Gretz and Billie Jean King I have no problem with whatsoever. But -- see, this is what I mean, donnnnnny. Tiger's been great, and by the end of his career he'll merit mention, but Jack was at the very top of his sport for half a century. Arnold Palmer was extremely popular to golf fans, but Jack appealed widely to the rest of the sporting world. Golf wouldn't be half the sport it is, especially in North America, without Jack Nicklaus. One more thing abut him: he was the first athlete to be a real financial success as an entrepreneur. Before him, some athletes may have made out okay, but he was a visonary who invested heavily in the development of his sport, and it made him very rich. We take that for granted now, but 40 years ago, such a concept was crazy talk.
Chico...ummm, Arnold seems to have done pretty well in the financial relm and, along with his agent McCormack (the first name eludes me), Palmer spearheaded the concept as an athlete as a product. So to say Jack was first in that department is not right. Arnold was the first to sell himself based on his status as an athlete, at least aggressively (remember, athletes had been pitching stuff since sports had been invented). Jack has done amazing things in business but there was also a time in the mid-1980s when he was struggling financially. He outlined his struggles in his book "My Way." He wasn't broke but he had some significant struggles. As for your assessment that Arnold did only well with just golf fans, well, that's completely off base. Arnold was one of the pre-eminent sports stars of the 50s and ushered in the TV era that embraced sports during that time. Jack merely jumped along for the ride in that area. I don't deny Nicklaus' greatness as a golfer, he's the best of all time, but as a person who changed the landscape? No way. And at the top of the game for a half century? Try just over a quarter century (1960-1986). Don't overestimate his dominance. It was amazing but not even close to 50 years. Jack has done incredible things with his course building and he won more significant titles than any golfer in history, but he didn't fundamentally change the sport or how it operated like Arnold did, or for that matter, Tiger. Woods took the game out of the country club and to the masses, where it had never been before. Purses on the PGA Tour increased ten-fold in the first part of his career and it was totally due to his appeal on TV and as a spokesman for the game. And like I said before, Tiger made it cool to play golf for everyone, from the farmlands to the inner cities. Simply put, he changed the perception of the sport for the masses. Every major golf writer, historian and all the players that I've heard interviewed from the PGA Tour say the same thing: Tiger made golf into a major sport capable of competing with the biggies (football, baseball, basketball). He also made it possible to have near million dollar first-place purses on a weekly basis. How you can discount that is beyond me.
donnnny, chico , I appreciate your debate of Palmer vs. Nicklaus, but you both should look at it from a different angle. I live in California now, but for a few years, I lived on Hilton Head Island in S.C., otherwise known as golf island. I'd never heard of the place before I moved out there, but on the other coast it's a major tourist destination and a golfer's heaven. Courses everywhere. Anyway, Palmer is beloved out there. He won the first Heritage Golf Tournament, which put him back on track after a lengthy slump. Guess who was a consultant on the design of the course (Harbour Town Golf Links)? Nicklaus. The course, in turn, had an effect on American golf architecture. And the tournament, the course -- all of it, helped golf take a quantam leap forward. Not just making the island one of the premier golfing spots, but helping to nurture the idea of building homes around golf courses. So, you see, Nicklaus did not "jump along for the ride," he helped lay the tracks. I'd say that makes it a tie as to whom was the more influential golfer.
Harbour Town is a Pete Dye course, sure Nicklaus consulted, but this was in 1970, when Jack had barely gotten his feet wet in golf course design. And, Harbour Town, with it's small greens and railroad tie buttresses is actually the anti-Nicklaus design, his courses usually have large greens and favor faders of the ball. I think Pete Dye was the one more influential in all you itemize. He is probably the biggest designer of high rent resort courses in history, and had started long before Nicklaus came along.
mjkredliner, your assessment of Jack's courses is off a little bit. I did a story when I was a newspaper sportswriter on a new course he was opening up back in 1998 so I researched his basic philosophy on course design. He prefers large landings areas for the tee shots (which do play to the fade, as you said) but he doesn't like large greens. He prefers small greens because, in his own words (I interviewed him), golf should be about iron play. The large fairways he gives the golfer allow for several places to drive the ball so that there are different options on how to attack the green. Just thought I'd let you know.
Oh, no doubt it was Pete Dye. I wrote enough Heritage stories to have that pounded into my brain. But Nicklaus came up too. And he played a part in it. I guess maybe I was just influenced by all those old-time golfers on Hilton Head Island. Palmer is beloved, but Nicklaus is respected. Which is better, I don't know.
