The Match: A Brief Postmortem

Don't worry, I won't keep you long.  All I can say is that I feel dirty for having let them have their way with me, and I was lucky to only catch the final eleven holes (If you call those last three "holes".

The good news?  I don't think we need to waste our time worrying about who will play in the next of these....

Thirty seconds seems a big ask, but we have to start somewhere:

The Match between Tiger Woods and Phil Mickelson had plenty of action — in their checkbooks early and on the fairways late. The Match went a full 18 holes, plus four

holes of overtime, to everyone’s delight. What did you miss? We’ve got you covered below. 

Who won: Phil Mickelson 

Why it matters: Because Tiger has beaten him his entire career! And because $9 million was on the line! And because it went to 22 holes! Seriously, it was a nice addendum to a rivalry that has spanned many years. Woods usually got the best of Mickelson. Not Friday.

As Rory said, maybe fifteen years ago?  Maybe....

So, who's spinning?  Shippy, you got next?

The Match was billed as a spectacle, but in the end it was just two proud champions playing golf

Playing golf is good....  but that's a very different thing than playing good golf.  I figured Charles Barkley was their insurance policy, and he had the line that will endure as the epithet for this event:

The Turner Sports commentator, who can be seen most frequently on TNT’s NBA

coverage, blasted Tiger Woods and Phil Mickelson for their poor play and the lack of quality golf on display during The Match. In fact, Barkley even jokingly said he could beat Tiger and Lefty if he were playing today. 

“This is some crappy golf,” Barkley said when Tiger and Phil were on the 9th hole. “Y’all know that. I could beat these two guys today.”

When you've lost Charles, you've lost the country.

That Shippy item linked above had some moments, most notably Alan calling every watering hole in town to find a place to watch it, when he was unable to order it through his Roku.  But he capture the aural beauty of the day perfectly here:

I never did get the Match to work on my TV, forced instead to watch it on my laptop. (For free. Seems like a bad business model but what do I know?) It was an exercise in cognitive dissonance. The announcers wouldn’t stop raving about Shadow Creek’s aesthetics but my eyes kept going to the aeration holes on the greens. There was breathless talk about the use of the world’s largest drone for beauty shots but its buzzing was so loud it was a distraction on nearly every shot on the opening holes. I was excited to have the players mic’d up, until Phil’s heavy mouth-breathing and Tiger’s snotty sniffles hijacked the broadcast.

We'll get to the free bit in a sec, but the heavy breathing and obstructed nasal passages were a bit off-putting...  They sounded like old men.

As for this bit which I missed, he makes it sound compelling:

The single most exciting moment of the front nine came on the par-3 7th hole, with its $200,000 closest-to-the-pin side bet. Woods went first and came up well short of a back-right pin, his ball rolling backward to 40 feet. Mickelson hit pretty much the same shot, and as his ball trickled back the slope the suspense was delicious. His shot expired a couple feet closer to the hole than Tiger’s, earning an ignominious windfall.

To his credit, Phil did promise major-like intensity.... Seriously, 40 feet?

At least the play was better than the technology, though that's setting the bar pretty damn low:

Word began to trickle out across social media early Friday afternoon as thousands tried to access Bleacher Report’s live stream of the Tiger-Phil match in Las Vegas: There seemed to be a problem. 

Users visiting the Bleacher Report site to pay for access to The Match were, well, unable to pay for access to The Match. 

ESPN media reporter Darren Rovell was all over the malfunction. “Bleacher Report Live stream slow or not working,” he wrote on Twitter. 

But as the afternoon wore on, users began to notice a change: the link to the B/R live stream was suddenly going through for free.

File this away under #youhadonejob.

Marty Kauffmann covers the TV beat for Golfweek, and he wasn't amused:

“This is some crappy golf. Y’all know that,” Charles Barkley saidmidway through the round. “These guys aren’t playing well. Listen, I know I’m not good, but I could beat

these two today. Maybe it’s nerves or whatever, but they’re both playing awful today.”

“The Match has been a game of mistakes,” analyst Darren Clarke said. 

In a rare epiphany, analyst Peter Jacobsen summarized Woods’ feeble birdie attempt on 16 with pleasing simplicity: “Underwhelming.” 

The same could be said of the entirety of “The Match.” Somewhere early in the round, Turner began offering the coverage free of chargeon its BR/Live site. That’s roughly the amount the entire coverage was worth.

And this:

This was a mess from the outset. I’m always open to new producers bringing new ideas to golf coverage, but Turner Sports’ production team – headed by Craig Barry, executive producer Michael Mandt and line producer Jeff Neubarth – made a totally predictable error. 

Seriously, I predicted this a week ago. Despite having the players mic’ed up, Turner Sports cluttered the coverage with seven announcers. Or maybe it was nine. I lost count. All I know is, it was at least seven announcers too many. 

Time and again, anchor Ernie Johnson or Jacobsen or Clarke or someone else insisted on chattering when Mickelson and Woods were talking to each other or their caddies. 

Johnson kept saying, “Let’s listen in,” as if he were doing viewers a favor by allowing them to hear what Woods and Mickelson were saying on course.

Shack was all over this as well, so hold that thought.  One last bit from Marty:

“I want to hear some more smack, I want to hear some more action,” analyst Pat Perez said late in “The Match.” “I want to see some more betting. But we also need some golf shots, some more good golf shots. These are the two icons of my generation. I want to see better shots.” 

But no, Woods and Mickelson remained poker-faced, hovering over their chips, playing it close to the vest. This wasn’t a duel in the desert. This was a battle of attrition, ultimately settled under the lights on a makeshift, 93-yard par-3 hole. 

The finale seemed so small, so unsatisfying. And yet, so appropriate.

And yet, like beating one's head against the wall, it felt so good when it mercifully ended.

So, Shack has a long, thoughtful post under this header:

The Match: The Great, Good, Bad And Ugly

The great?  This can't need much bandwidth, can it?  OK, whatcha got?

Charles Barkley - He should have been on the full broadcast, in hindsight. He got right to the point as Tiger and Phil struggled horrible to read Shadow Creek’s greens. He jousted as only he can with Justin Verlander’s Tweets, too. But sadly, Barkley also was not around for the last couple of hours to put a bow.

Alas, I was.....What else?

The Audio - Turns out, a feed of just open microphones would have been enough for most people. Phil was in hard sell mode early but once he settled into a normal round of golf, basically narrated the proceedings. Tiger chimed in with enough to make a player-only feed functional had that been an option. Yes, Phil was winded at times and a breather was distracting, but the real potential for this production came together as both players had driven beautifully down the 6th, the cameras were tight to both players as we could hear each in between clubs for the approach. The kind of gripping cinematic moment that the organizers had envisioned.

Like Marty above, this one I called.  We all know that audio has greatly improved on golf broadcasts in recent years, and it's a great thing.  But mostly the networks don't expose us to the raw feeds, they replay only the interesting bits for us....  They do that for a reason, that most of what an open mic picks up is drivel. 

I didn't have the benefit of hearing the front nine audio, and perhaps there was some charm to Phil's hard-sell mode.  But by the time I tuned in with them on the 11th hole, there wasn't much of interest, and what there was was subject to the announcing team talking over it. 

One last item:

ShotLink Putt Probables - A simple graphic told us how far the player was from the hole and his career make percentage (ShotLink era) from that distance. Simple, clean and informative.

