PGA Tour: Open Championship / True South Classic: Notes from the Ballwasher

First topic message reminder :

1).Well done Zach Johnson, winning the John Deere Classic after you tried hard to throw it away on the first play-off hole. Second win of the season for Zach who is on the Board of the tournament and has done so much to ensure its place on the PGA Tour schedule - reminiscent of Carl Pettersson's win at Greensboro a few years ago in that respect.

2).This win doesn't arithmetically ensure Zach Johnson of a place on Davis Love's Ryder Cup Team, but he and DLIII are near neighbours on the Georgia coast, have worked together to help create "The McGladrey Classic", and it would be a huge surprise if his John Deere success doesn't clinch a spot at Medinah.

3).Troy Matteson came way too close to winning last week's John Deere Classic, leading as he did every day, to throw it all away on his first play-off hole. He would have been the first player to win a Tour event in which he finished last in driving accuracy for 24 years! But he putted for his dough, leading the field in "strokes gained - putting". Sometime College Teammate of Kuchar and Molder, among others.

4).Open Championship week, then, and let's hope Royal Lytham gets the Champion it deserves. Rather like Carnoustie did in 1999, or so Davis Love thought:
"When you have a screwy setup, you're going to get a screwy finish," Love was quoted as saying. "And if Paul Lawrie is the champion that Scotland wanted, I think they got exactly what they wanted."
The R&A get exactly what they want on Thursday, 8.31 a.m. BST, when Lawrie and Love tee it up together with Tim Clark!

5).Let's see who's done well in the past at Lytham:
1996 result:
1st: Lehman
2nd: Els
11th: Darren Clarke, Vijay Singh
14th: Duval
18th: Harrington
22nd: Woods, Stricker
27th: Broadhurst (also 58th and Leading Amateur in 1988 - hope he plays well this week, will never get the credit he deserves for his 1991 Ryder Cup play.)
41st: Calc, Mickelson
Also made the cut: Hamilton, Furyk, Allenby, Ames, Lyle, Daly, Goosen

6).2001 result:
1st: Duval
3rd: Els, Clarke, Jimenez
9th: Garcia
13th: Vijay, Goosen, Jacquelin
21st: DLIII
23rd: Michael Campbell, Greg Owen
25th: Woods
29th: Barry Lane
30th: Cink, Mickelson, Rose
37th: Harrington
42nd: Stricker, Paul Lawrie
Also made the cut: Allenby, Scott, Westwood, Calc, Lyle.

7).The last two Major winners won Majors their namesakes had won, Watson and Simpson. Sadly Jarrod Lyle won't be maintaining the tradition as he battles leukemia in Australia. But Aussie Luke Elvy tweets a promising update on Jarrod's condition:
"Has had his ups and downs over the past 6 weeks but Bone Marrow tests overnight showed no leukemia cells. Great news."
Get well, Jarrod, hope to see you on Tour soon.

8).No idea who'll win this week, fingers crossed though for Westwood and Harrington. Obviously Els, Clarke and Vijay have played well here in the past, but, Woods apart, it's difficult to see where any American challenge might come from. (Interesting take in USA Today on David Toms' non-participation: "He's pulled out of the British on several occasions due to injury and general disinterest."!)
Apart from the golden oldies, Woods, Stricker, Furyk and Phil, the leading Americans in the owgr have little to show for their trips to The Open, Dustin Johnson, Fowler, Mahan and Watney scoring the only 5 top 15's.

9).Hate disclaimers but this week's "opposite field event", the True South Classic in Mississippi, has been abandoned by PGA Tour players in their droves, very few of the owgr top 200 bothering to show up for a $540K first prize. Players are withdrawing by the dozen and it seems futile to speculate too much about the event. If they don't care, why should we?

Except to say that it's a BIG tournament for Gary Christian and Russell Knox, not to mention the ailing Richard S.Johnson and a golfer with an excellent record in Lytham Opens, Alex Cejka - a cut for Cejka this week will earn him PGA Tour "Veteran" status as he reaches 150 career cuts. Good luck Alex, but a poor reward for a first-time sponsor and a Jack Nicklaus course that the players rate more highly than Torrey Pines, Doral, Bay Hill and the Greenbrier.

