PGA Tour: Farewell to the Deutsche Bank / Dell Boston Date: Notes from the Ballwasher

First topic message reminder :

A very brief few notes as the Ballwasher will be off line for a while:

1).Hugely impressive win for DeChambeau. He and Finau certainly look to have made Furyk's job a bit easier - both have continued their excellent "regular" season efforts but Captain Jim must be feeling his hands are tied with everyone seeming to have already inked in Mickelson and Woods as certain Ryder Cup choices.
Strange thing is: There's still the Billy Horschel scenario and the US player who did most to advance his cause at Ridgewood was, yup, Billy Horschel.

2).Still finding it difficult to warm to BDeC, but he did pretty much everything at Ridgewood better than anyone else, (although he still takes his own sweet time about it). Where's Richard McEvoy when you need him?
Can't say that any European would have filled Thomas Bjorn with any confidence, Hatton perhaps, and Tommy Fleetwood, but everyone else just made Bjorn's task harder.

3).Last week I mentioned eight players who teed it up for the Northern Trust and had made each of three previous Ridgewood cuts - of those course specialists, only Stewart Cink missed out this time round, largely because of a horrendous start on Thursday. But perhaps it was telling that most of these 30- and 40-somethings are no match for the younger brigade on bomber-friendly courses, Ryan Palmer the best of those seven old lags.

4).25 of the 125 Northern Trust qualifiers have left the FedEx stage, Charl Schwartzel probably the biggest name. Europeans Cejka, Laird and Power also have a month off unless they play in Europe.

5).Ridgewood CC looked terrific, but why does the Tour insist on wide fairways when the course is so soft? A bit like Bellerive really, and no doubt birdies and eagles will fly at TPC Boston for the final Dell Technologies Play-Off event. Only 3 Play-Off tournaments next year, and the Northern Trust will be at Liberty National, in New Joysey. Then alternating between Boston and the NYC area from 2020 onwards.

6).98 go at it this week with Fowler and Franny already declared as non-starters. Wouldn't be surprised if one or two others joined them, taking a week off before the top 70 head to Shotrock's Aronomink in Philadelphia next week.
Not quite sure of all the arithmetic permutations (help Bunsen!), but these "notables" look as if they'll need a strong week to advance:
Matsuyama, Rafa C-B, Louis Oosthuizen, Kuchar & Hoffman (these two always seem to make it), Branden Grace and Knox.
Remember, Round 1 gets underway on Friday, winner to be crowned Monday (US Labor Day).

Diggers wrote:

pedro wrote:But again a big mistake on 18 from BdC. That lay-up could have gone in the hazard. And last week his drive on 18 could have been dear as well. Luckily he had enough cushion both times. How will he handle a tight RC match?

Yep, poor lads really struggling to get over the finish line, in this kind of form you have to worry for him at the RC...

Last I checked you have to be mentally strong to do well in the RC.

If BdC were to be 4 up after 13 in all of his RC matches, OK, I agree with you. But how many times haven't we seen top players choke at big events?

If the match was all square going down 18 would you bet on BdC?

pedro wrote:

Diggers wrote:

pedro wrote:But again a big mistake on 18 from BdC. That lay-up could have gone in the hazard. And last week his drive on 18 could have been dear as well. Luckily he had enough cushion both times. How will he handle a tight RC match?

Yep, poor lads really struggling to get over the finish line, in this kind of form you have to worry for him at the RC...

Last I checked you have to be mentally strong to do well in the RC.

If BdC were to be 4 up after 13 in all of his RC matches, OK, I agree with you. But how many times haven't we seen top players choke at big events?

If the match was all square going down 18 would you bet on BdC?

Why not? He's got no RC record, at all. He might go 5 out of 5. His play and method is just as likely to pee the Euros off who're playing against him.

pedro wrote:

Diggers wrote:

pedro wrote:But again a big mistake on 18 from BdC. That lay-up could have gone in the hazard. And last week his drive on 18 could have been dear as well. Luckily he had enough cushion both times. How will he handle a tight RC match?

Yep, poor lads really struggling to get over the finish line, in this kind of form you have to worry for him at the RC...

Last I checked you have to be mentally strong to do well in the RC.

If BdC were to be 4 up after 13 in all of his RC matches, OK, I agree with you. But how many times haven't we seen top players choke at big events?

If the match was all square going down 18 would you bet on BdC?

He was a brilliant amateur, last time I checked they played a lot of matchplay. Anything could happen but to be picky about a guy who has won back to back seems a bit odd.

