Jump to content
IGNORED

Which Open Championship Collapse was Worse: Adam Scott or Jean Van de Velde?


mvmac
Note: This thread is 4261 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

0  

1 member has voted

  1. 1. Which Collapse was Worse: Adam Scott or Jean Van de Velde?

    • Scott
      7
    • Van de Velde
      28


Recommended Posts

  • Moderator

Call it whatever you want, choke, meltdown, collapse, Adam Scott had the tournament in his hands and lost it.  Yes, Ernie played great but you can't get away with bogeying the last four holes and winning.  Thirteen years ago, Jean Van de Velde wasted a three-stroke lead on the final hole at Carnoustie and lost the British Open in a playoff. Which collapse was worse?

I'm going with Adam Scott because Van de Velde didn't blow it until the last hole where he needed to make double bogey or better to win.  And a big part of him losing the '99 Open Championship was the unbelievably unlucky break on his second shot, hitting the metal railing by the side of the green, which then bounced off the top of the stone wall of the Barry Burn and then bounced fifty yards backwards into the deep rough.  Obviously it wasn't a great shot but if Van de Velde doesn't hit the railing, he hits it in the grandstands, gets a drop and makes bogey or double.

Scott is one of the best players in the world that hasn't won a major.. He’s one of the 10 best players of the last decade, he’s a winner of The Players Championship, he was once ranked No. 3 in the world and he won a World Golf Championship in impressive fashion 12 months ago.  To bogey the last four holes of the British Open, when one par would assure a playoff, is mind-boggling. Van de Velde blew the last hole but still had a chance to win in a playoff.  Scott didn’t make it to the playoff.

In case you haven't seen it here's Van de Velde playing the last hole in the '99 Open Championship

Mike McLoughlin

Check out my friends on Evolvr!
Follow The Sand Trap on Twitter!  and on Facebook
Golf Terminology -  Analyzr  -  My FacebookTwitter and Instagram 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Van de Velde by far in my opinion.  Scott's just kind of faded into a loss.  Got on the bogey train and couldn't get off.  Van de Velde was more of a comedy of errors all in one hole.  His was a true meltdown.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Originally Posted by gwlee7

Van de Velde by far in my opinion.  Scott's just kind of faded into a loss.  Got on the bogey train and couldn't get off.  Van de Velde was more of a comedy of errors all in one hole.  His was a true meltdown.

Totally agree.  4 shot leads with 4 holes to play are a lot less "in the bank" than a 3 shot lead with one hole left.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Van De Velde, and it's not even close.  Scott had a bad 3-putt on 16, but otherwise played reasonably well.  Even on 18 after making a bad tee shot, he still put his 3rd in range to have a very makeable putt to send it to a playoff.

Van De Velde blew a 3 shot lead on the 18th hole.  Scott was tied on 18.  I felt terrible for Scott, he will certainly rightly feel that he let this championship get away, but Ernie closed in on him with a stellar back 9, including a big birdie at 18.

Ping i15 9.0 (UST Mamiya S)

Cobra X-Speed 4+ Wood (Aldila S)

Cobra Baffler 3-Hybrid (19)

Mizuno JPX-825 Pro (4-GW) KBS Tour S

Cobra Rusty 55 SW

Cobra Rusty 59 LW

Never Compromise Gambler (34")

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Scott was leaking oil and Van de Velde threw a rod. I have to agree with Sobel (see Golf Channel link below) on this one. Scott never lost his composure and will lose less sleep than the collapse of Van de Velde whose loss will be the standard for a long time to come. The real test will be the next time someone blows a lead would we say, "He pulled a Scott" or "He pulled a Van de Velde"? In this scenario Jean wins every time.

