The bride and I thank all for your kind words last week. It's quite the loss, but also time to to move back towards normalcy.... I know, normalcy appears to have left town without leaving a forwarding address.
About That Tour? - Joel Beall and his back-up band take on these important questions:
The PGA Tour aspires to return to competition in June by limiting the number of people on site, most notably by not having fans. But a deeper look at how tour events operate underscores how much uncertainty remains
So, whatcha got?
While the rest of the sports world hibernates during the coronavirus pandemic, the PGA Tour is forging ahead with a season restart on June 11 at Colonial Country Club in FortWorth. The reimagined 2020 PGA Tour calendar unveiled last week is an ambitious endeavor: 14 tournaments in 13 weeks spread across the country, a venture many in and out of the game question whether is truly feasible. With any number of moving parts to a professional golf tournament ordinarily requiring the coordinated efforts of 1,500 to 2,500 people, can it be pulled off?
The decision to move forward is bred by confidence from Tour and tournament officials that their collective footprint can be minimized in an environment filled with new restrictions. Restrictions regarding safety, yes, that the sport can adhere to physical distancing from its competitors and those conducting the events, and by barring fans from at least the first four events. But also economical and logistical concerns, areas whose limits are shifting and evolving. So how does the Tour go about scaling down its operations to meet these unassailable, and uncompromising, new parameters?
Uncompromising? That adjective seems equally applicable to the Tour brass....See, for instance, that Chainsmokers concert....let's take a couple of bits out of order:
There’s also the acknowledgement that none of this begins without widespread COVID-19 testing. And currently there is a gap between what Tour and tournament officials aspire to do with testing versus the reality of coronavirus monitoring, which health experts say is woefully lagging. There are still seven weeks until the Tour’s restart to bridge this difference, but to go forward without reliable testing is a non-starter, as safety is paramount in every decision.
This is a bit of a Rorschach test, as the listener can impute his own biases into Jay Monahan's conditions. My own tend to the more cynical, to wit, that Jay wants to give the appearance of restarting, but will not have the stones to do so....
Then there's this:
A spectator-free golf course is the obvious response, but the changes under discussion go deeper than cosmetics. The entire Tour experience is being recalibrated during thecoronavirus pandemic. That includes who is working the events—from Tour staff, tournament officials and volunteers—and what their roles may be. It involves a review of the elements of a modern-day tour event, ranging from tracking scoring data to hosting pro-ams, to determine what are considered vital to running an event and what are deemed comforts. Moreover, which non-players/workers will be allowed, if any, on the property? And what will and won’t viewers see on the television and digital broadcasts, including who will be behind the cameras and mics? As each decision on who or what stays and goes is made—when contacted by Golf Digest, PGA Tour officials acknowledged they’re still in the planning process regarding many aspects of tournament operations—millions of dollars in revenue could be saved or lost, which will have an impact on players’ earnings and charity donations.
So, the impression is that it's a Corona-induced bit of zero-based budgeting, ruthlessly requiring each person on site to be justified as ..... well, what's the word I'm desperately seeking? That each be essential to the event.... But, have you noticed how each governor and mayor on TV is impeccably coiffed? Yup, their essential is just a wee bit different than our own.
As Jay keeps reminding us, golf is contested over hundreds of acres, so you're probably thinking that the CBS/GC footprint will be excessive. You might be pleasantly surprised at their ability to adapt:
As for the broadcast itself, officials involved in conversations with CBS Sports (in charge of televising the first 11 Tour events after the season resumes) and the PGA Tour said CBS is working on tinkering with its coverage, possibly cutting the amount of on-site staff by 30-40 percent, both to limit interaction at the course and reduce the amount of people traveling across the country. For context, a CBS official said it employs 70-something on-site workers in a normal week.
“You will still have the talent, production, operation, cameras, audio, technicians, trucks,” a source said. “There won’t be areas cut.”
