THE Open Championship 2013

by SmithersJones Sun 14 Jul 2013 - 23:53

First topic message reminder :

In response to PD's plea, here's my effort at a thread for this week's ET event, which just happens to be the most important event on that particular calendar, if not in the world of golf as a whole. I'll try to keep it factual, other than the 'ones to watch' at the end.

The 142nd Open Championship gets underway this week at Muirfield, just outside Edinburgh. Defending champion, in both respects, is Ernie Els, the big South African having followed up his playoff win at Muirfield in 2002 with last year's surprise victory at Lytham.

Els has quite a record in this event. He missed the cut on debut in 1989, but has played every year since 1992, recording 2 wins, 3 runner-up positions and a further 7 top tens. He's missed the cut just twice in that run, in 2010 when so many were caught out by the weather on the Friday at St. Andrews, and again in poor conditions at RSG the following year. In that context, his win last year is even more remarkable. Other notable stats for the Big Easy at the oldest major include twice recording 4 rounds in the 60s without winning, in 1993 and 2004 (brownie points on offer for naming the only other player to do this and the year), finishing under par most often since 1963 alongside two other huge names in the recent history of the Open (easy to guess who so I'd like the number of times too please), and he edges both of them on overall number of rounds under 70, 39 to their 37 and 33. Interestingly they both have more rounds under par than Ernie, which I suppose means when he's good he's very good. Testament to that would be his 29 on the front 9 in the second round at Muirfield in 2002, and his seven consecutive rounds under 70 in 1993-4.

Muirfield as a venue commands, it seems, a great deal of respect from the players even though the male only status of the Honourable Company of Edinburgh Golfers as a club casts something of a shadow over an otherwise excellent location for this great championship. I have no intention of expressing an opinion on that particular issue, not least because this week has nothing to do with the membership of the club and everything to do with the best players in the world. At 7,192 yards it's no beast, and indeed may even be considered short these days, even though they've added some 158 yards this time around. That won't detract from the substantial test that it's bound to provide, the rough at least providing some defence even if the weather doesn't look like it's going to. It's not an in and out type links, rather the front 9 loops clockwise around the anti-clockwise homeward 9. Par is 71, with 3 par 5s (5,9,17) and 4 par 3 holes (4,7,13,16). The prevailing wind will help on 5 and 17, so look for those holes to be eagle opportunities, while 9 plays back into it and at over 550 yards will be out of reach for most if there's any kind of breeze. 2, 3 and 11 are par 4s under 400 yards and ought to offer birdie opportunities, especially since the wind is likely to be helping on those holes. With the exception of the 4th, the par 3s are all around 180-190 yards, so should be no more than a mid-iron for most of the field.

Previous champions here have included some of the game's true greats - Els, Faldo of course, twice, as well as Nicklaus, Watson, Trevino, Player and Cotton. Nobody has won the Open here by default. Faldo's 18 pars to edge out Azinger in 1987 will be part of Open Championship folk lore for centuries, even though his finish here in 1992 was arguably more inspired following his mid-round stumble which let John Cook have a sniff of victory.

Perhaps important to note is that although we look back on those last 7 Muirfield winners as greats of the game, for some of them victory here was their first in the Open (2 names?) or indeed in a major championship of any sort (another 2?). As such, could this be the first of many Opens for a new great (Rory, Justin, Adam?)

Victory in Scotland this week for Phil Mickelson has to mean he should be considered as another great player with the potential to win at Muirfield, although the fairways there will surely look like tiny islands in a sea of rough in relation to the giant swathes of short grass that the contenders at Castle Stuart were faced with this past week. So who else could be lifting the claret jug next Sunday?

Rory McIlroy - the world no. 2 hasn't given anybody any reason to suspect he'll be able to turn his form so far this season around, and this isn't his favourite event on the calendar. If the weather remains as calm as forecast that may change, but there will surely be too many genuine contenders for Rory to sneak up on the rails and pinch this one?

Tiger Woods - we've not seen numero uno since his latest injury, to his left elbow, forced him to miss his own tournament at Congressional. He's apparently 'full go' for the Open, albeit recognising that staying out of the rough will be an even better idea than usual! The length, or lack of it, of the course means he can afford to leave the driver in the bag most of the time and still have scoring opportunities but as with Rory, there are too many other serious contenders to think that Woods might win here when he was only able to muster a T28 here last time, which included a very wet, windy and rough-strewn third round 81.

