Arnold Palmers Bay Hill Invitational

So the Pre-Masters run in is now in its final Stage with some of the big boys looking to use this event as a spring board to victory at Augusta National and the Green Jacket it brings.

As per usual Arnie has hand ed out his invites to some of the games top brass well if you can call being eligible to play based on your OGWR and PGA tour ranking and FedEx cup points being an invite as such!
Bur the King as he is known has handed out invites to some notable invites well notable in sense they definitely wouldn't be noticed if it weren't for Arnies sway at Bayhill the 2 stand outs being 58year old Andy Bean (who)and his grandson gets an invite to play to and most probably some serious camera time too!

The big easy is defending his title this year and Ernies game tee to green has been in great shape this year putting him high in the GIR stats for 2011 so far but his putting is really letting him down.

Big Phil has decided to add Bay hill to his schedule this year as he felt he needs more playing time to get his game upto to Masters standard.

Tiger will be looking to add a 7th bay hill title and produce some of the magic that saw the astonishing water skimming shot he played a while back on 18 there.

Poulter according to his twitter feed is striking the ball better than ever and feels this week is his time.

Inside PGA Tour weekly rate the following as ones to watch Kevin Na if he can keep that temperament in check maybe but can't see it myself , Bill Haas is top 7 in GIR this year but is outside top 40 for scoring average so he will need to improve that vastly for a W, their 3rd choice is Stuart Appelby has the game but does he still have the consistency

The big 3ball of the first 2 days is the pairing of Woods, Dustin Johnson and Woodland, inevitably Tiger if he manages to find a fairway will be hitting first to the greens with the tours 2 current longest hitters this year in this matchup the battle of the bombers and both having a good season.

Finally the last man to mention is Robert Garrigus, haven't checked if he's in the field this week but had his break through win in last years final event with a Win at the longest named tourney in the world! Even if he isn't playing what a turn around in life from a former drug addicted youth to PGA tour winner what more can be said!

MODS sticky please!

Fowler and Phil doing well aftershave R 1. Either one would be a crowd favorite to win.

Aftershave = after

Looks like Spencer Levin is continuing where he left off yesterday .. -3 after 9 for today's round. Can't see him hanging on to be honest but he's building a healthy lead at the moment

Great round by Tiger, shame sky dont seem to be showing half the event.

McLaren wrote:Great round by Tiger, shame sky dont seem to be showing half the event.

I don't know about great - Sergio's posted the same pair of scores, and their 68s today are by no means the lowest of the day. Great round by Chucky3 though. As for Sky's coverage, they're on air at 7 which is 3 pm Eastern at this time of year, when the US has switched to Daylight Saving but we haven't. Unfortunate for this event but hardly Sky's fault. They will show hightlights later tonight if you're that desperate to see TW flatter to deceive again.

So that well known american Martin Laird! is winning. No doubt many scottish people that are championing their home grown laird will say the british press are not covering him enough even though he had plenty of airtime and is subject to an article by the bbc but yet again in their infinite wisdom and toilet reporting they make some errors.

Indeed it was a fine round of 65 from Laird and he is improving a great deal, I even find myself beginning to like the way he goes about his business quietly much like my idols, Stricker and Goosen. However I cannot fathom how the bbc can even report so badly on a guy who writes a blog for them, as we know he has 1 victory to his name in 20009 in Vegas, lost 2 playoffs last year and having a very good year this year, surely the Beeb should know this yet they finish their report with Martin Laird seeking his 4th PGA Tour Victory!!!!

Just to note to my scottish friends, I know Laird is scottish but just find his American accent is reminiscent of Gmacs Irish American one. Also does Laird win the award for the man who can age 80years in an instant by simply removing his hat!

Have the beeb edited the article as it now states he is chasing his fourth win as a professional. Which is of course correct as he one once on the nationwide and one other title which I have no idea about. It is listed under other on his wiki page and was called the san juan open. A little misleading without explanation.

As for his accent, come on nothing can be as daft as Gmacs.

