My US Women's Open Pick

Hello. What an exciting US Women's Open we could have. So many stories that would be great ones should they play out.
Will Annika be able to defend her title after coming off of injuries?
Will Karrie Webb, the last lady to win at Pine Needles in 2001 be able to duplicate her feat?
Will Suzann Pettersen continue her major streak?
Will Morgan Pressel prove the Kraft Nabisco was no fluke?
Will the others make this tournament their first major?
The answer to the last question is yes, and the lady who I think will do it is Lorena Ochoa. I like her game and her attitude. I also think she's getting sick of the negative talk around her. She may be looking at this tournament as a chance to make a big statement.
The timing couldn't be better. Ochoa overcame a deficit with an eagle, then got her first playoff win last week. That's now one monkey off her back. She's now ready to get rid of the biggest monkey now.
Good luck ladies!

Regards,
Steve

Where's The Harm In Letting A Group Through?

Hello. I was very surprised today to see a group not considering to let another group through. Group A was a foursome, ahead of Group B, a threesome. Group A was many holes behind the group ahead of them. Group B was on Group A's tail.
Why not let Group B through? What's the harm? Is it an ego thing? A fear of not finishing (which shouldn't happen in the morning)? Or something else?
I finally had to tell Group A that I, in my role as marshall, would give them a yellow flag If they didn't let Group B through. They agreed, because they were on a par 3 looking for their tee shots. Group B was very thankful.
What will it take to get groups to let other faster groups through? I've thought in this case if Group B bought Group A 3 drinks, it would be a strong incentive. However, when I mentioned that to a player as an idea, he didn't like it, because he thinks letting people through is the right thing to do, and there should not be any incentive needed.
While I agree that's how it should be in an ideal world, we do not live in one. How else can letting groups through be encouraged? Please let me know your thoughts.

Regards,
Steve

UW Golf Team Reunion A Great Day II

Hello. What was interesting about Saturday was seeing what everyone had been doing in the time since graduation. Clyde ended up in Brockville, where my in-laws are. Jay has a son who works for Brian (we're really not that old are we?) at Brian's investment company. John is VP at Conestoga College in charge of continuing education. Bill and Jeff are doctors. And Doug has cut his hours at UW, but still has his hand in things.
Many of the guys still looked the same, with all of their own hair, which made me feel inadequate, as mine disappeared 15 years ago.
Many are married (or were), but some are still single. There were different family situations which some of us were envious of, but at the end of the day I think we'll all stay where we are with who we have.
What has definitely changed is how desirable UW is now for great golfers. With its outstanding reputation and co-op program, UW is now a viable alternative. Guys are realizing the degree they could get down south may not carry any weight when their golf career is over. Why spend more time up here to get the equivalent degree when you could get it here first?
Congrats Waterloo on getting a great program together, and remembering the past!

Regards,
Steve

UW Golf Team Reunion A Great Day

Hello. Many thanks to Dave and Jack for putting together a University of Waterloo 50th Anniversary Golf Team Reunion tournament. It was very nice to play with Doug, Bill and Jeff, and reminisce with Clyde, Jay, Scott, John and Brian.
Two themes emerged during our round at Grey Silo, which I'd never played before:

1. Bill kept telling me there were easy holes coming up. I'm still waiting. I was 2 over par after 13 holes, with the worst supposedly over. I ended up crashing badly. My mystery partner was probably not too happy.
2. Doug was the coach beginning in '91. Bill and Jeff played for him that first year. They were talking about how they used to travel on golf trips, and got balls, shirts, bags, towels, etc. There was none of that when I was on the team in the early '80s. In fact, I got the impression we were the forgotten decade at the event. All I can say is the team came in 2nd in the OUAA in '84, and I was 2nd individually. That's not bad, considering we didn't get anything!

It was great reliving lots of moments. It also proved to me Lee Trevino's saying "The older I get the better I used to be" is accurate.

Thanks again everyone for a wonderful day.