Ernie Els - the defending champion has to be a very serious contender this week, his excellent Open record combining with some pretty good recent form including of course victory in Germany 3 weeks ago. With no wind to blow him off course as he wedges his belly putter into place, you have to think Els will be in the mix next Sunday.

Graeme McDowell - another recent winner, and the all or nothing man of 2013. To mix missed cuts and wins the way GMac has done of late suggests huge mental strength, something that Muirfield Open champions have in common.

Lee Westwood - as some of you may know I'm a big fan of Lee's, but I don't really know why. Ordinarily my pessimistic, cynical nature would predict a good start to the tournament for Lee only to whimper out of contention on Friday and Saturday to the point where he hasn't got a realistic chance of winning on Sunday. However, he took the decision to miss the French Open in order to be better rested for the Open, and I'm hoping that will pay off. He's straight enough to win, especially if his recently improved short game holds out, but whether he has the mental strength I mentioned above remains to be seen!

Justin Rose - mental strength can't be questioned following that tremendous finish at Merion, and he certainly has the game to win at Muirfield. He doesn't have a great record in the Open though, his famous 4th place as an amateur in 1998 at Birkdale comfortably his best finish. 12th in 2007 and 13th in 2009 are his best pro finishes. Given his exertions at Merion, I think victory here would be asking too much.

Adam Scott - Justin's big pal and the other major champion of 2013 so far should arguably be defending champion this week. I was at Lytham to witness his demise on the Sunday, and it was pretty clear as he played the 18th that he wasn't in a good place mentally. Much like Rory he bounced back from throwing away a major by winning one very soon after, but I just have a feeling that also like Rory the one that got away will take a bit longer to finally reel in. Rory will most likely win the Masters one day, just as Adam will probably win an Open, but I fear the memories will still be too fresh for the Aussie this week.

All in all then, GMac, Ernie or Lee. All are around 25/1. If you want an outside bet; Brooks Koepke will return you 5 times as much as those big names - he's had a phenomenal year on the Challenge tour, graduating to the main ET via 3 wins before July and he played pretty well at Castle Stuart this week.

With the weather promising to be very pleasant, the course is likely to be hard and running, with the rough therefore coming more into play. Muirfield will doubtless produce a fantastic tournament and another excellent golfer will be announced by Peter Dawson around 7pm next Sunday as 'winner of the gold medal and champion golfer for the year'.

by **navyblueshorts** Tue 23 Jul 2013 - 10:53

McLaren wrote:...I loved peter alliss's assessment of PHIGAM's mastery of links; he didn't really play any of the traditional shots but just learned how to use his game on a links. I wonder if phil realizes his banging on about "getting" links golf sounded rather foolish given the shots he didn't bother to play.

His game did of course work so I guess he at least worked out the conditions better than the rest.

What was obvious in the final round was that the players could not get their heads around the concept of playing a knocked down longer iron short of the green instead of hoping a bombed wedge would run on with any level of consistency.

Who cares what Alliss said in regard of this? I got fed up to the back teeth with him banging on about hitting a 4-iron (or whatever dumb idea it was at any given moment) from 40 yards out etc. It's all about judgement whatever way it's played and they'd have had to judge random bounces if they'd landed it low and hard-running from 80 yards out - there's no guarantee that approach would have worked any better and as the wind wasn't blowing a gale, keeping it really low wasn't an issue.

by raycastleunited Tue 23 Jul 2013 - 11:00

Gutted for Lee, but have to agree that he blew it again, just like he did at the 2009 Open and the 2010 Masters. You can argue that Mickelson played great golf to come through and win it, but Westwood should have been able to shoot a solid round and hang on to victory.

As for Tiger, for the second Open running he looked timid and overwhelmed on the final day. His game plan was all about hiding his weaknesses rather than choosing the best way to play each hole.

by **navyblueshorts** Tue 23 Jul 2013 - 11:13

Disagree about LW Ray. He didn't 'blow' it. Out of 84 players on the last day, only 15 shot 70 or better and those out last (i.e. the leaders) had the course at it's hardest (literally). In addition, many of those 15 (with exception of Poulter, maybe, and Mickleson) had nothing to lose.
He didn't "blow" it at the 2010 Masters either and I think it's reasonable that he assumed Watson wouldn't drop a shot down 18 in the 2009 Open and therefore felt he had to try for a birdie. You can bet if he'd lagged his birdie putt, Watson wouldn't have dropped a shot and all the 'experts' would have slated LW for being conservative and not 'going for the win'.

by Bob_the_Job Tue 23 Jul 2013 - 11:23

barragan wrote:phil up to #2
you have to go as far as #29 to find a player who has scored less points than rory in 2013. interesting to see how quickly he'll drop out of the top 10 on current form.