Sure, time will tell. Just think there's a pattern. Obviously the man has got talent and is in great form. But the pressure he'll feel in Paris will be nowehere close to yesterday and last week. He just comes across as a nervous type and is a proven supplier of brain farts when under pressure. Just sayin'.

What about coping well with the pressure of playing well in in round 4, the pressure of getting into contention and staying there. There are a stack of players right now not coping with that kind of pressure.

Diggers, Being in rampant form never really helped Woods, Mickelson or Watson did it? They, despite all their majors and great form brought into the Ryder Cup have some of the worst records in the history of the event.

In contrast the competition is littered with players who haven't been on form prior to the match burning it up come the Ryder Cup. We simply don't know what will happen, all I can see is there are 2 evenly matched teams, one of which travels very poorly.

And then there were 69.
Daniel Berger withdraws from the Beemer, haven't seen why.

I’ve said form isn’t everything (though that hasn’t stopped lots of chat on here about the form of the respective potential picks). However, you’d think being arguably the hottest player on the planet right now might excuse you from a bit of criticism, apparently not. Apparently two weeks ago BCD was a bottle job weirdo who would be a brilliant asset in the RC...to Europe. Two wins later and he’s still the player getting grief on the pretty unlikely off-chance he’s all square on the 18th of a singles match.
I’d be far, far more worried about the number of players who can’t string 4 good rounds together than about Bryson.

Diggers, It's very easy to say someone is the hottest player on the planet if you are only looking at a very short period. I'm sure that Rizla Johnson and Koepka would disagree with you.
You could be the best player on the planet if you were measuring the one second it took for you to have a hole in one or pitch in from 100 yards. It's a matter of perspective, and all that BCB has done is have 2 very good weeks, under no circumstance does it make him the "hottest player on the planet" Simply means he's having a purple patch.

You'd never say that a footballer was the "hottest player on the planet" on the basis of 3-4 games, so it's pretty ridiculous to say that BDC is the best player in the world on the basis of just two back to back tournaments. He could just as easily miss the cut the next week, then all of a sudden he's not so hot any more.

Why would anyone be concerned about a player not being able to string four rounds together? Ryder Cup is one round at a time, and after each round you win a point, a half or you lose, the next round you play is not connected to the last,  and for all but one match a player has a partner so you can go off the boil but still play a significant part winning a point. That's why matchplay and strokeplay are so different and why the strokeplay form of any player isn't really that important.

Yeah, you’re right. It makes perfect sense to pick apart the game of a guy who is starting his career brilliantly well. Let’s face it, you were basically calling him crap a few weeks ago and yet again you look like a choob.

super_realist wrote:Diggers, Being in rampant form never really helped Woods, Mickelson or Watson did it? They, despite all their majors and great form brought into the Ryder Cup have some of the worst records in the history of the event.

You keep bringing that up as one of your regular mantras - is it really true? Maybe I can believe that Blubba's record isn't that great though I haven't looked - but are Tiger's and Phat Phil's really that bad?

Digs, we pick everybodys game apart. Rory, Tiger, Bubba, Dustin, Sergio, you name them. That’s what makes us armchair experts.

Davie wrote:

super_realist wrote:Diggers, Being in rampant form never really helped Woods, Mickelson or Watson did it? They, despite all their majors and great form brought into the Ryder Cup have some of the worst records in the history of the event.

You keep bringing that up as one of your regular mantras - is it really true? Maybe I can believe that Blubba's record isn't that great though I haven't looked - but are Tiger's and Phat Phil's really that bad?

Yes
https://www.thoughtco.com/ryder-cup-records-1566002

We do indeed, Pedro. Usually we pick a reasonably appropriate moment, not when they are playing the best golf of their lives.

I don't quite get those FedEx permutations. Is it right that DeChambeau could win 3 out of 4 play off events and still be losing the FedEx title to whoever out of #2,3,4 or 5 in the standings wins at East Lake? Could e.g. Finau win it all after a (3rd!) BdC win @Aronimink?

YES!!!
Though it would require Jupiter to align with Mars for the Finau scenario to play out.

Woods, Mickelson, Bunsen it is.
Plus Duval, Kuchar & Zach as VC's.
Interesting to hear Jimmy Walker that he lobbied Furyk and fellow pros for a VC appointment! That didn't go so well then.

kwinigolfer wrote:YES!!!

Why would BdC bother to play this week at all then? He'd better take a rest or go off to Atlanta and read the wind from every corner of the course, write himself a book full of local knowledge or whatever would prepare him best for holding those #2,3,4 and 5 at bay when time comes.

They want to keep it exciting till the very end and have consequently changed the points system a few times since the inception. I’m sure FedEx wants bang for their bucks.

