2012 AT&T National at Congressional Country Club Discussion Thread

[showtime583]

Was anybody else just mesmerized with Tiger's green reading on Sunday...especially the long lag putts? I mean double breakers that were cozying right up to the hole time after time after time.....was absolutely stunning!

Haven't read the entire thread, so forgive me if this is a repeat...

[bplewis24]

Originally Posted by showtime583

Was anybody else just mesmerized with Tiger's green reading on Sunday...especially the long lag putts? I mean double breakers that were cozying right up to the hole time after time after time.....was absolutely stunning!

Haven't read the entire thread, so forgive me if this is a repeat...

I think K-troop pointed out that he only seemed to have a single 2nd putt that was over a couple feet (hole #14 I believe).  His lines and speed were nearly perfect.

[Zwick]

I proudly present to you the biggest tool in golf: John Feinstein

http://bit.ly/M0QchF

Some of the best lines, for all of you who don't want to hear him speak:

"Truth has never been a big deal for Tiger", "Now we are watching a soap opera" (about the comeback), "he is not a nice person"/"not an interesting person" (because he doesn't give good interviews to Feinstein. Somehow he forgot to mention how Tiger gave all his winnings to the foundation.), "he has proven himself to be a bad guy" (Feinstein can't understand how one can root for Woods), he is baffled about the number of people who want to see Tiger win.

He can't understand how people can possibly forgive Tiger for what he has done to his family (yeah John, that really is our business...)

And Tiger didn't really win, Van Pelt gave it to him and the field was really weak and the course was terrible and it was no major blablabla....

"was för en blöde siech" (my swiss german reaction to him ).

[RonTheSavage]

Originally Posted by Zwick

I proudly present to you the biggest tool in golf: John Feinstein

http://bit.ly/M0QchF

Some of the best lines, for all of you who don't want to hear him speak:

"Truth has never been a big deal for Tiger", "Now we are watching a soap opera" (about the comeback), "he is not a nice person"/"not an interesting person" (because he doesn't give good interviews to Feinstein. Somehow he forgot to mention how Tiger gave all his winnings to the foundation.), "he has proven himself to be a bad guy" (Feinstein can't understand how one can root for Woods), he is baffled about the number of people who want to see Tiger win.

He can't understand how people can possibly forgive Tiger for what he has done to his family (yeah John, that really is our business...)

And Tiger didn't really win, Van Pelt gave it to him and the field was really weak and the course was terrible and it was no major blablabla....

"was för en blöde siech" (my swiss german reaction to him ).

Is this guy trying to be to Tiger what Skip Bayless is to LeBron James???

[bwdial]

Originally Posted by Zwick

... Van Pelt gave it to him...

He kind of did.

I think when Tiger hit his driver into the crowd on 16, and then hit his second down to a little inside 100 yards, Van Pelt started thinking, "by golly... I'm going to beat Tiger Woods."   If he makes birdie there - and with a six iron in his hand for a second, he should - he goes to 17 with a two stroke lead.  Instead, he peed down his leg, and made bad decision after bad decision.  He underclubbed his second and pulled it into trouble.  Then, instead of playing a higher percentage shot away from the flag, over fairway, he goes straight at it and leaves his third in the cabbage.

Van Pelt had every advantage possible on that hole, and he played it like I would have.

The wonks on CBS made such a big deal out of him bogeying 17, like that cost him the tournament, but it was really the unforced errors on 16 that did him in.

Tiger was Tiger.  He took advantage of those unforced errors and made it count on the last two holes

[k-troop]

Originally Posted by bwdial

He kind of did.

I think when Tiger hit his driver into the crowd on 16, and then hit his second down to a little inside 100 yards, Van Pelt started thinking, "by golly... I'm going to beat Tiger Woods."   If he makes birdie there - and with a six iron in his hand for a second, he should - he goes to 17 with a two stroke lead.  Instead, he peed down his leg, and made bad decision after bad decision.  He underclubbed his second and pulled it into trouble.  Then, instead of playing a higher percentage shot away from the flag, over fairway, he goes straight at it and leaves his third in the cabbage.