However, that reduction will manifest in the coverage itself. There will likely be fewer feature holes and groups and limited camera angles. There’s also expected to be a reduced video replay capacity. “We aren’t going back to the ’70s,” a source said. “But this won’t be the Super Bowl, either.”
Pretend it's the Masters, and therefore there's no need to show us the front nine.... I kid, but hand-held cameras are fine...
But if you believe the Tour isn't really serious about this, here's your tell:
Tournament officials know they won’t have the luxury of their usual corps. They are expecting many will drop out due to ongoing safety concerns, especially retirees, who are more at risk for COVID-19. Yet, at least in the aggregate, there won’t be a majorreduction in volunteers. Officials for the first four events—Charles Schwab Challenge, RBC Heritage, Travelers Championship and Rocket Mortgage Classic—estimate they will need 500 to 700 helpers to run their tournament.
“It’s not like we can run a tournament with myself and two other people,” says Michael Tothe, Charles Schwab Challenge tournament director. “It takes the majority of our volunteer workforce. We [can get by] without all of them, but we need many of them. There could be as many as 1,000 people on the property at any one time. People probably don’t realize what goes into this.”
Even in a slimmed down incarnation, that figure may seem high. However, there are areas the Tour has identified as essential, chief among them Shotlink. The Tour’s proprietary data content is key for scoring, stats and its gambling relationships, such as with daily fantasy site DraftKings. A fully-operational Shotlink system, according to multiple officials, ranks only behind the players in tournament priority.
From that 1860 Open Championship, more than 130 years of elite professional golf tournaments were played before the advent of Shot Link, so....WTF!
Geoff is as befuddled as your humble blogger, reacting thusly:
Outside of scoring, I’m not sure how eager fans and players are to have that information versus a simple return to play when it’s safe to do so. Especially if setting up Shotlink impacts COVID-19 testing for those more in need.
Just as expanding fields are being expanded at a time the size of gatherings is under scrutiny, this is a headscratcher. Hundreds and hundreds of golf tournament are played annually without ShotLink but with some form of live scoring. If a “fully operational” ShotLink system is the only way to monitor scoring, a reassessment of priorities is certainly in order.
As an aside, DraftKings began public trading on NASDAQ Friday.
Not that I tend towards the cynical, but the Tour is very proud of its deal to sell its data to the online betting houses, but surely that can't be the explanation.... Say it ain't so, Jay! By the way, how many encores did the Chainsmokers play?
I laughed off this story from a few days ago. Scott Stallings has some reasonable things to say about the nature of the Tour's restart:
These changes could see players putting with the flagstick in, playing without rakes in bunkers and pulling their own clubs to minimize contact with caddies, among otheradjustments. While the proposed guidelines could allow golf to be played in the near future, Stallings doubts players would get on board with the changes.
“I just don’t think there’s any way guys are going to do that,” he said. “Guys are not going to play for their livelihood with no rakes in the bunker and no caddies. That’s just not going to happen.
“I’m fully confident that there are going to be guys who choose not to play.”
Those same players, Stallings said, might be willing to compete in unofficial made-for-TV exhibitions but to protect “the integrity of the game,” he thinks they’ll “put their foot down and say, ‘No, we have to wait.'”
There's no truth to the rumor that Patrick Reed thought they were playing preferred lies in bunkers all along....
I thought was laughable because it never occurred to me that this was a serious consideration. But if it's in the Tour Confidential, it has to be a thing, right?
1. As part of its scheduled resumption in mid-June, the PGA Tour told GOLF.com it is exploring expanding social distancing guidelines in competition. Under the prospective mandates, players could be required to putt with the flagstick in, play without rakes in bunkers, and pull their own clubs to minimize contact with caddies, among other changes. Three-time Tour winner Scott Stallings said not all players would get on board with the changes. “I just don’t think there’s any way guys are going to do that,” he told our James Colgan. “Guys are not going to play for their livelihood with no rakes in the bunker and no caddies.” If indeed the Tour enacts these measures, would you agree that players would push back?
