Tell me about Nick Faldo............

First topic message reminder :

Apologies if this has been done

He was a bit before my time but I remember his name being synonymous with golf throughout my childhood. If I was to think of golfers from that era (I would watch golf on TV but never really played until a couple of years ago) I would think of Faldo, Woosie, Langher and Seve. As for the last three I admire them very much and I am still fond of Woosie and Langher on the Seniors tours.
It is funny to think that you like the personalities that your father likes. I much preferred Jimmy White to Stephen Hendry as although Hendry was from my home town my father said he was a d**k and this was also he reasoning with Faldo. Was it the arrogance? Was it rooting for the underdog? I’m not really sure but there is something about Faldo's personality I really can't stand even although he holds my utmost respect and he could fairly be described as a British Sporting Legend.

Does anybody have any opinions of Sir Nick either good or bad?
Would it be fair to say that the most similar British golfing personality around today would be Luke?
Why is it that the likes of Westie are much more popular in the golfing fraternity. On this point I would say that I am a Lee Westwood fan as he seems an all round good lad.

Does Nicky Faldo get a raw deal or was my father right?

Doon the Water wrote:Small hands then NBS?

Not unduly. Big enough to pick up a rugby ball (just) with one hand anyway. Just never liked the feel of the Vardon - always feels very insecure to me even if I persist with it for a while.

Good enough for Jack and TW though so maybe I'm on to something .

kwinigolfer wrote:No argument there, s_r, those made a mockery of the sport.

How so? And how were they so different to the JBWere.
Seems to me that none were strong fields but to suggest that Poulter's task was any harder than the others, come on.
At the start, I think Donald was the only player in the top 20, 3 or 4 in the top 50 and barely 10 in the top 100. Hardly a tough test by any standard.
LikeI said before, it is all about picking your moment to get a confidence boost. Nothing wrong with that, but don't make it something it wasn't.

Poulter had to beat in excess of 120 people to win a tournament (which also had a cut) . Woods and Westwood had to beat 17 and 11 others respectably with no cut, and a large number had already played themselves out of contention after R1.

No one is even saying that the field was strong, but a win is a win and a win in a tournament where there is a full field is certainly more noteworthy than a tinpot Invitational, especially given how tough the course and weather conditions were.
Can you imagine if Woods had entered the JBWere and won, there would be more trouser climaxes than Kleenex could deal with, and many would be proclaiming a messianic return, but because it's Poulter it's obviously a worthless win, and you could probably have done better?

Seeing Woods wins gets everyone thinking about what might come in 2012, its interesting to ponder whether he can find his best form, will he win majors again. Will we be seeing him and Rory go head to head in a big rivalry. We ponder those things because of what Woods has achieved in teh past.
When Poulter wins a golf tournament (and Im not knocking his win, as has been said on here a win is a win) to me its just another bloke winning a golf event. By and large I dont really care. I dont think Poulter will go on to do anything amazing in the world of golf, he is clearly coming back into some form but even at his very best I dont rate him that highly.

Nobody is denying that Diggers, but to say either the Nedbank or the Chevron is more worthy than a full field event as a tournament win is a bit silly.

Diggers,

I agree with your point, but I could see Poulter winning a major. Poulter in the last few years has had a couple of good weeks each year and when in contention he is as mentally tough as anyone. If one of hit hot weeks happens to be a major then he would be a hard guy to beat. For example Harrington had to eagle the 17th to beat him in the Open a few years ago.

He may seem like a bit of a berk, and I can fully understand why he isn't everyones cup of tea, just as Woods isn't mine, but his putting and short game are seriously under-rated and better than many players in the top 20.
He may never win a major but he's a lot better than people make out.

super_realist wrote:He may seem like a bit of a berk, and I can fully understand why he isn't everyones cup of tea, just as Woods isn't mine, but his putting and short game are seriously under-rated and better than many players in the top 20.
He may never win a major but he's a lot better than people make out.

I think by and large he gets the credit he deserves. The think that probably irks people is that he gets talked about possibly more that his game warrants. He will for arguments sake get talked about a whole lot more than say Rose or Casey who IMO are both better golfers. Im not saying the fact that he provokes discussion is a bad thing, just that it really helps if you can also provide a lot of substance with your golf game. Poulter provides this substance through his matchplay and RC performances, they dont interest me that much as I see them as something of an anomaly to the week in week out grind of strokeplay golf but they do impress a lot of other people which is fair enough.
Woods annoys a lot of people in the same way, however at least with him when it comes to playing the argument is probably whether he is the best or second best guy to ever play the game.