And yet, they made none of them....  It's fine, but we get make percentages on the network broadcasts as well.

In your humble blogger's opinion, only Charles lives up to the tag, and he only mattered because he was willing to call the guys out for their horrible play.  Shall we look at the good?

Live Drone Shot Down The First Fairway - It was pretty cool to move from one last player interview to a live shot down the first fairway. Unfortunately, the technology appeared limited from there on out. Perhaps too many competing cell signals?

Sorry, didn't see it, but yet another technology fail in an event whose broadcast quality was pretty God-awful.

Pat Perez - he sounded engaged and as someone who knew the players, through in a few opinionated remarks about being surprised that Tiger was giving putts and at how they were orchestrating the charity-driven side bets. And not one F-bomb!

Meh!  I did see most of the pregame, and I expected way more from Pat as the only real golfer on that panel.  he didn't tell me a single thing I didn't already know...

Hole Graphics - animated hole graphics with tracer technology may have been the most vibrant and eye-catching I’ve seen. Once it was clear the drone was not reliable and the drone flyovers were needed, these jumped out as adding a futuristic feel to the telecast.

Tiger Woods’ Generosity - Wow was that many giving putts! But they all helped in the interest of pace of play and entertainment value of the match. This is a nice way of saying he twice prevented (possibly) having The Match end on a missed putt. Phil returned the favor once, by my count.

Phil Mickelson Wearing A Mic - He should be in the great category, but the hard sell mode a few times (how great is this? how great was Samuel Jackson?) dings the performance a bit. I love how he went off topic with the PGA Tour’s Mark Russell, with brother Tim Mickelson and with others. That’s about how Phil plays a normal round of golf and he gave a window into the types of conversations he has. If only…

Again, this is really slim pickings.... 

Shall we take a dive into the next two categories? 

The Bad

Announcers Talking Over Players - Everyone was guilty at some point and I’m sympathetic to the cause as this was not a normal broadcast crew, not a normal match and an unprecedented amount of sound for a sporting event to take in. Still, to miss out on Mickelson asking Russell about a rule of golf change he just does not comprehend and several other side chats about shots, was tough for the core golf fan. The more novice viewer may prefer announcer storytelling, which is why lead announcer Ernie Johnson trampled over so much talk.

The Champion’s Belt - sensational buckle design, simple brown leather look but uh, it didn’t fit Phil Mickelson, who looked visibly annoyed he couldn’t put it on. Next time, let’s make two belts, one for those with subcutaneous fat and one for those without. 

Ernie Johnson - As Phil Mickelson is looking through his rangefinder for a yardage, Ernie Johnson is telling us on the 18th hole that Phil “has the laser out.” Somewhere Frank Chirkinian was screaming. Unfortunately, Johnson regularly spoke over on-course conversations, stated the obvious (what we saw on screen) and did not embellish the action. He would have been better served by having his Inside the NBA counterpart Charles Barkley in the booth, perhaps.

Natalie Gulbis - She appeared for some first hole observations and surfaced again at the 18th tee for a bad interview after Tiger’s chip-in. Her absence in between was not missed.

Lots to gnaw on here, first to note that our feed cut off quite abruptly before the award of the champion's belt.  I'd love to fight with my cable provider over that, but the whole thing was so damn amateurish, and it was a relief when the screen went dark.

 Care for some ugly?  Though I'm guessing that Geoff will need a bigger blog:

The Playoff Hole - a wise move by promoters to be ready for a tight match and sudden death, the 93 yard shot required a hole location change and had a strange feel to it given the amount of money at stake.

Watching them cut that new hole was really bizarre... 

Capital One Ads - Presented in Playing Through mode as we saw golfers walking off the tee, we missed out on match discussions to be annoyed by Samuel Jackson and Charles Barkley asking what’s in our wallet. Better than Capital One cafe spots, but still pretty annoying commercials given that some of us paid for the match.

Of course I was excited to see what was in Samuel L. Jackson's wallet, but wasn't this broadcast promised to be without commercials?   I need a shower, perhaps a long one...

Gambling - All of the stakeholders learned a valuable lesson today: golf is tricky to bet on and real-time gambling is even trickier. While Mark Broadie supplied some stats that were of note. But the whirlwind nature of a two-man golf match—yes it moved amazingly fast—made it hard to embed bets or betting scenarios to enjoy. The most interesting pointed out may have been at the 7th tee when we learned the great 5-1 price punters got on the match being even after nine, was in play. Otherwise, the action moved too fast for fun gaming.

I know gambling is supposed to save our game, but it was really feeble....  The putting odds and  Broadie's probabilities are interesting, but when they're missing four-footers badly (Tiger, I'm talking to you), what's the point?

Gambling 2 - We heard about what MGM punters were betting on each hole but was it interesting to hear what punters were putting on each hole, without any real reason to be better players on particular holes? Not at all.

I'm not the perfect tour guide for this portion of the programming, as I'm not much of a sports better.  But I think my pre-match calls look pretty good, in that ultimately the underlying sporting event has to deliver on that basis, in which they failed miserably.

Shadow Creek - The course lived up to its name, serving up shadows while the late light hit the treetops. This created an unimpressive look to a course once ranked in Golf Digest’s top ten in the U.S. Add on the excess of Flinstone rocks, strategically-light design and tree overplanting, and Shadow Creek did not pop. The course exuded underwhelming television appeal in part because of the odd lighting situation. The 17th hole was deemed a genuine centerpiece but came off looking like something even waterfall lover Donald Trump would say was sooooo last century.

That portion that I saw was quite underwhelming....  But the shadows, encroaching darkness and use of lights all contributed to the Mickey Mouse atmospherics.

AT&T/Turner/Bleacher Report Synergy - Seen as the future of sports broadcasting, the inability to conduct normal transactions and ensuing decision to give away a pay-per-view match overshadowed everything. The disastrous rollout of the supposed future of broadcasting and sports packaging provided a stark reminder that the rush to usher in a new era is just that: rushed.

That's just priceless.....  The only purpose to this event was to grab that Jackson from each of us, and they screwed that up.  Really, you can't make this up...

To sum up, that guy that pegged it as "Putrid and pathetic " yesterday?  Like Phil on the front nine, he's guilty of overselling....  Please, no more of these.

Tiger v. Phil Friday

It is upon us.....  No doubt you've been following the hype as, perhaps for those in low-Earth orbit, it's been difficult to avoid.

Most notably this totally unscripted bit:

However, the presser did deliver this piece of gold: Mickelson is so confident that he'll birdie the first hole at Shadow Creek that he's willing to bet $100,000 on the line. 

Tiger must be standing on a telephone book.

“So I’ve thought a lot about this and there are spots out on the course that are some great spots for a little challenge and the challenges are coming directly out of our pockets, OK?” Mickelson said. “And I feel like the first hole is a great hole for me. And I believe – in fact I’m willing to risk $100,000 that says I birdie the first hole. So that’s how good I feel heading into this match.”

With some "oooohhhs" filling the room, Mickelson added, "You don’t have to take it. You don’t have to take it at all. But I’m going to throw that out there.” 

To which Woods replied, "Double it." 

Congratulations to all those that took the over on the "There will be a $50,000 or more side bet" prop.