Good luck finding a pushcart available? But seriously, this is not going to happen, but it's a glaring juxtaposition with the position that ShotLink is essential.
Sean Zak: Some probably will, but they’ll really look like sore thumbs. Are you really going to complain about an imperfect bunker when you could just be at home spending your money and not making any? Anyone who complains will not be embraced by fans, but then again, this is the Groupthink Tour. Their opinions tend to all be the same by the end of a tournament.
Josh Sens: Playing for “their livelihood with no rakes in the bunker and no caddies.” Egad. The horrors! Not even Dickens could have dreamed up such hardship. I’m sure Stallings is right. Some players will push back, and they’ll look as ridiculous as the above sounds.
Yes....but with an upper case BUT. Tell a Tour player he can't have a caddie, but you've got 700 ShotLink volunteers on site? Oh, and the average age of a caddie is X, but that average age of those volunteers is....what? X+30? Is it really the players that will seem out of touch?
Of course, Mike Bamberger remains the conscience of our game:
Michael Bamberger: I think the game would be improved at every level without rakes in bunkers. Return to them their dignity. They are traps. They are to be avoided. The players will have to conform, or there won’t be a tournament in which to play.
I'm in his camp, as well, though this might not be the best moment for this debate....
Alan has wise words for all:
Alan Shipnuck: The bunker thing is getting a lot of play, but there could be an easy solution: Why not have one designated raker per hole who cleans up after every player? But the larger point is that sports is going to be different for all of us when it returns, and the players would be wise to get on board.
Why should they, when Jay hasn't? And for some reason this answer triggers a follow-up question about the R&A:
Dylan Dethier: I don’t see this being an issue, at least from the Tour’s bigger names. Ever since they officially canceled the Players, it’s been mostly sunshine and roses when it comes to Tour players and the rulesmakers. I would say the far bigger issue would be if players felt there was no effort being made to bring golf back, but that’s clearly not the case. I’m sure Stallings will come around.
I'm happy that Jay wants to get us back to professional golf, even if it proves to be overly-optimistic. Alas, that he can't envision PGA Tour golf without ShotLink speaks to a man with priories that aren't likely to overlap with our own....
Do you have enough time for their follow-up? Just kidding, I'm well aware that you have nothing but time on your hands:
2. We’re about 40 days out from the Tour’s scheduled return, at the Charles Schwab Challenge. What’s the biggest challenge the Tour faces between now and then to make that event successful?
Sean Zak goes right for the jugular:
Zak: The biggest challenge is obviously making sure 100 percent of the people involved are virus-free. Not 90 percent that is “probably” 100 percent. Not even 98 percent of people tested. 100 percent. Assuring 100 percent of anything in this world is difficult. Can the PGA Tour do it during the most uncertain of times? I think I am properly a skeptic.
Well, that straw man's jugular, in any event: Here are a couple of guys more tethered to reality:
Dethier: This is sort of ambiguous, but the biggest challenge is the same that every business and governmental entity in the country faces: knowing the trade-off between opening and staying closed. It’s always going to be a calculation. At the moment, it’s clear it would be irresponsible to gather large groups of people at PGA Tour events. In 40 days, it’s probably going to be murkier. There are plenty of positives to holding a Tour event (and plenty of negatives that go along with canceling one) so the biggest challenge is how to balance those forces against the very real threat to human life that is posed by the coronavirus. Not an equation we learned in school.
Bamberger: That’s well-said, Dylan. Life offers no guarantees, and the idea of any environment being 100 percent safe is unrealistic and has never been realistic. So, as Dylan says, a trade-off. Life carries risks. We manage them.
As thoughtful as these guys are, there's one thing they instinctively fail to cover, which is the threat to human life caused by keeping folks under house arrest and destroying their livelihoods. I'm sure our media will get right on that one...