One of the first years I think Vijay won the first two events and thereby clinched the FEC title with two events left. That proved to be bit of an anti climax for everybody involved. I think that was the first time they changed the point allocation.

kouchi wrote:

kwinigolfer wrote:YES!!!

Why would BdC bother to play this week at all then? He'd better take a rest or go off to Atlanta and read the wind from every corner of the course, write himself a book full of local knowledge or whatever would prepare him best for holding those #2,3,4 and 5 at bay when time comes.

Agree. Points are reset before the TC so he can’t even increase his lead by winning the BMW.

kwinigolfer wrote:Woods, Mickelson, Bunsen it is.
Plus Duval, Kuchar & Zach as VC's.
Interesting to hear Jimmy Walker that he lobbied Furyk and fellow pros for a VC appointment! That didn't go so well then.

So what if Finau stinks the place out next week? I can’t see anybody else getting it.

Davie wrote:

super_realist wrote:Diggers, Being in rampant form never really helped Woods, Mickelson or Watson did it? They, despite all their majors and great form brought into the Ryder Cup have some of the worst records in the history of the event.

You keep bringing that up as one of your regular mantras - is it really true? Maybe I can believe that Blubba's record isn't that great though I haven't looked - but are Tiger's and Phat Phil's really that bad?

Yes they are. For a player of the standard of Woods and Mickelson they have terrible Ryder Cup records. Woods has lost SEVENTEEN times for goodness sake.

He's won 13, Lost 17 and halved 3.
Mickelson is 18,20,6.
The bible bashing hypocritical halfwit from Baghdad, Florida is 5,5,1
Fowler is 2,4,5

Hardly any Americans have winning records, in fact off the top of my head perhaps only Koepka and Fatprick Reed do.(perhaps Rev Gordon Spieth does too, but only just)

It seems that being a big name doesn't make the slightest bit of difference.

Compare their records to Poulter for instance. 12,4,2 or Mcilroy 9,6,4.

Goes to show that the hype of the Americans being bigger names and having better rankings or more tournaments or more majors doesn't really count for anything. Now they may well win this time, but compared to their European counterparts their Ryder Cup records are very average indeed.

Diggers wrote:Yeah, you’re right. It makes perfect sense to pick apart the game of a guy who is starting his career brilliantly well. Let’s face it, you were basically calling him crap a few weeks ago and yet again you look like a choob.

I didn't call him crap, I didn't even infer he was,  I questioned his temperament. It seems to be ok when things are going well, but seems to be prone to Rahm like petulance when things aren't. Simple as that.

Undoubtedly he's a fine player, but there's no guarantee it will last. So probably best to leave your fawning until he's won more than a couple of relatively minor events.

BDC has as many PGA tour wins as Poulter and more then Casey. I'm not sure that I like him, but he had a pretty pretty pretty good start to his career. If he fails to win again, he would have had a better career then a lot of tour pros!

super_realist wrote:

Diggers wrote:Yeah, you’re right. It makes perfect sense to pick apart the game of a guy who is starting his career brilliantly well. Let’s face it, you were basically calling him crap a few weeks ago and yet again you look like a choob.

I didn't call him crap, I didn't even infer he was,  I questioned his temperament. It seems to be ok when things are going well, but seems to be prone to Rahm like petulance when things aren't. Simple as that.

Undoubtedly he's a fine player, but there's no guarantee it will last. So probably best to leave your fawning until he's won more than a couple of relatively minor events.

You've never said a good word about him...until now, funny that. He's won 4 tour events already, I would imagine in terms of win ratios to events played that's up there with the very best. Again I don't know how the OWGR points are worked but I'd imagine that the events he's won are stronger that the one Poulter won this year, or certainly had more highly ranked players, and you creamed yourself when that happened.

BDeC's wins? More than both Poults & Casey.
Same as Koepka & Fowler!

Thought that Rafa was one of the successes from the Hazeltine rout; bitterly disappointed he's not got the chance to repeat.

One or two partner questions. Not least who has to baby-sit Hatton? Possibly Casey would be a good fit.

Diggers wrote:

super_realist wrote:

Diggers wrote:Yeah, you’re right. It makes perfect sense to pick apart the game of a guy who is starting his career brilliantly well. Let’s face it, you were basically calling him crap a few weeks ago and yet again you look like a choob.

I didn't call him crap, I didn't even infer he was,  I questioned his temperament. It seems to be ok when things are going well, but seems to be prone to Rahm like petulance when things aren't. Simple as that.

Undoubtedly he's a fine player, but there's no guarantee it will last. So probably best to leave your fawning until he's won more than a couple of relatively minor events.

