brocks

Exact same thing happened to me yesterday, except it was Joe Montana.

I get so tired of attitudes like this. We Roman gods need shirts that fit, too.

He's sneaky good: https://www.cbssports.com/golf/news/these-five-tiger-woods-stats-may-surprise-you-entering-the-2018-stretch-run/

If all they do is change the number, sure. But typically when they convert a par 5 to a par 4, they shorten it. In an extreme example, suppose it's a 600-yard par five with a creek in front of the green. Pretty much everybody lays up. Then they take 50 yards off it and call it a par four. Now the short hitters still have to lay up, and even the long hitters have to lay up if their drive goes into the rough. But even so, the reduced length makes the third shot easier, so the scoring average on the hole goes down a few tenths. But long, straight hitters can now reach it in two. So it's a more difficult hole, even if the scoring average on it goes down a few tenths, because length and accuracy are more important than before. It's not just that it's harder to make par, it's that it separates the excellent players from the good players, just like a good par three hole can do. That's the theory in general, anyway. Whether it's the case at Bellerive, I don't know.

I'm talking about this one: https://www.golfmagic.com/golf-news/tiger-woods-i-didnt-touch-club-10-days-after-masters http://www.sportingnews.com/us/golf/news/tiger-woods-ranking-comeback-quicken-loans-national-open-championship/1a4tc1svaxv5c1lm1g8a7umk9i https://www.cbssports.com/golf/news/why-does-tiger-woods-keep-going-on-vacation-after-majors/ The first link is about not touching a club for ten days after this year's Masters, the other two are about him taking at least a week off after the US and British Opens in 2015, so it's not like the Masters was an anomaly. I agree on all points. Very clear explanation.

The OWGR website hasn't published the strength of field yet, and in any case the numbers aren't set until play starts on Thursday. But making the safe assumption that it will be as strong as usual, it would take something worse than about 42nd for Tiger to lose ground. Since it's a no-cut event, he has four chances to play a good round, and he would have to be really, really off form for that to happen. Still, there are reasons why it could: - he was contending in the Open right up to the last couple of holes. That was the first time in years, so he probably took the week off and didn't practice much to de-stress. - he has played Firestone so many times that he thinks he knows every blade of grass, and there's no pro-am, so he will probably show up late and not practice there much - he has the PGA coming up next week, so he's going to try to conserve physical and mental energy, and may even practice shots he'll need for the PGA rather than the optimal shot for his situation Not trying to make excuses in advance, just seeing the glass half empty.

That's a classic, all right. Also the one where he juggles the ball on his club. But my all-time favorite is "Dip the Hip."

I have to say I'm kind of on Phil's side here, although the timing seems strange to me, and I haven't watched Brandel much lately. For quite a long time, Brandel was openly hostile to Tiger, crystalizing it with his pronouncement a few years ago that he didn't care if Tiger won 20 majors, he would never be the greatest. I don't watch TGC any more except when they're covering an event I want to see, but from what little I've seen of Brandel lately, he seems to have mellowed on Tiger. I don't know, maybe he's going after somebody else, and that's what Phil is talking about. At any rate, although I agree with the article's basic premise that an analyst's job is to provide honest criticism when warranted, I disagree that that's what Brandel was doing during the years I never missed Golf Central. He struck me as somebody like Cosell or Bayless, trying to distinguish himself by showing how unafraid he was to criticize big stars, as if that takes courage.

I'm glad to see I'm not the only logician on this board. I said exactly the same thing about Tiger at the 2013 Masters. How could people say he dropped his ball in the wrong spot after seeing how well he played his long irons?

Colin Montgomerie's take on whether Tiger should be a Captain's Pick: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/golf/2018/07/24/america-would-mad-not-pick-tiger-woods-ryder-cup-imagine-motivated/

Wow. I realize that the quality of golf should be the first priority, but surely the PGA could find a high quality course that's a little more fan friendly.

I think you need a little more commentary to make your point, because your link says that 10 "plays as a par 5 for club members," which to me implies that it may be a par 4 for the pros.

Nothing wrong with your math, but that comparison is biased in Tiger's favor, because Tommy Fleetwood has a whole bunch of events that have been depreciated down to less than half their original value, while Tiger has just a few. It would be more fair to start counting for both of them at the last Hero Challenge, Tiger's first event of his comeback. Doing that, I get Tiger with 7.84 to Tommy's 11.05. Actually, I don't think the Hero should get WGR points, because the field is so small. Heck, if I got a sponsor's exemption into it, I would come away with about 2.4 points, which is about what you get for finishing 20th at the Greenbrier. I would not finish 20th at the Greenbrier. If you just look at 2018 events, Tiger's averaging about 7.7 points per event (undepreciated), which is better than Spieth (who's having an off year), but would only get him to about 25th if he played at that level for two years, and had most of his events depreciated. I agree with you that he seems to be playing better than that, especially after watching the Open, but I'm not sure he's top ten yet. Barring injuries, the way he's trending makes it just a matter of months, though.