Fair enough Diggers, and I'm happy for people to get the coverage they deserve in a meritocratic way. However, I don't think the likes of Woods really deserve the print they have received when they've done very little in a very long time.

Thats true Super but it wont last for ever with Woods. I suspect of we dont see signs of the "real" Woods in the next year to 18 months interest will wane and he might himself even consider stopping playing.
I think because of the injurys and the swing rebuild he certainly shouldnt be judged as being shot in the paddock just yet. Lets face it although his form has been very sketchy as a whole sheer will power has seen him achieve 3 top 5's in majors in the past two years. In comparison Poulter has had one top 5 in his whole career (and Im not bashing Poulter here, same would be true of a whole host of pros). I think thats why people still talk about Woods. Add a consistent swing to the will power that got him those top 5's and its hard to imagine he wont be contending again on a regular basis.

Diggers wrote:Thats true Super but it wont last for ever with Woods. I suspect of we dont see signs of the "real" Woods in the next year to 18 months interest will wane and he might himself even consider stopping playing.
I think because of the injurys and the swing rebuild he certainly shouldnt be judged as being shot in the paddock just yet. Lets face it although his form has been very sketchy as a whole sheer will power has seen him achieve 3 top 5's in majors in the past two years. In comparison Poulter has had one top 5 in his whole career (and Im not bashing Poulter here, same would be true of a whole host of pros). I think thats why people still talk about Woods. Add a consistent swing to the will power that got him those top 5's and its hard to imagine he wont be contending again on a regular basis.

Let's hope so.

I think Woods real long term problem is not his injury, nor his confidence or even getting his mental ability back, but that he has the swing of a much younger man, and he isn't getting any younger. I can't see a man in his 40's being able to continue to swing like that, especially a big man like that who looks likely to battle weight in the future.

Although a lot of people are dissing Faldo's personality, I think he attracted quite a lot of youngsters to take up the game, and was maybe at the forefront of moving it away from being such an "exclusive" sport.

Faldo was certainly my son's first golfing idol, and I know that he was very "hands on" when he started up the Faldo Junior Series. This was not an ego trip, but a genuine vehicle for giving youngsters the opportunity to play in tournaments on a wider scale than the County and regional basis, with some hands on coaching etc thrown in.

I agree, that his sense of humour in the commentary box is a bit like that of an embarassing Uncle, and the Ryder Cup captaincy was not his finest hour. But let's not let that overshadow his achievements as a player.

super_realist wrote:

Diggers wrote:Thats true Super but it wont last for ever with Woods. I suspect of we dont see signs of the "real" Woods in the next year to 18 months interest will wane and he might himself even consider stopping playing.
I think because of the injurys and the swing rebuild he certainly shouldnt be judged as being shot in the paddock just yet. Lets face it although his form has been very sketchy as a whole sheer will power has seen him achieve 3 top 5's in majors in the past two years. In comparison Poulter has had one top 5 in his whole career (and Im not bashing Poulter here, same would be true of a whole host of pros). I think thats why people still talk about Woods. Add a consistent swing to the will power that got him those top 5's and its hard to imagine he wont be contending again on a regular basis.

Let's hope so.

I think Woods real long term problem is not his injury, nor his confidence or even getting his mental ability back, but that he has the swing of a much younger man, and he isn't getting any younger. I can't see a man in his 40's being able to continue to swing like that, especially a big man like that who looks likely to battle weight in the future.

I actually think that could work as positive for him in teh long term. He might not hit the ball as far if he stopped trying to whack the cover of it but would have more control. And his real strength is on his short game and putting anyway.

Maybe, but if his body is telling him he has to slow it down then his brain wont have a choice but to accept if he wants to keep playing. Issue forced on him (as it was when he won the Open because of t he conditions) and he will change. Anyway we shall see, 2012 will tell us a lot.
By the way have you noticed how controlled Ive been in my discussion of Poultry ? Its the season of good will after all.

