby Jones had personality, personality goes a long way…
LOL! That has got to be one of my top three favorite movies. David
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – You give Bobby Jones, Jack and Arnie the same equipment, access to slow motion video review and course conditions that players have today and you would have a good match with Tiger. Better yet, give Tiger the same course conditions and equipment those guys had and he wouldn’t break par at Augusta. You’re joking, right? excuse me but didnt Tom Morris score a 74 or something on the Old Course using equipment that was like an old bent stick and a "ball" made of feathers and old leather.
Er no. In its early years of the Open Championship was a 36 hole competition (3×12 at Prestwick, 2×18 at St Andrews and Musselburgh). YoungTom Morriss set the "gutty ball" record with 149 for 36 holes at Prestwick. Crispin Roche Crispin Roche
Response:
In Jone’s time, Americans weren’t so dominant, but were getting there. In any sport, you still have to beat the best out there. Who knows, maybe 50 years from now scores over 70 will be considered hacker scores and some will look on Woods as not facing good competition because there were some many hackers on tour would shot over 70 a lot of the time. The fact is that Jones won 11/13 US and British Opens that he entered, and I believe that Jones was right in suggesting those two tournanents are the real test. Put modern golfers on the goat tracks of the day, where greens were less closely mown than most fairways today, among other things, with hickory shafts and very inconsistent gutta balls, and lets see what they shoot! You can beleive what you want, but in his day, Jones was as dominant a golfer as there ever has been, and he did have Hagens and Sarazens to challenge him. I just don’t see Mickleson, Els and Duval as having the same whatever it is that makes atheletes great as a Hagen or a Sarazen (or a Player, Trevino, Watson, Hogan, Nelson, etc.) Woods is the only one with the real stuff out there today, IMHO. I suspect that Woods very greatly wishes that someone else would come up and give him a real run for his money over a span of time, but I’m not holding my breath. I certainly don’t see the likes of Howell III or Kuchar doing this, Maybe Garcia? It might be someone we would hardly suspect, another Hogan type, someone who doesn’t look that great now, but is working away at it. Rob — Service is the rent we pay for being RSG Masters 2002 ( http://home.att.net/~janellenrob/RSG-MS_02.html ) RSG Masters 2003 ( http://home.att.net/~janellenrob/RSG-MS-03P.html )
Response:
Might not be. Ever hear of Jones complaining about "bumpy" greens on courses that he grew up on. Pete Z
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – You give Bobby Jones, Jack and Arnie the same equipment, access to slow motion video review and course conditions that players have today and you would have a good match with Tiger. Better yet, give Tiger the same course conditions and equipment those guys had and he wouldn’t break par at Augusta. You’re joking, right?
Response:
: :Bobby Jones had a wonderful tempo to his swing and literally caressed :the ball off the tee. : 
verrated? : :i dont think so. : : Bobby Jones emerged from a wrinkle in the time/space continuum last week and : appeared on the 13th tee at his beloved Augusta National. He watched as a : certain current PGA Tour pro played the last 6 holes of his course …. a : course he barely recognized. After the pro putted out on #18, Bobby couldn’t : help but speak to him. : : "Sir, I’ve played a lot of golf in my years and I’ve seen most of the game’s : greats. However, your ball striking is without peer, and you hit the ball : unimaginable distances off the tee. You are most certainly the finest striker : of the ball I’ve ever seen, sir. It would be my pleasure to know your name." : : The pro replied, "Billy Andrade." CUTE! I fixed the subject header for you. cb
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Bobby Jones had a wonderful tempo to his swing and literally caressed the ball off the tee. overrated? i dont think so. Bobby Jones emerged from a wrinkle in the time/space continuum last week and appeared on the 13th tee at his beloved Augusta National. He watched as a certain current PGA Tour pro played the last 6 holes of his course …. a course he barely recognized. After the pro putted out on #18, Bobby couldn’t help but speak to him. "Sir, I’ve played a lot of golf in my years and I’ve seen most of the game’s greats. However, your ball striking is without peer, and you hit the ball unimaginable distances off the tee. You are most certainly the finest striker of the ball I’ve ever seen, sir. It would be my pleasure to know your name." The pro replied, "Billy Andrade."
