Conference 7.286::golf

    
    
    IMO.....
    
    booooorrrriiiinnnnggggg...........Just doesn't have the name appeal
    anymore.
    
    Gimme Jack any day!!
    
    Joe
    
    

    
    Payne Stewart won again 220,000
    Fred Couples            210,000
    Greg Norman             110,000
    Tom Kite                      0
    
    The only real great moments took place on the par 3 17th.
    
    Couples hit a big slicing snake that rolled to within 2 feet of the 
    hole, then Kite took it straight over the pin and backed it up to 
    within inches outside of Couples.
    
    Then on the 1st playoff hole (The 17th again) they Stewart, Couples,
    and Norman were all within 3 feet, and Kite was 8 feet away.  Kite
    missed, Norman missed, then Couples' putt bounced out of the hole, and
    Stewart sank his for the win.
    
    Shane
    

    
       The real star of this one was the course (The Bighorn). Goofy 
       golf at it's best.  The undulating greens and breathtaking
       views, which made the course unique was lost on the little
       screen, however.
    
       As for the players, you need contrasting personalities to make
       a tournament such as this appealing and interesting. This year
       they found four guys cut from the same mold (easy-going, steady,
       methodical,quiet) and as Joe said,  'boooooorrrrrinnng'.
    
    -rick

    I appreciated the fine play of Payne, Freddie and Norman. The distances
    they hit the ball was awesome. TK wasn't playing well or having any 
    fun at all.

    
      Kite shot 35 (1 under) on the front side, hit every green and
      didn't win one skin.  Stewart on the other hand, was in trouble
      on almost every hole, must have shot a 50 on the front and 
      ended up winning one skin, and eventually the whole thing on
      the back nine.  No wonder Kite wasn't enjoying himself!  
    
    -rick

    
    	Speaking of Fred, his wife is suing him for divorce.  Says
    	he has refused any attempts to work on their marriage.
    	They sure seemed like opposites.
    

    Gee, what a rat ! Guess he didn't like hangin' around with the jet set
    in Palm Beach, or underwriting her hobby - playin' polo for the BMW
    polo team. Hey, it's never easy...
    
    __Jack (expecting some heat...)

    re: .5
    
    One of the commentators mentioned that Kite's game wasn't really
    suited to that format and I think anyone that has followed him
    over the years agrees, his game is consistant/no gamble/take what
    the course gives me type of golf....good for a lot of money BUT...
    ta gota let it out once in a while and go for broke...
    
    even though I don't care for him Ken Green or a Lanny Watkins would
    have been better for that format...they hold nothing back and are
    always going at the stick...IMHO
    
    

    Pretty, boring stuff this time around , except for some nice shots on
    17. Scully wears on me real fast, with that song and dance and story
    line approach with every comment. True this is not a Tom Kite venue,
    bring in some personality. Payne's got some but his ego is larger
    than the back nine. Bring back Jack and Lee.
    
    The Seniors is better viewing, they have some fun at it.
    
    Mike
      

    I agree with the last reply.  The four pros picked for this event
    should not be based on whether they are the best golfers over the past
    year, or the biggest money winners, but the best "characters".  For
    example, how exciting do you think it would be watching Corey Pavin,
    John Cook, Steve Elkington and Paul Azinger, vs. Daley, Norman, Mark
    O'Meara, and Peter Jacobson?  Give me the golfers who will have fun, go
    at it with wild abandon, and laugh it up with each other.  In fact, I
    wouldn't mind seeing Fuzzy back in the competition just to lighten
    things up.
    
    Gary

    re:Jack and the Couples story
    
    Sorry if it is true...but it is predictable.  Wait till the guy earns
    3-4 million in two years before you file.  Timing is everything.
    
    SCD

    re: last several - the reason  it is boring is the format - reward for
    a lucky shot, not good consistant play.  Heck I get to see a birdie and
    lots of those bogies, double-bogies every week-end.  I want to see guys
    that get par, par, par, birdie, eagle, par par,par, par, par, etc. -
    not just a great hole every once in a while, with luck from the other
    guys missing.  If it can only be interesting because of the
    personalities, then why not just have a talk show with good
    personalities?  How about some match play?
    
    Big Mac 

    
    
    I like watching the skins format.  You only see it twice a year. 
    Maybe next year more flamboyant players will make it to the top of the
    money list (and maybe the tv coverage can skip all those flash backs).
    
    lk

    One thing you can be sure of, Payne will be back as the defending
    champ. Thats how he got in this year.  
    
    Give me Daly, Floyd, Lanny, and anyone else that has the guts to put
    the driver in their hands on a 340yd par 4. 
    