About That Ryder Cup? - We've seen some pushback on that potential sound stage Ryder Cup, one from each side as it so happens. First, Rory:
“I get the financial implications for everyone involved … there’s a lot that goes into putting on the Ryder Cup that people don’t probably know or appreciate – but having a Ryder Cup without fans is not a Ryder Cup.
“For me I would much rather they delay it until 2021 than play it at Whistling Straits without fans. And that’s from a European going to America, knowing that I’m going to get abuse!”
This guy as well:
A @CTScoreboardPod exclusive. Hear from @RyderCupUSA Vice Captain Jim Furyk on the prospect of playing the #RyderCup with no fans. Full pod to come as we go hole by hole breaking down his 58 at @TravelersChamp pic.twitter.com/qoKxZZMv23— Jared Kotler (@JaredKotler) April 21, 2020
You can add Tommy Fleetwood and Padraig Harrington to that list, as well....
But then we get pushback to that pushback. Paul McGinley writes at SkySports...well, his subhead says it all:
"This is a moment for all stakeholders in golf to collaborate, communicate and support each other. Having open minds could well protect the sport and some of its historic events from spiralling into crisis"
He's surprisingly upbeat about the PGA's chances of pulling this off:
The PGA Tour have scheduled four tournaments, starting in June, to be played without spectators. They will be most fortunate to have access to several hundred thousand testing kits ahead of these events. Combined with quarantining, social distancing and restrictions allowing selected key personnel on site, I actually think they may well be able to pull this off.
It will take a lot of work and careful monitoring but is achievable if everyone involved accepts and abides by the measures that will be essential to create a safe environment for players, caddies and officials.Alongside our becoming acquainted with watching other sports played behind closed doors and, assuming that this is successful, a "new norm" for watching sport will likely be created. We will be able to visually enjoy our sports again through TV coverage, with no spectators; a welcome return to our enjoyment of sport from our sofas, albeit not like we are used to.
Selected key employees? It's true enough, as Jay apparently picked the "all of the above" option....
I actually wish that he kept the Ryder Cup out of the mix, because to me he's really making the argument to support the efforts to restart the games, including this on the long-term economic prospects:
The suspension of play in men's professional golf is made even more complex by the number of different independent governing bodies involved. There are seven different owners of the elite golf events and Tours in the world. Each relies heavily for their sustainability on incomes derived from the playing of events they administer.
Their insurance policies are unlikely to include a worldwide pandemic like this which gives rise to a number of questions for each organisation:
- In the face of the financial implications that could potentially range anywhere from cash flow issues to bankruptcy, can they realistically afford the extreme measure of cancellation?
- Do they have enough in the coffers to put everything on hold for the rest of an uncertain 2020?
- Have they got the financial resources to tide them over and ensure employment of their staff until professional competition resumes in its entirety?
- Can they feel certain that 2021 will definitely be back to normal?
There are obviously folks who think that PGA Tour is moving too aggressively, mostly out of concern for safety. Of course, there's always a few who will be outraged at the thought of anyone not having a boot on their throat, but those folks presumably don't read this blog.
But many have focused on McGinley's comments in relation to the Ryder Cup, most notably Shack in this post. But there's only this one reference to that event:
The recent talk of playing without spectators has been mainly around the staging of the Ryder Cup in September. The proposed restrictions envisage the exclusion of crowds extending to all the major golf championships, including the Masters, as well as to other sports including football and the English Premier League.
To me, that's just an acknowledgement of the sate of play, but he himself doesn't make that specific case. And those profound economic concerns? I don't actually think we need to worry about the Ryder Cup, that elite event with no purse. But come to think of it, perhaps that explains the PGA of America prioritizing the Ryder Cup over the PGA Championship...
Also making the case for a no-fan Ryder Cup, is that same Shack:
Shack Show Quick Take: Why A Fan-Free Ryder Cup Might Be The Right Thing
After a few guests I felt there was an opening to consider the Ryder Cup/fan matter as afirst world news distraction. In part, because after watching some of the recent replays and considering the times, maybe this is the year to tone things down.
