Late-Week Laments - End Times Edition

Just when you think things can't get any more bizarre.... 

Phil, Revealed - An excerpt from the forthcoming Billy Walters autobiography has dropped, and take a wild guess who's featured.  Yup, quite the flattering profile:

It’s not news that Phil Mickelson liked to gamble. It’s also not news that his betting led to staggering losses. Those losses had been previously reported in the neighborhood of $40 million.

But a former Mickelson associate alleges that was a lowball number.

Like, really low.

According to a new account by a former gambling partner of Mickelson’s, the golfer’s losses amounted to closer to $100 million, the nine-figure downside to a destructive habit that saw Mickelson wager more than $1 billion over the past 30 years.

I have to question that lead premise though.... Certainly Phil likes to place and win bets, but it's not actually "gambling" if you don't pay off those losing bets, is it now?

There's an incendiary allegation that we'll get to in a sec, but first some background on that Walters-Mickelson partnership:

The next time they crossed paths, in a pro-am at the 2008 Wachovia Championship, in Charlotte, N.C., Walters says that Mickelson was blunter about his interests and broached the topic of a gambling partnership.

Walters was no stranger to such arrangements, but he says he told Mickelson that he only entered them if they allowed him to place wagers with accounts that he didn’t already have access to, and at sums greater than the limits most bookmakers placed on him.

Mickelson checked both those boxes.

“In all the decades I’ve worked with partners and beards, Phil had accounts as large as anyone I’d seen,” Walters writes. “You don’t get those types of accounts without betting millions of dollars.”

Walters says their deal was verbal, and that it called for them to “split everything, fifty-fifty.” During their five-year run, Walters says that he and Mickelson also played “a few dozen rounds together,” always with money on the line but never at big stakes by their standards. The bets were “usually $10,000.”

They saved the big wagers for offshore accounts.

But just a reminder, that this is just the piece of the iceberg that Walters saw.  It doesn't included the huge gambling debt that Callaway paid off in 2004, nor the amounts bet with the Detroit mob.  That last story was broken by a local paper when Phil played in Detroit, leading him to threaten the event and the city over their failure to control the....checking notes, independent media.

There's more:

According to Walters, Mickelson had account limits of $400,000 on both college sports and the NFL, caps that allowed Walters to double his own limits. Walters says that Mickelson also had a “$100,000 limit on college over/under bets with each book, twenty times my maximum.”

Over the first six months, Walters says their partnership “ran like Secretariat.” Having studied Mickelson’s betting patterns, Walters says he learned to emulate them, the better to disguise his own involvement in the wagers. It wasn’t long, though, before the bookies caught on.

“They told Phil the best were far more disciplined than usual, so they knew they weren’t solely his,” Walters writes. “He could resume his betting, they said, but only if it was on his own.”

Are you done laughing yet?  They could tell the bets weren't actually Phil's because they weren't idiotic, but his business was only welcome if he went back to pissing his money away.  

For those keeping detailed scorecard at home:

Walters comes to a far larger tally, based on what he says are his own “detailed betting records” and two other “very reliable sources.”

Between 2010 and 2014, Walters says that a partial picture of Mickelson’s gambling ledger shows that he bet $110,000 to win $100,000 a total of 1,115 times; $220,000 to win $200,000 more than 800 times; and, in a single day in 2011, placed 43 bets on baseball alone that led to $143,500 in losses.

“In all, he wagered a total of more than $1 billion during the past three decades,” Walters writes.

That's billion with a "B"?  Sure sounds under control to me....

As I've noted frequently, this specific of the story doesn't seem to intrigue folks quite like it does me:

In “Gambler,” Walters ranges beyond betting to discuss the 2017 insider-trading case that led to his being sentenced to a five-year-prison term. In the case brought by federal prosecutors, Mickelson was named as a relief defendant, meaning he was not accused of wrongdoing. According to the suit, Mickelson was in gambling debt to Walters and received a stock tip from him that that earned Mickelson nearly $1 million.

Mickelson, who was ordered to pay back that money, did not testify in the trial, a development that Walters says hurt his own legal cause.

Gee, Billy, why was the debt unpaid?  It seems that this is something of a pattern for our hero...

I promised that headline item:

Exorbitant numbers aside, perhaps the most eye-popping of Walters’ claims stems from a call that he says he received in September 2012 from Medinah Country Club, outside Chicago, host of that year’s Ryder Cup. Walters says that Mickelson was on the other line, keen to place a $400,000 bet on the U.S. team to win.

