FEDEX Cup - Go For It or Lay Up

[Chief Broom]

I'm sure the pressure/concern of holding on to their tour card plays a part in this too. The majority of the guys on tour don't have any wins to their credit and a big part of their focus is holding on to their card so that they can remain on the tour. Those are guys who are as much concerned about making cuts (which generally equates to making a paycheck that week) as placing up on the leaderboard much less winning. I agree with iacas in that today's pros are a bit on the wimpy side, but they have good reason to be that way. I think that there are few similarities between the touring pro of today and those of yesteryear. The money has changed things. Years ago a touring pro could make more money off the circuit playing in money games and the like while playing the tour. Today professional golf is more a science, than it is a game that some talented kid coming up could manage to make it out on the tour. Those old pros usually came from humble beginnings, whereas today's pros are almost being raised from birth to be top tier players.

[WUTiger]

It's not the FedExCup, it's the money that's available for second, third, fourth, etc. in general. ...

Every couple of years, some sportswriter will suggest that pro golf would be more interesting if the first-place money increased 50% - at the expense of places two through 10. If I recall, the people who suggest this are never former tour pros.

[sean_miller]

Do some players start with a strategy of how to play each hole, regardless of where they are in the tournament? Some of those guys can really putt well, so mabe they just want to be in the best position to have a birdie putt.

For every guy I might deride for laying up, there are two guys dunking their long approach into a creek or other watery grave, and I find myself saying, "why did he go for the green when an up and down would have been a par/birdie?".

Did anyone see Paula Creamer repeatedly try the hero shots during the Women's US Open last year? She had a couple meltdowns thanks to errant tee shots that were a hope and prayer at best. I saw Eun Hee Ji playing a lot of safer shots tee to green for 4 days. She made a crapload of putts to beat Kerr, but she would have finished ahead of Creamer either way.

[Phil McGleno]

You know who goes for it all the time... John Daly, Hank Kuehne, JB Holmes. Why aren't they as good as Jack, Arnie, or Tiger?

Tiger, Jack, and Arnie went for it (or go for it) as often as possible.

What an asinine comment, comparing them to John Daly or JB Holmes.

As for Tiger... geez... he's one of the most conservative players out there, especially in the majors -- using irons and 3-wood off every tee to keep it in the fairway.

He still reaches the par fives. That's what this is about, not "laying up" off the tee. If you put Tiger 230 from a par five in the fairway and a gentle breeze when he's trailing, he's going for it. No ifs, ands, or buts about it.

[Cussin hacker]

Tiger, Jack, and Arnie went for it (or go for it) as often as possible.

I'm right with you Butch! For those sighting stats.......thats for the tour as a whole. Look at the top players and you will find few lay uppers when winning is on the line. Most players on the tour will always be average pro's wether they layup or go for it. Fact is most of the greats were go for it guys. Site stats all you want with the tour as a whole, but if you look at the really good multiple winning players that play well year after year stats you will find that they go for it most of the time.

[Rexx]

Tiger, Jack, and Arnie went for it (or go for it) as often as possible.

Huh? Everyone is saying that that the top players "go for it" more. I gave examples of non-top players that I believe go for it with just as much if not more regularity (maybe to their detriment). Do you not agree? I didn't say they were "as good" as those guys, just that they have the same "go for broke" attitude. Please reread what I wrote. Wow... and how dare I compare ONE aspect of other pro golfers to some of the greats... sheesh.

And yes... Tiger would go for it. So would probably 90% of the players on tour (hell... even Corey Pavin hit a 238 yard 4-wood to win his U.S. Open and he was regarded as one of the best wedge players of his day). The difference is that Tiger has a better chance of pulling it off because... get this... he's better than they are. He might be the best long iron player of all time and if he misses, he is near the top in his scrambling abilities. He is the best player on tour for many reasons, but some type of "go for it" attitude is not one of them, because it simply is not unique to him or even a small percentage of the pros. Oh, and Zach Johnson won the Masters by never going for it. And Phil Mickelson lost the U.S. Open by going for it. What do either of these mean?