10).Finally, Majors may be two-a-penny on the Champions Tour, two-in-Michigan even, but Sundridge Park's Roger Chapman won't be complaining as he added the US Senior Open title to the Senior PGA he won a few weeks ago. Two fingers, then, to the USGA who only saw fit to invite five Europeans (Hogberg went through qualifying) to their Senior Open which is even more of a closed shop than the Champions Tour. Pathetic.

Roger Chapman won't mind though as he will be at Kiawah Island for next month's PGA Championship, and joins Lee Westwood in being the first two Englishmen to punch their tickets to next year's US Open at Merion.

Tinmar wrote:I think Lytham is a magnificent course. The only pity is that we didn't have four days of weather and course conditions like yesterday. I don't think I'd ever get tired of watching that type of play. It's great to see real bunkers. It's so hard to win on such a difficult course that it just magnifies the achievement even more for me. You know that a player can't win just by having a really hot putter. He has to have played really well and have hit a serious number of great shots...

Absolutely. Interesting how some of these supposed excellent golfers were nowhere to be seen when it mattered. Could it be that they just bomb the heck out of it all the time and carve a recovery from way off line? Sorry, it may take some skill to do that but Lytham was another level all together. What on earth is wrong with them hitting a lot of irons off the tee???? Matter of fact, I loved the occasional time a camera tracked a 2-iron tee shot etc - you could really see the flight of a proper long iron. Too much golf these days is driver, driver, driver.
It was also great to see bunkers that were proper hazards instead of some kiddy playground afterthought. Stay out of them and there's little problem is there?
A thinkers layout and a suitable winner. Scott played magnificent golf on all but 4 or so holes over 4 rounds and one or two of his fairway woods into the par 5s were awesome - hope he wins a big one soon even if I have to put up with that arse Williams taking the credit.

I know, and imagine Dawson holds his nose at each and every one.
Is there a more dislikeable man in Britain? (Apart from David Cameron of course.)

Fader wrote:...Maybe my analogy of club medal play to his driver was wrong but I still expect a player of his quality to be able to at least be able to drive the ball in some way whether holding it against to wind or using the wind to his advantage. I think all he did was show how poor he is with a driver at the moment and how he fears using it. I don't think he is just overcooking it I think he has genuine fear of it which imo makes Faldo right if he has no go to shot with it he won't win a big one but that is just my opinion....

According to the PGA's web site this morning, Woods is 28th (of 193) in driving accuracy. That doesn't sound as chaotic as some would have us believe. The other thing about Woods' strategy at Lytham was that at his best he's been almost peerless from 150-220; if you're that good from distance, why not leave it that far out from the tee? One thing's for sure, hitting a driver into Lytham's bunkers or that rough was more often than not a guaranteed dropped shot; at least leaving a mid/long iron approach gives you a chance.
Faldo's wrong anyway. The Masters hardly penalises inaccurate driving enough to make a difference these days. The other three maybe but not there.

McLaren wrote:...A million bunkers may be a rather one dimensional way to negate the 330 yard drive, but on many of the holes it worked....

Eh? The bunkers were there long before the modern drivers and the idea of making a course 'Tiger-proof'...

woods looked at the conditions and the course and decided it would be better to take the driver out of the equation- he isnt a bad driver, but he assumed he would be better placed by taking out the 6-12 drives in the rough by habving longer shots in and having maybe 3-7 shots from the rough in the week

Navy, what is that stat done on though, is it just based n tee shots from Par 4's and 5's or is it actually taking into account the number of times players take the driver out of the bag and percentage of time they hit fairway using it.

I'm inclined to believe it's the former of the 2, in which case his stats are skewed by the fact he currently rarely uses the driver so doesn't given an account of how poor he is with the driver.

super_realist wrote:Did he win Navy?
His plan failed. It might have worked on a dry course in good conditions, but you can't leave that many long shots into greens and expect to make birdies.

Would he have been in that bunker if he was a better driver and could have had an easier shot in? Conjecture of course.

He might think it was a clever gameplan, but as soon as the weather turned, he had no plan B.