I rolled my eyese when I heard Phil talking of seven-figure side bets, but he seems all-in on playing the roll of former friend Billy Walters.

Josh Berhow has the seven funniest lines from that presser, and you'll no doubt agree that we're grading on the curve:

5. Referring to Mickelson’s Mizzen+Main commercial, the one in which Mickelson hit the dance floor and did the worm, Woods said, “I’m not dancing [if I win]. That’s not happening.” [Laughs] Added Mickelson: “I’m intimidating with my moves.”

This is far and away the best of the bunch:

7. Asked if there were any thought of calling it “The Match: Phil vs. Tiger,” with Mickelson’s name first, they both laughed. “That was my first loss,” Mickelson said. “And I’m trying to get it back even 1-1 on Friday.”

Which only reminds of the fact that the negotiation of the terms and conditions might have been the best part of the entire process.  Although, as I've noted previously, Phil would seem to have the advantage as far as format and course set-up, so perhaps he's playing 3-D chess.

See if you think he's really the smartest guy in the room with this behind the curtain view of that first skirmish:

“Did you see how I baited him like that,” Mickelson crowed. “So, $200,000 I make

birdie on the first hole.” 

“Just water down the left. He likes to lose his golf ball to the left. A little flare out that he hits,” Woods chided. 

“Here’s what you’re missing,” Mickelson replied. “I’m going to hit a 2-iron in the fairway, and I am a great short-iron player. In fact, one of the best.” 

“Yeah,” Woods countered, “but if he hits that 2-iron a little hot, which he sometimes does, it’s a little right and hot and it’ll be up against that tree, he’ll be blocked out, so he can’t spin the ball … yeah.”

Magic 8-Ball says: Outlook Cloudy. 

Dylan Dethier finds it far worse than cloudy for our hero, taking that which comes out of Phil's piehole far too seriously:

Au contraire, Phil. The $200,000 bet Lefty put on the table is, by any statistical measure, a disaster. Let’s break down why. 

The par-4 opener at Shadow Creek is 393 yards, making it relatively short by PGA Tour

standards. But take a look at the hole itself. The landing area narrows significantly about halfway down the hole, meaning Mickelson will either lay back off the tee or try to find a relatively small target with his mercurial driver. A creek runs down the left side of the hole, while a fairway bunker guards the dogleg. 

In effect, that combination makes Shadow Creek’s opener a relatively neutral par 4, perhaps slightly easier than average. And there’s more good news for Mickelson: in 2018, he ranked sixth on Tour in birdie average, as well as sixth in par-4 birdie average. The only problem? He birdied par-4s just 20.06 percent of the time. That’s admirable, by the way — Dustin Johnson led the Tour and was hardly any better at 22.52 percent. But that number should be far closer to 50 percent for Mickelson’s bet to make sense.

If you let Phil drop his ball in the fairway, he's still be below a 50% chance to make birdie....  But of course it's that 3-D chess, so we mere mortals should just ooh and aah at the way he sucked Tiger in.

Josh Berhow obviously drew the short straw, also shamelessly pimping the vent with these nine reasons to watch:

3. No slouches 

Yes, these two are past their prime, but it’s not like they are limping onto the senior tour. Tiger Woods won the Tour Championship a couple of months ago and even Phil Mickelson ended a winless drought earlier this year, winning the WGC-Mexico Championship. Mickelson struggled to end the season, but if you think he won’t have his “A” game for this matchup you are crazy.

Josh musta been in a medically-induced coma during the Ryder Cup.... 

As for this?

8. The broadcast team 

Charles Barkley and Samuel L. Jackson are on the pregame show. I’ll pay $20 just to see what they have to say about the wonders of the golf swing.

To each his own, but those guys have to keep it lively for an hour, and I'm taking the under.

The best reason to watch might be the golf course, for which your humble blogger will never meet the membership criteria.  This unbylined item plays up that angle:

What it Looks Like: Hewn from a poker table-flat, lifeless plot of desert, Fazio and Wynn conjured up a Hollywood set come to life, complete with rolling terrain, thousands

of pines, bursts of flowers and a network of creeks and lakes. The foliage and features block out any glimpse of the surrounding desert, except for the mountain peaks.

Signature holes: There’s not a weak link in the entire chain, but five holes stand out for scenery and challenge, including the 553-yard par-5 4th, the 409-yard par-4 9th and the 438-yard par-4 15th. Still, the showstoppers, as they should be in Las Vegas, arrive at the end, with the 164-yard, par-3 17th and the 564-yard, par-5 18th. In particular, the 18th befits its locale as the ultimate gambler’s hole. From an elevated tee, the ambitious player will contend with a water carry on both shots via a network of three lakes separated by waterfalls. Choose the three-shot route and you still must fly over water to a long, narrow green surrounded by grassy hills, pine trees, mountains and flowers. Desert? What desert?

Sounds pretty dreadful, I know...  Even I'll concede that this is a perfect site for Fazio, because even if it offered unique and interesting landforms, he'd plow them under. 

Mike Bamberger is an old-school purist, making it somehwat cruel to enlist him in the hype effort.  To no surprise, he can't deliver the goods on this header::

 Tiger vs. Phil is a TV event, a gambling event and a head game all rolled into one

This golf match is tricky for a lot of reasons, and a small part of it is because the two combatants are at the very least pretending to be chummy. Plus, the stakes are actually low. Also, their professional lives have unfolded, for the most part, on broadcast TV. Now we’re being asked to pay upfront. The actor Michael Douglas was on with Stephen Colbert Tuesday night (CBS), talking about how hard it was for him to make the transition from being a TV star to a movie star. “Television,” he explained, “they see you for free. Movies they pay to see you.” We’ve been paying to watch Phil and Tiger for years, but it has been so indirect we didn’t even know it. For this event, we have to get out our credit cards. 

Mark Steinberg, Tiger’s agent, is doing his part, to promote Capital One’s The Match (its full name) and lay the groundwork for future ones. There were more direct quotes from him in a recent (and excellent) Golfworld piece about the mechanics of The Match than you might have ever read before. Steinberg helped orchestrate the seven years in which Woods was involved in a series called Monday Night Golf. 

“We created those ‘Battle’ programs years ago, and Tiger was in the prime of his career, but we’re coming at this event differently,” Mark Steinberg told Golfworld. “This is going to be fun. This is a TV show. That will make it more sustainable. You’ll see things that you just won’t see on a Sunday at a regular tour event. Are they going to want to beat each other’s brains in? Absolutely. They’re there to compete. But they’re going to have a hell of a lot of fun, and it will be different start to finish. The battles back in the day were more about competition. This has other elements that make it entertainment, too.”

It is tricky, because they have to keep this interesting for four hours or more....  It's obvious that the difference between this and the prior iteration referenced above is the gambling component, and Phil is obviously all in on that....  But he's got a certain predisposition to over-sell, and the underlying match has to deliver the goods as well.

It seems to me that in a perfect world the side bets will carry the water for a while, perhaps the front nine.  But then the smack talk should recede and the guys have to be grinding down the stretch to prevail in the match, and that's a crapshoot.  It's easy to see Phil goading Tiger into side bets, while four down in the match.... 

You know how amused I was about the LPGA's Box 'o Cash?  You'll not be surprised that this photo has generated some pushback:

Putrid and pathetic....  Got it.

