The greatest golfers of all time

Following the exciting finish to the US Open, i'm in a bit of a golfing mood today. Who would you rate as the top 10 greatest golfers of all time? I'll start it off. My rankings would be-

1. Tiger Woods (USA)
2. Jack Nicklaus (USA)
3. Ben Hogan (USA)
4. Walter Hagen (USA)
5. Bobby Jones (USA)
6. Sam Snead (USA)
7. Harry Vardon (Eng)
8. Arnold Palmer (USA)
9. Gary Player (RSA)
10. Byron Nelson (USA)

Dominated by Yanks, of course....

Unlucky to miss out- Tom Watson, Gene Sarazen, Nick Faldo, Lee Trevino, Seve Ballesteros.

Thoughts?

Your list is pretty much similar to mine, although I like to see Watson and Trevino in the list but the question is in whose place?

Also, The 'Golden Bear' is still numero uno in my list until Woods surpass him in next few years. Remember, Woods is playing against 'the field'. Jack won 18 majors playing against the likes of Arnie, Player, Trevino and Watson to name a few.

Forum Goat wrote:Your list is pretty much similar to mine, although I like to see Watson and Trevino in the list but the question is in whose place?

Also, The 'Golden Bear' is still numero uno in my list until Woods surpass him in next few years. Remember, Woods is playing against 'the field'. Jack won 18 majors playing against the likes of Arnie, Player, Trevino and Watson to name a few.

You could argue that the likes of Mickelson, Els, and Singh would have won a lot more majors in the last 11 years if Tiger had not been playing.

Was Nicklaus so good because he was competing against the likes of Watson, Player, and Palmer? Or could you say that Woods is so good because he hasn't let Mickelson, Els, and Singh win too many majors?

Was Nicklaus ever ranked twice as good as his nearest rival as Tiger is now?

Watson has to be in the Top 10.

Henry wrote:

Forum Goat wrote:Your list is pretty much similar to mine, although I like to see Watson and Trevino in the list but the question is in whose place?

Also, The 'Golden Bear' is still numero uno in my list until Woods surpass him in next few years. Remember, Woods is playing against 'the field'. Jack won 18 majors playing against the likes of Arnie, Player, Trevino and Watson to name a few.

You could argue that the likes of Mickelson, Els, and Singh would have won a lot more majors in the last 11 years if Tiger had not been playing.

Was Nicklaus so good because he was competing against the likes of Watson, Player, and Palmer? Or could you say that Woods is so good because he hasn't let Mickelson, Els, and Singh win too many majors?

Was Nicklaus ever ranked twice as good as his nearest rival as Tiger is now?

I never thought I would agree with you.... but you are completely right.

This can go both ways.

Nicklaus, in addition to his 18 majors had another 20 or so runner up finishes - which would have been against the likes of Watson, Player etc. So these guys were good enough to beat Nicklaus reasonably often. If there is still some conjecture as to whether Jack is the greatest then clearly these other guys were outstanding too having won so many majors during the Jack era.

Since 1997 there have been 34 majors that Woods hasn't won. Els, Mickleson and Vijay have only won 8 of those.

Well Tiger has five runners up as well as three thirds in about 48 majors. So add his 14 victories, that makes him getting in the top three in 22 of his 48 major starts. Pretty good going. I may have my figures wrong, so feel free to correct it.

I think the fact the Els, Mickleson and Vijay have only won 8 majors since 1997 is irrelevant. As I said on another thread, the field of players IMO is strong and there is quality from #1 to 100. Hence we will see major taken out by players whom we never heard of.

Lee Trevino.

Enterainment value alone.

What are you basing it on? Earnings?

PeterCS wrote:Lee Trevino.

Enterainment value alone.

What are you basing it on? Earnings?

Majors won, mostly. But also on the impact they had on the game of golf in general. In hindsight, maybe I would rank Jones above Hagen, based on the fact that he won the grand slam, and had such a huge impact on the game of golf during the 20's and 30's.

I think the fact the Els, Mickleson and Vijay have only won 8 majors since 1997 is irrelevant. As I said on another thread, the field of players IMO is strong and there is quality from #1 to 100. Hence we will see major taken out by players whom we never heard of.

That is still an open question. Of the list initially posted above (and near misses) at least 5 can be seen as Jack's direct peers whereas only Faldo overlaps with Tiger.

Lee Carvallo must be up there too.

You have selected...3 wood. May I recommend.... a putter.....3 wood. Ball is in parking lot.....Play again.....you have selected.....no.

Everyone on this thread should be lined up against a wall, kicked in the jewels repeatedly and then shot in the head. Except me, of course, as this was my idea.

Golf is gay and that is that. Stop talking about it and stop watching it or you will all go to hell (Leviticus 7:9-10).

Yeah, golf shouldn't be discussed as in depth as it is in this thread. Silly people.

bliksem wrote:Everyone on this thread should be lined up against a wall, kicked in the jewels repeatedly and then shot in the head. Except me, of course, as this was my idea.

Golf is gay and that is that. Stop talking about it and stop watching it or you will all go to hell (Leviticus 7:9-10).

Well you know who started the tread.

JGK wrote:

I think the fact the Els, Mickleson and Vijay have only won 8 majors since 1997 is irrelevant. As I said on another thread, the field of players IMO is strong and there is quality from #1 to 100. Hence we will see major taken out by players whom we never heard of.

That is still an open question. Of the list initially posted above (and near misses) at least 5 can be seen as Jack's direct peers whereas only Faldo overlaps with Tiger.

Faldo was past his prime when Tiger emerged. Faldo's true contemporaries were guys like Ballesteros, Norman, Price, Langer, Crenshaw, Strange, Stewart, Pavin etc.

Two other players from Jack's era not mentioned above are Ray Floyd and Hale Irwin - no way inferior to today's 2nd ranked player whoever it may be.

Like tennis, one could assume that technology has played a part, particularly with clubs nowadays.

Paul Keating wrote:Like tennis, one could assume that technology has played a part, particularly with clubs nowadays.

And you could counter that by saying the courses have increased in length.

Clubs and balls have improved, but everyone has the advantages of these improvements.