A Solution for the Masters

It pains me to be typing about my absolute favorite tournament but there's a logical explanation for the lack of drama recently at the Masters. An explanation that goes a bit deeper than the 2nd cut of rough, the increased length, and the cement greens. Although those 3 things have already eliminated half of the field before anyone steps on the tee which is cause for concern by itself.

The real reason is a very simple one. The best players don't even get invited to play in the Masters. The tradition of the Masters is one of the main reasons it's a favorite of the PGA Tour members. To be able to put on the coveted Green Jacket, a staple forever linked to the winner of the Masters, is what any golfer dreams to do. However, the best golfers aren't always even in the field.

The Masters field is already limited to a select number of golfers, usually around 100. Only golfers who are on top of their game at the moment are invited. If you've had a bad year, you're a lost soul. It's a 'What have you done for me lately?' formula at the Masters. Unless, of course, you're a past winner. Or if you've won some amateur sectional qualifier the year prior. I'm not exactly sure of the breakdown but it's only about the best 40-50 golfers in the world that are in the field. The other golfers are past winners and a couple golfers who won some qualifiers. These are tournaments that any golfer ranked 75-100 in the world would win but they're not in those tournaments.

Again, I'm all for tradition but I don't think past winners who have no shot at winning the tournament should be in the field and taking spots from guys who have proven they can compete at a high level. Craig Stadler, Fuzzy Zoeller, Gary Player, Larry Mize, Tom Watson, Sandy Lyle, Raymond Floyd, guys like that have no chance of winning. Hey, it's great to see the legends of the game out there but you're talking a tough track already and these guys couldn't win on the PGA Tour in a regular tournament if they tried. Also guys like Jose Maria Olazabal and Mark O'Meara who aren't on top of their game shouldn't be invited just for being past champions. O'Meara isn't winning on the Champions Tour and Olazabal just isn't up to form yet. He's usually a competitor but if you know your game is rusty, you should give it up to someone who is competitive.

It wasn't fair to not have reliable guys like Fred Funk, Billy Mayfair, Corey Pavin, Kenny Perry, and Rocco Mediate in the field. Even guys like Rod Pampling, Tim Herron, and Jeff Maggart are reliable golfers who have shown to be consistently competitive no matter the tournament. Hell, Chris DiMarco finished in the top 5 of the Masters in 2004 and took 2nd in 2005 and wasn't invited. He had surgery in early 2007 and didn't have enough tournaments to get a high ranking on the tour. Yet had he won he would be invited no matter how bad he sucked. Something is wrong with that.

So between the length, second cut of rough, cement greens, past champions, sectional qualifiers, and 'what have you done for me lately?' conditions, the Masters will only have about 15 guys who have a legit chance of winning the tournament each year. That's where the drama went. I hope things change but this could be an ongoing tradition at the Masters.

If anyone does know the breakdown of who gets invited into the tournament please comment and I can re-post to check for accuracy.

What Happened to the Masters?

This is a painful post to write but it seems that my favorite tournament has been turned into a lot of luck and a bit of skill. Because of the new length, second cut of rough, and plexiglass greens, the Masters has become a tournament in which the best golfer doesn't win, but the guy who makes the least amount of mistakes wins.

You can say that's true for most majors but the Masters has always been different. The greens have always been slick but they were also there for attacking. The saying behind this major was that the tournament doesn't start until the back nine on Sunday. Trevor Immelman won the Masters going wire to wire. I'm not saying he didn't deserve it but where was the drama?

Where has the drama been? The Masters is turning into the other majors. Even the PGA Championship has become a crap shoot as of late. The Masters was supposed to be the tournament where length didn't matter. It was about angles, ball position, imagination, creation. Now it's whether or not a golfer can make par on the last 3 holes. Guys just can't go low on Sunday anymore. Due to the length and second cut of rough, guys can't get close enough to be aggressive on their approach shots to attack the traditional Sunday pins.

The proof is in the winners. I will never discredit anyone that wins a golf tournament but it's becoming a cinderella story every time just like the other majors.

Trevor Immelmon, Zach Johnson, Angel Cabrera, Geoff Ogilvy, Michael Campbell, Shaun Micheel, Rich Beem, Ben Curtis, Todd Hamilton, Paul Lawrie. These guys are all past major winners. Who are they? Ok we know Geoff Ogilvy because he has some serious potential and he'll probably win a few more majors. Rich Beem is a good dude but is never gonna win again. Shaun Micheel is a KISS fan so he's got my vote but will never win a major, let alone a golf tournament again. Michael Campbell has completely fallen off the earth. Todd Hamilton may have lost his exemption but I'm not sure. Paul Lawrie benefited from the biggest meltdown in major history when Jean Van de Velde made a triple bogey 7 on the 72nd hole at Carnoustie to let Lawrie (and Justin Leonard) into a playoff. Van de Velde just couldn't recover from that hole and Lawrie won. Ben Curtis, Zach Johnson, and Trevor Immelman will win again on the PGA tour but I would almost guarantee it won't be a major.

