We'll never know if Jack Nicklaus, right, could have given Tiger Woods the competition that Woods so clearly lacks, had they been contemporaries.

AP photo / Mike Munden

Oldtimers, a category in which I reluctantly, and accurately, must include myself, tend to reminisce about “the good old days” and wax poetic (putting it politely) about how much better things were “back in the day” — especially in the world of sports.

In some cases, such as the NBA, the geezers are right. And we don’t have to reach all that far back into our memory banks — which may be in even worse shape than America’s savings banks — to make the case. Not only were Bill Russell’s Celtics of the 1960s more enjoyable to watch than either the present-day Lakers or Magic, but so were Larry Bird’s Celtics of the ’80s. And, surely, there are scores of former major-league pitchers — who not only won 20 games with regularity, but also completed more than 20 games, season after season — who would scoff at the idea of a six-inning effort qualifying as a “quality start.”

But then you watch what Tiger Woods and Roger Federer did over the weekend, and even the most cantankerous of codgers would have to admit that nobody ever has played golf or tennis any better.

A case could be made that both Woods and Federer are the best ever in their respective sports. I wouldn’t argue against that. But neither will I argue for it because of a belief that you can’t truly, or fairly, compare eras.

Who’s to say that Bobby Jones or Jack Nicklaus — the dominant golfers of their time — might not have given Tiger the competition he clearly lacks in the present day? As for tennis, let us remember that Rod Laver twice — twice! — won the game’s “Grand Slam” in the same year, sweeping the Australian Open, French Open, Wimbledon and the U.S. Open in 1962 and 1969.

What can be said is that no one ever has played any better than Woods and Federer are playing now. It is not merely a treat to watch them, but an absolute thrill. How privileged, how fortunate, we present-day sports fans are to be able to see them perform with such skill, and tenacity, too.

Federer’s straight-set win Sunday in Paris was his 14th major championship, tying him with Pete Sampras for the most in tennis history. But Sampras never won the French Open, the only one of the sport’s four majors played on clay. He never even made the finals.

Federer never had won it before this year, having been frustrated in the finals the last three years by the incomparable Rafael Nadal, who I will unequivocally say is the best clay-court player I have ever seen in the five decades I’ve been watching tennis. Nadal embarrassed Federer in last year’s French final, routing him in straight sets, 6-1, 6-3, 6-0.

More determined than demoralized, Federer continued to work on his slow-surface game and beat Nadal on clay in the Madrid Open earlier this year. Then, after Robin Soderling upset Nadal in the fourth round of the French, Federer disposed of Soderling in straight sets Sunday in the finals.

Federer now has won five Wimbledons, five U.S. Opens, and three Aussie Opens, in addition to this year’s French Open. Only five other players in history — Laver, Andre Agassi, Roy Emerson, Fred Perry, and Don Budge — have won all four titles.

It’s not exactly going out on a limb to predict that, before the year is over, Federer will have added to his collection of major titles, thus establishing a legitimate claim to being the best player in tennis history.

As for Tiger, it’s only a matter of time before he surpasses Nicklaus’ record of 18 major championships.

The Memorial, which Woods won for a record fourth time over the weekend, is Nicklaus’ tourney — an invitational event. Trailing by four shots in the final round, Tiger shot 65 on Sunday to edge Jim Furyk (who won the U.S. Open in 2003 and the Memorial in 2002) by a shot for his 67th PGA Tour victory.

Included in that total are 14 majors — a number that Nicklaus fully expects to see jump to 15 two weeks from now, when Tiger returns to Bethpage Black, where he won the U.S. Open in 2002.

“I suspect that number 15 will come for Tiger in two weeks,” Nicklaus said Sunday. “If he drives the ball this way and plays this way, I’m sure it will. And, if not, it will surprise me greatly.”

Tiger is the defending U.S. Open champion, having beaten Rocco Mediate in a playoff last year at Torrey Pines, despite playing on an injured knee that required surgery. Off eight months after having the operation, Woods has returned at full strength. His victory in the Memorial was his second this year. He has played eight stroke-play tournaments in 2009 and has yet to finish lower than ninth.

At the Memorial, Tiger didn’t miss a fairway off the tee in the final round, and clinched his victory with back-to-back birdies on the last two holes, hitting a 7-iron to a foot from the flag on 18 for a tap-in that won the tournament.

Only 33 years old, it would not merely surprise, but shock, Nicklaus — and anybody else who’s ever swung a golf club — if Woods doesn’t surpass him in the next few years by winning his 19th major.

Take it from a geezer-codger: With players like Woods and Federer, these are the good old days.

jdonalds@projo.com