You've never said a good word about him...until now, funny that. He's won 4 tour events already, I would imagine in terms of win ratios to events played that's up there with the very best. Again I don't know how the OWGR points are worked but I'd imagine that the events he's won are stronger that the one Poulter won this year, or certainly had more highly ranked players, and you creamed yourself when that happened.

I didn't exactly say anything bad about him either. I simply questioned his dubious mentality as I have with numerous players like Rahm.

I didn't cream myself when Poulter won, I was impressed that he won a tournament that he had to in order to get into the Masters bearing in mind he'd never won a strokeplay competition in the States.

I pity your pupils if you go in with the sort of sullenness that you post here with.

super_realist wrote:

Davie wrote:

super_realist wrote:Diggers, Being in rampant form never really helped Woods, Mickelson or Watson did it? They, despite all their majors and great form brought into the Ryder Cup have some of the worst records in the history of the event.

You keep bringing that up as one of your regular mantras - is it really true? Maybe I can believe that Blubba's record isn't that great though I haven't looked - but are Tiger's and Phat Phil's really that bad?

Yes they are. For a player of the standard of Woods and Mickelson they have terrible Ryder Cup records. Woods has lost SEVENTEEN times for goodness sake.

He's won 13, Lost 17 and halved 3.
Mickelson is 18,20,6.
The bible bashing hypocritical halfwit from Baghdad, Florida is 5,5,1
Fowler is 2,4,5

Hardly any Americans have winning records, in fact off the top of my head perhaps only Koepka and Fatprick Reed do.(perhaps Rev Gordon Spieth does too, but only just)

It seems that being a big name doesn't make the slightest bit of difference.

Compare their records to Poulter for instance. 12,4,2 or Mcilroy 9,6,4.

Goes to show that the hype of the Americans being bigger names and having better rankings or more tournaments or more majors doesn't really count for anything. Now they may well win this time, but compared to their European counterparts their Ryder Cup records are very average indeed.

You love bringing up Tiger's abysmal Ryder Cup record, but the reality is that in the singles he has a very strong record: W4, L1, H2. That solitary defeat came in 1997 when he was a 21 year old rookie. And one of the draws was the meaningless match against Molinari at Medinah where he graciously offered a half... I expect if it had mattered, Woods would have gone on to win that one.

His doubles record is poor. But is that because he has been handicapped by poor partners? Even the best player would struggle having to play with an out of form Stricker in 2012, or a wayward Mickelson.

What I do, Super, is have the ability to laugh at myself and to admit when I make mistakes. I think the kids see that. The fact that the irony of you calling somebody else sullen is clearly totally lost on you speaks volumes. Then again, you are a man who intently studies sports and pastimes he despises, a man who doesn't see the irony in banging on and on and on and on literally (using the word in it's correct form) ad infinitum about religion...because you resent being preached to. A man who uses the word curmudgeon (I'm guessing because you get called on a lot?), yet is picky about works like purse because it offends your sensibilities. So nothing should come as too much of a shock I guess.

raycastleunited wrote:And one of the draws was the meaningless match against Molinari at Medinah where he graciously offered a half... I expect if it had mattered, Woods would have gone on to win that one.

Didn't matter?

That match mattered for at least 16 holes (They were all-square) & Woods won 17, and lost 18.

It was probably a psychological edge to team Europe that Frankie was never losing for the first 12 holes of that match.  

Woods only made one birdie that match (Frankie also birdied).  On Paper*, Woods should have had the match well at hand going into the back nine which would given Team a mental boost.

And IIRC, Stricker played much better than in the two four-ball and one foursome match in the earlier sessions.  It was Stricker making the birdies and Woods driving wildly.

"...Hardly any Americans have winning records, in fact off the top of my head perhaps only Koepka and Fatprick Reed do.(perhaps Rev Gordon Spieth does too, but only just)..."

Fatprick? Rev Gordon Spieth? If I wanted to watch "Mean Girls" I would rent it on Netflix.

And still claiming Spieth is a bible thumper? IIRC, your citations are a couple Religious web-pages with an obvious agenda. I thought that shipped has sailed.

and, yes, Yanks don't have a good record in Ryder Cup. They have lost a bunch of RC's in the last 25 years. Don't you think there is a high correlation to Yanks individual records and the Team overall records? Well Duh, Yes there would be a high correlations.