The Masters was a major where a bunch of people could go low on Sunday and that's just not happening anymore. Obviously mother nature has a say in the matter but that's why length wasn't supposed to ever be an issue. The greens have always been super slick and that's the way it should be but the Masters was the one major where you never didn't get rewarded for a great shot. This year the Masters had great scoring conditions, and the best players in the world couldn't score. Sure, there was a little wind but that's to be expected. The other majors have such thick rough and burnt greens on occasion that even shots that would land right near the pin would roll back or bounce way off the green.

It's a bit of sour grapes on my part because I've watched my favorite tournament the last two years be as boring and anti-climactic as watching flies have sex. Guys are supposed to go low at the Masters. It's not like the US Open or PGA where if you're off the fairway you're in 6 inches of rough. Or the British where the fescue can grow up to 3 feet. Again, the British has always been like that and length isn't the issue. Bobby Jones wanted the Masters to be the American version of the British Open. The British also had it's cinderella stories through history, along with the other majors, but never the Masters.

This is Billy Payne's second year as chaiman at Augusta, after replacing Hootie Johnson, and it's also been 2 years of a boring tournament. This can't happen. Granted, if Tiger could sink a putt in the last 3 Masters we wouldn't even be posting this.

Bobby Jones wouldn't want this. Neither do the fans of Augusta National. Jack and Arnie were very critical of the new layout last year and at first it looked like they were just a couple of guys who the game past by (even though they design golf courses). Now it looks as if they were right on the money in their criticism of the new look Masters. While the grumbling amongst the tour players has been minimal, be ready for it to grow if the next couple years produces the same thing.

I'll never say it's a fluke for a golfer to win a tournament. 4 rounds of spectacular golf is never by accident. But now it's getting to be who gets the most breaks wins. Don't take the game out of the players hands. Let them win or lose because of their own clubs, not because of the course. The one thing about the Masters was that there was always one true winner. Unfortunately for the last two years, the winner was Augusta National.

The Masters is Upon Us

Well folks, it's that time of the year when the greatest golf tournament begins. Today marks the first round of the Masters, the youngest major yet the most rich in tradition. Bobby Jones created this tournament in the 1930's to be the American version of the British Open. He wanted to emphasize angles and accuracy instead of power and length. Unfortunately that's changed a bit but the tradition remains.

The Masters tournament is the only major that's played at the same course every year. It's played at the legendary Augusta National in Augusta Georgia. The caddies still wear white jumpsuits, everything is wrapped in green and not labeled. The prices of consessions are comparable to 1950 prices. Nothing is labeled because not one thing will be more important than the tournament.

Another group of the best players in the world will vie for the coveted Green Jacket that the eventual winner of the Masters receives. The course has been lengthened over the past few years to about 7,400 yards, more than 400 yards than it was just 10 years ago. Some traditionalists will bark about Augusta changing it's landscape, however, with the technology boom in golf, they had no choice.

Either way, the tradition of this course will never waver due to its landscape. Ask anyone on tour which tournament they dream of winning and they'll say The Masters. Sit back, and enjoy the greatest golf tournament on the face of the earth.

It's time for The Masters!

The Only Man to Rival TIger

Over the years there have been a few guys who were almost gonna dethrone Tiger as the number 1 ranked golfer. Phil has been the most talked about since the early 2000's. Vijay took him over in 2004 but was never a serious threat to maintain the throne. Ernie Els sniffed it a bit but besides winning the 2002 British and coming close in the 2004 Masters, he hasn't played up to his talent. Retief Goosen was also a threat with his always competitive play during the majors. The 2 time US Open champ always competes well in the majors. He was in the final pairing with Tiger in the 2002 Masters, was also in the final group in the 2005 US Open but shot in the 80's with Jason Gore to fall out of contention as Michael Campbell (who?) won.

They have all shown some sort of flash but the only guy who has put up numbers similar to Tiger Woods is.............. are you ready for this??????????


David Duval. He put up numbers for a 2 1/2 year stretch that were comperable to Tiger's. Between the end of 1998 and beginning of 1999 he won 5 out of 7 tournaments he competed in and was closing in on the number 1 ranking. In the meantime, he became one of the few guys who shot a 59 on a Sunday when he won the Bob Hope Chrysler Classic in 1999.