Walters writes:

“Have you lost your f—ing mind,” I told him. “Don’t you remember what happened to Pete Rose?” The former Cincinnati Reds manager was banned from baseball for betting on his own team. “You’re seen as a modern-day Arnold Palmer,” I added. “You’d risk all that for this? I want to part of it.”

Whether Mickelson wound up placing the bet elsewhere, Walters says he doesn’t know. But it would have been a loser, as the Europeans mounted an epic Sunday singles comeback that included a crucial point won by Justin Rose in his match against none other than Mickelson himself.

Gee, if he were betting the other side that could explain that Sunday at Medinah.... Amusingly, this might only be the third most egregious Ryder Cup offense from Phil, as I'd place it behind 2014 and 2004, though the order of those two is arguable.  But, kids, this is the man we put in charge of our Ryder Cup Task Force.  

But perhaps the best part of this story is that it's triggered a classic-of-the-genre non-rebuttal rebuttal:

I never bet on the Ryder Cup. While it is well known that I always enjoy a friendly wager on the course, I would never undermine the integrity of the game.

I have also been very open about my gambling addiction. I have previously conveyed my remorse, took responsibility, have…

— Phil Mickelson (@PhilMickelson) August 10, 2023

Heaven forfend!  How would betting with the Detroit mob undermine the integrity of the game?

But, riddle me this, Batman, given that others have always paid off his gambling debts, in what sense has be taken responsibility?

Return of the Jay - Pretty amazing how under wraps this was kept:

7. What happened during Monahan’s medical leave?

Monahan’s departure in mid-June due to a then-undisclosed medical concern was sudden and

mysterious, which was not unlike the Saudi deal he had just hatched. The Tour’s statement at the time was brief. Speculation came. Was it because of the deal? Something else? In announcing via a memo his return, he noted how the past two years have been “grueling for us all,” presumably a nod to the Tour’s fight with LIV.

Health, of course, is a private matter, but Monahan is a public figure. On Wednesday, he was asked what happened.

“I think the reality for me was that I was dealing with anxiety, which created physical and mental health issues and challenges for me. I realized that, as I said earlier, I needed to step away and to deal with that and understand how to develop the skills to deal with that going forward. I knew that we have a great team in place, and I knew that I had — ultimately, you can’t wait when you’re in a situation like that, and I needed to deal with it, and I needed to deal with it for my family, as I said, for myself, and ultimately to be as strong as I can possibly be for the players.

“That was a very hard thing for me, and for the reasons I said earlier, but I’m really proud of the fact and I’m grateful for the fact that I was able to do that, and for me, it’s very personal, and I think it is for anybody, and in being personal, I recognize that people deal with far worse problems and challenges in their lives, and I realize that — I’m not looking for — all I was trying to do was get myself back to a place where I was ready to do exactly what I’m doing right now. But I’m proud of myself for doing that.”

Your humble blogger isn't always the most sensitive guy on the planet, but I certainly hope that he can meet this challenge successfully.

That said, what are we to make of this?  Jay Monahan is a hired hand, and we typically expect a level of dispassionate objectivity from such outsiders.   I understand that it was a pressure-packed year, but it's just a deal, right?  He's been doing deals his entire professional career, or is that his conscience speaking?

Did Judas go for therapy after the crucifixion?  I'm far more sympathetic than it may seem from the above, but it presents an obvious issue that no one else seems to want to put into voice.  To wit, is this the guy the Tour should have at the controls?  Psychological fragility is nothing to be ashamed of, but the usual course of treatment would be to reduce the stress level of the afflicted.

The above came out of a press availability, so shall we sample some of what else Jay shared?  Regrets, he's had a few:

8. How did Monahan feel when he heard that players felt he betrayed them?

The question drew maybe Wednesday’s longest pause.

Following the deal, players were angry. The proposal would now not only partner them with the group they fought against, but in some cases, rejected. They felt betrayed. A quote from pro Xander Schauffele, during the Scottish Open, is notable here.

“If you want to call it one of the rockier times on Tour, the guy was supposed to be there for us, wasn’t. Obviously he had some health issues. I’m glad that he said he’s feeling much better. But yeah, I’d say he has a lot of tough questions to answer in his return, and yeah, I don’t trust people easily. He had my trust and he has a lot less of it now. So I don’t stand alone when I say that.”

To be clear, he betrayed his constituents, but apparently all that matter is how he felt about their reaction....

When you heard the comments that you had lost players’ trust and that the players said that they felt that you betrayed them, how did that make you feel personally?

“How did that make me feel personally? Determined to regain it. And for those that I lost it with, determined to regain it. I see a clear path to doing that, as difficult as that may seem right now for some.