Think Felix Baumgartner, that should give you an idea.

by raycastleunited Tue 23 Jul 2013 - 11:26

A lot of people on this thread praising the BBC for their coverage and commentary.

I have to say it was a welcome relief to watch the golf without the continual ad breaks or the annoying Colin no majors. I found the commentators pretty decent on the whole and Aliss is a bit of an institution although I couldn't listen to him every week.

There were 2 things however that I thought were really poor:

1. A totally hopeless highlights package. I know they devoted the whole day to live coverage, but a paltry 45 min highlights show on after midnight was disgraceful and meant that people who had to work during the day had no real opportunity to watch a proper programme. What was more annoying was that this highlights programme was basically a putting show. Endless clips of players rolling in 10 foot putts for birdie, but no clips of the fantastic shots that put them in that position. We didn't get to see the disasters either eg Colsaerts 6 putt, which are just as important in telling the story of the tournament.

2. The second thing was the timing of switching to a shot and the camera work. The editor would always switch to a player just as he played a shot... you need to switch a few seconds before so the commentator can set the scene before the shot (eg what hole, what shot, what distance, club, wind, etc) and display a graphic. Some of the camera work was a bit ropey and they didn't use the technology like shot tracker enough, but I guess it is difficult to follow the ball in overcast skies and the Open is nearly always played in drab and dreary conditions.

Wall to wall coverage with no advert breaks is great for golf fans, but the quality was a real step down from what I'm used to seeing on sky.

by John Cregan Tue 23 Jul 2013 - 11:27

Allis was a bit hard to listen to all right going on about the clubbing..........he appears to have a chip on his shoulder about players being able to hit a 9 iron 150yds or whatever it is.......there was one hole that was playing an 8 iron and he was wondering why the players weren't playing a low easy 6 iron...........how boring.

by Tinmar Tue 23 Jul 2013 - 11:42

navyblueshorts wrote:Disagree about LW Ray. He didn't 'blow' it. Out of 84 players on the last day, only 15 shot 70 or better and those out last (i.e. the leaders) had the course at it's hardest (literally). In addition, many of those 15 (with exception of Poulter, maybe, and Mickleson) had nothing to lose.

That's still not good enough. Lee probably shot about the average score for the day on Sunday. That's not terrible but it was never going to be good enough. It would be very, very unusual to win a Major from the last group on Sunday by matching the average score of the field. Yes, the course was at its most difficult when he teed off but that's not really a point worth making. That will always be the case in every Major and is something he will have to overcome if he wants to win one.

As you stated above, almost 18% of the field shot 70 or better on Sunday. Look back as far as you wish in Majors and the winner's final round score will almost always be in the top 10% of the scores for that day. Muirfield was very difficult and Lee didn't have to be awful to shoot a 75. But not being awful is not good enough. Lee has challenged for a lot of Majors now. If he is to win one then he will have to shoot one of the best scores of the day on Sunday after starting in one of the last few groups.

by **navyblueshorts** Tue 23 Jul 2013 - 11:45

raycastleunited wrote:...Wall to wall coverage with no advert breaks is great for golf fans, but the quality was a real step down from what I'm used to seeing on sky.

Really? I don't have Sky but always scab a watch at the in-laws and, frankly, I find Sky's golf coverage pretty average. The studio anchors are terrible and the 'experts' annoying. A friend of mine once said of experts - "An 'ex' is a has-been and a 'spurt' is a drip under pressure". Thought that sums them up pretty well.
There were plenty of shots which were subject to shot tracker on the Beeb and some of the camera work taking in the actual ball trajectories on many shots was excellent.

by raycastleunited Tue 23 Jul 2013 - 11:56

navyblueshorts wrote:Disagree about LW Ray. He didn't 'blow' it. Out of 84 players on the last day, only 15 shot 70 or better and those out last (i.e. the leaders) had the course at it's hardest (literally). In addition, many of those 15 (with exception of Poulter, maybe, and Mickleson) had nothing to lose.
He didn't "blow" it at the 2010 Masters either and I think it's reasonable that he assumed Watson wouldn't drop a shot down 18 in the 2009 Open and therefore felt he had to try for a birdie. You can bet if he'd lagged his birdie putt, Watson wouldn't have dropped a shot and all the 'experts' would have slated LW for being conservative and not 'going for the win'.