Regards,

Steve

USGA Gets Mixed Reviews From Me

Hello. The USGA gets mixed reviews from me after its US Open setup.
They did keep Oakmont from ending up like Shinnecock, thank goodness. They did cut the rough down, and they did water the greens. They shortened some holes to give players a chance, like the 17th, to drive some holes. And contrary to Phil Mickelson's comments, I do not think Oakmont was 'dangerous' to human health. (As an aside, Phil got injured in a practice round hitting a ball out of rough. Why was he doing that? It doesn't seem like a smart thing to do, when he could've lifted it and played from the fairway or green.)
However, if Oakmont is the beast of course everyone says it is, why do anything at all to it? I heard it was the one course you could have a major championship on at a moment's notice. Why didn't they then?
Also, isn't the major highlight of Oakmont's US Open career, and one of the US Open's highlights, Johnny Miller shooting 63 on Sunday to win? Isn't that more memorable than Payne Stewart shooting 75 in a Monday playoff to beat Scott Simpson? Isn't Tiger Woods shooting -12 at Pebble Beach to win by 15 another great US Open highlight?
The USGA may start taking a page out of the British Open's course preparation book, and simply let it be.

Regards,
Steve

The Hometown Boy, The Nightmare Ending

Hello. Jim Furyk had all the stars aligned his way. They were playing the US Open at Oakmont, where Furyk's cousin was club champion. He'd grown up in the Pittsburgh area. He had hometown support. He finished 2nd last year, and won in 2003. When people think of Jim Furyk, they think of the US Open. And vice versa.
And here was Jim Furyk, standing on the 71st hole, tied for the lead after going 3 under for the last 4 holes. A 305 yard par 4. And he had driver in his hand. When I saw that, I thought of Phil Mickelson. It was so out of character. And after a bogey, Furyk parred the 18th for another 2nd.
In the press conference, Furyk defended his driver decision, saying he'd do it again. He also said he hit it 20 yards farther than normal, which gave him the bad angle that led to two more shots to reach the green and two putts.
All I can say is Angel Cabrera was 65 yards away on that hole after hitting an iron. An iron! If Furyk's objective was not to reach the green, then why did he use driver? I don't think there's any other explanation than he had a brain cramp.
Furyk may now be the new "old Phil Mickelson". The one who throws away tournaments. Furyk gets close regularly, but has surprisingly few victories. It may be time for him to take a course management class.

Regards,
Steve

Tiger Finishes 2nd, Becomes a Dad for the First Time

Hello. Congrats to Tiger and Elin Woods for the birth of their daughter, Sam Alexis. From all accounts, everyone is doing fine.
Congrats as well to Tiger for finishing 2nd at the US Open. For most players, finishing 2nd once in a major can make their career (right Bob May?). Of course, for Tiger it's viewed as a disappointment.
Why is Tiger 0 for 29 when trailing after 54 holes in a major? He suffers from an ailment I'll call the "Frontrunner Syndrome", and it applies to all sports.
When someone is really good, they're usually in the lead. As a result, they learn how to protect that lead. Being behind is very unusual, so they don't have as much experience coming back from being behind.
I had this discussion with the best curler at our club. I mentioned to him he has no idea what to do if he's down 4-0 after 2 ends. I, on the other hand, am in my comfort zone at that point. I've come back many times to win because it's my usual condition.
What we "normal" people have to realize is that Tiger Woods does not have a lot of experience at being behind. And that may be his biggest weakness. If Tiger can remember how he came back to win his 3 US Amateurs, he could become even better. What a sight that would be!

Regards,
Steve

Cabrera Comes Through

Hello. Congrats to Angel Cabrera for winning the US Open. There was no doubt that Cabrera was the best player Sunday. His 69 could have easily been 67. It was a clutch performance from a guy who was really pumped. Did you see him go through water, cigarettes and grimaces? He was going at 100 rpm, yet hung together to take it.
Cabrera's win was very similar to Zach Johnson's Masters win, and Geoff Ogilvy's 2006 US Open win - all three had guys from a few groups behind play good steady golf with moments of brillance to overtake the leaders.
Angel's irons into 11 and 15 were just tremendous. I thought he'd eagled 15. And his drive on 18 after two straight bogies was clutch.
Who is really smiling today, besides Angel? The European Tour, which I think now deserves to be mentioned in the same breath as the PGA. Having a European Tour regular win the US Open is a big deal for that tour. Well done!
So who are shaking their heads today? Several, who I will deal with the rest of this week.