This thread is about SNF. Let's keep it that way.

SR, You leave me in absolutely no doubt that were Woods and Poulter's results reversed, so too would your argument.
Your prejudice is a joke....isn't it?

Not at all gt . If you were around last year you'd have known that I placed absolutely no worth on gmac and westwoods wins in the nedbank and chevron.
I've never said that poulters win at the weekend was earth shattering either. All I've said was that it was a nice win but if if it was woods who had won then we'd never hear the end of it. Is that an unreasonable comment to make?
If anyone is guilty of hypocrisy or prejudice then it would be bandwagon jumping woods fans.

SR.. I guess we will have to agree to differ on the value of Poulter's win. The field was very weak with only 3 or 4 realistically capable of mounting a serious challenge, as you would surely have pointed out had it been almost any American player in Poulter's place.
I certainly don't see it as a step toward him fulfilling his claim of 2008.
While I understand your point about people jumping on the Woods bandwagon, that alone would not make them either prejudiced or hypocritical. Also, many people have followed his career since long before it became fashionable to write him off.
2012 indeed has the potential to be a very interesting year for golf.

Steady, I've not put any value on poulters win other than to say a four round tournament with a cut and a full field is worth more than the chevron or nedbank with a dozen or 18 players and no cut.

Also, if you think poulters claim was anything more than Murrays anti English 'rant' then you are taking things too literally and out of context.

For me Faldo is a bit of a Rainman character. Genius golfer but socially totally inept. I wouldnt be at all surprised to find hes got a touch of aspergers. When hes breaking down a players thoughts and options hes great, but then he'll make an arse of it by throwing in some totally inappropriate comment. I dont think he means to be rude/offensive, he just seems to think hes being funny. Best post war European golfer though.

Be_the_ball wrote:For me Faldo is a bit of a Rainman character. Genius golfer but socially totally inept. I wouldnt be at all surprised to find hes got a touch of aspergers. When hes breaking down a players thoughts and options hes great, but then he'll make an arse of it by throwing in some totally inappropriate comment. I dont think he means to be rude/offensive, he just seems to think hes being funny. Best post war European golfer though.

Good assessment.
He's like a comedian dying on his backside when on TV. He's as cringeworthy as David Brent.

Actually a bad assessment. Rainman had the savant syndrome which is quite rare and gives that genius quality of a photographic memory. It is true that aspbergers can exist in people to a lesser or greater extent. My nephew has it and it is quite noticeable. Not everyone who is socially awkward should be labelled as an aspbergers sufferer though. I am a fan of SNF (as if you didn't know) and yes he can put his foot in it from time to time, but he can also be very insightful, witty and knowledgable as well.

Merry xmas all

Watched the ADT Golf Skills Challenge yesterday on TV. SNF was in it. He played quite well, hitting the winning shots in 'the longest drive' and 'the trouble shot'. Having said that. He did hit some bad ones as well.
He and his partner, Rocco Mediate were top scorers in the various challenges, but lost to Nick Price and Mark O'Meara in the 'Reverse Texas Scramble' game.
Jerry Kelly and Zach Johnson were the eventual winners.

Don't know much about Sir Nick, but some comments have made me chuckle. "will never forgive him for leaving 1st wife and kids" Kids where born to 2nd wife! would be hard to leave 1st wive with kids, as they never existed.
Also, as far as I knew 1st wife, Melanie, was in no rush to loose the surname Faldo as it was helping her career for many a year!
Other than that everyone forgets the good he did, but remembers all the bad. Pretty much the same for everyone alive today, I try to remember "never rush to judge people, ebven God waits until the end"

mentalrhino wrote:Don't know much about Sir Nick, but some comments have made me chuckle. "will never forgive him for leaving 1st wife and kids" Kids where born to 2nd wife! would be hard to leave 1st wive with kids, as they never existed.
Also, as far as I knew 1st wife, Melanie, was in no rush to loose the surname Faldo as it was helping her career for many a year!
Other than that everyone forgets the good he did, but remembers all the bad. Pretty much the same for everyone alive today, I try to remember "never rush to judge people, even God waits until the end"

Did you get that off Webb Simpson

SR- Is it being a Scot that gives you that sunny disposition or is that monumental chip on your shoulder due to something else?
Under 5' 10" by any chance?