Its like saying that a tennis player is 4-20 in Grand Slam events, and to reinforce that fact he is poor player that the player is 1-8 in 5th sets. HIGH CORRELATION

Diggers:

Long Long time ago, I used to be on a golf forum who would go ballistic when golf announcers called "flag-sticks" as "pins"

And also he would get in knickers in a knot when an announcer would say that a golf ball landed in a divot. He claimed the divot was the "pelt of grass and soil" and not "the void of air left behind when a pelt of grass and soil was displaced by a previous golf shot "

GPB wrote:Diggers:

Long Long time ago, I used to be on a golf forum who would go ballistic when golf announcers called "flag-sticks" as "pins"

And also he would get in knickers in a knot when an announcer would say that a golf ball landed in a divot.  He claimed the divot was the "pelt of grass and soil" and not  "the void of air left behind when a pelt of grass and soil was displaced by a previous golf shot "

I can see why you came over here, GPB. Glad you did.

Zach J. has a decent RC record, probably the best among active players. Yet he was asked to be a VC in JULY? While he was still producing good results and had a decent chance of making the team as a player. What was that all about?

That was on the old Golf channel Message board that was run by CBS Sportsline. Vintage 1997-1999.

The guys screen name was Harry Pudenda. (google Pudenda if you don't know what it is)

GPB, Sounds like the average English club golfer..

GPB wrote:"...Hardly any Americans have winning records, in fact off the top of my head perhaps only Koepka and Fatprick Reed do.(perhaps Rev Gordon Spieth does too, but only just)..."

Fatprick?  Rev Gordon Spieth?  If I wanted to watch "Mean Girls" I would rent it on Netflix.

And still claiming Spieth is a bible thumper?  IIRC, your citations are a couple Religious web-pages with an obvious agenda.  I thought that shipped has sailed.

and, yes, Yanks don't have a good record in Ryder Cup.  They have lost a bunch of RC's in the last 25 years.  Don't you think there is a high correlation to Yanks individual records and the Team overall records?  Well Duh, Yes there would be a high correlations.

Its like saying that a tennis player is 4-20 in Grand Slam events, and to reinforce that fact he is poor player that the player is 1-8 in 5th sets.  HIGH CORRELATION

Well that's a great tautology isn't it? If they'd won more they'd have better records. Wow, what an insight. The point is the we are constantly reminded of how much better the US players are in stature, rankings, majors, talent etc, but it doesn't seem to work out that way in the Ryder Cup.

Why don't they win more often?

As a result they have poor records and it is by far the most reliable marker in assessing a Ryder Cup than ranking, majors, tournament wins,  perceived talent etc. Thus, what is the wisdom of picking Woods and Mickelson when they have two of the worst records in US history?

If these players are so good, why is it that "inferior" players with less majors and lower rankings can routinely turn them over in this event?

These American players SHOULD have better records.

Ryder cup records mean basically frick all about a player apart from how they've played in ryder cups. Woods and mickleson have poor ryder cups but it means nothing to their overall career.

GPB wrote:

raycastleunited wrote:And one of the draws was the meaningless match against Molinari at Medinah where he graciously offered a half... I expect if it had mattered, Woods would have gone on to win that one.

Didn't matter?

That match mattered for at least 16 holes (They were all-square) & Woods won 17, and lost 18.

It was probably a psychological edge to team Europe that Frankie was never losing for the first 12 holes of that match.  

Woods only made one birdie that match (Frankie also birdied).  On Paper*, Woods should have had the match well at hand going into the back nine which would given Team a mental boost.

And IIRC, Stricker played much better than in the two four-ball and one foursome match in the earlier sessions.  It was Stricker making the birdies and Woods driving wildly.

The point I was trying to make (poorly) was that Woods was 1 up after 17, but when they got to the 18th green and the match no longer mattered, he made no effort to win and offered Molinari a generous gimme.

Re Stricker/Woods, maybe you're right. I just don't remember Stricker playing well that week.

beninho wrote:Ryder cup records mean basically frick all about a player apart from how they've played in ryder cups. Woods and mickleson have poor ryder cups but it means nothing to their overall career.

Nobody is claiming that it is, but Ryder Cup records are far more reliable in terms of the Ryder Cup than rankings, majors, tournament wins or how good you are on paper aren't they? When considering who is the favourite to win the Ryder Cup, people always look to the things which have proven to be irrelevant in Ryder Cup, and as a result, Yanks are usually given the favourite tags, but in the last 30 years at least, that favourite tag rarely seems to play out in a win.
America's "best", "most successful" and "most talented" players have proven to be their worst.

Given how much some of them hate travelling (Watson)  and particularly to France, I can't exactly see him for example turning his particular Ryder Cup record around can you?

I'd expect Koepka to do well because he's been on tour in Europe before, and DJ is just too dense to know the difference, but overall the team struggles in Europe and that's a real leveller and perhaps even gives Europe an edge.