Actually, the "real" Zach isn't a bad bet at 80-1. He looked very good at the Open.

To be fair, he did hear the lamentations of their women.

From http://golfodds.com/upcoming-major-odds.html. If you can find a bookie who isn't paying too close attention, try to get Zach Johnson at 2000-1 (there's a Zach J. Johnson at those odds) PGA Championship Bellerive Country Club - St. Louis, Missouri August 9 - 12, 2018 ODDS to Win: Rory McIlroy 12/1 Jordan Spieth 12/1 Dustin Johnson 12/1 Tiger Woods 16/1 Rickie Fowler 16/1 Justin Thomas 16/1 Justin Rose 18/1 Brooks Koepka 20/1 Jon Rahm 20/1 Tommy Fleetwood 25/1 Francesco Molinari 25/1 Jason Day 25/1 Hideki Matsuyama 30/1 Patrick Reed 30/1 Henrik Stenson 40/1 Paul Casey 40/1 Alex Noren 40/1 Phil Mickelson 50/1 Sergio Garcia 50/1 Bubba Watson 50/1 Tony Finau 50/1 Xander Schauffele 50/1 Matt Kuchar 50/1 Marc Leishman 60/1 Branden Grace 60/1 Louis Oosthuizen 60/1 Patrick Cantlay 60/1 Bryson DeChambeau 60/1 Webb Simpson 60/1 Adam Scott 80/1 Zach Johnson 80/1 Kevin Kisner 80/1 Ian Poulter 100/1 Thomas Pieters 100/1 Tyrrell Hatton 100/1 Rafael Cabrera Bello 100/1 Daniel Berger 100/1 Kevin Chappell 100/1 Brian Harman 100/1 Brandt Snedeker 100/1 Charley Hoffman 100/1 Jason Dufner 125/1 Jimmy Walker 125/1 Emiliano Grillo 125/1 Matthew Fitzpatrick 125/1 Charl Schwartzel 125/1 Martin Kaymer 150/1 Ryan Moore 150/1 Kevin Na 150/1 Russell Knox 150/1 Peter Uihlein 150/1 Russell Henley 150/1 Kyle Stanley 150/1 Brendan Steele 150/1 Luke List 150/1 Haotong Li 150/1 Byeong Hun An 150/1 Gary Woodland 150/1 Kiradech Aphibarnrat 150/1 Lee Westwood 150/1 Keegan Bradley 150/1 Pat Perez 150/1 J.B. Holmes 150/1 Aaron Wise 150/1 Joaquin Niemann 150/1 Bill Haas 150/1 Billy Horschel 150/1 Shane Lowry 200/1 Beau Hossler 200/1 Chris Wood 200/1 Andy Sullivan 200/1 Danny Willett 200/1 Charles Howell III 200/1 Michael Kim 200/1 Adam Hadwin 200/1 Cameron Smith 200/1 Si Woo Kim 200/1 Chez Reavie 250/1 Scott Piercy 250/1 Austin Cook 250/1 Chesson Hadley 250/1 Shubhankar Sharma 250/1 Jim Furyk 250/1 Padraig Harrington 250/1 Ross Fisher 250/1 James Hahn 300/1 Satoshi Kodaira 300/1 Ollie Schniederjans 300/1 Bernd Wiesberger 300/1 Jordan Smith 300/1 Brice Garnett 300/1 Andrew Landry 300/1 Patton Kizzire 300/1 J.J. Spaun 300/1 Ryan Armour 500/1 Ted Potter, Jr 500/1 Chris Stroud 500/1 Scott Brown 500/1 Vijay Singh 500/1 Davis Love III 500/1 John Daly 1000/1 Rich Beem 1000/1 Y.E. Yang 1000/1 Paul Broadhurst 1000/1 Omar Uresti 1000/1 Rich Berberian, Jr 1000/1 Matt Dobyns 1000/1 Marty Jertsen 1000/1 Shaun Micheel 2000/1 Craig Bowden 2000/1 Michael Block 2000/1 Bob Sowards 2000/1 David Muttitt 2000/1 Jaysen Hansen 2000/1 Brian Smock 2000/1 Sean McCarty 2000/1 Matt Borchert 2000/1 Zach J. Johnson 2000/1 Jason Schmuhl 2000/1 Danny Balin 2000/1 Ben Kern 2000/1 Ryan Vermeer 2000/1 Shaun Warren 2000/1 Craig Hocknull 2000/1 Johan Kok 2000/1

This doesn't go into a lot of detail, but it gives you an idea: https://www.pga.com/events/pgachampionship/what-its-play-bellerive

Tiger won the 100th US Open by 15 shots. Just sayin.

