He would have to be third then because Nicklaus could not touch Byron Nelson in his prime.
I wonder about his statement...I mean other than Jacks 18 majors, I think he finished 2nd in 20 majors?.
Yes, Nelson was very good, as was Snead, Jones, Palmer...etc...but even if...say anyone eclipses Jacks major wins...is he better than Jack?
\It's not auto racing, but if you gave points to then top ten finishers...hmmnnn;)
But just too difficult to compare "era vs era" players, in any spot...but what makes me think Jack could definitely compete against Byron, was equipment was essentially the same, sans the ballata ball that came later (big factor?...maybe), and with the advent of new equipment since the early 90's or so, that required lengthening course ...you just cant compare ...unless you have computer model...lol.
I say group the top 10 together,,,heck, was Aaron better than Ruth?...Bonds better than Aaron? Softer balls in the 20's and 30's?
But better pitchers in the 60's and 70's...Roids in the 80's on up!...lol!
What makes us sports fans bicker like 8 YO's!