Van Pelt had every advantage possible on that hole, and he played it like I would have.

The wonks on CBS made such a big deal out of him bogeying 17, like that cost him the tournament, but it was really the unforced errors on 16 that did him in.

Tiger was Tiger.  He took advantage of those unforced errors and made it count on the last two holes

You might be getting the shots out of order.  When BVP hit the 6-iron, Tiger was in the middle of the fairway, 98 yards out.  There's no reason to think Tiger is going to make bogey from 98 yards with a back pin; I fully expected Tiger to make 4 there, and I'm sure that BVP did also.  With the 6-iron, BVP is thinking birdie to stay tied, eagle to take a 1-shot lead to the 18th (maybe a 2-shot lead at best with an eagle).  He also knew that he'd have an easy birdie/eagle chance from the front fringe, but long would be playing catch-up--hence the 6-iron.  It wasn't that bad of a shot; only missed his line by 10 or 15 feet, but might have been a hair chunky.

I think BVP still had a legit birdie chance laying 2 in the cabbage with Tiger in deadsville over the green.  That might have been where the mental error occurred.  He had a decent enough lie and 75 feet of green; only difficulty was gripping way down, but it's not that hard if you take a couple practice swings to get the feel.  That he flubbed it was very surprising, and was probably the result of BVP thinking he had a great chance to take a 2-shot lead to 17.

[Shorty]

If I'm not mistaken, the tournament, like most, was over 72 holes. You can't say that someone "gave" the tournament away. It's not over until it's over

Pressure comes into play and some handle it better than others, If it weas just a question of saying "Par the last three holes and you've won" there would be a lot more guys aout there with wins under their belts.

[bwdial]

Originally Posted by k-troop

You might be getting the shots out of order.  When BVP hit the 6-iron, Tiger was in the middle of the fairway, 98 yards out.  There's no reason to think Tiger is going to make bogey from 98 yards with a back pin; I fully expected Tiger to make 4 there, and I'm sure that BVP did also.  With the 6-iron, BVP is thinking birdie to stay tied, eagle to take a 1-shot lead to the 18th (maybe a 2-shot lead at best with an eagle).  He also knew that he'd have an easy birdie/eagle chance from the front fringe, but long would be playing catch-up--hence the 6-iron.  It wasn't that bad of a shot; only missed his line by 10 or 15 feet, but might have been a hair chunky.

I think BVP still had a legit birdie chance laying 2 in the cabbage with Tiger in deadsville over the green.  That might have been where the mental error occurred.  He had a decent enough lie and 75 feet of green; only difficulty was gripping way down, but it's not that hard if you take a couple practice swings to get the feel.  That he flubbed it was very surprising, and was probably the result of BVP thinking he had a great chance to take a 2-shot lead to 17.

Sorry, but I didn't mean that he knew he'd have a one stroke lead, just that he would have if he hadn't soiled himself.  I tend to think that the shot that he decided to play is exactly what you described, but that at the top of his backswing, Tiger was inside his head whispering, "I might put my third inside your eagle putt", and he pulled it trying to hit it harder to get it back there.

[bplewis24]

Originally Posted by Zwick

I proudly present to you the biggest tool in golf: John Feinstein

http://bit.ly/M0QchF

Some of the best lines, for all of you who don't want to hear him speak:

"Truth has never been a big deal for Tiger", "Now we are watching a soap opera" (about the comeback), "he is not a nice person"/"not an interesting person" (because he doesn't give good interviews to Feinstein. Somehow he forgot to mention how Tiger gave all his winnings to the foundation.), "he has proven himself to be a bad guy" (Feinstein can't understand how one can root for Woods), he is baffled about the number of people who want to see Tiger win.

He can't understand how people can possibly forgive Tiger for what he has done to his family (yeah John, that really is our business...)