Navy, I think someone earlier in the thread said that 21 out of 84 players shot 71 or better, a score which would have got LW into a play-off. I think it's reasonable to say that if you want to win a major you need to shoot a top quartile score on the final day. I'm not talking about shooting the lights out, just level par, and I think his form over the first 3 days showed he was capable of doing that on Sunday. After 5 or 6 holes he was on course, he seemed to lose confidence after a couple of shots slipped away and never looked like he would bounce back.

The 2010 Masters is always remembered for Mickelson's great final round, but after 3 rounds in the 60's LW finished with a 71 on a day when a load of players were posting scores in the 60's. If he had shot 69 and lost by a single stroke I would say well played and hard luck but he limped home with what was it 3 or 4 bogeys on the final day?

The 2009 Open I agree that he was right to go for it on 18, but it was the bogeys on 15 and 16 where he blew it.

by raycastleunited Tue 23 Jul 2013 - 12:05

navyblueshorts wrote:
raycastleunited wrote:...Wall to wall coverage with no advert breaks is great for golf fans, but the quality was a real step down from what I'm used to seeing on sky.
Really? I don't have Sky but always scab a watch at the in-laws and, frankly, I find Sky's golf coverage pretty average. The studio anchors are terrible and the 'experts' annoying. A friend of mine once said of experts - "An 'ex' is a has-been and a 'spurt' is a drip under pressure". Thought that sums them up pretty well.
There were plenty of shots which were subject to shot tracker on the Beeb and some of the camera work taking in the actual ball trajectories on many shots was excellent.

The quality I was referring to was not the commentators but the camera work and editing. Am really not interested in the studio pundits whether sky or beeb (tend to fast forward through this when I can) but I just found the jumping around from player to player without setting the context of the shot really annoying.

Have to admit I quite like some of the gimmicks the US network uses eg the aimpoint putting line.

by Aruglia Tue 23 Jul 2013 - 13:25

I enjoyed the BBC coverage overall. Wouldn't be a big Hazel fan but she doesn't really annoy me either(prefer her to the sky anchors). Overall I like Peter Aliss but I think it's getting near the time to hang up his mic. I didn't think he looked very well through the week. On the production values side, I watched fridays highlights because I had missed some of the afternoon play and thought it was really badly slapped together. I know these are done to really tight schedules but this was just plain bad. In one short piece they showed 2 guys from different groups playing to the same par 3 one after the other and then their putts like they were playing in the same group. It just seemed amateurish. But as I said, overall I enjoyed the bbc's coverage.

by barragan Tue 23 Jul 2013 - 14:42

given sky will be throwing a lot more money at coverage of similar events it doesn't particularly surprise me that they have more techno gimicks. personally, having never had sky, but having watched a few times, i'd take bbc every time. the masters was painful to watch on sky - we all agreed to switch to bbc after about 20 minutes, as the drama didn't feel as stop-start or as irritatingly smug. the bbc might be a slower beast, but in terms of comfort of delivery it's like sitting in a cosy old pub compared to sitting in a sparse departure lounge.

by **navyblueshorts** Tue 23 Jul 2013 - 15:15

Tinmar wrote:
navyblueshorts wrote:Disagree about LW Ray. He didn't 'blow' it. Out of 84 players on the last day, only 15 shot 70 or better and those out last (i.e. the leaders) had the course at it's hardest (literally). In addition, many of those 15 (with exception of Poulter, maybe, and Mickleson) had nothing to lose.

That's still not good enough. Lee probably shot about the average score for the day on Sunday. That's not terrible but it was never going to be good enough. It would be very, very unusual to win a Major from the last group on Sunday by matching the average score of the field. Yes, the course was at its most difficult when he teed off but that's not really a point worth making. That will always be the case in every Major and is something he will have to overcome if he wants to win one.