But you can't just assume that had he hit a lot more drivers, he'd have been better off. His plan and that of 154 others failed. Els was just better over 4 rounds and Scott was absurdly good apart from the last few holes. Other than that, I don't think Woods' plan did so badly.

Fader wrote:Navy, what is that stat done on though, is it just based n tee shots from Par 4's and 5's or is it actually taking into account the number of times players take the driver out of the bag and percentage of time they hit fairway using it.

I'm inclined to believe it's the former of the 2, in which case his stats are skewed by the fact he currently rarely uses the driver so doesn't given an account of how poor he is with the driver.

A good point. Don't have the answer however!

See the Faldo love in is not just me.His commentary was just so much more informative about the way the guys went about play.I thought he sounded like tim henman though

Fader wrote:Navy, what is that stat done on though, is it just based n tee shots from Par 4's and 5's or is it actually taking into account the number of times players take the driver out of the bag and percentage of time they hit fairway using it.

I'm inclined to believe it's the former of the 2, in which case his stats are skewed by the fact he currently rarely uses the driver so doesn't given an account of how poor he is with the driver.

yeah good point.. he obviously wasnt confident but couldnt trust himself with the driver in the bag- Perosnally i know exactly how he feels- i just know i would save 5 shots around by not taking the driver out with me

I don't care how good a golfer is from 200+ yards (and Tiger's obviously very good), that same golfer is much better from 100 - 150 yds (a glaring comparitive weakness for New Tiger).
Tiger's game for the most part has been based around his power, otherworldly miracle shots and somehow getting the ball in the hole from everywhere - he holed a 60-footer, chipped in and holed that 36th hole bunker shot this week.
When he's playing defensively he's just not going to be able to separate himself from the field, even when Thursday and Friday were going swimmingly.
He had his gameplan, as he called it, but forgot his Plan B. Looked as if Joe LaCava is intimidated not to question Tiger's club selection whereas Woods and Williams seemed to be very much a team.

Kwini

I reckon Osborne is in with a shout as a more detestable human being than Cameron and Dawson combined.


Navy

Even when we agree you take issue with my points. I stated it worked, without mention of the original intent of the bunkering. I liked the course set up and think had conditions been more favourable in the run up to the event the greens could have provided a second line of defence. I certainly don’t think firm lythm greens would have easily held iron shots from 220+ yards out like they did this week. Tiger would have been in real trouble hitting 3 iron to every green.


Which I think strengthens kwini’s point about tigers game plan not working. Someone on form like ernie hitting in from 150-200 would beat event the 2000 tiger hitting in from 220+. His plan worked in that he still had a chance on Sunday, but his plan did not allow for a triple as he could not make enough birdies.

I accept he still beat a lot of players but in the past he was able to beat the whole field and not have to worry about them coming back.

McLaren wrote:...Even when we agree you take issue with my points. I stated it worked, without mention of the original intent of the bunkering. I liked the course set up and think had conditions been more favourable in the run up to the event the greens could have provided a second line of defence. I certainly don’t think firm lythm greens would have easily held iron shots from 220+ yards out like they did this week. Tiger would have been in real trouble hitting 3 iron to every green.


Which I think strengthens kwini’s point about tigers game plan not working. Someone on form like ernie hitting in from 150-200 would beat event the 2000 tiger hitting in from 220+. His plan worked in that he still had a chance on Sunday, but his plan did not allow for a triple as he could not make enough birdies.

I accept he still beat a lot of players but in the past he was able to beat the whole field and not have to worry about them coming back.

What I meant earlier was your post implied the bunkers were put there to stop those sort of drives when all I suggested is that they'd been there before anyone hit it that far. A minor pedantic point maybe!

As for Woods, do you think he'd have been hitting 3-irons in if it were hard and firm????? His 2-iron would go a mile in firm conditions and he'd be hitting short irons in. In fact, I'd be willing to wager that more of the rest of the field would be hitting irons off the tee in drier conditions than they actually did as there's no way that driver would be holding the fairway.
Kwini brings up an interesting point though. Woods' shortish game did seem way off, particularly on distance control. He was far too often way too long or way too short. Bit odd that.

True, his 2 iron would have gone further and therefore closer to the bunker. I wonder if he would have been hitting mid irons off the tee in firm conditions to avoid the bunkers?