And Tiger didn't really win, Van Pelt gave it to him and the field was really weak and the course was terrible and it was no major blablabla....

"was för en blöde siech" (my swiss german reaction to him ).

I listened to the entire thing.  A couple points:

1) They gave him flack for referring to how sportswriters wrote him off and as recently as 6 months ago said he wouldn't win again.  I watched the conference, and he said this in response to a direct question about how it feels to win 3 tournaments after his struggles.  So when Feinstein said that "it wasn't true," he was lying.  I'm sure there were sportswriters that claimed he would win, but a good majority of high profile sports stories were about how he may not win again, especially implying he would never be a dominant force on tour again.  So, Feinstein was lying when claiming Tiger was lying.  Go figure.

2) He also made it a point to use his bogey at 16 as an example of Tiger's short game being sub par.  One bogey since the 10th hole on Friday, and his short game is sub par.  His short game has been sub par lately, but Saturday and Sunday were not good examples of it.

3) The best thing he said was, "I'm not the right person to ask ...because I'm in the minority" and "I'm biased."

In the later stages of the interview he came off like an idiot when acknowledging that people don't care about his personality/personal life and just want to see him play well, and then goes on to say "well why not want to see Mickelson...McIIlroy...Billy Hurley III play well?"  Well, dipsh**, probably because at their best they were ever as good as Tiger Woods, and some people want to be able to say they witnessed the greatest ever.  And by introducing Billy Hurley into the conversation you are implying that because of something non-golf-related (his service/dedication to his country) people should root for him to win, which is exactly the thing you just acknowledge those same people don't care about.  What a tool.

[bwdial]

Originally Posted by bwdial

He kind of did.

I think when Tiger hit his driver into the crowd on 16, and then hit his second down to a little inside 100 yards, Van Pelt started thinking, "by golly... I'm going to beat Tiger Woods."   If he makes birdie there - and with a six iron in his hand for a second, he should - he goes to 17 with a two stroke lead.  Instead, he peed down his leg, and made bad decision after bad decision.  He underclubbed his second and pulled it into trouble.  Then, instead of playing a higher percentage shot away from the flag, over fairway, he goes straight at it and leaves his third in the cabbage.

Van Pelt had every advantage possible on that hole, and he played it like I would have.

The wonks on CBS made such a big deal out of him bogeying 17, like that cost him the tournament, but it was really the unforced errors on 16 that did him in.

Tiger was Tiger.  He took advantage of those unforced errors and made it count on the last two holes

Originally Posted by Shorty

If I'm not mistaken, the tournament, like most, was over 72 holes. You can't say that someone "gave" the tournament away. It's not over until it's over

Pressure comes into play and some handle it better than others, If it weas just a question of saying "Par the last three holes and you've won" there would be a lot more guys aout there with wins under their belts.

Van Pelt finished bogey, bogey, bogey.  He choked as soon as he had the advantage, but I still gave props to Tiger for doing what needed to be done.  Tiger's finishing move was efficient.

[bplewis24]

Originally Posted by bwdial

Van Pelt finished bogey, bogey, bogey.  He choked as soon as he had the advantage, but I still gave props to Tiger for doing what needed to be done.  Tiger's finishing move was efficient.

That's taking it a bit out of context.  For 15 holes, it was a helluva tournament with BVP and Tiger both playing solid and sometimes extremely clutch golf.  BVP saw Tiger's best and then stuck it sometimes 6-8 feet closer on 2 or 3 holes.  And the final bogey was a result of him having to go for the hole-out from off the green.  He probably could have made par there if he needed par to force a playoff.

In any event, my point is that BVP didn't choke the tournament away like Feinstein implied.  He played very good for a great portion of the round.  Tiger played better.  It's not like he had a 3-4 stroke lead and Tiger shot +1 to win the tournament.  BVP made a couple mistakes.  That's not giving it away.