As you stated above, almost 18% of the field shot 70 or better on Sunday. Look back as far as you wish in Majors and the winner's final round score will almost always be in the top 10% of the scores for that day. Muirfield was very difficult and Lee didn't have to be awful to shoot a 75. But not being awful is not good enough. Lee has challenged for a lot of Majors now. If he is to win one then he will have to shoot one of the best scores of the day on Sunday after starting in one of the last few groups.

It's definitely a point worth making given the comments on his round. It was as hard as it could have been and, yes, he must have been trying to defend/increase the lead he started with. What isn't worth stating (despite people banging on about it ad nauseam) is that LW's 75 wasn't good enough - demonstrably it wasn't as he didn't win!
With the exception of Stenson (and he didn't do enough either) no-one at the upper end of the field (Mickleson excepted) did themselves justice on the last day which suggests to me that it was chuffing hard. Just out of interest, I wonder how many recent Major winners have come from the last group? LW seems to continually get it in the neck despite all the evidence that suggests how hard it is to actually win one of these, especially from the front on day 4.
It's only places like this that're giving LW a hard time. The man himself said he didn't do well enough and what's being conveniently forgotten is that his game wasn't in the best of shape going in to this. Frankly, I'm amazed he had such a good chance and ironically that was down to his short game - something else that people continually give him grief about.

by **navyblueshorts** Tue 23 Jul 2013 - 15:16

barragan wrote:given sky will be throwing a lot more money at coverage of similar events it doesn't particularly surprise me that they have more techno gimicks. personally, having never had sky, but having watched a few times, i'd take bbc every time. the masters was painful to watch on sky - we all agreed to switch to bbc after about 20 minutes, as the drama didn't feel as stop-start or as irritatingly smug. the bbc might be a slower beast, but in terms of comfort of delivery it's like sitting in a cosy old pub compared to sitting in a sparse departure lounge.

by barragan Tue 23 Jul 2013 - 15:22

I guess those who have sky have to think it's the best because they're paying a blinking fortune for it.

by **navyblueshorts** Tue 23 Jul 2013 - 15:24

raycastleunited wrote:...The 2010 Masters is always remembered for Mickelson's great final round, but after 3 rounds in the 60's LW finished with a 71 on a day when a load of players were posting scores in the 60's. If he had shot 69 and lost by a single stroke I would say well played and hard luck but he limped home with what was it 3 or 4 bogeys on the final day?...

If LW had shot in the 60s in that Masters, I think he'd have been the first person to shoot all 4 rounds sub-70. At the end of the day, he'll either win one or he won't and at least he's getting himself in the position to bag one sometime.

by **navyblueshorts** Tue 23 Jul 2013 - 15:25

barragan wrote:I guess those who have sky have to think it's the best because they're paying a blinking fortune for it.

Maybe. Personally, I hate their typical OTT wizzy-bang-aren't-we-special gadgetry and special effects but that might just be me.

by Tinmar Tue 23 Jul 2013 - 15:57

navyblueshorts wrote:It's definitely a point worth making given the comments on his round. It was as hard as it could have been and, yes, he must have been trying to defend/increase the lead he started with. What isn't worth stating (despite people banging on about it ad nauseam) is that LW's 75 wasn't good enough - demonstrably it wasn't as he didn't win!
With the exception of Stenson (and he didn't do enough either) no-one at the upper end of the field (Mickleson excepted) did themselves justice on the last day which suggests to me that it was chuffing hard. Just out of interest, I wonder how many recent Major winners have come from the last group? LW seems to continually get it in the neck despite all the evidence that suggests how hard it is to actually win one of these, especially from the front on day 4.
It's only places like this that're giving LW a hard time. The man himself said he didn't do well enough and what's being conveniently forgotten is that his game wasn't in the best of shape going in to this. Frankly, I'm amazed he had such a good chance and ironically that was down to his short game - something else that people continually give him grief about.

It seems as though we're dealing in semantics here and just going around in circles. As far as I can make out, we're agreed that the course was very difficult and that Lee's performance on Sunday was far from terrible but still not good enough. I haven't read anyone giving him a hard time. The strongest anyone has said is that it wasn't good enough. Since he is in agreement with this himself, I'm not sure what the problem is with anyone else making similar comments.