So, who ya got?  Our friends at Golf.com convened their panel of writers on this subject.  In fact, given the names with which I am unfamiliar, they might have included the office janitor as well....

First, those who like the fave:

Rachel Bleier,: Tiger — he didn’t come back to get his 80th win to lose to Phil in a head-to-head match. He’s here to win. 

Alan Bastable: Tiger. When asked Tuesday about his being the 2:1 betting favorite, Tiger said those odds were about right. I know there was a lot of forced peacocking going on in the presser, but that moment felt genuine. It’s just like the old times: Tiger knows he’s better than his opponent, his opponent knows that, and Tiger knows his opponent knows that. I think I butchered that saying, but you know what I mean. Woods, 3 and 1. 

Josh Sens: Tiger. As much as I’d like to go against the conventional Vegas wisdom, which has Tiger as a 2-to-1 favorite, I just can’t find enough argument to go with Phil. Yeah. He’s the better smack talker. But Tiger is the better player in better recent form.

Fair enough, but remember that that "recent form" is a double-negative....  Not only did it not include much form (No e-mails please, I know Tiger won at East Lake), but it wasn't terribly recent in golf terms....We haven't seen either of them in two months, and that can be an eternity.

And while there are more of that ilk, you can see the logic.  Phil wins the gamesmanship award, but when it devolves into actual golf, Tiger is the more consistent grinder. 

However, these folks beg to differ:

Alan Shipnuck: Phil. Tiger is an introvert and a grinder — he’s trying hard, but this isn’t his kind of deal. Mickelson is a showman who thrives on action, and match play is a better fit for his all-or-none game.

Patrick Ralph: Phil. It’s clear that Tiger owns several acres of real estate in Phil’s head, but I love Phil’s confidence and enthusiasm leading up to The Match. He’s going to be much more in his element than Tiger, and he clearly cares about it more. I think it results in a win for Lefty.

Jonathan Wall: Phil. Lefty has been grinding and game-planning for The Match as if it were a major. He’ll trash talk his way to victory and cash those plus-money tickets at the window on the way out of town.

Sean Zak: Phil because Tiger will be uncomfortable with being mic’d up (I cannot substantiate that claim).

If Lefty does for today only half of that he's done for the U.S. Ryder Cup effort.... well, you guys can fill in the rest...  But the logic is that if Tiger isn't discombobulated by Phil's antics, he should win.  

When all is said and done, though, 18 holes of match play is a crapshoot, so better to view it as reality television.  Big Break - Shadow Creek, a sit were....

Those writers tackle on last question:

What ‘Match’ do you want to see next?

Hmmm...  how about Hogan-Nelson v. Venturi-Ward?   Hey, Bamberger isn't the only insufferable purist....

Shipnuck: Tiger and Phil aren’t exiting stage right after this one – it’s their franchise, after all, so any future matches have to include them. So I’ll say Tiger-Phil vs. DJ-Brooks. 

Dethier: Shippy’s right, these two will be involved…gimme a live draft, a bit like the NBA’s new all-star game. Each captain (Tiger and Phil) picks three teammates. Each team of four forms two alternate shot pairs and switches partners every six holes. 

Confused? Me too. But I wanna see how that draft goes down. 

Bleier: I’d like to see all of the guys who’ve held the No. 1 spot over the past couple of months go head to head: DJ vs. Brooks vs. JT vs. Justin Rose. 

Bastable: Bond vs. Goldfinger rematch.

I do like that last one, but promise me that in the team match against the Bash Bros. that DJ and Brooks will not be mic'ed....  They're not reality TV material....  Of course, Paulina in that Oakmont pull-down microskirt could change my mind here...

Sens: Spieth vs. Reed. I’m tempted to say DJ vs Koepka, which would likely make for greater pyrotechnics. But I like the idea of this latent Good vs. Evil rivalry and it would be entertaining to hear a mic’d-up Spieth talk smack, in a Ned Flanders-swearing kinda way.

Zak: Reed vs. Spieth. Too bad only half of that hypothetical match actually wants it to happen.

As Shippy said elsewhere, Patrick doesn't figure to be invited into the cool-kids club, though he is surprisingly in next weeks TigerJam in The Bahamas.  More likely would be Tiger-Phil taking Jordan and JT.....

Marksbury: Do you think anyone would tune in to watch a couple of no-name 20-handicappers battle it out for a million dollars? I would! Aside from that, I love the idea of involving some stars from the women’s game, like Lexi and Michelle, Ariya and Inbee. I also think any European player — Poulter, Rory — facing Patrick Reed would be entertaining. And for something a little off the wall, how about Steph Curry-Tony Romo?

No doubt they'll get to the ladies, but does anyone remember how terrible that event with Annika and Karrie Webb was?   But the no-names was exactly the premise of Big Break (as well as the Golf Digets bit before the U.S. Open), and watching no-names fight the pressure can be great drama.....

I have no clue who will win, and the timing couldn't be worse for me.  I have a prior family commitment which will preclude my presence in front of a television before 5:30 or so.  I've deputized Employee No. 2 to report on behalf of Unplayable Lies,  but with Lumpy not in the field I worry about her attention span.

I will probably blog the event tomorrow morning, though you'll quickly identify the key word therein. 

Udder Stuff - I shan't keep you long, but both major magazines have given out their prestigious Turkey Awards, to which attention must be paid.  Of course, the both lede with golf's answer to Dale Carnegie:

The Pepé le Pew Award for Stinking up Paris 

Winner: Patrick Reed 

After a fetid Ryder Cup performance at Le Golf Nacional, Reed further befouled the atmosphere outside Paris by blaming others for his poor showing. Frustrated? Fair enough. But in his petulance, Captain America came off more as a self-pitying villain than the hero we’d been hoping for.

C'mon, the poor guy was blindsided....  Though GD wins this little match-up because they also included those Red Sox tix.  You remember, the ones in the "Line drive section".

But fun to be reminded of these fun times:

The John Gruden Freeze the Field Goal Kicker Award for Delaying Play 

Winner: JB Holmes 

In the span of a lifetime, four minutes isn’t much. But from the fairway of a par-five, it’s pretty much forever. Which is how long Holmes took over his second shot on the closing hole at Torrey Pines, an agonizing lag that left his playing partner, Alex Noren, in the lurch with the Farmers Insurance Open hanging in the balance. To make matters worse, Holmes, who was two shots off the lead, finally put an end to his human rain delay by laying up into the rough.

Four minutes of our lives we'll never get back. 

Kudos to Golf Digest for exhuming the story of Rhein Gibson - Brandon Davis contretemps that cost the former a stroke at a Web.com event.  It's a fine example of the rules of the game being an ass, but of greater interest is the hostage video posted later by Davis in which he does his spot-on Khalid Sheikh-Mohammed impression:

It's OK, you can thank me later...

I can't top that, so I'll let you get on with your day.

Midweek Musings

A surprisingly robust news cycle, not limited to that Friday spectacular....  Folks seem to have gotten an early start on their mother-of-all-news dumps, including a body blow to your humble correspondent.  But we'll make you wait a bit for that...

Our Cup Floweth Over - Shack has himself positively giddy over the return of The World Cup to The Metropolitan, a sandbelt gem that gets lost in the shuffle.  With our temps headed towards the twenties, I'll admit that this looks pretty damn sweet:

Shack's got all your links, including this on the field from PGATour.com.  Yeah, the hole team looks pretty formidable, and Wally's Belgians do no better than an honorable mention.

