It may not be a good poll thread because I would think approaching 99% would answer with one of two players: Jack or Tiger, with the other one second. There probably is such a thread but it just faded away with Tiger's fading.

I came across something statistically tonight that I didn't realize. I'm in the Tiger GOAT camp, by the way. I had always known that Nicklaus, seemingly incongruously and even incredibly, had never won a Vardon Trophy, while Tiger owned the thing. So one can start thinking, well, Nicklaus was the best at making pars on the major set ups, but wasn't really the one going low otherwise, evidently not shooting the lowest scores.

Not so fast, of course. In between Jack and Tiger's careers, the rounds played to qualify for the Vardon was reduced from 80 to 60. Tonight I looked up how many times Nicklaus scoring average was actually lower than the Vardon Trophy winner. It is referenced as 8 times, I came up with 9. That matches Tigers 9 Vardon's. So that's about a push, not a big win for Tiger at all, as it appears at first glance.

I did a chart comparing all their Top 2's, Top 5's, Top 10 percentages in majors ... and I forget a lot of that. Maybe somebody has it handy. To me, since it's close, it comes down to who shoots the lower scores on the harder and longer courses ... and Tiger is dominant there. So he's my GOAT.

But it was meaningful to realize the Vardon "problem" with Nicklaus really isn't a thing. And I knew fully he didn't play a lot of tournaments, just never put 2 + 2 together to realize his Vardon thing is pretty much that simple, and much ado about nothing.

Most of the stuff you mentioned is common knowledge amongst Nicklaus supporters.

You can also bring up Jack leading the tour in driving distance by 2 standard deviations over average in 1968, as measured by IBM. This was after Jack's earlier years when players of the time conceded he could hit the ball further.

You can also bring up Jack, at age 40, leading the tour in 1980 combined driving (accuracy + distance) = 13 + 10 = 23, which has never been equaled.

You can also bring up Jack finishing top 6 in the Open Championship 15 years straight, 12 of those top 3 or better.

Tiger had 2000 US Open, Jack had 1965 Masters.

Tiger had the 6 iron at the 2000 Canadian Open @ Glen Abbey, Jack had the 1 iron at the 1972 US Open @ Pebble Beach.

Tiger had the 2019 Masters, Jack had the 1986 Masters.

I take Tiger as he had an incredible short game which Jack sorely lacked. But Jack did not need a short game when he had the tee-to-green and putting skills very few others had.

The goat is Tiger AINEC. End of thread.

Yeah it's Tiger by a fair margin. The depth of fields is just light years different

Nicklaus should be disqualified anyway because of the 1968 player revolt he led and the organization to compete with the PGA he created. Just an absolutely disgusting disregard for the traditions of the game and disloyalty to the tour.

Different eras, different technology, different courses, different prize structure, etc.

I have no problem claiming Tiger GOAT. His all around game was better, and he could compete like nobody else before or after him.

Peak Jack against peak Tiger 72 holes circa 1963 @ Oakmont I'd favor Tiger -250. Circa 2000 I'd favor Tiger -600 at least.

But personal achievements != who was the better golfer, as they played in different generations.

Don't forget Palmer and Player, those terrible people.

i wish i could see them both play with the same quality and quantity of video footage

You guys go ahead and chug the goat milk. The equipment element alone is enough to create uncertainty.

However, my dream foursome is tom Watson, lee Trevino, and bo Jackson.