Anyone can have a disappointing round on a given day and I don't underestimate the pressure involved at all. The fact is that Lee has gone into the final round of Majors either leading or within 2 or 3 of the lead on a number of occasions now. All I'm saying is that, in order to win one, he needs to be the one who produces his very best golf on the Sunday. He has never done that yet and the more chances that slip away, the harder it will be for him to ever do so. Suggesting, as some have done, that he didn't lose it and was helpless in the face of Phil Mickelson's brilliance doesn't really do Lee any favours. Follow that line of thinking through a bit more and you arrive at the sort of conclusion expressed by Sergio Garcia about his own Major aspirations in the past year or two.

by shclaff Tue 23 Jul 2013 - 16:11

barragan wrote:it's like sitting in a cosy old pub compared to sitting in a sparse departure lounge.

Well put!

Remember the Masters this year when Mark Roe "stepped into" Bubba's shot from the 2012 playoff? CRINGE!

When it went back to the studio the other anchors were in awe picard

by **navyblueshorts** Tue 23 Jul 2013 - 20:35

Tinmar wrote:
navyblueshorts wrote:It's definitely a point worth making given the comments on his round. It was as hard as it could have been and, yes, he must have been trying to defend/increase the lead he started with. What isn't worth stating (despite people banging on about it ad nauseam) is that LW's 75 wasn't good enough - demonstrably it wasn't as he didn't win!
With the exception of Stenson (and he didn't do enough either) no-one at the upper end of the field (Mickleson excepted) did themselves justice on the last day which suggests to me that it was chuffing hard. Just out of interest, I wonder how many recent Major winners have come from the last group? LW seems to continually get it in the neck despite all the evidence that suggests how hard it is to actually win one of these, especially from the front on day 4.
It's only places like this that're giving LW a hard time. The man himself said he didn't do well enough and what's being conveniently forgotten is that his game wasn't in the best of shape going in to this. Frankly, I'm amazed he had such a good chance and ironically that was down to his short game - something else that people continually give him grief about.

It seems as though we're dealing in semantics here and just going around in circles. As far as I can make out, we're agreed that the course was very difficult and that Lee's performance on Sunday was far from terrible but still not good enough. I haven't read anyone giving him a hard time. The strongest anyone has said is that it wasn't good enough. Since he is in agreement with this himself, I'm not sure what the problem is with anyone else making similar comments.

Anyone can have a disappointing round on a given day and I don't underestimate the pressure involved at all. The fact is that Lee has gone into the final round of Majors either leading or within 2 or 3 of the lead on a number of occasions now. All I'm saying is that, in order to win one, he needs to be the one who produces his very best golf on the Sunday. He has never done that yet and the more chances that slip away, the harder it will be for him to ever do so. Suggesting, as some have done, that he didn't lose it and was helpless in the face of Phil Mickelson's brilliance doesn't really do Lee any favours. Follow that line of thinking through a bit more and you arrive at the sort of conclusion expressed by Sergio Garcia about his own Major aspirations in the past year or two.

by JAS Tue 23 Jul 2013 - 22:35

barragan wrote:phil up to #2
you have to go as far as #29 to find a player who has scored less points than rory in 2013. interesting to see how quickly he'll drop out of the top 10 on current form.

Well he won the PGA last year during a purple patch (after a bit of a sketchy first half of the season) so I imagine that unless his ideas buck up pronto, he'll start dropping like a stone as his last years points start diminishing.

by super_realist Wed 24 Jul 2013 - 11:27

Is McIlroy going to disappear like a Michelle Wie or Kournikova?

by McLaren Wed 24 Jul 2013 - 11:50

super_realist wrote:Is McIlroy going to disappear like a Michelle Wie or Kournikova?

Would anyone care if he did?

by shclaff Wed 24 Jul 2013 - 11:56

super_realist wrote:Is McIlroy going to disappear like a Michelle Wie or Kournikova?

No. He's too good and every golfer has slumps.

The comparisons don't work either - McIlroy has 2 majors and 10 total wins already. Kournikova was never near that kind of success and Wie hasn't really delivered at all since turning pro.

