2006 U.S. Open: Won or Lost

[joeTM]

I sat on 18 next to a guy that was telling his friend that the leaderboard is a misconception. You really need to compare players thru a hole and not compare them to somebody that has finished. I agree now!

I think Winged Foot proved that theory well. Nobody can assume pars on some of the toughest finishing holes in golf. You have to be there to appreciate the slope of the greens and the thick rough. If Geoff was in the last group with Phil, everybody would have said Geoff won the Open with a great par save.

[TheShanks]

I really thought Phil was going to win until he hit his wood out of the ruff and it went about three feet and then it went down hill from there.

[muskegman]

I'm not taking anything a way from Ogilvy... he won it, deserved it because of his quality play down the stretch. He's played wonderfully all year long and this only validates what we've been seeing: he's a great player. I'm really happy for him.

But... what the heck Phil?! He tried way too many heroic shots in situation where he should have taken his medicine, punched out of the hay and played for par. He seemed crushed after the loss and hopefully he can learn from it without it breaking his spirit. Mickelson suffers from a lack of good judgement in critical situations. Its the U.S. Open for Pete's sake! You're not going to overpower Winged Foot, I don't care who you are.

His 4-wood out of they hay earlier in the weekend illustrates Phil's problem perfectly: sometimes he believes he's superman out there. He pulls off ridiculous shots enough to believe he can do it all the time. Just a little more caution interspursed into his play and he'd have won it. He beat himself at his own game.

As for Monty, the pressure obviously got to him. It was great to see him make a run at it.

What a weekend. With 11 or 12 holes to go who could have know who the winner would be? Furyk, Mickelson, Monty, Ferrie (or not), Ogilvy... it was any one's game. What a finish.

[TheShanks]

Im happy for Oglivy he played good this year and he showed it in the U.S. Open.

[TerenceFinn]

I was really hoping someone would step up and deliver and it looked like Monty was going to be the man. Before his long birdie on 17, he had two make able birdie tries on 15 and 16, he missed both of them. Obviously his drive on 18th kept the hope alive.

It turned out that Vijay was a factor. The long delay caused by his tee shot going into the hospitality tent made Monty change clubs (he would say later that it was due to additional addreline which causes him to hit the ball about 10 yards farther). Unfortunately he hit it fat and the rest is history.

Congratulations Oglivy.

[cireyamel]

I play golf almost everyday, and I tell myself about 36 times, "Don't do anything stupid."

Phil was stupid on 18.

cy

[allin]

The golfers who gagged at the end may feel they should have won. The person who deserved to win, did. If winning majors is only about physical skills then Monty would have won 2 or 3, Greg Norman 5 or 6, and I would break 80 about 6 times a summer.

[jaystock]

All due credit to Ogilvy, but this Open was lost. Phil and Monty both "lost" it...in more than one sense. Yes, Ogilvy did par the last 4 holes, but he had to have some serious help in the form of a sturdy flagstick to do so. Hitting the pin with the bunker shot on 16, then chipping in on 17 for a par after otherwise slogging it around on that hole. Clearly, there is alot of skill involved in hitting those shots, but none of those guys can hit the pin on consecutive short games shots like that with any kind of regularity, so take that as you will. He was definitely the steadiest of the them all for 72 holes, with no doubles, and in this case that got him the win.

Anyway, back to the losing...

Monty's was just a pure and simple physical choke job. Seven-iron from the fairway and he lays the sod over it. Pure Open pressure at its best. He may have also made a slight mental error on his first putt, possibly thinking he might need to make it to get into a playoff at +4, and then running it 12 ft by. But he didn't know exactly where he stood. Very similar to the situation on 18 at Southern Hills in 2001.

Phil, on the other hand, knew exactly where he stood. Par for the win, bogey gets him into a playoff. Even after the poor drive (club selection very dubious), his worst error was clearly going for the green on the 2nd shot. Since he had pulled off a very similar shot on the 17th hole (a 20-30 yd cut from the trampled gallery path), I'm sure he figured he could pull it off again. He did have a clear path back to the fairway, and with his wedge/short iron game, he should have played the percentages and tried to get up and down to win, and at worst get into a playoff.

I actually feel bad for Dave Pelz. He just put out his newest book...the title? "Damage Control". Now his star pupil has a mental meltdown for the ages. That's somewhat funny, yet quite sad to me. Hopefully, Phil will read (or reread) it for next year.

[iacas]

I actually feel bad for Dave Pelz. He just put out his newest book...the title? "Damage Control". Now his star pupil has a mental meltdown for the ages. That's somewhat funny, yet quite sad to me. Hopefully, Phil will read (or reread) it for next year.

That's funny. I didn't think of that angle. I may have to mention that in the podcast...

[BruceH]

Phil can be the "Before" shot.

[satch_ip]

First of all, Ogilvy posted the score and made the shots. He won it.

Second, as for the previous post about bad golf, this was one of the most riveting matches I have seen. These guys are the best in the world and that course tested them to the max. There were some tremendous shots and plays. To play that course with that rough and that length for 4 rounds and only be 5 over is real skill. Unlike last year with the greens of glass this was a fair setup.

On another note, I have been hearing alot of talk about Phil "choking". It maybe just semantics but I don't think it was a choke. If he was hitting the driver straight as an arrow all day and then hit the duck hook on 18, that would be a choke. Something you are expected to do well and you blow it. What Phil did was a) run out of luck, and b) made a terrible decision to go for it with the second shot. Incedentally, there is an article on ESPN.com where Bones defends the driver decision. Interesting words.

[iacas]

On another note, I have been hearing alot of talk about Phil "choking". It maybe just semantics but I don't think it was a choke. If he was hitting the driver straight as an arrow all day and then hit the duck hook on 18, that would be a choke. Something you are expected to do well and you blow it. What Phil did was a) run out of luck, and b) made a terrible decision to go for it with the second shot. Incedentally, there is an article on ESPN.com where Bones defends the driver decision. Interesting words.

But that's how I define a choke. It's not a physical problem, but a mental one. It's a brain fart, a brain cramp, a brain lockup, etc. It's a poor decision that USUALLY leads to bad execution or a bad shot.

To me, it still would have been a choke if he had hit the ball in the middle of the fairway with his driver. The choke was the decision, not the swing. Same with Monty - TWICE: switching clubs right before he hit and then running his par putt 12 feet past the hole.