[iacas]

Originally Posted by bplewis24

I listened to the entire thing.  A couple points:

In addition to your points:

1. He said the tournament was "terrible" and called it a "complete disaster." Something about buses being seven miles away and people paying to ride them.
2. Tiger should be on the "Soap Opera Channel"? Grow up Feinstein.

3. Tiger Woods winning another tournament is not that big a deal.

4. Tiger beat a "weak field in a terrible golf tournament."

I've corrected Feinstein several times on his personal blog when he talks about Tiger Woods. I unsubscribed at one point when he talked about Pebble Beach and Tiger not putting out to let Phil Mickelson "have the stage." You know, the stage wherein people were in the fairway waiting to play and who still had a chance to tie Phil. :-P

[brocks]

3) The best thing he said was, "I'm not the right person to ask ...because I'm in the minority" and "I'm biased."

Fatstein wants to be this generation's Howard Cosell, whom I also couldn't stand (for you young punks, he's the guy who ruined TV boxing by devoting his "Color Commentary" to whining about how boring the fight was. Think of some moron calling a no-hitter at the World Series, and complaining that nobody was getting on base). He thinks it makes him edgy or courageous or something to knock Tiger, and that's been his gig on TGC since they hired him. He's probably especially teed off this weekend because he normally does all his work from home -- like Hawkins, he has a cheap camera (which makes him look like they just fished him up from the ocean bottom) installed in his home, and he does most of his TGC "reports" from there. Same with his radio show. But since the ATT was within a short drive of his home, he felt obligated to actually attend the thing, and found out why 100 degree temperatures and 300 pounds of lard don't mix well. And after suffering through a day outdoors, he probably got stiffed by Tiger when he asked for a quick interview. My favorite part of his rant was, "When was the last time you heard Tiger say something interesting?", and the dummy host going along with him. What the host should have said was, "Well, when was the last time a reporter asked him an interesting question that had anything to do with golf?"

[k-troop]

Originally Posted by bplewis24

2) He also made it a point to use his bogey at 16 as an example of Tiger's short game being sub par.  One bogey since the 10th hole on Friday, and his short game is sub par.  His short game has been sub par lately, but Saturday and Sunday were not good examples of it.

Umm, that was a pretty good shot from behind the green at 16.  It almost went in the hole, and he left himself a very makeable par putt.  He chose the percentage shot (under the circumstances) and executed it perfectly.  A weak short game shot from there would have been trying to hit the flop, coming up short, and having to play the exact same shot again.

I agree Feinstein is a joke as a on-course reporter, but we writes some pretty good books.

[jamo]

I've gotten to the point where I can't stand Feinstein. He's perfectly fine at "Rosaforte"ing, i.e. getting the inside nuggets of information that you inevitably need to write a 300-page book about one golf season. But I don't find him to be a particularly interesting writer (not that I consider myself to be a particularly great writer, then again I'm not making millions from my living room on Shelter Island), and he relies way to often on irrationalities and straw-man opinions. He likes to seem be old-school when he really comes off as a stick in the mud, and I think he often likes to take radical opinions just to take radical opinions. The poster who made the Skip Bayless analogy above was spot-on.

[zipazoid]

Originally Posted by bwdial

Van Pelt finished bogey, bogey, bogey.  He choked as soon as he had the advantage, but I still gave props to Tiger for doing what needed to be done.  Tiger's finishing move was efficient.

One might conclude that Tiger 'intimidated' him; if only he still was able to do that, eh?

[newtogolf]

Feinstein is a drama queen.  The show he co-hosts on XM Mad Dog Radio (Beyond The Brink) has been horrible since he joined.  He prides himself on being a hard ass on highly controversial topics such as college athletics and the NCAA, BCS, and Tiger.  He's like a slightly less obnoxious, more intelligent Miceli.

[uttexas]

The poster who made the Skip Bayless analogy above was spot-on.

Agree. Mark Cuban summarizes the Skip Bayless/ Feinstein approach really well in this interview. [VIDEO]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hv2jqFd2-qI[/VIDEO]