Golf for Beginners - Latest Comments on Why should Mike Weir replace Phil Mickelson at the 2006 Grand Slam of Golf?

Oliver Sudden [Visitor] in response to: Why should Mike Weir replace Phil Mickelson at the 2006 Grand Slam of Golf?

Oliver Sudden [Visitor] — Sat, 30 Sep 2006 04:06:09 +0000

Full credit to Phil for blowing it off to underline the need for a several month break in the golf season.

Mark Nessmith [Visitor] in response to: Why should Mike Weir replace Phil Mickelson at the 2006 Grand Slam of Golf?

Mark Nessmith [Visitor] — Fri, 29 Sep 2006 16:28:57 +0000

From the PGA of America media guide:
"If one or more winners are unable to attend, alternates will be selected from a Major Champions Points List. The list is composed of players who have won a major championship during their careers and are active Tour professionals. The PGA of America developed the point system for the selection of alternates based on performance in the 2006 major championships."

In other words, of the pool of past major championship winners (who are not already in this year's Grand Slam of Golf), Weir apparently had the best record in this year's majors. Now no, I haven't gone and verified that - hey, I got a job to do! :-) But it's safe to say that if Weir is now atop that list then the guy who was opted out of playing this event, hence Weir getting the nod.

Brian Miller [Visitor] in response to: Why should Mike Weir replace Phil Mickelson at the 2006 Grand Slam of Golf?

Brian Miller [Visitor] — Fri, 29 Sep 2006 08:22:33 +0000

Weir hasn't won a major other than the 2003 Masters, that's true, but, at least in the majors, he has performed better than Singh or any other golfer not already participating. His finishes the past 2 years are:

Masters - Tied for 11th: 2005 - T5
US Open - Tied for 6th: 2005 - 42
British - Tied 56th: 2005 - MC
PGA - solo 6th: 2005 47

Other than the British, which obviously doesn't suit his game, he's played pretty steady golf worthy of an invitation. By the way, I'm more than a little irked at American undervaluation of Weir. He's well-liked by other players on the Tour, but virtually ignored by the US media unless he's in the lead or tied for the lead.

He came in 2nd last time he played in the Grand Slam and I sincerely hope he wins it this time. He'll have his work cut out for him facing Tiger, but stranger things have happened.

Stacy [Visitor] in response to: Why should Mike Weir replace Phil Mickelson at the 2006 Grand Slam of Golf?

Stacy [Visitor] — Fri, 29 Sep 2006 00:43:27 +0000

True Tom, that is why I only mentioned prior major tournament winners. However, Mike Weir has not won a major nor has he had a truly stellar performance this season.

I wonder if the PGA called upon other golfers who could not commit at the last minute to fill Mickelson's shoes.

It's truly an honor to play this final "hurrah" of the season.

Tom Gov [Visitor] in response to: Why should Mike Weir replace Phil Mickelson at the 2006 Grand Slam of Golf?

Tom Gov [Visitor] — Thu, 28 Sep 2006 23:51:25 +0000

I'm sure many would like Phil's replacement to be chosen in some method that is based more on popularity. But the PGA of America has a more definded method established. In a nut shell replacements are former major winners who
have accumulated the best record in majors this season. Jim Furyk was first
and Mike Weir was second.

Remeber, the PGA of America is run by Golf Pros. So there are always rules to
fall back on.