Trav

Sure you haven't lost your grip, there, Butch?

The people who put this course together have done a fabulous job. I don't know how they did in terms of budget or whether any toes were stepped on to complete this project, but the result is beautiful. What a setting.

A long time ago, when this thread and I were both still young, I said maybe Tiger by a hair. But today John Feinstein had this interesting stat: One thing is now clear in assessing Woods's career: Those who say Jack Nicklaus faced higher-quality competition in his peak years are right. There just isn't an Arnold Palmer, a Gary Player, a Lee Trevino or a Tom Watson in this group. Just check the numbers on those four: 30 majors among them and several down-to-the-wire battles with Nicklaus that Nicklaus lost. That's one reason Nicklaus finished second in majors 19 times. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...081701195.html I think he has a point.

Although Yeng also missed some makeable putts, too. While it may not have been quite up to his standards, I thought TW make some challenging putts late that kept him closer than it could easily have been, like his birdie on 14 to avoid going 2 down.

If you listened to the announcers, the premise of this thread is faulty. According to them, it would have been better for Yang to let Tiger putt first so that TW was not required to complete his match while a distracting celebration was going on (or conversely, to let Yang begin to celebrate without upon completiing his hole after Tiger had finished first). They said something to effect that Yang had been calm and in control all day and could be forgiven for this slight mental lapse. I bet TW would have preferred to putt first and finish up. I saw nothing to indicate TW was anythng other than gracious in defeat.

As it turns out, Daly got in as ninth alternate precisely because there were last-second withdrawals literally a few hours before the first group teed off Thursday. Not exactly the same as withdrawing mid-round, but this story shows how tenuous it was for him to have gotten in as an alternate, and how it's possible a listed alternate might not actually play if the withdrawal occurs too late.

Why did he not make it as a former PGA champ (1991)?

Not unless there a maximum number of spots in the event. If he didn't play as former champ, another person would not have gotten in as a former champ. chill. Edit: Having invited correction but not having seen anything substantive posted here, I took a moment to try to look up and post the actual eligibility criteria for benefit of anyone interested in learning what the provisions are. Apparently the field is limited to 156 players. Also, it appears the additional players would have been taken from the designated list of alternates, which I don't have, although the PGA also reserves the right to designate other players not shown on the alternate list, which I assume they use for flexibility in emergency situations such as when a vacancy occurs too late to get the designated alternates in. http://images.pgalinks.com/vmc/press...pFactSheet.pdf From this, it looks like another player could have been invited had Daly not played, although it's not exactly certain, nor is it clear precisely who that person would have been, depending on when he withdrew (e.g., if he withdrew Thursday morning, were any designated alternates milling around in the area waiting to play, as opposed to him withdrawing a week beforehand in time for the alternate to make arrangements). FYI, JB Holmes also withdrew (today, I think).

Correct me if I am wrong, but I believe he gets an automatic spot in this event as a former PGA winner, so I'm not sure he is taking away a spot from someone else who would qualify through some other route. Your argument may apply more to a regular tour event, where he takes one of a limited number of sponsor exemptions and quits after one round.

OK, it's only 218 today - but Pavin birdied the hole.

So now we know 642 yards is reachable in two. Next up: 700 yard par 5.

An important point, turns out that 248 yard hole is only 218 today. I can do that. Of course, I wouldn't be using my PW or SW, like these guys.

Except that Jones was embarassed by his behavior and taught himself to change. Woods is quoted as saying "that's just me." IMO, big difference.

There's a major difference between censorship, on the one hand, and responsibility/civility/decorum, whatever you think the latter should consist of. If it doesn't bother you, OK, that's your right, even if I may disagree. But let's not start linking this whole thing to "censorship" and "free society."

I'm totally tapped out when they get over 400 yards. enduro is right as matter of general principle, but still I'll bet Pavin averages better score on that Par 3 than a lot of the bigger hitters.

If that's what he meant, then I'm fine with that, at least to a point. In my experience, when people speak of power (distance) as a game component, they usually mean in contrast to other aspects of the game, such as accuracy. Watching someone hit 350 yards to another fairway isn't something that strikes me as deserving an advantage, as compared to someone hitting 290-300 to a fairway spot to set up a well-conceived second shot for the pin placement.

Why should power count any more than finesse? If golf were simply a ball-busting exercise, then we could go watch Long Driving contests. Distance without accuracy is fun sometimes, but it's not golf. I always favor making penalty situations truly challenging. We already know about making the rough deeper (I like the graduated rough concept). Another example could be to make the bunkers more challenging, like the pot bunkers you see on Scotland - most are very difficult to get out of, whereas in the US they are typically regarded as easy shots for pros. Also if you set them on the fairway where the pros put their drives in play, they aren't going to affect the average hacker the way merely adding distance does. But there's only so much you can do, after all these are pros for a reason.

Check ebay, see what the club has been going for, decide if the difference (if any) between what you paid and what you can sell it for is worth it in terms of being happy with the club you want. If you are unhappy with your club, for any reason, it will constantly grate on you.

What he said. I understand these clubs are soft, but if those pics are of "lovingly and gently used" irons, I would not want to see the "heavily and harshly used" ones.

On Thursday night TGC replay, they showed Daly doing very close to this - not lining up putts, hitting the ball as soon as he got to it. I'm not going to try to say an exact moment he gave up, but it looked to me like he was mentally out of it by late round Thursday.

Meanwhile, John Daly scored a 10 on a par 5 and is currently +11 on this round, with 6 holes to play, even after two early birdies. I would say he has mentally checked out. How many more sponsor exemptions can he wrangle like this?

The back nine is supposedly the easier of the two, but he's making the most of it so far. Yesterday was his second worst score ever on this course, and he was only 1 shot out of the cut even then. And to answer the question - no, he doesn't miss the cut.

Maybe my course is different from everyone else's, but our rough is deep and thick fescue. There is usually no way I can use even a hybrid without grass grabbing the club; the only hope is an iron on a steeper swing. So I would use the lowest loft I can get away with to make sure the ball gets out (anything from a 4 to a 7). It used to be an automatic bogey, but with improved control over wedges I have a reasonable chance at getting close enough to the pin for an up and down.

Apparently he's coming back next week. http://sports.espn.go.com/golf/news/story?id=4361861

Stevie uses a simple system. He holds up his thumb for Driver, his index finger for a fairway wood, and for a 3-iron ...