Kournikova/Wie were hyped based on potential. McIlroy has already delivered.

by kwinigolfer Wed 24 Jul 2013 - 12:06

McIlroy already has a record that would be a pretty decent career for most players - and his year (away from the Majors) hasn't been totally dismal, just nowhere near what we're used to.

by barragan Wed 24 Jul 2013 - 12:09

as alluded to earlier kwini, his form since the beginning of 2013 is still top30-40ish so not too bad considering.

by Shotrock Wed 24 Jul 2013 - 13:30

My guess is that Rory gets 10 majors and the career grand slam. Just going through a rough patch at the moment.

by super_realist Wed 24 Jul 2013 - 13:51

shclaff wrote:
super_realist wrote:Is McIlroy going to disappear like a Michelle Wie or Kournikova?

No. He's too good and every golfer has slumps.

The comparisons don't work either - McIlroy has 2 majors and 10 total wins already. Kournikova was never near that kind of success and Wie hasn't really delivered at all since turning pro.

Kournikova/Wie were hyped based on potential. McIlroy has already delivered.

Is it a slump or is he just disinterested now though? He seems just like a mediocre Premier League Player these days, massive sponsorship deal, celebrity girlfriend.

by SmithersJones Wed 24 Jul 2013 - 14:04

I agree with Super's sentiment, if not his meaning. Rory isn't unbiased, he's uninterested.

by shclaff Wed 24 Jul 2013 - 14:13

On what basis can you question his interest?

When I see him playing badly he seems completely dejected. Hardly someone who isn't bothered

by super_realist Wed 24 Jul 2013 - 15:00

He didn't seem overly fussed about his Open exit and he stunk the place out. His girlfriend isn't much better in her sport. A couple of also rans.

by SmithersJones Wed 24 Jul 2013 - 15:26

He doesn't seem to want to put the shifts in, as Faldo suggested. He's got a huge contract, celebrity girlfriend, Monaco home and all the superstar trappings. Where does he go from there? I'm sure the majors are his focus but in order to play well in those you have to maintain your top level game but he doesn't seem to want to do that. Whenever you hear about him hitting balls it seems to be at the club closest to the latest LTA tour stop on a Tuesday afternoon, which suggests the golf is second to getting his end away in his list of priorities.

by McLaren Wed 24 Jul 2013 - 15:50

SmithersJones wrote:He doesn't seem to want to put the shifts in, as Faldo suggested. He's got a huge contract, celebrity girlfriend, Monaco home and all the superstar trappings. Where does he go from there? I'm sure the majors are his focus but in order to play well in those you have to maintain your top level game but he doesn't seem to want to do that. Whenever you hear about him hitting balls it seems to be at the club closest to the latest LTA tour stop on a Tuesday afternoon, which suggests the golf is second to getting his end away in his list of priorities.

pretty much spot on.

by shclaff Wed 24 Jul 2013 - 17:18

Are you guys keeping tabs on the practice he does? From what I've seen there is no evidence to suggest he doesn't want to put a shift in.

Super, he looked completely demoralised at the Open so I'm not sure what you mean.

I'm not even a huge McIlroy fan but armchair viewers and even ex pros having a crack does get my goat a little. Especially when it's based on nothing but conjecture.

by SmithersJones Wed 24 Jul 2013 - 17:23

I happen to have been at East Sussex National when he was practising there last year, while the LTA event was in Eastbourne. I played a match against someone who saw him at Wimbledon GC driving range during Wimbledon fortnight. He's always tweeting pictures of the pair of them in various locations. Most pros accept that they'll be away from their families for weeks at a time, or have their families follow them around. He's following her around and squeezing in a bit of practice when he can.

by shclaff Wed 24 Jul 2013 - 17:30

You saw him practicing at East Sussex National and heard he was practicing during Wimbledon? Doesn't really sound like he's not putting the effort in.

The only time I do agree there was a problem is after the Irish Open he said he couldn't add another ever or two because of sponsor commitments.

by Shotrock Wed 24 Jul 2013 - 17:53

As if Phil didn't have enough tax related burdens ... now this ...

http://ftw.usatoday.com/2013/07/phil-mickelson-open-championship-taxes/

by super_realist Wed 24 Jul 2013 - 18:17

shclaff wrote:Are you guys keeping tabs on the practice he does? From what I've seen there is no evidence to suggest he doesn't want to put a shift in.

Super, he looked completely demoralised at the Open so I'm not sure what you mean.

I'm not even a huge McIlroy fan but armchair viewers and even ex pros having a crack does get my goat a little. Especially when it's based on nothing but conjecture.

I said it LOOKED like he was disinterested, I didn't say I knew for certain that he was.