As for his distance control, that has never been very good. I suspect because he has too much acceleration through the ball and from an inconsistent position. He either times it from hip height (a good swing) or lashes at it from the top. From the top and he could go anywhere.

Woods v2 is still a work in progress but the progress is pretty good all in all.

tigers distance control can be amazing- his problem sometimes is that his irons into the green can be to hot and if that first bounce is to strong and then bounces on to a part of the green that isnt receptable it might not react or it might react to much

Navy, driving stats don't take into account the club played, Woods with the long club is abysmal, hence why he doesn't play it much and hence why his driving stats aren't that bad. If it was based purely on accuracy with a driver, Baldy Woods would be down the bottom somewhere.

How can a pro not develop a technique to improve such a glaringly weak element of their game? Seems obvious

Personally, I'm not a great driver, but have a fall back in that my rescue is 90% reliable and puts me just 15 yards behind my driver. A plan B if you like.

The distance Woods was leaving with an iron off the tee made his gameplan in bad weather impotent and his accuracy was poor too.

Super

If your rescue is only 15 yards behind your dirver your driving must be really bad. If you could drive properly your rescue would be at least 35 yards behind your driver.

Not at all Mac,

My rescue is 16 deg, and has a perfect draw with a lot of run produced, my driver, goes longer, but is less reliable and has less run.

Drive plus run about 265-285
Rescue plus run about 240-260.

It's basically a substitute for a three wood at that loft, and like all my clubs has a similar yardage gap between clubs.
So whether you think that makes me a bad driver or not is irrelevant, truth is I have a well balanced yardage across my bag. Perhaps a reason i'm a better golfer than you.

SR thats crazy dude- you are close with my rescue length but quit abit short of my driver length- my rescue is also a 16 degree. I am gonna be honest mate you just need a better set up driver.

Ok i dont get much run with either club but if you can hit a rescue with much more run to carry ratio there is no reason why you cant with your driver as well

Mysti - Obviously early, but if I were to pick one player it would be Woods.

Majors are just another tournament, but down the stretch seem to do strange things to player's games. The best players play in majors and many of those gear their season around them.

Donald's MO seems to be to throw down some fine numbers last day or two, but to start the day too far behind. He could change this at the PGA, but I'll be surprised if he does.

I hear Tiger is about to surpass Rory and Lee into the number two spot. Pretty meteoric rise for a player that was out of the top 50 not too long ago, and still a work in progress.

SR(shotrock) would you be more surprised if donald wins this pga than you may have been with els, simpson or bubba winning this year?

Its my pick and he is no.1 ..

you are offcourse right- he needs to start better than what he is accustomed to. But could you see him doing a snedeker, gmac or scott if he was in there position over the open championship!

Oakey, I'm being realistic about my driver length, I think most people think they hit it further than they do, of course I have hit drives over 300 sometimes much further at times, but generally a good solid drive will be 260-270.

Been fitted for my past few drivers, spent a lot of time on getting something suitable, but I think it's just a bit more difficult to shape it and get the run. DOn't think I need a different set up really, as I barely need it anyway.

SR you may be overestimating your rescue length then mate.. because 15 yards is not a normal difference. There is a clear issue there mate. Mac says 35 yards, but thats immaterial the difference is gonna be about 17.5% in my mind.

the difference between your 6 iron and 5 iron should be about 15 yards with your driver length i would guess, but not your rescue and driver.

You should be able to get your 3 wood about 22 yards past your rescue and your driver 20 yarsd past that

Els, yes ... Watson, yes ... Simpson, no.

What's totally untested about Donald's game is stepping up to the last few holes with a lead in a major and holding that lead. Obviously, could do it - but given Europe's PGA record to date (1958 medal player era there has been only one European, Kaymer) odds are stacked against him.

Oakey, I play off 2, rarely need a driver and consistently measure my rescue to be 15 yards shorter.

A three wood(which I don't have) is only 1 deg less at 15 degrees, so why would it go 22 yards further than my 16 deg rescue when the difference between irons is typically 3 deg and the difference in yardage about 12 yards.