Here is the Golf Channel Version of the debate that was posted last night:

http://www.golfchannel.com/news/golftalkcentral/scott-or-van-de-velde-bigger-open-collapse/

Cobra LTDx 10.5* | Big Tour 15.5*| Rad Tour 18.5*  | Titleist U500 4-23* | T100 5-P | Vokey SM7 50/8* F, 54/10* S, SM8 58/10* S | Scotty Cameron Squareback No. 1 | Vice Pro Plus  

Link to comment
Share on other sites


IMO, I think blowing it on the last hole for Van de Velde is worse than Adam Scott's bogey streak to lose. Van De Velde had his name on the trophy by the time he reached 18. Basically, he knows he won especially if you just have to shoot double bogey or less. But it was a lot of mental mistakes and poor decisions that did Van de Velde in on just one hole.

Best Regards,
Ryan

In the :ogio: bag:
:nike: VR-S Covert Tour Driver 10.5 :nike: VR-S Covert Tour 3W :titleist: 712U 21*
:nike: VR Pro Blades 4-PW :vokey: Vokeys 52*, 56* & 60* :scotty_cameron: Studio Select Newport 2
:leupold:
:true_linkswear: 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


scott by far.  van de Velde buried an 8 footer to force a playoff; scott missed an 8 footer that would have forced a playoff.  it's a lot easier to come unraveled in one hole (see tiger at #6) vs having chance...after chance...after chance...after chance...to pull it together.  absolutely no excuse for scott's meltdown - els was 6 shots back at the turn for chrissake!

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Originally Posted by Infamous 273

scott by far.  van de Velde buried an 8 footer to force a playoff; scott missed an 8 footer that would have forced a playoff.  it's a lot easier to come unraveled in one hole (see tiger at #6) vs having chance...after chance...after chance...after chance...to pull it together.  absolutely no excuse for scott's meltdown - els was 6 shots back at the turn for chrissake!

So you're basing it on one putt? Yeah, JVdV made his eight footer...for a triple bogey. Does it matter that Scott's was for par? Didn't that factor into your thinking?

So in other words, forget all the hacking JVdV did prior to the putt - all forgiven since he made it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Originally Posted by zipazoid

So you're basing it on one putt? Yeah, JVdV made his eight footer...for a triple bogey. Does it matter that Scott's was for par? Didn't that factor into your thinking?

So in other words, forget all the hacking JVdV did prior to the putt - all forgiven since he made it?

he made the putt when it counted the most, and scott didn't.  regardless of what van de Velde carded for the hole, and how bad he looked doing it, he put himself in a position to still win the championship.  my opinion is based on more than the putt: scott had an hour (literally) to compose himself, and get his round back together after the levee started to leak - it was a lot easier for vdv to make some rushed, ill-advised decisions in the heat of the moment over the course of a 12 minute hole - and for that, (coupled with the fact scott didn't even force a playoff) imho, scott's fall from grace is worse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Van De Velde and it isn't even close, if I was VDV's caddy I would have busted every club in the bag up to the 7 iron on the 18th hole like Ceech Marin did to Kevin Costner in Tin Cup when VDV asked for driver. Fortunately for VDV he found dry land with his driver but then proceded to try and hit a shot on the green over grandstands!!!! He once again lucks out and mises the hazard with a shot blown way right into the stands,he has drawn a bad lie and instead of playing out to the fairway so he could hit up on the green and two putt for the win he once again tries to hit it over the hazard!!! At this point hes screwed in the hazard sitting 4, he has no choice but to take the drop and penalty chunks it in the sand trap blasts out and remarkably sinks the putt. The first and second shot where total mental breakdowns the third is hard to say because his lie may have made a shot to the fairway more difficult and I think I remember he feared that he may have wound up in a worse lie. It took 3 holes for Scott to lose his lead VDV did it in one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


The only decision Scott made over the last four holes that I would call an unforced error was hitting a fairway wood off the 18th tee, bringing the bunkers on the left into play. Scott made no questionable decisions; he just couldn't execute. Van de Velde's entire 18th hole was one questionable decision after another. Scott had a bad stretch at the most inopportune time, and there's little shame in that; Van de Velde was burned after taking a load of unnecessary risk, and there is plenty of shame in that. Van de Velde was worse - much worse.

