jimmymo

Given their respective results over the past 3 years, it is tough to make a case that Sergio is better than Scott.....that said, I actually think Sergio has a better shot of breaking through and winning a major.....both have issues with pressure, but it seems to me that Sergio has been in position more often and will probably be the more comfortable of the two if in a position to win a major.... Just give me Phil and Tiger in the last group on Masters' Sunday.....is that too much to ask?

By "last year" I meant last 4 majors -- I should have been more clear -- Phil 2 for 4, Tiger 1 for 4.....I guess it is all how you define the parameters. You're right though, winning is all that matters -- Phil gets himself in position, but does not have the mental toughness to put them away like Tiger. I am a big fan of both players and am least glad we are talking about how many majors Phil has won rather than if he will ever win one.

No doubt Tiger is the better player -- all the hooopla just a function of the Majors over the last year -- which, quite frankly, has been dominated by Phil. I'd be curious who would have the highest number if you went back and added up their finishing place in the last 20 majors -- I bet it would be Phil -- but I doubt it means much, just that Phil has been more consistent in the majors and can't finish.

No more funny than someone who doesn't have a routine and shanks one into the woods....

my exact point

coming off an injury and strugling yes....made both cuts in the majors....of course so has tiger......

To be humble and self-depricating at her age, with her talent, says a lot to me about her level-headedness. She get a lot of criticism for her choices and faces a lot of animosity among her peers -- she seems to handle it with a lot of class. I hope she sticks to her guns and doesn't let the bastards ever get her down.

Well, I would guess August then -- I sent my new 905 back to Titleist to get it re-shafted and they told me it would be "5-7 weeks".....I was pretty shocked, but my contact at my local place said that happens when they are in the midst of "full production." Maybe this is what they got cooking.

Maybe you're right that it was a bit harsh -- but Tiger doesn't play for top-10s and his failure to make a run at Phil on Sunday at the Masters and his meltdown at the US Open were truly disappointing. Yes, the bar is high for Tiger, but if Phil had the same results this year, I would say the same thing. Doesn't help that I would have won some nice dough in my US Open tourney if Tiger would have just made the cut -- not win, or even top-10 -- JUST MAKE THE DAMN CUT!!!!!!!!!

You are correct, out-of-bounds is a stroke and distance, meaning if you hit your ball OOB from the tee, you re-tee hitting your 3rd shot. Lateral v. Water Hazard (probably one of the most misunderstood rules). If a Water Hazard (not lateral), you have two options: 1. Hit as close as possible to where you played your original ball with a penalty of one stroke. 2. Hit behind the water hazard, keeping the point of entry into the hazard directly between your ball and the hole (you may go back as far as you want on this line) with a penalty of one stroke. If it is a Lateral Hazard, you have the above two options, PLUS you may either: 3. Drop the ball within 2 clubs lenghts of the spot where the ball crossed the point of entry, but no closer to the hole, with a penalty of one stroke. 4. Drop the ball within 2 club lengths of the spot that is on the opposite side of the hazard and equidistant from the hole, with a penalty of one stroke. As for provisionals, you need to continue to play until you know you are in the fairway -- that will help speed things up and avoid a situation where you need to make the long walk back to the tee. Also, check to see if the tournament requires you to play "one ball" -- this is not in the rules of golf (I believe), but some tourneys require that you do so. Good Luck!!!!!!!!!!!

Player of the Year- Phil Mickelson Rookie of the Year- Camillo Villegas Biggest Disappointment- Tiger Woods Best Comeback (as in comeback player basically)- Paul Azinger Best Tournament- US Open

73 (par 72) with a missed 5 footer for birdie on 17 and a lip-out for birdie on 18 -- still trying to take down old man par -- getting there.

Like your thoughts Mikee -- I play match-ups on the PGA weekly and sometimes dabble in the Euro Tour. The Kelly/Perry match is intriguing -- I think KP is starting to get it going a little with a nice showing at Avenil -- I don't see a ton of value in laying chalk with Kelly. Really like Holmes over Watson -- Bubba struggling with his accuracy off the tee and JB seems to be a more consistent driver of the ball. Good luck with the rest

I actually think Phil may have more (or at least as much) god-given physical talent for the game than Tiger -- but Tiger has more dedication/work-ethic and a better golfing mind.

Rafkin, the fact is that PMick didn't think he could even hit a 4 iron in the fairway on 18 -- that is one of the big issues I have -- you know that hitting a good golf shot is all about confidence and commitment -- just a few holes prior, Phil hit what he thought was a "perfect" 4 iron that bounced off the fairway -- he stood on the tee assuming that he could not hit the fairway with any club in his bag -- if he is going to play from the rough, he best advance the ball as far off the tee as possible -- that is why driver wasn't a bad play. And I don't want to hear anything about playing for a bogey on the tee box to get in to a playoff.

Diggitydog, here is the article -- they were fishing in Canada when it went down and were relying on second hand info -- tough spot to be critical without any first hand info of the situation. Some quotes:

I actually heard an interview with one of the competitors at the US Open (he was a qualifier who missed the cut) -- he said he was walking the course on Sunday and said the wind was blowing about 10-12 mph in the players' faces on the 18th tee -- his thought was that PMick could have (at best) hit his 4-wood about 240 on the hole, assuming it hit the fairway. If he misses the fairway, he is looking at 215-225 yards from the rough. From his perspective, he thought that Driver wasn't as bad of a decision as the world is making it out to be -- interesting to hear that from a particpant who was actually there. And by the way, Nicklaus and Watson can go fu*k themselves for criticizing a play they had no factual backgroud about -- I am sure the golf gods will make me pay for that one.

How can you say Driver off the tee was necessarily a bad play? Especially after he says that he if he pulls 4-wood and doesn't hit the fairway, he will leave himself too long of a play out of the rough. What does that tell us? Phil knows his swing and knew he was playing with his "C-" game -- the fact is that Phil stood on that tee without the confidence to hit the 4-wood in the fairway -- given that reality, Driver is the play. An analogy can be made to the decision to leave the pin in or take it out when playing from just off the green -- Pelz will telll you that the statistics support leaving the pin in -- the opposing argument is what if you feel more confident with the pin out. The fact is that Phil was struggling and had doubts about hitting the fairway with his 4-wood -- so take the Driver and at least get it in position to chase one to the green -- unfortunately for Phil it didn't work out. Finally, there is no Fu$King thing as an "easy" par on the 72nd hole of the US Open, period.