And there's even bonus video of Matt Adams dissing the fabled Arnie-Jack pairing....  Good luck with that, Matt, though Arnie-The Slammer wasn't you know, chopped liver.

Bonus video of the venue as well:

A better than most format as well....

Golf Channel coverage starts at 8 pm ET Wednesday to Saturday, with the first and third rounds played at four-ball, and the second and final rounds alternate shot. Tee times and other particulars.

The event has quite a bit of actual history, though there won't be any side bets or presses.

Want some Tour news?

The Euro Beat -  The Euro Tour season wound down in desultory fashion in Dubai last week, with a troubling number of players failing to show to collect their checks.  We had that earlier in the week, which combined with Rory's threat to take his ball and go home to Florida should have Keith Pelley awakening in a cold sweat.

Yet, there's only one thing the golf press wants to talk about...  a transitory story that no doubt will have Jim Accosta lecturing POTUS soon:

Pelley has another potential PR disaster looming. The European Tour travels to Saudi Arabia next year for the Saudi International from Jan. 31 to Feb. 3 amid the House of Saudi’s fall from grace following Jamal Khashoggi’s murder in the Saudi consulate in Istanbul. 

Pelley was resolute recently when asked about breaking new ground in Saudi Arabia.

“I can simply say that the Saudi International is on our schedule in 2019, and I really don’t have anything more to add than that,” he said several times to repeated questioning. 

So the curtain falls on another European season, but a glimpse through that curtain suggests everything isn’t rosy backstage at the European Tour.

Folks can be so very curious....  This very Tour has been playing in the varied and sundry emirates for years, but it's only the Saudis that are beyond the pale....  really, they've been stoning gays and oppressing women womyn since the time of the Prophet, peace be upon you, but suddenly they're bad guys....

But here's that about which Pelley prefers we focus:

If the absence of star players sat heavily on Pelley’s mind, he didn’t show it in Dubai. The bespectacled Canadian may be diminutive in stature, but he’s got that hockey player’s mentality of never backing down from a scrap. 

“Our two critical KPIs [key performance indicators] are playing opportunity and prize funds,” Pelley said. “The 100th-ranked player in 2016 made €275,000. This year, they are going to make over €400,000. 

“This year on the schedule, I think there are 4,382 playing opportunities, which is a little up from last year but it’s five or six hundred more playing opportunities than a couple of years ago. As a members’ organization, that’s key, providing opportunities for people. We’re thrilled with the media value and we’re thrilled with what the Rolex Series has brought to the tour.” 

Rolex might think otherwise. The luxury watch company probably couldn’t care less about the 100th ranked player. Star players skipping lucrative events isn’t what they signed up for.

To this observer, these are warning shots across the bow of the Euro Tour, but the press is only focused on the Saudi event.  It's almost like they've got another agenda or something.... 

Hasta La Vista Malaysia - News broke a few days back that the Tour's Malaysian stop was imperiled....

The PGA Tour’s Asian swing will likely remain at three official-money tournaments, with the new event joining the CJ Cup @ Nine Bridges on the Korean island of Jeju, and the World Golf Championships-HSBC Champions tournament in Shanghai. 

The CIMB Classic in Malaysia is expected to fall by the wayside and is not likely to be played in 2019, a different source told Reuters.

Why?  Don't be silly, because the Tour got a better offer:

TOKYO (AP) — The PGA Tour will hold its first official tournament in Japan. And the

main sponsor of next year’s event, Japanese billionaire Yusaku Maezawa, is describing it as a kind of “moonshot” for golf in his country. 

Maezawa should know. 

The founder of the Japanese fashion website Zozotown, Maezawa was announced earlier this year as the first commercial passenger to attempt a flight around the moon. 

“I think this will be the first PGA Tour sponsor that is going to the moon,” he said through an interpreter Tuesday in announcing the tournament. “I haven’t decided who I will take to the moon with me yet. I would like to talk to many people with an open mind.”

The significance won't escape you....  You've upgraded, trading one Asia stop broadcast in the dead of night for another..... That this will diminish the Asia-Pacific Tour, well, we cam argue whether that's a bug or feature, but it's clear that's of no concern in the 904 area code.

The PGA said it was a six-year deal, and driven partly by the 2020 Tokyo Olympics and golf’s high profile there. 

PGA officials said the Zozo Championship will have a purse of $9.75 million with a field of 78 — plus 10 designated by the Japanese Tour, and eight others with special exemptions. It will be played at the Accordia Golf Narashino Country Club in Chiba prefecture, just outside Tokyo.

I'm assuming we'll have none of those pesky membership issue there.... 

The World According to Chucky Three-Sticks - Last week's winner has endured out there, and shares with us what he loves and hates about our little game....  The irony being that they're the same thing:

What He Loves About Golf

“I love most about [golf] because it’s all on you, it’s all on the player. Golf is never about one competitor versus another and it never will be. It’s against the player versus himself

and versus the golf course. At no point today or whatever was I thinking it’s me against Cameron or it’s me against Webb or whatever. It’s just you against you, and as crazy as that sounds, it’s the way that it is.”

What He Hates About Golf

“What I hate about it is that you can work and work and work and get absolutely no results from that, and I know that there’s a lot of industries and a lot of areas where that also applies, but golf for certain. You can speak to any Tour player out here past or current and I think they would tell you the same thing, that you can go down a rabbit hole and work and work and work and literally on the back end nothing come out of it, and I think that’s the hardest part to swallow.”

It's not so much that one gets nothing out of it, it's just the timing thereof can be idiosyncratic.  Or, as this guy said:

If you can dream—and not make dreams your master;

If you can think—and not make thoughts your aim;

If you can meet with Triumph and Disaster

And treat those two impostors just the same;

At which CHIII has done well.

A Certain Blogger Hardest Hit -  It is with a heavy heart that I bring you this sad news:

The PGA Tour and Vijay Singh released a joint statement on Tuesday, claiming a

resolved end to a years-long dispute between Singh and the tour involving Singh's anti-doing suspension. 

"The settlement reflects our mutual commitment to look to the future as we put this matter behind us," read the statement. "The PGA Tour fully supports Vijay as he continues to be a true champion on the PGA Tour and PGA Tour Champions. The PGA Tour recognizes that Vijay is one of the hardest working golfers ever to play the game, and does not believe that he intended to gain an unfair advantage over his fellow competitors in this matter. Vijay fully supports the PGA TOUR’s Anti-Doping Program and all efforts to protect the integrity of the game that he loves so much."

OK, I'm gonna need a moment here....  I acknowledge that Vijay was always a flawed vessel for my hopes and dreams,  and yet he's all I had.

Shack's got some spit-out-your-drink funnies from the press release:

The PGA TOUR and Vijay Singh are pleased to announce that we have resolved our prior dispute.

The PGA TOUR fully supports Vijay as he continues to be a true champion on the PGA TOUR and PGA TOUR Champions.

The PGA TOUR recognizes that Vijay is one of the hardest working golfers ever to play the game, and does not believe that he intended to gain an unfair advantage over his fellow competitors in this matter.