It’s only about 9 minutes of my thoughts, so your input on both this Shack Show format and today’s topic is always appreciated.Before half of Wisconsin sends hate mail, understand I was initially in the no fans/no Cup camp, and after looking through photos from Versailles in 2018, it pained me to offer this perspective knowing how many American fans were eager to root on their team at Whistling Straits.
To be clear, this is Geoff's new podcast, to which your humble correspondent has not listened. As such, I'm not clear on that which Geoff thinks needs "toning down". Those thoughts were much in evidence after the 1991 War by the Shore, but recent installments have reverted to an intense but friendly competition, no? Though, perhaps Geoff is, like your humble blogger, worried about Bethpage...
Of course, Geoff isn't always of one mind, as there was this comment in discussing a postponement:
A postponement obviously pushes all cup events back a year. Or, I’ll be the first to say what most of us think: cancel the 2021 Presidents Cup and play the Ryder Cup in 2021 and 2022. It’s what we all want anyway.
So, tone it down or turn it up to eleven? Whatever your call, Geoff agrees.
About That Sequel? - It's far from the first Hollywood tent pole to bomb, though it might be the first to still warrant a sequel:
The PGA Tour won’t be back until June, at the earliest, but in the meantime we do have one golf event to predict, dissect and discuss over the next month.
Turner Sports made it official on Wednesday, announcing a match between Tiger Woods, Phil Mickelson, Tom Brady and Peyton Manning dubbed “The Match: Champions for Charity.” It will air live on TNT with no spectators on site, and it will benefit coronavirus relief efforts. The team event will put Woods and Manning against Mickelson and Brady.
GOLF’s Michael Bamberger reported three weeks ago that this match was in the works and it’s picked up steam since, so Wednesday’s announcement was hardly a surprise. But there are still some elements of this match that have yet to be announced or figured out. Let’s break them down.
This is to happen sometime over Memorial Day weekend, and figures to be played at Medalist (sadly, those Seminole rumors have not panned out). The other point to note is that the PGA Tour has not yet signed off, awaiting their satisfaction as to the safety precautions. Oddly, Tiger and Phil have no hesitation in playing this event in the absence of ShotLink.... weird, because I had been reliably informed that professional golf cannot be safely played without that Yangtze Division of volunteers.
This is only of the most modest of attention, basically taking refuge in the assumption that it can't be any worse than the original... Another key assumption is that by Memorial Day, Big Break will seem Oscar-worthy.
But here's where it could get modestly interesting:
What’s the format?
Tiger and Phil played match play in Las Vegas two years ago, and this format will likely be a four-ball. Playing foursomes (alternate shot) would be a fun addition for half the match, especially to see how Brady and Manning perform under that kind of pressure. If handicaps are involved, The Action Network reports Manning is at a 6.4 while Brady is an 8.1. This can’t just be the Tiger vs. Phil show with Brady and Manning tagging along, so we’re likely to see something level the playing field.
It gets a bit complicated, no? Those indexes are only half the story, though, because Tiger and Phil are legitimately +6-7. It's a bit tricky to ensure that the QB's matter.... in fact, I'll go out on a limb and predict that it's their play that will provide the most interest. That seems a safe call, because I can't conceive that Peyton and Brady could possibly play more poorly than Tiger and Phil did at Shadow Creek.
Shall we see what the TC gang thinks?
4. The Match II is on. Tiger Woods and Peyton Manning will face Phil Mickelson and Tom Brady in May in Florida for charity. We don’t know the exact format, but what bells and whistles would you like to see in play to improve the event from its first iteration?
Zak: Make it wacky as hell. One of the best aspects of the Skins Game in Japan was when four amateurs hit tee shots in a quick, sweet scramble with the pros. Force Tiger and Phil to hit tee shots and sit out the rest of the hole. Force the quarterbacks to be all-time putter for three holes. Anything creative will be better than The Match 1.0.