To which Jones replied: " Oh yeah, I’ve heard of you. A Wake Forest Man. Sorry, my mistake. Have you ever met Moe Norman? Ya know, you are shorter in person than you seem on TV." Bill-OB
Response:
You give Bobby Jones, Jack and Arnie the same equipment, access to slow motion video review and course conditions that players have today and you would have a good match with Tiger. Bobby Jones did some film and many shorts in which he both instructed others and analyzed his own swing. All of the film was viewable in slow motion for indepth analysis.
Some of the Bobby Jones films shown on TGC have Bobby in a laboratory wearing a black and white suit showing in slow motion how the various parts of the body move during the swing. In fact, the website that Miguel hosted has these swings available for download. He actually was an astute student (master) of the golf swing. Golfers were aware of the finer points of swing mechanics in the 30’s. High speed cameras have been used for decades, and both Arnie and Jack used the technology. As far as course conditions, most of the fairways were dry compared to modern standards (more roll), and the greens were much slower.
The lies the pros got in the early days were terrible because even some of the best courses were poorly maintained. But they did get a lot of roll. As far as greens being slower, Johnny Miller wrote in Golf Digest that one of the biggest myths in golf is that fast greens are more difficult than slow greens. He suggested "Tiger Proofing" a course by slowing the greens down to 8 on a stimpmeter. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Arnie played a round at Erskine Memorial in our area some years ago, and the guy on the bag (the junior madalist at the time, chosen as the honorary caddie) said that he (Arnie) got at least 80 yards roll on the 610 yard par 5 setting him up for an easy 3-wood to the front of the green. Better yet, give Tiger the same course conditions and equipment those guys had and he wouldn’t break par at Augusta. I really doubt that Tiger would have that particular problem. AFAIK, he has played ‘traditional’ golf equipment most of his career. These guys can break par most any day with a bag of poorly-matched range clubs in their flip-flops.
No kidding. When reading coverage of the 2000 British Open there was a lot of talk about Tiger. Nicklaus admitted that at his age Tiger was playing better than he ever did. One long-time friend of Nicklaus said that is the first time Jack ever admitted that anyone was better. And as far as Jack compared to Jones, it was Jones who said "Jack Nicklaus plays a game with which I am not familiar". – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Not taking anything away from Tiger but lets don’t even try to compare his game to theirs. You certainly can compare Bobby to Arnie or Jack, or Arnie and Jack to Tiger. In context. Brian — Ron Blanchard RSG Rollcall – http://rec-sport-golf.com/members/ I took the RSG 2002 Pledge to not encourage trolls "Make Golf Difficult Again." - Ian MacCallister
Response:
You give Bobby Jones, Jack and Arnie the same equipment, access to slow motion video review and course conditions that players have today and you would have a good match with Tiger. Better yet, give Tiger the same course conditions and equipment those guys had and he wouldn’t break par at Augusta.
You’re joking, right?
Response:
You give Bobby Jones, Jack and Arnie the same equipment, access to slow motion video review and course conditions that players have today and you would have a good match with Tiger. Better yet, give Tiger the same course conditions and equipment those guys had and he wouldn’t break par at Augusta. You’re joking, right?
excuse me but didnt Tom Morris score a 74 or something on the Old Course using equipment that was like an old bent stick and a "ball" made of feathers and old leather. I think you seriously underestimate how good he was even if it may have "looked ugly" in tv terms and Bobby Jones had a wonderful tempo to his swing and literally caressed the ball off the tee. overrated? i dont think so. — Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Response:
You give Bobby Jones, Jack and Arnie the same equipment, access to slow motion video review and course conditions that players have today and you would have a good match with Tiger. Better yet, give Tiger the same course conditions and equipment those guys had and he wouldn’t break par at Augusta.
And you base this on what, exactly?
Response:
Bobby Jones had a wonderful tempo to his swing and literally caressed the ball off the tee. overrated? i dont think so.
Bobby Jones emerged from a wrinkle in the time/space continuum last week and appeared on the 13th tee at his beloved Augusta National. He watched as a certain current PGA Tour pro played the last 6 holes of his course …. a course he barely recognized. After the pro putted out on #18, Bobby couldn’t help but speak to him. "Sir, I’ve played a lot of golf in my years and I’ve seen most of the game’s greats. However, your ball striking is without peer, and you hit the ball unimaginable distances off the tee. You are most certainly the finest striker of the ball I’ve ever seen, sir. It would be my pleasure to know your name." The pro replied, "Billy Andrade."