My explanation is that my rescue shaft is absolutely optimal to me and my driver isn't quite there. I'm not fussed about it because as I've said I'm long enough to leave my preferred distance most of the time.

Shotrock wrote:Els, yes ... Watson, yes ... Simpson, no.

What's totally untested about Donald's game is stepping up to the last few holes with a lead in a major and holding that lead. Obviously, could do it - but given Europe's PGA record to date (1958 medal player era there has been only one European, Kaymer) odds are stacked against him.

Harrington SR

firstly els is an older dude, I have said all year we need to watch out for him in the majors so i am not surprised.

Watson -slightly surprised that he held on as anyone that had seen him choke countless times before would tell ya. But i wasnt overly surprised because he is a great golfer.

simpson - not surprised at all- but he is what could be considered a donald lite!!

What most people judge doanld these days on is the disney v simpson last year- 6 behind back 9- to win the event- he was 6 or 7 under par to win- but obviously it wasnt the tourny he was trying to win it was the Money list!

the thing to note is that he said he was gonna do it pre tourny and after day 3- he applied the pressure on himself and he rose to it!

the simple fact is if anyone says there are shocked if donald wins a major then i think there simply lieing!

super_realist wrote:Oakey, I play off 2, rarely need a driver and consistently measure my rescue to be 15 yards shorter.

A three wood(which I don't have) is only 1 deg less at 15 degrees, so why would it go 22 yards further than my 16 deg rescue when the difference between irons is typically 3 deg and the difference in yardage about 12 yards.

My explanation is that my rescue shaft is absolutely optimal to me and my driver isn't quite there. I'm not fussed about it because as I've said I'm long enough to leave my preferred distance most of the time.

I did say your driver isnt optimal to you mate- that was allways my point


point is though i use a 8.5 degree driver ,13 degree 3 wood and a 16 degree resucue. as most people would(if there have a 16 degree rescue)

if you use a 15 degree 3 wood then the better club would be a 19 degree rescue as standard. but obviously clearly you should be using a 13 degree 3 wood. But i dont take all 3 out on a days golf i personally only normlly take 2 of the 3 unless i am playing a 7000 plus yard course

Oakey, like I say I have a good spread of clubs and yardages across my bag.

My driver is set to 10.5 and my next nearest club is 16. Not a major difference. I don't need a three wood for that reason, then I've got a 19 rescue and 3-W from there.

I've been fitted many times so confident my driver is ok-ish, but my rescue is my stock club at St.Andrews because I'd prefer to hit a full 110 in for my second than an awkward 95.

Super - How could I forget ... good call. Padraig tamed Oakland Hills!

Donald's task still tall ... the last Englishman to win that Championship (and it was in the Match Play era) was Jim Barnes in 1919.

You are right that it is all about consitant yardage. thats a great thing to have in the locker. so its no biggie and probally a big advantage to you. But you clearly arnt getting enough out your driver. Personally get a 3 wood that is right for you then(my 13 degree pt is amazing) and does go realively close to my driver but with much less carry.

SR, I don't agree with that assessment at all. The form and nationalities of players in this year is not related to that of years and winning nationalities gone past.

It's like saying that simply because you toss 40 heads in a row that it means it's less likely to toss another. What has gone before has no bearing.

Every major starts afresh, and if someone is in form and playing better than the others, it doesn't matter where they come from.

Shotrock- no one will be suprised if he wins this thing.. Anyway nationality is irrelevant(keep trying to tell my self this!!!!)

He has the game to win(i am 100% certain)- he will have a bit more confidence as well, and i hope the pressure will be slightly more off him in the up and coming PGA

Oakey, I'm picking up a patronising tone there, not sure it's intended or not.

I hit rescue because it goes far enough and prefer their versatility to 3 woods. I don't believe I need a three wood and as you don't know my ball flight and swing speed you can't say whether or not I'm getting the full beans out of my driver.

no i am not patronising at all. but you clearly dont need the driver- you should easily be able to hit a decent 3 wood 15 yards furthar than your 16 degree rescue- the yardages you gave are the key to that assesment.

but then us down south play more target golf than you do up in scotland.. so that could be a factor- your drives might be landing in the rough, your resuce is obviously more penetrating with less backspin applied and you are getting alot of roll from pitching it on the fairway.