In my UnderArmour Links stand bag...

Driver: '07 Burner 9.5° (stiff graphite shaft)
Woods: SasQuatch 17° 4-Wood (stiff graphite shaft)
Hybrid: 4DX Ironwood 20° (stiff graphite shaft)Irons/Wedges: Apex Edge 3-PW, GW, SW (stiff shaft); Carnoustie 60° LWPutter: Rossa AGSI+ Corzina...

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Let's look at it a different way ... what if I told you that you HAD to bet your life savings on either A) A guy with a 4 shot lead with 4 holes to play OR  B) A guy with a 3 shot lead with one hole to play.

Wouldn't every last one of you put your money on 3 shots/1 hole?  It is a slam dunk, which is why it is way more of a choke than what Scott did.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Don't consider either a collapse. Jean VdV had a horrible case of "rub of the green."

Adam Scott basically went to sleep because he had too big a lead. With a 4-shot cushion, he thought he could play it safe, slide through holes and pick up the Claret Jug on his way to the pub. He lost his competitive edge, and couldn't stay focused at the end.

On the final hole, he should have bounced a low shot onto the front fringe and gone for a two-putt. I couldn't tell if... he rolled over on the shot and delofted the club... or overclubbed... or possibly caught a gusting tail wind at the top of his swing.

Focus, connect and follow through!

  • Completed KBS Education Seminar (online, 2015)
  • GolfWorks Clubmaking AcademyFitting, Assembly & Repair School (2012)

Driver:  :touredge: EXS 10.5°, weights neutral   ||  FWs:  :callaway: Rogue 4W + 7W
Hybrid:  :callaway: Big Bertha OS 4H at 22°  ||  Irons:  :callaway: Mavrik MAX 5i-PW
Wedges:  :callaway: MD3: 48°, 54°... MD4: 58° ||  Putter:image.png.b6c3447dddf0df25e482bf21abf775ae.pngInertial NM SL-583F, 34"  
Ball:  image.png.f0ca9194546a61407ba38502672e5ecf.png QStar Tour - Divide  ||  Bag: :sunmountain: Three 5 stand bag

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Originally Posted by WUTiger

Don't consider either a collapse. Jean VdV had a horrible case of "rub of the green."

Adam Scott basically went to sleep because he had too big a lead. With a 4-shot cushion, he thought he could play it safe, slide through holes and pick up the Claret Jug on his way to the pub. He lost his competitive edge, and couldn't stay focused at the end.

On the final hole, he should have bounced a low shot onto the front fringe and gone for a two-putt. I couldn't tell if... he rolled over on the shot and delofted the club... or overclubbed... or possibly caught a gusting tail wind at the top of his swing.

So how many strokes lost down the stretch, or on the 72nd hole, would you consider a collapse?

Mizuno MP600 driver, Cleveland '09 Launcher 3-wood, Callaway FTiz 18 degree hybrid, Cleveland TA1 3-9, Scratch SS8620 47, 53, 58, Cleveland Classic 2 mid-mallet, Bridgestone B330S, Sun Mountain four5.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


So how many strokes lost down the stretch, or on the 72nd hole, would you consider a collapse?

One, two, three, three. Or maybe that is how many licks it takes to get to the tootsie roll center of a tootsie pop. The world may never know, but three seems like a good number to qualify for a 72nd hole collapse.

Cobra LTDx 10.5* | Big Tour 15.5*| Rad Tour 18.5*  | Titleist U500 4-23* | T100 5-P | Vokey SM7 50/8* F, 54/10* S, SM8 58/10* S | Scotty Cameron Squareback No. 1 | Vice Pro Plus  

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Originally Posted by WUTiger

Don't consider either a collapse. Jean VdV had a horrible case of "rub of the green."

Adam Scott basically went to sleep because he had too big a lead. With a 4-shot cushion, he thought he could play it safe, slide through holes and pick up the Claret Jug on his way to the pub. He lost his competitive edge, and couldn't stay focused at the end.