Vijay fully supports the PGA TOUR’s Anti-Doping Program and all efforts to protect the integrity of the game that he loves so much. The parties will make no statement concerning the settlement terms resolving this matter.

I'll just have to console myself by enjoying the thought of how many billable hours were involved in the drafting of that enconium to the hardest working man in show business....

Shack thinks that Veej got himself paid for his troubles:

Anyone care to guess what the final dollar figure was? Maybe during The Match, Tiger and Phil can wager what they think Vijay got…for their charities of course. 

Given that Singh won an appeal in June and the case—summarized beautifully here by SI’s Michael McGann—was headed to a trial that might have gotten ugly, I like Vijay’s chances of having exceeded The Match’s winner-take-all purse.

Egads, I don't think so, but is it possible?  Do they have that much to hide in their disciplinary procedures, given that we probably know about all three of DJ's failed drug tests....  Unless you know, three is low.

I don't think for a moment that Vijay was trying to cheat in using deer antler spray, because he naively admitted it to a couple of Sports Illustrated writers.  As for why he might be a tad overly sensitive to such allegations, you'll need to read this John Garrity item from the Wabac machine.

My interest in the case was exclusively related to its promise to throw some needed sunlight onto the Tour's disciplinary actions.  Alas, Vijay turned out to have only his own interests at heart and the Tour had much to conceal, both of which we kinda knew from the get-go.

Women and Minorities Hardest Hit -  Who says POTUS isn't compassionate?  The fake news media will ignore this example of him identifying and correcting an injustice:

Donald Trump has ordered changes to his Turnberry golf course in Ayrshire – because it is too difficult. 

The President has demanded holes be redesigned as good shots are being "punished".

It follows his visit to the resort in July when he played the new-look Ailsa links for the first time. 

The course, which was redesigned as part of the resort's overhaul, was named in the world's top 10 earlier this year.

Now Trump wants greens rebuilt to better reward players whose balls are flying off the putting surface.

 The revised layout has received glowing reviews, but there was one interesting note:

Turnberry members have been told the 11th, where the most extensive work will take place, could be out of action for up to three months. 

The President’s son, Eric, told the Ayrshire Post this week: “We will always look to tweak and make things better where we can.

“This is part of the natural bedding -in process of a new course and we’re making the changes in line with the R&A. 

“We want every hole to be perfect and if that means making a few changes like this, we’ll do it.”

Members?  I actually didn't realize they had any, it being a resort.  It's that reference to the R & A, though, which is of interest, since they're trying to wait out the 2020 election before deciding how to proceed.  Not that I really blame them...

The Long Way -  I'm not much of a social media guy, that's a young man's game. But this from Golf.com's Social Seven caught my eye:

1. Ladies European Tour player Florentyna Parker played a round at Gunsan Country Club in South Korea. Why is this notable? Well, the third hole at Gunsan CChappens to be the longest in the world, which she brought to our attention. When converted from meters into yards, this par 7 comes in at just under 1,100 yards. 

My head is already spinning at the thought of taking a courtesy “double the hole” 14…

OK, first it's even longer than you likely think, because it's in meters....

Exit question: How would Cam Champ play it? Driver-six-iron?

I've no clue as to the blogging schedule going forward, so check back early and often.

Tuesday Tidbits

I made you wait a day, but you'll be rewarded with our patented flood the zone coverage....

Da' Match - By the time I hit publish, I suspect that I'll feel dirty for having aided and abetted the hype...  But where to begin?  Perhaps with this retrospective on their relationship?

From bitter rivals to business partners: How Tiger and Phil's once-frosty relationship thawed

Though at the present moment this seems a curious place to begin:

Four years ago, with Woods at home recovering from a second micro-discectomy surgery to remove a disc fragment that was pinching a nerve (and soon to undergo another procedure to relieve discomfort in his back), the U.S. Ryder Cup team got drubbed at

Gleneagles for its sixth loss in the last seven biennial matches. At the press conference that Sunday night in Scotland, Mickelson blasted his own captain Tom Watson (and in essence the PGA of America) for the mismanagement of the team. It was a seminal moment that led to sweeping changes and the formation of the Ryder Cup task force, of which Woods, ever the competitor who had also grown tired of all the losing, readily signed on. Golf’s two biggest stars were aligned, and more importantly the lines of communication, be it the Ryder Cup or other topics, were open. 

“I think that had a lot to do with [them becoming closer] because they were forced into the same room,” said Love, who captained the U.S. in a 2012 loss at Medinah before returning in 2016 and a victory at Hazeltine. “It’s hard when you’re both trying to be No. 1. They were on the path to [becoming more friendly] in 2004. That’s why Hal Sutton threw them together. But [how that went] that threw a wrench in things.”

I guess I should have done a CTL:F Sutton before leading with this piece, but does '14 smell any better than '04 right now?   

I actually watched some of the 24/7 promo last night, which featured this bit:

Even so, there have been endearing moments between the two stars through the years. 

When Mickelson’s wife Amy was diagnosed with breast cancer in May of 2009, Woods reached out to Mickelson. Six years later, while Woods was struggling with his back and suffering a nasty case of the chip yips, Mickelson sent encouraging texts. 

“He offered numerous times to help me out with technique and just about it,” Woods said earlier this year. “I said, ‘Yeah, you and I have the same philosophy in how we approach chipping and how we do it. I just can’t physically do it.’ But now it’s different. I feel better. And my short game has turned around.” 

So has their relationship.

So they keep telling us....

ESPN's Bob Harig tells us to ignore the naysayers, though he gives a really compelling account of their points:

What appeared then to be an interesting idea has taken considerable hits in the lead-up to 

this 18-hole encounter at Shadow Creek. 

Charging via pay-per-view probably leads the list, forcing those who might be intrigued to make a decision about parting with $20 to watch an otherwise meaningless exhibition on television. 

The fact that this type of encounter would have played better in their primes is also prominently mentioned, with even Rory McIlroy chiming in last week, saying that it "missed the mark a little bit." 

Certainly the play of Woods and Mickelson at the Ryder Cup -- they combined to go 0-6 in a deflating performance as part of a United States loss to Europe -- didn't help.

And nor does the huge sum being played for, an amount even Woods suggested was "astronomical." 

All perfectly good reasons to have your doubts.

Well argued, Counsellor, but I'm anticipating that this will crumble on cross-examination.  So, whatcha got?

Counterargument: so what? 

With a nod to all the negative takes, why not just sit back and enjoy it for what it is, two of the game's legends going head-to-head in a big-money match with some trash talking and side bets thrown in? 

Nobody is suggesting this is major championship theater, or even Doral-level drama. (Their 2005 showdown during the final round in Miami was epic and remains -- unless it happens at a major in the twilight of their careers -- their best head-to-head matchup). 

Yes, having to pay for it is annoying, but, as even Mickelson noted, that $20 can be split among friends who take in The Match together. While not suggesting how to spend other peoples' money, we are talking about a discretionary income choice that many would squander on other dubious endeavors. And it is Black Friday after all, a day associated with money-spending opulence.

You're going with so what?  And not so much as a note about my mother's swimming after troop ships?

But this is the bit that seems a tad strained:

And then there are a couple of issues concerning the big money being offered. 

Many have opined they'd only care about this if the two players put up their own cash.