Regards,
Steve

An Interesting Day

Hello. As I write this, it's 5:35pm Eastern. Most of the afternoon groups are still on the tough Oakmont course. Six guys are under par. Only two of them are finished.
So far my Colin Montgomerie pick is not looking good. Yet, if he shoots 70 Friday, he'll be back in the tournament.
Who did look good? Nick Dougherty. 68 is a wonderful score for the 25 year old. From what I saw he was full marks for doing it. No fluke at all.
Angel Cabrera. Very solid. Nice 69. Held it together, unlike David Toms.
Ian Poulter. So far so good. Learned a lot playing with Geoff Ogilvy last year.
Ogilvy. At home playing with Tiger Woods.
Jim Furyk. Seems like he's right at home, which he is.
Tiger. Turned a bad round into 71. Determined.
I'm now going to say one of these 6 guys is going to win.
Which one? I'm giving the edge to Poulter. Under the radar. All anyone talks about is his clothes. That will change.

Regards,
Steve

My US Open Pick

Hello. Who am I picking to win the US Open? I've narrowed it down to 5:

1. Tiger Woods - if he plays smart like he did at last year's British Open and PGA Championship, he should be the man. However, he has to hit fairways to be in the hunt, which is always a question.
2. Jim Furyk - seems made for the US Open, and it's in his home state, and he's won it before. Always a factor when mental toughness is required.
3. Retief Goosen - has won as many US Opens as Tiger, and should've won a third prior to a Sunday collapse. He can be in contention, as last 36 at Augusta proved.
4. Steve Stricker - getting very good results lately, including close to top at Wachovia.
5. Colin Montgomerie - so close last year, and lost in a playoff here in '94

So who's going to come through? Believe it or not, I think Monty has what it takes. I don't know why, but you heard it here first.

Regards,

Steve

Old And Desperate Beats Young And Entitled Again

Hello. Congrats to Woody Austin for winning the St Jude with a closing round 62. Austin salvages his year, and possibly his career, with the victory. Austin was probably the least likely pick to win this tournament. Now he has a two-year PGA exemption.
Austin's win came at the expense of Adam Scott, who had a 3 shot lead heading into Sunday. However, Scott ballooned to finish 4th. He now seems to be following in his mentor Greg Norman's shoes in not being able to close out tournaments.
Is it possible that the 20-somethings on the PGA Tour are not as driven as they could be? They know they'll keep their cards, and they know they're not going to challenge Tiger, so they cruise through life, keeping their fans and groupies happy?
It seems like now you can look at a leaderboard and predict that the 40-somethings are going to come through, while the 20-somethings fade. There's just so much more on the line for a 40-something player - exemptions, momentum going onto the Champions Tour, maintaining a 7-figure lifestyle they've grown accustomed to.
When in doubt, bet on someone over 40.

Regards,
Steve

Pettersen Player of the Year?

Hello. Congrats to Suzann Pettersen for winning the McDonald's LPGA Championship. Pettersen held off two-time runner-up Karrie Webb for a one-stroke victory.
With this win, her second of the year, and a runner-up in the Kraft Nabisco, a tournament she had all but sealed up, is it time to say Pettersen is the LPGA Player of the Year to this point? If nothing else, she has certainly burst onto the scene. For the moment, she is in the spotlight, and a heavy favourite to win the US Women's Open.
Of course, the same questions are now even more prevalent now than they were before. Will Lorena Ochoa finally win a major? Will Annika come back to her dominating form? Will Morgan Pressel's Kraft Nabisco win be the last this decade by an American? Will Natalie Gulbis ever win an event (and if so, will anyone notice or care)? And finally, is Michelle Wie in an injury slump, or establishing herself as the youngest has-been ever?
No matter who you cheer for, the LPGA has a lot of intriguing stories. Here's hoping for an exciting US Women's Open.

Regards,
Steve

The Cup Is In California

Hello. Congrats to the Anaheim Ducks for winning the Stanley Cup last night. While I didn't watch any of the series, wining in 5 games is very conclusive.
My sympathies to the Ottawa Senators for not going all the way. To be honest, I was worried about the reaction to getting into the finals. That may have been Ottawa's Cup this year; the real one may be easier to attain next year.
And what of the Canadian teams now going 14 years without a Cup? Or the Leafs going 40? Anaheim was the laughing stock of the NHL when they were first coming in with Florida. Both those teams have been to the finals now. So have Tampa, Carolina and of course the original Mickey Mouse organization, the New Jersey Devils, 3 time Cup champions.
It does certainly prove that necessity in non-hockey markets to win is definitely the mother of inventing a competitive hocket team. The Anaheims of the world have to win to stay solvent, whereas the Leafs will never have this problem.
What will this do for hockey in California? Hopefully a lot.
And for hockey elsewhere? Hopefully the competitive juices will be reborn.