Response:
You give Bobby Jones, Jack and Arnie the same equipment, access to slow motion video review and course conditions that players have today and you would have a good match with Tiger.
Bobby Jones did some film and many shorts in which he both instructed others and analyzed his own swing. All of the film was viewable in slow motion for indepth analysis. He actually was an astute student (master) of the golf swing. Golfers were aware of the finer points of swing mechanics in the 30’s. High speed cameras have been used for decades, and both Arnie and Jack used the technology. As far as course conditions, most of the fairways were dry compared to modern standards (more roll), and the greens were much slower. Arnie played a round at Erskine Memorial in our area some years ago, and the guy on the bag (the junior madalist at the time, chosen as the honorary caddie) said that he (Arnie) got at least 80 yards roll on the 610 yard par 5 setting him up for an easy 3-wood to the front of the green. Better yet, give Tiger the same course conditions and equipment those guys had and he wouldn’t break par at Augusta.
I really doubt that Tiger would have that particular problem. AFAIK, he has played ‘traditional’ golf equipment most of his career. These guys can break par most any day with a bag of poorly-matched range clubs in their flip-flops. Not taking anything away from Tiger but lets don’t even try to compare his game to theirs.
You certainly can compare Bobby to Arnie or Jack, or Arnie and Jack to Tiger. In context. Brian
– Ron Blanchard RSG Rollcall – http://rec-sport-golf.com/members/ I took the RSG 2002 Pledge to not encourage trolls "Make Golf Difficult Again." - Ian MacCallister
Response:
Yes, Jones was a great golfer. But so is Tiger, and yet lots of people say he’s overrated.
Bobby Jones had personality, personality goes a long way…
Response:
Jones certainly has a claim to being called the greatest amateur ever, but to compare a British Amateur field to any PGA tour event field is ridiculous.
Didn’t Old Tom Morris play in The Open Championship when he was 75? 
But you can only ever compare a golfer with his or her peers of the day and by their record. Trying to compare them across generations is pointless. Was Mark Spitz a great swimmer, even though he’d now finish half a lap behind Ian Thorpe in a 400m? Of course he was … he blitzed the fields of the day and won seven gold medals. Cheers Colin Wilson RSG Roll Call: http://rec-sport-golf.com/members/?rollcall=wilsonc Trentham Golf Club: http://www.trenthamgolf.com
Response:
Yes, Jones was a great golfer. But so is Tiger, and yet lots of people say he’s overrated. They are entitled to their opinion, but that doesn’t mean it’s not a stupid opinion, as evidenced by their chief argument that Tiger’s competition isn’t as good. This is so ridiculous it’s hardly worth comment. John Daly was leading the field at Bay Hill midway through the third round last week. He was ranked below 500 a little over a year ago. How much more parity can you have than over 500 pros being viable contenders? Jones certainly has a claim to being called the greatest amateur ever, but to compare a British Amateur field to any PGA tour event field is ridiculous. And how many quality pros did Jones face? Here’s one indication: from 1921-29, there were only three winners of the PGA tournament. Hagen won five, Sarazen won two, and Diegel (who?) won two. Not what I’d call a deep talent pool. I wish I knew how many players even entered those tournaments. Probably a few dozen at most. I do know that less than ONE dozen played the first US Open in 1895. The fact is that golfers just weren’t that good back then. Not their fault — they didn’t have good equipment, or training, or theory, or incentive. Walter Travis took up golf as a hobby at age 37, and won the first of his three US Amateur titles just three years later. During that era, pros were not necessarily the best players, but were more often just fairly good players who liked the lifestyle, i.e. it beat shoveling coal. It wasn’t all that unusual for an amateur to beat a pro. Amateurs won three out of four US Opens between 1913 and 1916 (Hagen won the other one). Throw in Jones and John Goodman (1933 winner), and you have five amateurs winning the US Open 8 out of 19 years between 1913 and 1933 (WWI cancelled the 1917 and 1918 events). During that span, four of the others were won by Hagen and Sarazen, so it seems there were only a handful of pros that were very good. They didn’t even charge admission to the US Open until 1922, didn’t have qualifying until 1924. The British Open and Amateur had some prestige, but their fields were jokes compared to the world-class tournaments today. It took a month (and a pile of money) for an American to take a ship to England, play, and take a ship back, so very few did. The Open was still paying $1500 to the winner as late as the 1960’s, when many American wins paid $20,000. In other words, most people couldn’t afford to play it, because the trip cost more than the winner’s purse. Only after Arnie started playing it did it attract a decent field. The Amateur is so diminished that even Tiger, who had his eye on all the important amateur records since he was four years old, didn’t bother playing it. Of course, none of this is Jones’s fault (just as it’s not Tiger’s fault that Jones didn’t play full time). Jones played the best tournaments available to him, and he won many of them, and that’s all you can ask of anyone. But to say that he had tougher competition than Tiger is just laughable. It would be like saying that a boxer who refuses to fight black fighters has tougher competition than Ali did. Oops, I forgot, the same people who say Jones is the greatest golfer ever often do say that Dempsey is the greatest boxer ever.