I only measure my length and swing speed on the fight scopes. I do suggest that if you got your stats from flight scope there is 100% something wrong. but at the same time carry is the important factor not your actual yardage

Ah right, I see what you mean, I might test out a 13 deg 3 wood then and potentially ditch the driver.

All fittings have taken place outdoor on trackman/dopplar radar etc, but I measure distances with GPS and or laser so I'm pretty confident they are right.
I actually prefer the inland target golf with short par 4's I can hit irons off the tee.

However I can't seem to crack the glass ceiling of being a one handicap despite having a short game most would kill for.

well my lowest was 4- so I do feel abit silly telling you what to do lol... I am just saying what i think, at the end of the day its all about consitant yardage..If you trust that yardage your gonna be ten times better. If yours/mine/anyones drives are having a 50 yards variance then thats not gonna help us is it

Super, maybe a lesson with mysti would help ?

My drives are so short I can use a tape measure........

mystiroakey wrote:well my lowest was 4- so I do feel abit silly telling you what to do lol... I am just saying what i think, at the end of the day its all about consitant yardage..If you trust that yardage your gonna be ten times better. If yours/mine/anyones drives are having a 50 yards variance then thats not gonna help us is it

Well that's just it Mysti, I don't have that variance, my yardage is very consistent.

Bam Bam i have given out lessons mate- dont knock it.

(normally hot birds offcourse)

are you pretty SR?

Mysti i'm not knocking it, if anything i'm encouraging it
could be the beginnings here of super v mac mark 2.0 (hope I've not jinxed it )

Ban, Oakey and I are usually fairly friendly in our debate. It doesn't have the spice of that a contest with Mac would have.

Tbh the mark 2.0 is me v mac!

One of the ways to tell who's had a good year at the end of the four majors is to see who's had the best combined score through all of them. These are the guys who have played 72 holes at all three majors so far in 2012. Kuchar probably the biggest surprise I would think, along with the sheer number of players still in there:

Scott: (-4) 844
McDowell (-2) 846
Kuchar (E) 848
Westwood (+3) 851
Furyk (+4) 852
Harrington (+4) 852
Poulter (+6) 854
Dufner (+7) 855
Mahan (+9) 857
Woods: (+9) 857
Watney (+12) 860
Jacobson (+13) 861
Z Johnson (+14) 862
F Molinari (+14) 862
Stricker (+15) 863
Fowler (+16) 864
Bradley (+24) 872

On the Europeans-at-the-PGA debate - I think the point is probably weakened somewhat by both of those European wins being in the last few years, after a long drought. But, I also think it's worth noting that Europeans still tend to struggle generally at the two rotating US majors, the US Open and the PGA. And if you take out Harrington, a multiple major winner, and McIlroy, surely a future multiple winner, the only two courses Europeans have won on in 40 years are Pebble and Whistling Straughts. My theory is that there's a home advantage when the majors are on standard, parkland courses which suit the PGA Tour players who've grown up on similar. In tournaments on more unusual style courses, the playing field is levelled a bit. Which suggests Kiawah might be a bit kinder to European players than a lot of places. My tip for European to watch would be a scrambler, probably Poulter.

Super - Agree that nationality should not matter, but I'm not sure it doesn't play a part. When you have the weight of "X" nation on your back it certainly can add pressure to a situation. Whether or not a golfer (any athlete really) wants to accept or entertain that pressure is another issue. I forget who the golfer was, but an American player once said the most difficult shot in golf he ever played was his first tee shot at a Ryder Cup.

SR, I think it's a case that since it's inception there hasn't been a large number of Europeans permanently on the US Tour, so perhaps haven't been well enough prepared. It seems to be happening more now that Europeans permanently reside over there, statistically they are usually outnumbered too, but in the next ten years I'd expect to see more European wins.

SRock its clear that westy has the weight of the world on his back - but not the nation! poulter wants the weight of the nation on his back- And in fairness i think if he did- he would perform better. Donald has his own weight on his shoulder like westy- but he hasnt been in a position as of yet that hurts him(given away chances to win) so he isnt tarnished yet..

Poulter is having a good year in majors. Could he emerge as the best chance of an English winner?