    Ken 

    The reason it was boring was you had two chance taker (Norman for sure
    and maybe Couples) and two boring players (Kite and Stewart).  Looks
    like the boring players win again.  Although it would be tough to be
    Freddy Couples and be called a "loser" as you walk away with 210K.
    
    In January theyare having a made for TV event here in my backyard. 
    Daly, Jacobsen, Zoeller and Wadkins.  They each get a pot of money to
    start and play medal play the first day (9 holes).  Along with points 
    for pars etc. and score, they get points for closest to, first on, 
    first in (bingo-bango-bongo).  The second day they play 9 holes and use
    the points they won the first day to make wagers on longest drive,
    closest to, etc. So they play with their own money (to a degree) and
    can bet just like we do on the course.
    
    SCD
    
    

    
        Norman is a boring player.  His preshot routine is painful to 
        watch.  He fidgets and widgets, waits, fidgets some more, reminds
        me of Joe Inman. 
    
    -rick

    re. -.1
    
    Is Norman's preshot routine long and tedious?  Yes.  But does that
    equate to a boring player?  In my oponion, no!  I look at it more as
    intenseness, similar to Nicklaus.  Just look at this past weekend's
    Johnny Walker tournament.  You can tell that on just about every shot
    he's going for the pin instead of the middle of the green, or he's
    going for the green on two instead of laying up.  At times this may be
    poor course management, but boring?  Not to me.  In fact even if he never
    wins another sudden death, I'd rather watch Norman put on the charge to
    get in position than watching most other players (even if they play
    fast).
    
    Gary

This distinction between "boring, conservative" players and "attacking, 
exciting" players always fascinates me.  

Consider the recently completed Johny Walker tournament in Jamaica.
Norman (attacking) and Faldo (Mr Conservative) fought out a truly exciting
back nine together, that was more-or-less match play, since they were within
a few strokes of eachother and 8 or 9 ahead of everyone else.

The common perception of this, I'm sure, is "The shark attacked, closed from
5 back to tie, but Mr Boring managed to hang on."

I doubt anyone ralizes that in over the last 6 holes, when they were within 1
stroke of eachother, every one of Faldo's approach shots was INSIDE of Norman's,
with the exception of 18.  Faldo stuck it about 10-12 feet from 165, Norman
stuck it 3 feet from 130.

Tell me again that Faldo was aiming for the fat of the green, he's boring,
and plays conservatively.  I don't buy it.

(For those of you who missed 18, Faldo made it, Norman missed, and Faldo won
on the first playoff hole, when the Tuna cranked a wedge over the green,
then skulled his chip 10 feet past the hole and made bogey.)

Another totally wrong perception is that of Tom Kite.  Tom is actually
very aggressive.  I've seen him take out the fairway wood several times
on a par 5, leading the tournament, and lace it into very dangerous greens.
His play at the 92 Open was VERY aggressive.  He even said once in an interview
he plays and thinks aggressively all the time, just doesn't have the length
for Joe Average Viewer to think he's aggressive.

My own personal opinion of Norman is that he is too 'agressive', for want 
of a better term.  I  can think of a tournament he blew a few years ago
where he had a 1 stroke lead on the last hole, took out his driver and reached
a 6 foot deep pot bunker 300 yards away, took 2 to get out, and lost.
That's not aggression, that's extremely poor course management, and a tad of
stupidity.

My 2 cents,
Mike

    
      That was the British Open Mike. I think he reached the bunker because
      he didn't factor in the adrenaline supercharge of playing a final
      hole in a major with a chance to win.
    
    -rick

    
    
     re last 2
    
      That was at the British Open at Troon a few years ago. Norman was
     level with Calcavecchia playing the last of a 4-hole play off along
     with Wayne Grady of Australia who was 1 behind. Norman cracked a drive
     further than even he expected and landed in the bunker. If it had
     missed the bunker it would have rolled another 20 - 30 yards and left
     Norman with a pitch to the green.
    
      Calcavecchia on the other hand got very lucky. He pushed his drive 
     well to the right and was heading for the OOB before it hit a fence
     landed in play. He even got a good lie and then played a great 7-iron
     to 4 feet and holed out to take the championship.
    
      In this instance, some would say Norman was foolish, others would say
     he was unlucky. As I said, Calc. got lucky with his tee shot and found
     the green with his second. Norman had no option but to go for the
     green with his second from sand. He left it in then put his 3rd
     through the back, leaving Calc. with the trophy.
    
      Danny.

    
    re. -1
    
    >>                         -< Unlucky or foolish..? >-
    
          foolish!! Norman was just as unlucky as Calc was lucky. Play 
    the percentages.
    
    Mr. Conservative