Response:
You give Bobby Jones, Jack and Arnie the same equipment, access to slow motion video review and course conditions that players have today and you would have a good match with Tiger. Better yet, give Tiger the same course conditions and equipment those guys had and he wouldn’t break par at Augusta. Not taking anything away from Tiger but lets don’t even try to compare his game to theirs. Brian
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Yes, Jones was a great golfer. But so is Tiger, and yet lots of people say he’s overrated. They are entitled to their opinion, but that doesn’t mean it’s not a stupid opinion, as evidenced by their chief argument that Tiger’s competition isn’t as good. This is so ridiculous it’s hardly worth comment. John Daly was leading the field at Bay Hill midway through the third round last week. He was ranked below 500 a little over a year ago. How much more parity can you have than over 500 pros being viable contenders? Jones certainly has a claim to being called the greatest amateur ever, but to compare a British Amateur field to any PGA tour event field is ridiculous. And how many quality pros did Jones face? Here’s one indication: from 1921-29, there were only three winners of the PGA tournament. Hagen won five, Sarazen won two, and Diegel (who?) won two. Not what I’d call a deep talent pool. I wish I knew how many players even entered those tournaments. Probably a few dozen at most. I do know that less than ONE dozen played the first US Open in 1895. The fact is that golfers just weren’t that good back then. Not their fault — they didn’t have good equipment, or training, or theory, or incentive. Walter Travis took up golf as a hobby at age 37, and won the first of his three US Amateur titles just three years later. During that era, pros were not necessarily the best players, but were more often just fairly good players who liked the lifestyle, i.e. it beat shoveling coal. It wasn’t all that unusual for an amateur to beat a pro. Amateurs won three out of four US Opens between 1913 and 1916 (Hagen won the other one). Throw in Jones and John Goodman (1933 winner), and you have five amateurs winning the US Open 8 out of 19 years between 1913 and 1933 (WWI cancelled the 1917 and 1918 events). During that span, four of the others were won by Hagen and Sarazen, so it seems there were only a handful of pros that were very good. They didn’t even charge admission to the US Open until 1922, didn’t have qualifying until 1924. The British Open and Amateur had some prestige, but their fields were jokes compared to the world-class tournaments today. It took a month (and a pile of money) for an American to take a ship to England, play, and take a ship back, so very few did. The Open was still paying $1500 to the winner as late as the 1960’s, when many American wins paid $20,000. In other words, most people couldn’t afford to play it, because the trip cost more than the winner’s purse. Only after Arnie started playing it did it attract a decent field. The Amateur is so diminished that even Tiger, who had his eye on all the important amateur records since he was four years old, didn’t bother playing it. Of course, none of this is Jones’s fault (just as it’s not Tiger’s fault that Jones didn’t play full time). Jones played the best tournaments available to him, and he won many of them, and that’s all you can ask of anyone. But to say that he had tougher competition than Tiger is just laughable. It would be like saying that a boxer who refuses to fight black fighters has tougher competition than Ali did. Oops, I forgot, the same people who say Jones is the greatest golfer ever often do say that Dempsey is the greatest boxer ever.