Columnist Dean Juipe: Nicklaus errs in deriding Tiger’s foils

Dean Juipe

Monday, July 15, 2002 | 9:45 a.m.

Dean Juipe's column appears Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday and Friday. His boxing notebook appears Thursday. Reach him at juipe@lasvegassun.com or (702) 259-4084.

If Jack Nicklaus would just let this rest, so could we.

But Nicklaus is persistent if not calculating in his repeated insistence of late that one very big reason Tiger Woods is winning more than his share of golf tournaments is the lack of quality competition that he regularly faces.

Jack, lighten up. You're wrong.

Pro golf has never seen the type of quality depth it enjoys today. From top to bottom, it has never been stronger.

But Nicklaus has not only gotten overly protective of his record in the past few weeks, he has seen fit to indirectly strike out at the man who is on pace to obliterate it. Nicklaus is peeved that Woods, should he win this week's British Open -- which is iffy, at best -- would have half as many major championships with a good many productive years yet ahead.

Nicklaus, at 62 years old, seems to have fallen into the "things were better in my day" trap that snares many an old-timer no matter what their calling or position in life. That and a case of sour grapes has him grousing at a time when honor and dignity would be more appropriate in the public's eye.

Given that Woods is more athletic, at least as skillful and blessed with better artillery in the form of improved clubs and balls, Nicklaus should do little more than stand back and marvel at his younger rival. Instead, the other day, for at least the second time this summer, Nicklaus became confrontational when the subject of Woods and his pursuit of a Grand Slam was broached to the once golden Bear.

Nicklaus compiled 18 major titles in a pro career that began in 1962 and continues, intermittently, even today. His last major was the 1986 Masters, so, in essence, he had a 25-year heyday.

Woods, 26, has eight majors under his belt in fewer than six full years as a pro. At that rate, he'll have around 33 by the time his career hits the quarter-century mark and Nicklaus, to many sports fans in the year 2021, may be reduced to footnote status.

That's not sitting too well with him, so he has taken the offensive. He does, however, realize the pointlessness of directly criticizing Woods, so he's trying to polish his own hardware at the expense of those players that Woods has to play against and beat today.

Citing Arnold Palmer, Lee Trevino, Gary Player and Tom Watson, Nicklaus says his competition was superior to the likes of Phil Mickelson, Sergio Garcia, Ernie Els, David Duval et al. And, strictly at face value, it's not a bad argument.

But two ancillary factors jump out: Unlike when Nicklaus played, Woods is competing on a global stage and is facing the best players in the world, not just America; and if Mickelson, Garcia, Els and the rest of them don't statistically measure up to Palmer and that bunch it's as likely the result of Woods' amazing consistency as anything else. If Nicklaus wasn't at the top of his game or opened the door in a given tournament, one of his challengers would win; Tiger, conversely, isn't letting that door swing open.

It's not that his foils don't know how to win.

Add in the caliber of player competing today vs. the men who regularly placed 25th or so in the old days and it's a slam dunk for Woods.

Nicklaus should acknowledge as much, or, if that's too much to ask, take his opinions into a prolonged hibernation.