Such a proposition is naive. What athletes in any other sport have done something similar? It's never happened and never will, and to think that these guys would be the first to do it lacks an understanding of their place in the entertainment, marketing and endorsement world. 

Depending on the outlet tracking such things -- Forbes, Golf Digest, etc. -- Woods and Mickelson earn in excess of $40 million per year apiece in off-the-course income. Mickelson makes well into six-figure paydays for one-day outings that are not televised. Woods can command $2 million plus for overseas tournament appearance fees. 

The what-should-be-obvious point here is that these guys garner a healthy sum for walking across the street to tee up a golf ball. They are not going to -- nor do they need to -- put their own money on the table. (And to be clear, neither player will walk away from this with nothing; both of their management teams are heavily invested, and nobody is working for free.) 

The $9 million amount seems gaudy to some (it was actually $10 million before the PGA Tour got involved and asked the parties to play for less, wanting to protect the prestige of its $10 million FedEx Cup payout -- which is actually going to $15 million in 2019). Again, for guys who each have a couple of eight-figure endorsement deals, nobody should be shocked at that number.

And yet Phil puts up his own money every Tuesday of tournament week....  The point that Harig drives home is that it would have been more interesting if these guys risked $50,000 of their own money, than playing for $9 million of TNT's....

Christine Brennan of US Today remains defiantly unconvinced:

Thanksgiving will be upon us before we know it, bringing with it turkey, family, friends, pro football, college football, Black Friday, cold weather, clogged highways and packed airports. 

And one more thing: Tiger Woods and Phil Mickelson playing golf.

Nothing says the holidays quite like a meaningless $19.99 pay-per-view golf match between two men whose ages add up to 90.

Aren't you the killjoy?  

Not surprisingly, there will be gambling. As luck would have it, the match is being played on a golf course in Las Vegas. The race and sports books at MGM Resorts will be delivering odds, moneyline and other information about the golfers’ performances, also right there on the screen. Tiger and Phil will make all kinds of side bets on shots and putts, with that money being donated to charity.

Your TV screen will be so full of numbers, facts and information that you might think you’re watching CNBC and forget you’re actually watching golf. Perhaps that’s the point. 

And there will be drone coverage! Live, state-of-the-art drone coverage “delivering camera angles that have never been seen before for a live golf event.” 

I’m imagining the possibilities: let’s go live to the Tree Cam. How about a Squirrel Cam? Perhaps a Phil’s Wallet Cam, for all the action there? 

Tiger, Phil and their caddies will be wearing microphones throughout the match “to capture the strategy and competitive banter that takes place,” according to the event’s press release.

Wallet-Cam?  Heh, that's a good one....  A layup for sure, but still....Though she exhibits some confusion here:

But in a holiday weekend overflowing with real, meaningful sports events, faux golf is out of place. Look at the trade-off you’ll be making if you watch: while either Tiger or Phil will make $9 million in the winner-take-all match, you’ll give up four hours of your life that you’ll never get back.

Not so much, Christine.  Friday is a wasteland, so it's either binge watching Netflix or this.  Or, you know, curling up with a good book...

Sunday's Tour Confidential panel devoted some pixels to this (with more to come tomorrow. when they pick a winner):

1. After months of speculation, several hype videos (some better than others) and (forced?) trash talk, Tiger Woods and Phil Mickelson will finally square off in “The Match” at 3 p.m. ET on Friday at Shadow Creek in Las Vegas. We’ll make our picks on Wednesday, so for now a different topic: Will the event be a success?

Hmmm...I guess the lads are free to interpret that in either the commercial or artistic senses....

Luke Kerr-Dineen: Golf has a pretty solid track-record of hating everything that’s different until they realize they actually quite like it. Olympic golf is a good example. It’s tough to figure out what exactly “success” looks like for this event because it’s so unique. But generally speaking, yes, this is going to be a success. I think golf fans will be surprised by how many bored, casual sports fans are going to pay a nominal fee to spend their Thanksgiving breaks watching (more) sports. We’ll probably get a viral moment or two, and Barkley and Co. will do something hilarious at some point. This time next year, we’ll be talking about “The Match” 2.0. Book it. 

Michael Bamberger: Well said, K-D (and the Sunshine Band). I was all cranky about Olympic Golf until it was played and then I was merrily on the bandwagon. What constitutes success? Everyone will get paid, and then some, I suspect. That’s likely the working definition of success here.

Olympic golf seems a bizarre template for this endeavor, no?  Isn't this the polar opposite of the Olympic ideals, with its emphasisi on gambling and trash talk?

Alan Shipnuck: Yes, in part because our collective expectations have been lowered a bit by months of tedious hype. After all the nonsense, the golf will be a bracing change. And I think the production values and other do-dads will be cool, too. 

Dylan Dethier: Shippy raises a valid point…everyone is sleeping on this thing now! Golf fans have down-talked this thing up until now, and there’s been some valid criticism (from me, too) about the hype. But the 24/7 last week was fun, and now that this is closer to being a reality, golf fans won’t want to miss it. I’m predicting modest numbers but a big success.

OK, Shippy, though you might have noticed that there elephant in the corner.  What really reduced our expectations was their play in Paris, the only outstanding question being whether they cost themselves as much money as Mannny Machado did in the postseason?

2. Who has the most to lose and/or gain in this event? Tiger? Phil? The promoters? The viewers who fork over $19.99?

Kerr-Dineen: Who has the most to gain? Rory McIlroy, Jordan Spieth, Justin Thomas,

Dustin Johnson and all of golf’s other big-name players. If this thing works to any substantial degree, this format could turn into an entirely new revenue stream for those guys. That’s why I was so surprised to see some of those players throw shade at this event. It’s a proof of concept. They should want this to work, because if it does, they’ll be next in line for a big potential payday. 

Zak: I think Phil Mickelson has the most to lose. This guy had a big lead on Tiger in terms of being America’s favorite golf dad over these last few years. If we’ve learned anything in 2018, it’s that Tiger is inching toward grabbing that title. Does Phil still have it? At 48? If he can beat Tiger, he’ll at least have that to cling to entering 2019. If not, well, we may be talking a lot more about his decline than his (normally) impressive late-40s form. 

Shipnuck: Tiger does, because if Phil beats him in this intensely personal format it will further erode Woods’s aura.

The most important thing is that they're perceived to play reasonably well, which can't be taken for granted after Paris.  I suspect the golf course will be wide open, favoring Phil, though we've heard surprisingly little on the subject.  

Some more on this subject:

Bamberger: I would disagree, Alan. Tiger’s horrid play in Paris did virtually nothing to erode Tiger’s aura. Phil’s poor play had people saying the Mexico win was a one-off. If it’s close, nobody gains or loses anything. If Phil loses big, it will hurt, kind of, briefly. If Tiger loses in a blowout, which is hard to imagine, it will be written off to some unforeseen thing. 

Dethier: Tiger, for sure. He’s supposed to win. That’s how this is scripted to play out. Phil’s got nothing to lose, which is probably what makes him particularly dangerous.