GT350 wrote:SR- Is it being a Scot that gives you that sunny disposition or is that monumental chip on your shoulder due to something else?
Under 5' 10" by any chance?

Isn't it ironic GT that whenever I mention a national stereotype you jump on my back straight away and scald me for it, but then you don't see the hypocrisy in doing it yourself.
I think you have your metaphors mixed up too, as I don't see how I have a chip on my shoulder simply because I highlight a silly and embarrassing quote.
If you'd been around here longer you'd know that I'm not particularly proud or happy to be Scottish, its merely an accident of birth (although it is perhaps the one nationality I'd rather be than American)
It has also long been a criticism on these boards ,not just by me, but by many others that Americans constantly bringing up their faith in god, a la Webb Simpson or Zach Johnson is a completely ridiculous, pretty unacceptable and a vomit inducing thing to do. Therefore whenever someone mentions god in such a simpering and sanctimonious way it's no surprise that it gets short shrift.

Also I am 5'11.

SR... Please accept my apologies, I had no idea you were quite so sensitive. As you have pointed out (twice), I am new to the site and had thought I had found a forum where the serious and idle banter could coexist. My mistake.
I didn't think mentalrhino's tone was either simpering or sanctimonious. It was a point well made given that the real content of his/her text was that previous posters on this topic were well off target, resulting in Faldo being badly misrepresented. Something that seems to happen a lot.
Yes, I totally agree with you that the constant references to God and Jesus Christ in the sporting arena are overdone and often seem to lack sincerity, but you also have to remember that we are not all brought up the same. "Cultural differences" are real whether we like them or not, but they are apparently not a good indication of an individuals personality, are they?

I'm both proud and delighted to be able to call myself a scot particularly as Scotland is the spiritual (oops!) home of the game.

Have to ask though s_r ... just which nationality would you rather be?

GT, I'm happy to embrace all cultural differences except those which include religion.
I cannot think of anything quite so preposterous as believing there is a divine entity which favours one golfer winning a tournament over another. Therefore I'd prefer if all sporting references to god were vetoed and punished in a capital manner.

I am well aware of MentalRhino's tone, but still feel that saying something along the lines of "only god can judge" is sickening do gooder guff.

Gael, I'd happily be any nationality other than American or French. As for being Scottish, just don't see that we've got much to crow about at the moment. I'm not embarrassed to be Scottish, just when you look around at the state of our country and many of the people within there's not a lot of good stuff around.

Gael

I would like to point out to anyone about to jump on your back and mention that Holland or china, or whatever theory is currently in vogue about the origins of the game that you said; "spiritual" home. I could not agree more, it matters not where the first ball was struck but rather where the game was embraced and grown into what it was at the start of the last century. From this point the game become one played in many countries.

In Scotland the game was transformed from something that only kings might play into something that was played in almost every village. Maybe it is worthwhile pointing out that people like Faldo continue this trend by providing great sporting moments for the masses to enjoy. Just like Tiger spawned a generation of enthusiastic young golfers, so did Faldo.

Re the religion thing you will usually find that it's completely not the case that people thank god for helping them win a golf tournament or any event. They are thanking god for health and happiness and giving them the strength to be the best they can. If you are religious I'd imagine that would seem an obvious thing to do.
I'm not religious but I also believe that to dismiss religion and faith with contempt shows far more ignorance than choosing to believe in a god.

Super

I think this might help your argument

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-highlands-islands-16346065

it is either a new creature or just some poor sole (not a pun) from glasgow gone AWOL.


Diggers

"I also believe that to dismiss religion and faith with contempt shows far more ignorance than choosing to believe in a god."

Really, i think the two must be fairly close?

Very true Mac.
Folk seem to easily forget the influence that Faldo had in his prime.
He started many new golfers playing, not just in the UK but around Europe and the rest of the World.
He also played a big part in the Scottish knitwear economy with sales of Pringle jumpers.
Well deserved Knighthood IMO.

Do you think any golfers will be knighted this week?
Neil Coles is a standout IMO.

If Allan Sugar can get a knighthood for services to finger pointing then really anyone could get one.

What about Monty, he is the sort of person that would like a knighthood so they may as well give him one. I don’t think most people would care for that sort of thing.