Regards,
Steve

Can Someone Be #1 Without Winning a Major?

Hello. Another item coming out of last week's LPGA event was Lorena Ochoa not winning the tournament. She lost in a playoff after losing a two shot lead late on Sunday.
I'm surprised no one's calling her Lorena O-choke-a. Maybe it's because if they did, they'd be wrong.
Ochoa is the #1 player on the LPGA now. There's no argument about that. What people are pointing to is Ochoa has not won a major yet in her career. They feel she won't be accepted by everyone as a dominant player until she does.
Hogwash. Right now there is no one who wants to face Lorena Ochoa. She has been in the top of almost every field she's entered this year, as well as last year. She's been by far the most consistent player out there. And she'll be the favourite Thursday when the McDonald's LPGA begins.
To say she's not worthy of being crowned the LPGA queen because of not winning a major is ridiculous. She's won as many US Opens as Nancy Lopez, and no one had any problem crowing her queen.
It's only a matter of time if she keeps playing this way that she'll be a major champion, and everyone will realize how good she really is.

Regards,
Steve

Did Wie Bail Out?

Hello. The saga of Michelle Wie continues.
If nothing else, Wie is living proof that a lot of talent alone doesn't lead to instant success. Of course, Phil Mickelson was living proof of that too prior to 2004.
This time Wie is being second guessed for withdrawing after 16 holes at Annika's tournament. At the time she was 14 over. If she would've finished bogey-bogey, she would've shot 88, which would've meant not being able to play on the LPGA Tour for the rest of 2007, as Wie is a non-member of the LPGA.
So did Wie pull out because her wrist bothered her, as she claimed? Or did she realize the possibility of shooting 88 and its consequences? The fact her agent came out to talk to her prior to her withdrawal seems to give evidence to the latter.
My comment is that anyone in their right mind would withdraw due to injury or illness (even if they were healthy) than shoot 88+ with this rule in place. This rule does nothing to help the LPGA Tour, and should be eliminated immediately.
Why? If someone else besides Michelle Wie shoots 88+, they will not get invited back again to play in an LPGA event for years. And if Wie shoots 88+, there goes lots of extra money for events.
All this rule does is encourage cheating, or the perception of it. Get rid of it.

Regards,
Steve

Choi Comes Through at Memorial

Hello. Congrats to KJ Choi for capturing The Memorial tournament after shooting a Sunday 65.
Choi and Rory Sabbitini have now established themselves as strong candidates for the International President's Cup team. When combined with Vijay Singh, Retief Goosen, Ernie Els, Trevor Immelman, Geoff Ogilvy, Adam Scott et al, it should be a very strong team.
If Gary Player is true to his words earlier (and I certainly hope he is), the chances of having a Canadian on the team is at best remote. Stephen Ames and Mike Weir have done nothing to beat out any of the group above.
Will this be the equivalent of Canada hosting the 1988 Winter Olympic Games and 1976 Summer Olympic Games, and not getting a gold medal? I think it's even worse. Obviously the thinking of having Canada host was that it was close to the US and Mike Weir was a lock to get a spot. Hopefully the event will still draw without a Canadian. It should do better than the Canadian Open.

Regards,
Steve

The Joys Of Improvement

Hello. My apologies for not writing yesterday. My wife and I were golfing with old friends at Ballantrae. It's a very nice course.
The last two times my wife and I have played, she has shot her best games ever. This is after playing the game for over almost 20 years.
Why has this happened? One of her best friends took up the game 4 years ago, and is already breaking 100 regularly. This inspired my wife to change from being just a social player to someone who wanted to get better. She saw a role model who had no golf experience become pretty good.
Another thing was her equipment improved. She is now using the latest gear, as opposed to before when she didn't care about equipment.
Finally, my wife went to Sandra Post for golf lessons the last 4 years with her friend. The short game classes she took this year were especially helpful.
That in a nutshell is how you can improve with minimal course time; my wife only plays 1-2 times a week, and most of the time just 9 holes.
Is she having fun? You bet. We are all happy to see her improve.

Regards,
Steve