Sens: Zak is onto something there. I’d add at least a few holes of alternate-shot competition. Make Brady leave Phil in some impossible position and see how he gets out of it. Also: sprinkle some football skills challenges into the mix. We know Mickelson can throw the pigskin a bit. Can Tiger? Can either run a post pattern? Or at least limp their way through one?
Shipnuck: Yeah, the problem with the first Match was that it couldn’t decide if it was hokey entertainment or hard-core competition so it wound up being neither. By introducing amateurs, this edition is clearly the latter, so they need to mix up the format and have fun with it.
Dethier: They should just hold a “run-through” practice round match with these four guys, not tell them they’re filming it, and air that one. I’m excited for this, don’t get me wrong, but I’m already cringing at the forced banter.
Bamberger: Golf is complicated enough, and this event will draw viewers who don’t know it well. I’d have all four players hole out and count every stroke and add ’em up. In other words, not a better ball. So what the QBs do really matters. That will bring out their athleticism and their competitiveness. We will see them as they really are.
For what its worth, I think Alan misfires pretty badly there. The problem with the first match was far more profound than he seems to realize. It was a shameless money grab, which perhaps they could have weathered, but combined with technological glitches and 10-handicap golf left exactly no one happy... well, maybe Phil.
I think they can have some fun with the format, if they can let themselves... alternate shot could be the ticket, as it checks off many of the boxes. And I've got a further tweak, have them draw blindly for the batting order, so that Tiger and Brady hit the tee ball on the odd-numbered holes, and Phil and Peyton on the evens. Let us see how each team manages under those constraints, and we might have something worth watching.
Although this doesn't inspire confidence:
Tiger Woods says match with Phil, Brady, and Manning will be about helping relief efforts—and needling one other
The former is timely. But who wants to tell them that the latter isn't nearly as interesting as they seem to find it?
About Those Long Reads - Today is all about closing browser tabs, and you're the lucky beneficiaries. Lucky, because there are some great reads to be savored.
First, a deep dive on a scandal that I'd heard of, but knew nothing about:
The sandbagging scandal that shook golf
From the archive (March 2001): Decades after padding his handicap and almost making off with thousands, the man behind the Deepdale Scandal was still paying the price
Better yet, the story comes via the late Dave Anderson, the former Pulitzer-winning N.Y. Times sportswriter. This bad photo is a wonderful memory for me:
That's Employee No. 2 foisting an Unplayable Lies business card off on Dave at a Met. Golf Writers awards dinner.... Of course that was a few years ago, back when she actually read my little blog. Not that I'm bitter...
It's a wild story, though the dollar amounts will seem laughably small....
Next up, the Sands of Nakagima. Does that ring a bell? The story begins on the 13th hole at Augusta National in 1978 and, be forewarned, there's haiku involved:
The story began on Friday, April 7, at Augusta National. It was a day of infamy in the life of Tsuneyuki Nakajima (pronounced Tsuneyuki Nakajima) who damn nearcommitted hara-kiri in Rae’s Creek.
According to the record, Nakajima, at 23, was the youngest Japanese PGA champion … before he stepped in the water. He is now the first man, of any age, to make a 13 on a single hole at Augusta during tournament play. That eclipsed the record of Frank Walsh, who made a 12 on the par-5 eighth in 1935.
Nakajima, playing in his first Masters, opened with an 80 on Thursday. On Friday, he was even par going into No. 13, “the Azalea Hole,” a 485-yard, dogleg-left par 5. A long drive around the corner leaves an iron to the green and eagle possibilities. Nakajima didn’t need a calculator to know that he had to have an eagle for any chance of making the cut. All or nothing. And as they say in aerial warfare and boxing, “He went the kamikaze route!” Attempting to hit the longest drive possible, Nakajima duck-hooked it into the creek.
Wild goose, wild goose
At what ageDid you make your first journey—Issa
He was forced to drop the ball out. Penalty shot. The third swipe went less than 100 yards. The fourth sailed into the creek in front of the green.