On the other hand, it was terrible conditions for him since he got the worst draw of any of the top ten finishers. What if he had gotten Spieth's draw, scored a couple or three better the first two rounds, and then shot the same 66 on Saturday. If he starts Sunday at 8 under instead of 5 under, and then reaches the turn two under for the round like he did, while Spieth and Kisner are over par like they were, then maybe Molinari and the others would have had to try riskier shots once Tiger hit 10 under and looked like he was running away with it, and maybe Tiger would have been content to cruise in and not have to try super risky shots like that one out of the bunker (which he pulled off) and the flop on 11 (which he didn't). That's how he and Jack won a lot of their majors. It may not be as exciting, but it gets results. Now calm down, I'm not saying he should have won. I know that everybody out there had their share of bad bounces and putts that missed by an inch. But I am saying that he's shown that he can play well enough to win. Not just contend, but win, against the strongest field and one of the toughest courses of the year. And while it's true he's not getting any younger, he seems to be improving faster than he is aging. That cannot continue indefinitely, but it can continue for four or five years. If he can stay healthy, which is a huge "if," and if he continues to improve, which seems likely (at least for the near future, although the curve is bound to flatten out) given that he essentially started from zero less than a year ago, then he's got as good a chance as anyone to win a major if he is on his game during a major week. It's not likely that he will dominate like he used to, not likely that he will get to the point where his B game can beat everybody else's A game unless they have an insane putting streak, but I think there's a good chance that he can get to the point where he's the favorite again -- not just the betting favorite, but the guy with the best chance to win any given week. In golf, except at the peak of phenoms like Tiger and Jack, the guy with the best chance to win still loses about nine out of ten, so I'm not predicting any nine-win three-major seasons. But I do think he has more than one major win ahead of him.

I honestly have no idea; I don't have any knowledge of Tiger's relationship with Joey other than what I see when they're on the course. I do wish Tiger could find a coach he trusts and not try to coach himself, but on the other hand, if you had told me in January that he would have the outright lead on the back nine on Open Sunday, I would have thought you were crazy, so it seems like he knows what he's doing. Maybe it just works better for him to make up his own mind and fully commit to a shot or a swing philosophy, than to have somebody tell him he's wrong. I don't know, probably no more than five or six people in the world know.

Molinari got the second worst draw of the top 10, but he still teed off two hours before Tiger on Thursday, when the wind got worse as the day went on. But that's always been a part of the Open, that and weird bounces. It's part of the game.

I'm sure he would have played 11 differently if he had a mulligan --- he would have been LESS aggressive, and not have gone for the flop shot on his 3rd, which is what caused the double bogey. The hole was only 385 yards and the wind was at its worst when he was on the 11th tee, he would have been crazy not to use an iron. There was nothing wrong with the club he selected; he just mishit it. As for 12, it has a fairway about wide enough for three carts, except for a landing area that he would have run through if he used driver. He had just seen how hard it was to hit out of the rough, so he wanted to be sure he hit the fairway. He mishit again and it missed the fairway by a few feet. If he had hit driver, God knows how far into the junk it would have gone. Mishits are part of the game; they don't mean you used the wrong club. Another part of the game is the draw you get --- Tiger got a worse draw than anybody who tied or finished ahead of him. I thought after Friday that it cost him four shots compared to the guys on the good side of the draw. And four shots would have won it.

Well, I was goofing. I think he probably knows his capabilities better than you, and I haven't been able to relax when he pulls the driver out since about 2003. I even think it's possible that he has guys who know more than the average fan about golf in general, and his game in particular, to give him advice when he wants it. And I'm very sure he doesn't intend to mishit shots with whatever club he plays. It's all very nice to say he should have hit it in the fairway with the wind gusting, but if you check that big board with the numbers on it, you'll see that the #1, #2, and #5 golfers in the world missed the cut, the #4 golfer who just won back to back US Opens finished T39, and YJS shot a nifty 76 today. In conclusion, golf is hard.

I'm extremely disappointed in Tiger... to play a major without consulting you first on his game plan. I mean, where does he get off thinking he knows more than you about the state of his game, and how to win majors?

No, the OWGR points for majors are hardwired, regardless of the strength of field. The Players was stronger than the Masters, as you posted, and yet the Masters winner got 20 more points than the Players winner, and proportionately down the standings.