McLaren wrote:Super

I think this might help your argument

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-highlands-islands-16346065

it is either a new creature or just some poor sole (not a pun) from glasgow gone AWOL.


Diggers

"I also believe that to dismiss religion and faith with contempt shows far more ignorance than choosing to believe in a god."

Really, i think the two must be fairly close?

Mac, some of the finest minds in history have had faith in one god or another. I'm in a position in life to understand that just because I might have my own belief it doesn't automatically make it the right one.
I also believe that if you don't have faith it's impossible to understand people who do and why they do.

I think if I told you that there were pink Chinese speaking bats living on the dark side of the moon, you would not believe it unless you saw it. If you did believe it, would that be faith?
I think if people have found religion or faith then they should explain why they have it. I would imagine the vast majority of religious people in the world happen to have the same religion as their parents. Now, maybe it would be too extreme to call them indoctrinated but it must be close.
My own thought is religion was invented by men to control other men. As for a God, I need more proof.

Lorus, I'm sure there are literally countless examples of people explaining their faith , whether you choose to accept them is a different matter.
I guess re proof the argument is that faith can't exist without proof. Personally I can see why it's perfectly possible to see the universe could have a divine creator, there is a belief even within science that the universe is so complex it's foolish to think it wasn't planned.
Anyway as I said I'm lot religious but to dismiss faith is equally naive. And my original point seems to have been lost, which is that very few people are thanking god for winning a golf event. That's usually just a case of twisting what had actualy been said.

Doon,
Neil Coles would be worthy in my book but Tony Jacklin even more so.

In America, the golfers will get more endorsements by believing in God. Let's be honest the vast majority of golf fans there are the conservative, white, middle upper class church goers. It's a bit like an atheist can never become the president.

lorus,
You're getting in to stereotypes; while you're at it, you should note that far fewer Americans attend church than you might think, it's just that the ones that do (or pretend that they do) wield extraordinary political power. Very much doubt any golfer's endorsement income is significantly influenced by the "Religious Right".

Diggers

Many of the finest minds in history have been wrong.





I am sure there are many factors that cause people to become religious and many of them outside their control or justified in some way. The main point however is it does not stand up to scientific analysis and that is all that matters for me.

If some people wish to abandon all logic and scientific methods then you have to wonder why?

Mac, many scientists who are stratospherically brighter than you choose to believe in god, Lord Winston for example. Science and religion and logic do not have to be mutually exclusive.

"Science and religion and logic do not have to be mutually exclusive."

Yes they do. Unless of course you think there were no dinosaurs and if there were that the existed 3000 years ago.

I really, really, really hope that you were not referring to “intelligent” design?

By the way I hold philosophy in the same contempt if it helps you.

Why should the fact that dinosaurs existed mean that god doesn't exist ?
Next you'll be writing God doesn't exist...FACT.
Anyway, I don't pretend to have all the answers, far from it, but I also know that you don't as well.

Diggers, "stratospherically" What a delightful word.

I wonder why Lord Winston and friends believe in God. I am not saying it's wrong to believe in anything. People many years ago believed the world was flat because they didn't know any better. Do you know what they base this belief on? Is it a simple case of "If it exists, someone had to create it?" Maybe someone (or thing) did but I can't see any "Made by God" labels anywhere.

"Why should the fact that dinosaurs existed mean that god doesn't exist ?"

Cause the bible says so. And that is fact, right? Oh, and sarah palin said it too.

I am so unlucky, if I was one of Sarah Palin's triplets, I'd be the one on the bottle.

If Webb Simpson or Zach Johnson were to have said "I have to thank the little green men from Jupiter, who were with me every step of the way" then everyone would think they were lunatics,and rightly so, but because they have a silly belief in an imaginary god they are seen to just have faith. Seems a bit odd to me.

As for Lord Winston, who cares what he believes?, he's not in a position where the existence of God (or not) has an bearing or one that gives him greater insight. He's a doctor/surgeon, not a palaeontologist, anthropologist, astronomer, astro-physicist or geologist.
If he wants to believe in some mad way that the world is 6000 years old then that's up to him, it needn't influence anyone else simply because of who he is.

I dont think you really understand how he views his faith to be honest. I've read some of his articles on religion and they are very well thought through.