If we aren't allowed to air our views based on what we see and what we think we see then what's the bloody point of this forum?

McIlroy to me looks to be more interested in his girlfriend, who also is enjoying a similar downward spiral in her career, making turgid adverts and pocketing loads of money than actually grinding it out on the course like people like Poulter or Garcia have done after having dreadful rounds.

I may be completely wrong and he may be the most dedicated pro around and never off the practice ground or adapting his game to the conditions he might face. However to me he may have been distracted by A) how good he was last year and B) his massive bank balance and C) newly found enhanced celebrity status, or, maybe he peaked early and he's just another very good, but not top of the tree tour pro who can be brilliant for long terms, or completely gash.

by Diggers Wed 24 Jul 2013 - 18:33

Can't believe you'd list Poulter and Garcia as role models for putting a shift in. By his own admission Poulter focused too much on designing his new mansion a couple of years ago and had a duff time on the course as a result. I bet it looks just like any other one as well so probably a waste of time to boot. Plus his clothing line has sen him take his eye off the ball, if his house looks as bad as his clothes then it will be rank. And Garcia must be the biggest shoulder slumped on tour when things don't go his way.
The last two people Coco should look to quite frankly.

by shclaff Wed 24 Jul 2013 - 18:46

super_realist wrote: I said it LOOKED like he was disinterested, I didn't say I knew for certain that he was.

If we aren't allowed to air our views based on what we see and what we think we see then what's the bloody point of this forum?

Fair point but, equally, I'm free to disagree when I think it's cobblers with nothing to back it up. Also, I don't know where you saw him look disinterested, he looked gutted to me.

He's not just another talented pro - when his game is on he laps the field. Not many can say that.

by super_realist Wed 24 Jul 2013 - 18:47

Exactly, but don't say it's cobblers, say: "well it didn't look like that to me, and here is why........"

Diggers, I was talking specifically about The Open, where both Poulter and Garcia put great recoveries in from pretty awful rounds. I haven't seen McIlroy do that in a long time.

by shclaff Wed 24 Jul 2013 - 18:53

Thanks for the tip, I'll bear it in mind.

by Diggers Wed 24 Jul 2013 - 19:01

To be fair Super that's a fluke for Garcia these days, he's normally the worst for quitting and Poultry has been carp all year until last week.
Coco will come good again, too good not to, but he does need a bit of refocusing I think.
It's not like his birds even particularly fit to be honest, I preferred the dirty looking Irish one he ditched.

by super_realist Wed 24 Jul 2013 - 19:11

Garcia has been pretty good this year with a lot of top 10's, 20's and no missed cuts.

by Diggers Wed 24 Jul 2013 - 19:45

Well if you are looking to Garcia for inspiration re mental fortitude the bar is set pretty low that's all I can say.

by super_realist Wed 24 Jul 2013 - 20:03

I'm not saying that Diggers as you may well know. I'm saying that the likes of Garcia and Poulter appear to have shown greater desire and fortitude than pube head of late.

Incididently much was made of Westwoods bottle crashing at the weekend. I think the same could be said of Nine Chins. The longer he goes without a major the harder it will be for him. Time and again he has back nine on the final round collapses. 5 years and counting laughing

by **navyblueshorts** Wed 24 Jul 2013 - 21:24

Diggers wrote:...It's not like his birds even particularly fit to be honest, I preferred the dirty looking Irish one he ditched.

I'm with you on that one too

.

by Dave. Wed 24 Jul 2013 - 21:28

I met her a few times Laugh

by SmithersJones Wed 24 Jul 2013 - 22:42

shclaff wrote:You saw him practicing at East Sussex National and heard he was practicing during Wimbledon? Doesn't really sound like he's not putting the effort in.

The only time I do agree there was a problem is after the Irish Open he said he couldn't add another ever or two because of sponsor commitments.

It's the 'while I've got a spare couple of hours I'll hit some balls at whatever club happens to be nearby to my latest jaunt' appearance that contrasts with the 'I'm going to stay in one place and work on my game till it's back to something like my best' approach that he ought to be taking.

by puligny Thu 25 Jul 2013 - 8:06

Commentators make so much of the change in clubs, and more importantly ball that I wonder when Rory pitches up at random club for a bit of practice, does he have a bucket of Nikes with him or he does he use rubber range balls? Tournament practice balls are sorted specifically by player.

by Sponsored content