Anyone that votes no the this has to be insane, and if you say no, you better have a good arguement behind it!!

This is a question you can't really justify. Things have changed so much since Jack etc... were in their prime. Would Woods in his prime, have dominated Jack in his time with the same equipment? I will however say that he is currently the best, and he is most definately one of, if not THE best ever.

Im with Cyfer (wow, thats a change?)

He is the best today. There is no way to ever tell if a player is the best player that has ever lived.

the only time he is better than _everyone_ else is when im behind the control of tiger woods 2007 on ps3 otherwise he has his ups and downs but no doubt he is one talented sportsman. best ever? no. best of this era? probably

best of this era. no doubt. same as roger in tennis. Tiger has won 60 PGA tournaments and he is only 31. He is the youngest to 60, like he was the youngest to 50. He is 5th in the all time list of PGA tour wins. The other guys got to 60 in their late 30's. I definately think he is the best of this era.

I will have to agree with all of you. I imagine Jack in his prime with modern technology vs. Tiger would be a hell of a match

I just think its impossible to compare someones amount of wins, because hell, its not the course you are playing, its everyone else!

For example - If Jack had 3 big rivals that almost beat him every time because they were so damn good then man, jack was a legend, but if jack happened to play in a time when there was virtually no one else with that much talent or commitment, then he win tournaments by a million shots, and everyone ends up thinking he was amazing.
There is no way to tell if this is true for Jack, Arnie, Tiger or anyone else because firstly, we are accustomed to seeing these players play the way that they do, and get the scores they do, and so our mind perceives them as great, but how do we know they aren't London under 16 C teams second string players out for a knock?

If there was a time machine and we could peg these players against each other, I don't even know if it would be accurate then, because the equipment is so different that if the players played with their own stuff, the younger players would have an advantage, but the older players may not be able to adjust to the new stuff, AND the courses are laid out so differently, I mean over the past few years the major course have undergone major reconstructions, moving tee's, changing greens and bunkers just because they want to make it different, and of course to compensate a little for the new equipment.

I still have to say that Tiger is the best ever. You can say it is the equipment, but everyone he is playing against is using new technology just like he is, just like Jack and Arnie were playing against people who had the same equipment as them. Yes he has his ups and downs, but who doesn't, if he were to win them all, then why play the game. But whether he is or not, he is still amazing to watch play.

Whos to say that the competition he faces is any where near as good as what jack faced?

Maybe we pit 30 players from his era against 30 from this era, then we might see who is better.

Tiger has been dominant in the sport ever since he was a child. He is the best today by far. But I think he would have to surpass Jacks 18 major titles to be the greatest. Its too soon for Tiger to be titled the best ever, but I believe he'll eventually get there.