On the shingleBeaten by wavesHe sleeps with his headAmongst the rocks—HitomaroPerhaps feeling his luck would change, he attempted to blast the ball from the water. Everything flew straight up, and the ball came down on top of one of his FootJoys. Penalty! Oh! Oh! Unsnap calculator case … push on button … clear! … click … click, click, click, etc. … Total! He now lay 7! Maintaining his composure, he handed his sand wedge to his caddie, for cleaning, but they muffed the exchange, and the club was accidentally dropped in the water. Ground club hazard! Penalty! Clear … click, click, click, click, click, click, click, click … Total! Nine! Finally, Nakajima wedged it out of the creek and over the green, chipped on and two-putted. Final audit. Clear! … Number of times ball struck … click, plus eight … number of penalty shots … click, plus five … push add … click. Total … 13!
When I went outIn the spring meadowsTo gather flowersI enjoyed myselfSo much that I stayed all night—Akahito
Bit of an overly long excerpt, but thirteen strokes takes a bit of time... and where else will you turn for your golf-infused haiku?
Of course, the indelible nickname comes from trauma endured later that summer on the iconic Road Hole.... He was safely on that green in two, and then....suddenly not. Give it a read if you don't remember the circumstances.
Next up, the Land of the Lefties:
Badenoch. The Scots accent the first syllable and dwell gutturally on the last: Bay-de-nochhht. The word means “drowned land” in Gaelic; back in the 14th century, a locallaird known as The Wolf of Badenoch brutishly held sway over the district. It is now fine deer-stalking country, with Britain’s best ski slopes near to hand, but to me “Badenoch” means one thing alone: The Land of the Left-handed Golfers.
I first heard of this mysterious district from a left-handed veterinarian named Peter Stuart, an expatriate Scot who lives near London. A stalwart of the Left Handed Golfers’ Society of Great Britain, Stuart twice had won its coveted Quaich Bowl, a silver replica of a vessel owned by Charles I, which is said to be the oldest golf trophy for left-handers in the world. Remarkably, Stuart considered his left-handedness to be quite—well, unremarkable.
“I don’t feel I’m a freak,” Stuart had said. “I come from the District of Badenoch in the Central Highlands, which is sort of a left-handers’ Brigadoon. I’d say about 40 percent of the golfers up there are lefties.”
If you guessed "Shinty" in your office pool you're a winner... but what were you doing in your office?
Last up for today, have you noticed the success of European golfers at the Masters? But it wasn't that long ago, 1980 to be exact, that the Masters was for locals only to win....
The year was 1980 and this would be the 44th Masters, an invitational tournament which gave the Americans the chance to show off their skills and, all being well for the folks watching on TV, win on home soil.On all bar two occasions this had been the case. Only Gary Player had broken the deadlock, in 1961 and 1978.
Only four Europeans were in the field – and one of those was an amateur, Peter McEvoy. Mark James was playing in his first and only Masters, while Sandy Lyle was making his debut. Finally, our own reigning Open champion was Seve Ballesteros.
This would be the Spaniard’s fourth appearance in Georgia. His uncle Ramon Sota had finished sixth in 1965, which at the time was the best performance by any European. Hence Seve’s early love affair with Augusta National.
This bit made me laugh, mostly because had I typed such a thing they'd be calling me a racist:
At 13 he had an iron left into the par 5, a shot which was caught heavy and which resulted in another visit to the famous strip of water while Newton two-putted for a birdie to be within three of the lead.
“The fight was on the inside. What I say was ‘son of beech!’”
I get that that's how he pronounced it, but there's no call to make fun of a man speaking in a non-native language....
Think of the names that follow him on that honor toll, Lyle, Faldo (3x), Olazabal (2x), Woosie and Langer (2x). OK, I didn't include Danny Willett there, but I'm guessing you'll agree that he's not of the same stuff as those other guys.
Lots for you to digest and we'll see each other down the road.
No comments:
Post a Comment