Tiger Woods vs. Michael Jordan

I define athlete a bit differently here. I mean I guess it'd be better defined as something like best sports performer or something like that. I mean as an athlete I suppose Randle El is more of an athlete than Tom Brady, but Brady is the guy you'd rather have.

So, should we consider an athlete someone who runs and jumps only?

No, I really think that an athlete is by definition a very fluid, subjective concept. It's almost like asking, "What is art?"

You can easily be one of the "World's Strongest Men" and be considered an athlete, while having no other talent than being able to pick up heavy stuff.

You can also easily be a professional bowler or golfer and while you may have a gut and not be in the greatest shape in the world, you're still considered an athlete, even though you might not be more "athletic" than the stronger, faster people in the world.

How about this? No professional currently dominates his own sport at the same level as Tiger Woods. He is, as they say, battling history now more so than he is battling the rest of the field. Again though, you can say the same for Roger Federer.

No, I really think that an athlete is by definition a very fluid, subjective concept. It's almost like asking, "What is art?"

You can easily be one of the "World's Strongest Men" and be considered an athlete, while having no other talent than being able to pick up heavy stuff.

You can also easily be a professional bowler or golfer and while you may have a gut and not be in the greatest shape in the world, you're still considered an athlete, even though you might not be more "athletic" than the stronger, faster people in the world.

Agreed. I do think it's a fluid definition. I also think our society or culture labels who we collectively consider an athlete. For instance, SI might run an article next week "Is Tiger Woods The Greatest Athlete?"...whereas duing the Nicholas era such a discussion may never have been thought of. I guess what I'm saying is where one generation never thought of a golfer as an athlete, Tiger might challenge that perception.

When I consider that Tiger is 12-0 when leading or co-leading on the final day of a Major, I would say he is one of the greatest "closers" or clutch athletes of all time. MJ was a great "closer" as well, but in the world of golf, I don't think Nicholas has ever been undefeated when leading on the final day? what Tiger is doing these days is truely amazing. I mean if he is leading, he wins. Period. He knows it, the field knows it, the fans know it. It is unbelievable!

How about this? No professional currently dominates his own sport at the same level as Tiger Woods. He is, as they say, battling history now more so than he is battling the rest of the field. Again though, you can say the same for Roger Federer.

Kobiashi!!!

I'm also just playing devil's advocate. I think Tiger really does dominate his respective sport like no one else playing currently.

Except for Kobiashi.

When I consider that Tiger is 12-0 when leading or co-leading on the final day of a Major, I would say he is one of the greatest "closers" or clutch athletes of all time. MJ was a great "closer" as well, but in the world of golf, I don't think Nicholas has ever been undefeated when leading on the final day? what Tiger is doing these days is truely amazing. I mean if he is leading, he wins. Period. He knows it, the field knows it, the fans know it. It is unbelievable!

One knock on Tiger is that he's not known really for coming back on the final day if he's trailing. And one impressive stat about Nicklaus is not only 18 majors, but 19 second place finishes. I realize that second place is just the first loser, but still that's not bad.

And of course....Kobiashi!

Finally! Give my boy some respect.