After winning the British Open in 2001 he hasn't been seen. He developed vertigo which altered his mechanics. Then found new love by re-marrying, enduring his wife having a troubled pregnancy, enjoying life by snowboarding and having family time.

At the moment, Duval can't recapture the magic he had back in the late 90's. He's a good guy to root for too. Only because he said he doesn't need golf to be happy, but for his life and family to be healthy to be happy. He's since lost his exemption to play on the PGA tour, except for a couple sponsor's exemptions.

That being said, I'm always gonna be a fan of David Duval simply because he's a great underdog that can hopefully regain some of the fire that propelled him to the top ranks.

The Mickel-Slam: What Could Have Been??

It was only 2 years ago when there was just about a changing of the guard in regards to the best golfer in the world. It wasn't any secret that Tiger was still the best but he had been going through a bit of mental anguish with the health of his dad. In the meantime, Phil Mickelson was quietly becoming a threat to Tiger's invincibility.

Phil Mickelson was one hole away from winning 3 straight majors and on his way to completing the Mickel-Slam, having won all four majors in a row. He had won the 2005 PGA Championship, the 2006 Masters, and needed just a par on the 72nd hole to win the US Open at Winged Foot. Lefty's double bogey on that hole set a chain of events that set golf back to the way it was in the early 2000's.

But what if Mickelson had simply made a par on the 72nd hole? Was he about to get into Tiger's head and was the landscape of golf about to change? These are the questions that will never be answered due to Mickelson's inconsistent play ever since that meltdown. He's managed a few tour victories as well as the 2007 TPC at Sawgrass but has yet to return to pose a serious threat to make a run at the majors.

Mickelson was forever known as the best player to never win a major. That all changed when he won the 2004 Masters. Once he shed the stigma of never winning a major he became a serious threat at every major and he certainly came full circle by the end of 2005. He had finally gotten over the hump and was also a serious threat to Tiger's stranglehold on golf.

That all changed on the 72nd hole at Winged Foot in 2006. Mickelson has been in a funk at the majors ever since. He's yet to post a top 10 in any major since that tournament. So the questions will forever be out there for as long as Mickelson goes winless in future majors. Did that hole change Mickelson? What would have happened if he wins the US Open? Does that challenge Tiger to work even harder? Does Mickelson gain the mental advantage over Tiger?

Well they're all moot points now because Tiger's not only regained his form since he missed the cut at Winged Foot, but is going forward full throttle. It's only gonna take that much more from Mickelson in order to get to that peak once again. Can he do it? This week might give us a hint as the greatest tournament in golf is upon us. The Masters.

And If You Play Golf, You're My Friend

Harvey Penick wrote the above titled book and it began where his 'Little Red Book: Lessons and Teachings from a Lifetime in Golf' left off. Both books are bestsellers, with the Little Red Book as the highest selling golf book ever.

He relates to golf and life as they're synonymous with each other. His teachings go way beyond the actual game of golf. It was how to be not just a better golfer, but how to be a better person. There are bad breaks in golf, just as in life, and it's not about what you score, but how you respond to the situation. Harvey Penick knew the game so well that over the course of a round, there's a bunch of scenario's that don't go your way on the golf course. He could measure a person's character by how he or she dealt with the situation. He also learned that how you react to situations on the golf course is directly proportional to how that same person would react in life.

There are a ton of bad breaks in life, a lot of bumps in the road that we deal with each and every day. Golf puts you in those same scenario's only they're not as important. Again, he never emphasized the score when faced with adversity, but how you dealt with it and learned from it. Not every shot is makable in golf, nor is everything in life makeable. The most important thing is to rise above the adversity, and do it without cheating.

There's never going to be a time where I don't follow Sam Snead's quote, "If you cheat at golf, you cheat at life." There's a reason golf is so hard and it's to test your integrity. It's very easy to fluff the ball when you got a bad break, but is the score that important to you? Is that the answer to golf or life? To cheat? You will never learn anything about yourself if you're a cheater, nor will you ever build any character or integrity. The scorecard doesn't reflect your character by any means. It will show you the rewards of your character if you play by the rules. Sometimes you should just go out and play a round of golf without even keeping score.

Golf is way bigger than the scorecard ever will be. That's why life has no scorecard. In life, you keep your own score by being the person golf will test you to be. The person who plays for the honor, tradition, and integrity which started this great game over 100 years ago. That's why golf has the richest camaradie and that's also why, if you play golf, you're my friend.