« Playing golf in Hilton Head? Make Old South a priorityJohn Daly, Ricky Williams, and myself: More similarities than I ever realized »

14 comments

Comment from: tim [Visitor]
Exceedingly well put.
06/19/06 @ 16:55
Comment from: Jim COULTHARD [Visitor]
Phil's 3 Majors has nothing to do with the difference between this year's Open and the British Open Jean Van de Valde lost. The difference is that Phils needed a fairly challenging Par to wrap up the title in regulation. Jean could have won in regulation with a double bogey.
06/19/06 @ 17:42
Comment from: Stacy [Visitor]
I think this U.S. Open will also be remembered as the one where Tiger Woods missed the cut.
06/19/06 @ 19:56
Comment from: Simon [Visitor]
This major will probably be remembered as the one which Mickelson lost. The only people who will think of it as the one when Tiger missed th cut are the people with their heads buried so far up Tigers arse that they dont realise there are other golfers in the world with talent.
06/19/06 @ 20:04
Comment from: RonMon [Visitor]
This is your best entry to date, Spence. I think the operative words are "Phil sees himself..." I would love to know what Bones was thinking, but those thoughts are in the vault, deeper than Elaine and George can dig. It was a flat-out choke, and I guess the fact that we don't see such things anywhere but the majors tells us loads about the quality of mental game that these gals and guys bring to the table.
06/19/06 @ 21:44
Comment from: Brad Moore [Visitor]
I respectfully disagree with you though you do make a good argument. I'm just reminded of the line in "Tin Cup" -- sometimes Par is good enough to win. Phil is hands down the best golfer in the world right now and creative shot making has been a big part of that, it just seems to me Winged Foot and especially the eighteenth hole at Winged Foot were not places to get creative.
06/20/06 @ 06:44
Comment from: Shanks [Visitor]
Pretty convincing argument ..... but not enough. Phil had a 4-wood in his bag Sunday and hits it about 240 yards so that would've been plenty of club for the tee shot. But even allowing for the tee shot into the tents, why wouldn't he take a short iron and put it down in front of the green and then rely on getting up & down from short range? He'd only been doing it all day. Well, that, and he might be the best wedge player in the history of the game. Not to mention that his putting was excellent all week too.

When Phil won his first Masters he was touting his more mature decision-making. And much of the same discussion has followed his wins in the last 2 majors as well. To say now that he is not capable of it is contradictory. It is Phil that is trying to have it both ways to cover up the fact that he choked in his decision-making. Simple case of denial.
06/20/06 @ 08:14
Comment from: Ford [Visitor]
It's a great week to be a Phil hater. Anybody else find it ironic that Phil's caddy is named Bones?
06/20/06 @ 10:21
Comment from: Spencer Hux [Visitor]
Shanks and Brad-

I just don't think that punching out into the fairway there and getting up and down was all that simple. I don't know of the exact yardage he had (and the network did a horrific job of covering the situation), but I'm not sure a short iron gets him by the green or gives the opportunity to bend it around the trees as much as he needed to.

Sure, 4wood off the tee gives him enough distance, but that doesn't ensure a hit fairway either, especially the way he was swinging.

Ron Mon- excellent Seinfeld allusion. well done

06/20/06 @ 13:11
Comment from: Shanks [Visitor]
Not trying to change your mind but here's how I see it: the 4 wood tee shot on the exact same line would've gone 50 yards shorter than his drive did and stopped in the rough, short of the tents & trees.

Mickelson himself said that he had 185 to the front of the green and he thought he could slice a 3 iron onto the green. Even if he's trying to hit a 50-yard slice, it goes to reason that he could've hit a shorter iron straight through to the fairway and leave himself a pitch or flop.

06/20/06 @ 16:09
Comment from: Spencer Hux [Visitor]
A valid point Shanks. I thought Mickelson had a little farther to the front edge. I guess the way I see it is that there is never a guarantee for par in the Open, and I don't fault Mickelson for being aggressive, especially if he really thought he could hit the shot. It didn't seem like he hit the 3 iron all that well; otherwise the shot may have worked for him.

I see your point though. We may be looking at the "Mickelslam" if he had approached the hole differently. But I guess we'll never know.

How stupid is the name "Mickelslam" by the way?
06/20/06 @ 17:21
Comment from: Rich [Visitor]
Of course Phil should have hit 4 wood off the 18th tee. He hadn't hit fairways all day. He can hit a 5 iron 200 yards to the green from his 250 yard 4 wood. Earlier in the round he had hit a 176 yard 8 iron for God's sake. Let's face it he was just plain stupid! And Spencer, I'll cheer Phil when he's going well and playing smart and mock him when I think he's stupid. The style Phil should play is called winning golf, not reckless abandon. Do you think for one second that Tiger would have pulled out the driver on that tee, if he'd hit it the way Phil did all day? I can have it both ways, it's might right as a fan and I won't shut up becasue you say so.
06/21/06 @ 20:09
Comment from: Merrin [Visitor]
"The only people who will think of it as the one when Tiger missed th cut are the people with their heads buried so far up Tigers arse that they dont realise there are other golfers in the world with talent. "- Simon

With all due respect to the ACTUAL winner, I remember it more as the event Mickelson squandered. However, to think that those who think Eldrick Woods not making the cut was a bigger story are "blind Tiger fans" is not only false, but also a bit myopic. Phil might be the "beloved" golfer on tour as the writer stated, but Tiger has been the most dominant. And Im sorry, I dont care how much of a Phil fan you are, thats not to be denied. How many cuts has Tiger missed? Seriously...how many? That signifcant number ALONE makes it a relevant story.
07/25/06 @ 12:48
Comment from: Arthur Boyd [Visitor] Email
Someone used the word CHOKE when talking of Tiger's four bogeys at
Bridgestone. I say that word has no place in describing any of Tigers
rounds.
10/11/06 @ 03:01

This post has 3 feedbacks awaiting moderation...

Leave a comment


Your email address will not be revealed on this site.
PoorExcellent
(Line breaks become <br />)
(Name, email & website)
(Allow users to contact you through a message form (your email will not be revealed.)
 
Swing Fix