Why is Bobby Jones not mentioned more as the greatest of all time?

The Masters didn’t come along until after he retired (because he started it) and he couldn’t play in the PGA because he was an amateur.

By age 30, when he retired, he had won 4 US Opens and 3 British Opens.  That is exactly how many Jack Nicklaus won in his entire career.  Tiger Woods is 33 and has won one fewer US Open and the same number of British Opens.

Jones won 7 majors going up against the likes of Gene Sarazen (7 majors) and Walter Hagen who won 11 majors without the benefit of aving the Masters to play in.

None of Tiger’s contemporaries have more than 3 majors under their belt.

Lastly, from 1922 to 1930, Bobby Jones play in 9 US Opens and finished first or second in 8 of them.

It is not my position that he is better than Jack or Tiger, but I feel he needs to be in the discussion more often than he is.

Previous

Next

5 Comments

  1. armando

    and he played part-time too!

    PS Though not a great golf movie with Jim Caviezel, it was enlightening.

    Reply
  2. TonyKim

    Good point. He certainly does have one of the best swings of all time and is the only one to have won golf’s grand slam.. (or at least the slam as it was defined during each persons’ respective era).

    Stewart Maiden OWNZ Hank Haney!

    Reply
  3. BruinMel

    The real reason is that it happened so long ago no one pontificating today can speak intelligently on him. That’s why all “greatest” athlete/player discussions focus on people within 1 or 2 generations of the current players.

    I remember watching Jack, and Arnie, and an old Hogan. And obviously I watch Tiger.

    BTW, I’m not sure I buy the implication in your post about Tiger’s competition. I think modern players in most sports compete against stiffer competition, even if their contemporaries aren’t as accomplished. It’s so much more difficult to get through to the “major league” level in any sport (and particularly golf) that the competition has to be tougher even if Tiger’s competitors don’t accomplish as much. You’re exhibit A to my argument.

    MEL

    Reply
    • Monte Scheinblum

      I think the level of competition has a higher quantity, but not quality.

      In other words, there are a lot more players capable of shooting 15 under par or more for 4 days, but fewer guys that are capable of winning majors.

      I will post this week on why that is.

      Reply
      • Banner 12

        Tiger’s had the least amount of competition of any great player in history. It’s not a wonder he’s won 14 Majors, it’s a wonder why he hasn’t won 25 by now. He has been his own worst enemy with his idiotic swing changes and when he looks back on his career he’ll kick himself for trying to fix something that wasn’t broke.

        Reply

Leave a Reply

Share This
X