On the final hole, he should have bounced a low shot onto the front fringe and gone for a two-putt. I couldn't tell if... he rolled over on the shot and delofted the club... or overclubbed... or possibly caught a gusting tail wind at the top of his swing.

VDV made at minimum 2 huge mental mistakes on the last hole maybe 3 depending on the lie he had for his third cause if he could've chiped to the fairway then it's 3. Like someone else said Scott only made one debatable error on the 18th by hitting a club that could find trouble or maybe he was trying to hit a cut and came over on it we just don't know but I'll bet VDV would have tried to advance that ball out of that trap instead of blasting to the fairway like Scott did.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Note: This thread is 4261 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • TST Partners

    TourStriker PlaneMate
    Golfer's Journal
    ShotScope
    The Stack System
    FlightScope Mevo
    Direct: Mevo, Mevo+, and Pro Package.

    Coupon Codes (save 10-15%): "IACAS" for Mevo/Stack, "IACASPLUS" for Mevo+/Pro Package, and "THESANDTRAP" for ShotScope.
  • Posts

    • I did read the fine print tonight. It said replace with “similar features & function”.  8 yeas ago my purchase had features that today are available on the lower end models and the current version of my model has more “bells & whistles” than what I got 8 years ago.  So I am thinking they honored the agreement and I can’t argue the offer. since getting a credit for the full purchase price all I am really out over the past 8 years was the cost of the extended warranty, which was less than a low end  treadmill would have cost me. now the question is which model to replace with.  I’ll stay with Nordic Track or I forfeit the $1,463 credit so I will get Nordic Track.  And they honored the warranty and were not hard to work with which is a plus.
    • Generally speaking, extended warranties are a terrible deal and should almost always be avoided. They are a huge profit center for the companies that offer them, which should tell you almost everything you need to know about how much value most consumers get when purchasing them.  This is correct, and the old adage applies - only buy insurance when you can't afford the loss. This usually doesn't apply to most consumer goods.  To your second question, no I don't believe the offer is fair. They are replacing it, but it is not being replaced at "no cost to you". Since the amount being disputed (over $500) is non-trivial, I would probably push the issue. Don't waste your time on the phone with a customer service agent or a supervisor. They have probably given you all they have the authority to do. Rather, I would look at the terms of your agreement and specifically legal disputes. The odds are you probably agreed to binding arbitration in the event of a dispute. The agreement will outline what steps need to be followed, but it will probably look something like this.  1. Mail the Nordic Track legal department outlining your dispute and indicate you are not satisfied with the resolution offered.  2. Open up a case with the AAA (American Arbitration Association), along with the required documentation. 3. Wait about 4-5 weeks for a case to be opened - at which point someone from Nordic Track's legal department will offer to give you the new model at no cost to you.  They certainly don't want to spend the time and energy to fight you over $500. 4. Enjoy your new Nordic Track at no cost to you. I recently entered binding arbitration against a fairly large and well known company that screwed me over and refused to make it right. In my demand letter, I made a pretty sizeable request that included compensation for my time and frustration. Once it hit their legal department, they cut me a check - no questions asked. It was far cheaper to settle with me than to send their legal team to defend them in the arbitration.
    • I never thought of looking at it on multiple purchases like you said.  Yes, the extended may help me on 1 or 2 items but not the other 5 or 6.
    • Day 84 - Forgot to post yesterday, but I did some more chipping/pitching.    Back/neck were feeling better today, so I did a much overdue Stack session. 
    • Wordle 1,013 4/6 ⬛⬛🟩🟨⬛ 🟩⬛🟩⬛🟨 🟩🟩🟩⬛⬛ 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Welcome to TST! Signing up is free, and you'll see fewer ads and can talk with fellow golf enthusiasts! By using TST, you agree to our Terms of Use, our Privacy Policy, and our Guidelines.

The popup will be closed in 10 seconds...