Shippy had a second bite of the apple in his weekly mailbag:

#AskAlan: What does it say about both players if Phil wins the Match? Is it an indication that Phil still has some w’s left (maybe another major?), or just that Tiger isn’t as close to his old self as it seemed last year? -@JoePangaro 

No doubt Tiger has more at stake here. He has always been the alpha in this relationship, and he’s the heavy betting favorite for a reason. But this gaudy stage is better suited for Phil. Woods is a grinder, Mickelson a showman. On Tour, Tiger’s practice rounds are all business, while Phil’s are a moveable feast involving lots of bets and trash-talk. Also, Mickelson has always been able to get under Woods’s skin, sometimes even intentionally. If Phil gets a lead early and starts running his mouth, I can see Tiger’s clubhead speed approaching 150 mph, which is probably not a good thing. If Woods loses this match it will definitely sting, but I’m not sure these 18 holes have any value beyond pure entertainment. 

How is it a “high stakes” match when neither competitor has any skin in the game? #AskAlan -Joshua (@fishahhh) 

Nine milli is a lot of money to win but it won’t change either of their lives. Neither would losing that amount, if they put in their own money, as so many pundits suggested. It’s all about saving face. Both guys have immense egos, and it’s going to be highly embarrassing to whomever loses this thing. I’d say that’s actually a lot of skin in the game.

We're quite a bit down the road from the days when winning was requisite to support oneself, but the ramifications for losing are fairly tame.  Before we move on the wagering, Alan...errr, excuse me, Shippy, had this on that proof-of-concept thing:

Since we’ll probably have to listen to this dopey Match thing for a few years to come (a la the Skins Game) who would make a good pairing next year? Rory M. v. Patrick R. perhaps? -Gordon (@fofop05) 

Well, Tiger and Phil are not going to relinquish the stage any time soon. This is their franchise and they have a stake in its financial success. So all future matchups, and there will be many, are going to involve them. If I was Steiny, I would already be working on Tiger-Phil vs. Shubhankar Sharma-Haoong Li. Can you imagine the marketing possibilities on that one, sucking in China *and* India?! Tiger-Phil vs. Rory-Poults could be fun, especially as a walk-up to the next Ryder Cup. Phil-Jordan vs. Tiger-JT? Phil-Tiger vs. Brooks-DJ? Tiger-Lexi vs. Phil-Inbee? There are lots of fun possibilities … but none of them will involve Reed after his post-Ryder Cup temper tantrum.

Yes, though Patrick is surprisingly in the Hero World Challenge field.  I'm unsure when those invites go out, but I had assumed that Patrick would be at a Table for One elsewhere...

And finally someone addressees the important issues:

I got one for ya, Alan..will there be cussing? And follow up..if so, what is over/under on F-bombs?? -Jon (@Crockett418) 

If you can believe the “24/7” hype, yes, there will be profanity. I can imagine one or two s-words early on, or maybe a stray a**hole, just to add a little edginess, but both of these guys are walking multinational corporations with a brand to protect, not to mention kids and parents watching at home. So I would expect zero f-bombs or any really exotic locutions.

Yes, I caught that...  Tiger apparently has quite the potty mouth, and that doesn't even account for the flatulence humor....

As for the betting, back to the TC Panel:

3. To keep the match interesting, Tiger and Phil will have the ability to make mid-round prop bets with their own money. What’s one bet you’d like to see the players wage?

Kerr-Dineen: I want Phil to throw down a big bet on Tiger to miss a makeable putt, Tiger to miss it and then get angry. I want full-on, angry, fist-pumping Tiger. I need the intensity. It would be so much fun.

Luke, you might want to take something for that.....

Zak: You want intensity? How about Tiger saying “Phil, hit the fairway with your driver for $50k.”

 Well, yeah, but I'd expect Phil to be begging for odds...

Dethier: Auto 2-down presses. Getting one of these guys on an off-day, then getting that guy going on full tilt? I’d be glued to the TV AND it would ensure we get to the 18th hole. 

If they allowed air presses, that might sway me to watch it. 

Bamberger: Double D! Sounds like you actually have played some money games. Automatics is smart for reason just cited. I’d like to see a closest-to-the-hole on a par-3 where Tiger plays with one of Phil’s clubs and Phil one of Tiger’s, and let the rules slide.

Mike ignores the fact that Phil is actually right-handed, making this a dubious proposition for Tiger.

The Golf Digest crew dives deep into the Chinese menu of prop bets, starting with the important stuff:

Will Tiger Woods wear a red shirt? (Yes +350, No -600) 

Listen, there's a level of unavoidable shamelessness to these events. That—the cringe-worthy Twitter trash talk, embellished hype videos—comes with the territory of pulling in an eight-figure check. Still, there are things so sacred they can't be soiled by money, and we like to think Tiger's Sunday red falls in that territory. -- Joel Beall 

Are we really getting 3-to-1 odds on a sure thing? Sign me up. Part of the reason I’m so confident is, if you noticed in the HBO 24/7 episode, Woods was in his signature black and red. Pretty sure that was for a reason. Oh, and Phil was in his signature all black, albeit that ridiculous long sleeve shirt. Might as well bet Lefty to wear black at +250 as well. Unfortunately, we haven’t found a long sleeve vs. short sleeve prop...yet. -- Christopher Powers

I do so hope that Phil shows up in red, like Rocco at Torrey Pines.  But, of course, in a Mizzen+Main button down....

Will Phil Mickelson record an FIR on Hole No. 1? (Yes -130, No -110) 

Finding the short stuff ain't Phil's forte, ranking 192nd in driving accuracy last season. Conversely, Shadow Creek's fairways are so broad and spacious that you can land a 747 on 'em with ease. "Yes" is the call. -- JB 

Yes, and ditto Tiger (-190). Doesn’t look like driver is necessary for either Tiger or Phil, which should mean they both find the short stuff with an iron and we take things from there. -- CP

FIR?  This mostly reinforced to me that Phil has the advantage in the set-up....  And back to this issue:

Total curse words said by Tiger Woods and Phil Mickelson (Over/under 21.5) 

Too bad Charles Barkley doesn't count towards this wager. Could have bet the house on the over. As it is, expect a few mild swear words, yet don't envision a parade of F-bombs. -- JB 

As much as I’d like to believe we’re going to get these two truly unfiltered, I’m not buying it. We’ll get a few token “sh--s” at best, and I highly doubt an F-bomb will be dropped. Think of the children. -- CP

The Under would seem to be a mortal lock here, unless, you know....

Will Donald Trump be in attendance? (Yes +600, No -1000) 

(Afraid to say anything). -- JB

Can anything happen in this world without an obligatory Trump reference?

Chuck Three-Sticks, Explained -  We'll exit on this item from Shippy's mailbag, explaining the under-achieving winner from Sea Island:

Is CH3 the biggest disappointment (besides Tiger and Anthony Kim maybe) in the last 10ish years? First few years, and quality of his swing, made many think he was going to be an easy 20 win guy. Great career, but seemed like should have been special. #AskAlan -Kris (@Oiler3535) 

This is certainly the counterpoint to all of the raves about his consistency. Howell’s incredible college career and the purity of his swing obscured a simple fact: he had a mechanical, imagination-free wedge game and his putting was streaky at best. He just has never had a flair for scoring, seemingly turning a lot of 66s into 70s. Maybe the greatest line ever typed about a golfer was Chris Jones a decade ago saying Howell plays golf “like a teenager f*cks.” Given Howell’s many, many chances, three wins is indeed a pretty paltry total. He’s living proof that golf is not played on the driving range.

I can't top that, so I'll tip my cap and see y'all tomorrow.