And what is he doing to regain that trust?

1. The specifics of the deal remain ongoing — and largely unclear

Since the deal’s announcement — where the Tour and PIF entered into an arrangement to create a new, for-profit enterprise and end pending litigation between the Tour and PIF-funded LIV Golf — there have been vague details on what that may actually look like. Notably, that lack of clarity has also led to player unease. (More on that in a minute.)

Wednesday, though, Monahan provided little new insight, saying at one point: “Ultimately what we did is we had an agreement to explore an agreement. That process is well underway.”

Later, he added: “I think it’s the right move, and obviously being in a position with the establishment of NewCo [the for-profit enterprise] provides us with the opportunity to have productive conversations and to move PIF into the position where they become a minority investor in the PGA Tour, and … we have economic operational board control, and the strength of the PGA Tour model stays intact under our governance, and we’re moving forward in a way that unifies our sport.

“Ultimately, when we’re sitting down at some point at the end of this year and these conversations have been completed, I fully expect that that’s where we’ll be. But I understand that we’re a long way between where we are today and that point, but I’m determined and inspired to get there on behalf and for our players and for our fans.”

Basically doing the same thing that created that sense of betrayal.... Cutting deals behind the scenes and then presenting a fait accompli to the rubes.

In the larger sense, I don't feel I have any clue as to what's going on:

2. The PGA Tour can survive without the deal

Of course, the deal could fall through. Could it be voted down by the player directors? Could it run into legal concern? Could it run into issues with the government? (Two Tour officials sat before Congress last month.) Could the PIF have second thoughts? All are, of course, possibilities.

Which led to this exchange on Wednesday, where, in short, Monahan said that the Tour could live without the deal.

Is there a chance with the deadline that there is no agreement, and if so, what would be the path forward?

“Again, for us to reach an agreement … we’ve got to have approval and buy‑in from our board.

I assume Peter Malnati has received some valuable offer, but this is the head-scratcher:

Is there a contingency plan? How imperative is it that you actually strike a deal? Is the Tour going to be sustainable if you don’t figure something out with the PIF?

“Yeah, the Tour will be sustainable. But again, we have identified a framework to a future that has the PIF as a minority investor in the PGA Tour where we have the proper safeguards in place to protect our model from a governance standpoint and from a control standpoint. There are a lot of conversations that led to the framework. Admittedly, there’s a lot more conversations that need to happen to complete the definitive.

“You always — the expectation is that we’ll complete an agreement, but there are always contingencies.”

OK, let me see if I have this straight.  We had to do the deal to protect the Tour's viability, but if no deal is struck they're still viable?

Does this make anyone feel better?

5. What does the PIF involvement look like — and what is the potential end game?

Let’s set this up. You may have been thinking it yourself, if you’ve been following along.

The Al-Rumayyan-led PIF funded LIV. It funded its players and its staff. LIV grew. It grew a format and a schedule and a TV deal — all the way down to T-shirts and caps. It competed for prestige.

And now the Al-Rumayyan-led PIF is all of a sudden on Team PGA Tour, regardless of whether LIV sticks around? At the least, it’s a leap. On Wednesday, there was this exchange:

What’s your sense of what Yasir wants out of this? Do you get the sense he wants to be collaborative and wants to be part of the general golf landscape, or are you getting any sense at all that he does not want to be disruptive, like it’s sort of been the past year?

“I think the framework agreement speaks for what he wants. I’m not going to put words in anybody else’s mouth, but we obviously spent a lot of time with him getting to that, and that’s something that the PGA Tour, the DP World Tour and PIF have agreed to is the framework for these discussions, and I think he wants to see a successful outcome, and we want to see that with him.”

There were exactly two binding terms in that framework agreement, the discontinuance of that antitrust lawsuit and the non-disparagement clause.  So, Jay wants us to believe that Yasir will p[ump in billions, but those two things are all he'll want.... That's a good one.

I'm not even sure at this point that anyone expects this deal to be consummated, but I also can't imagine what the breakdown in those negotiations might look like.

And the desertions start accumulating:

6. What happened to Andy Pazder?

The resignation of Andy Pazder, the Tour’s chief tournaments and competitions officer, on Tuesday was curious.

As was Monahan’s short reaction to the abrupt departure of a 30-plus-year Tour employee.

“I don’t have anything to add beyond the statement that was issued yesterday, other than I had the opportunity to thank Andy … for 34 years of contributions to the PGA Tour, which were significant and meaningful.”

Added to Randall Stephenson, rats and ships, it seems.

That'll be it for today, kids, and I'll look forward to seeing you on Monday.