Smithers

Why make it sound like such a negative to be interested in the main attraction of the event, Tiger of course. He is a true great and I have no feeling of shame in wanting to watch him whenever he is playing.



I am also glad to see KJ Choi back up the top of a leaderboard, a season or so back I really expected him to pick up a major. Most likely a masters or PGA.

Indeed it appears the article has been edited as it no longer reads the same way it did this morning at 630. Guess they either realised mistake or more likely someone pointed it out to them.

McLaren wrote:

Smithers

Why make it sound like such a negative to be interested in the main attraction of the event, Tiger of course. He is a true great and I have no feeling of shame in wanting to watch him whenever he is playing.

I'll assume your tongue was firmly in your cheek as you wrote that, Mac.

After throwing his driver on 9th tee he should be fined, he hit the shot so he should accept it and not throw a childish paddy!

Most pointless moment of the day award goes to............................

David Livingstone for the ridiculous comment "do we think it maybe to much to ask for Tiger to win from 10shots back after all Paul Lawrie did in the 99 open"

Few issues with that Dave! A) tiger couldn't a barn door from 5yards at moment. B) This is Bay Hill in calm conditions not Carnoustie in a howling gale and C) JVD isn't playing, can't see Laird or Levin ditching a few in the water because their to thick to play safe! These are sensible players and their not french so they won't surrender a lead!

Still laughing at Livingstone fool! Oh and Oosterhuis you gotta love it when the only thing sky can display on screen regarding his career is "played 7 Anrold Palmer Invitational events"

All that aside:

Laird solid display, clutch putting when required and surprised that he is so long off the tee.

Levin looks like he wants to explode god knows what'll happen if he doesn't win! Certainly a little hot headed but despite all that he still remains right up in contention so if he can control himself who knows what he can do.

Good to see TI back up the leaderboards since his masters win in 2008 his game suffered with illness and wrist injury, would be nice to see Immelman back on the winners podium

Golf Channel is starting to get cruel to Tiger. They reported this statistic from his round yesterday: 'He hit 100% of the lakes'.

This really is the event no-one wants to win, Laird throwing away early shots, Fowler and Watson looking decidedly average.

Steve Marino does it again gets a lead and completely bottles in, he's twitches more than a bird watcher!

Spencer Levin needs to get a grip of himself or see a therapist because that is one angry little man, certainly appears to have little man syndrome and I can say this before anyone gets jumpy at me as I'm only 5foot6 myself.

Laird then finally wakes up on 15 and 16 consecutive birdies. But like Toms punished for a decent tee shot at 17! For all the praise being thrown at bay hill about how pretty the course is etc they should too be slated for having greens so hard its near on impossible to hold one with any more than a wedge.

So as we stand now, Laird is again -8 and leading and could well be the first European winner of the API Bay hill event. But he has to par 17 and 18 after Marino sinks birdie on 18

75 is hardly doing it in style but well gritted out! Great day for Scottish golf, well done Martin and Paul.

Congratulations to Laird on a superb recovery, with particularly fine putting.

Johnny Miller on NBC was quite critical of the 17th green being too hard, so even a perfect shot bounces off. The problem could be fixed with a little water.

For a while, I thought Justin Rose might be a surprise winner, the way things were going. But Laird and Marino finally started going forwards instead of backwards.

No not in style, but the great thing is it shows, grit, determination and staying calm and finding a way to win when it matters which is good.

So congratulations to him clutch putting indeed. Paul Lawrie did it in much the same way, ropey start good finish, think that's gotta be first time scottish winner on both tours on same day, and first on PGA tour since Sandy"s wonder bunker shot finish at Augusta

Well that was hardly the most inspiring event I've watched and actually bailed out a few holes before the end. The adverts were doing my head in, which you put up with if theres some great gold going on, but I couldn't be bothered near the end.

Well done to Laird, another win for him even though he like the others were doing their best to throw it away. Tiger and Phil still in the doldrums, Justin having a great back 9 to finish clubhouse leader, and the usual Ricky Fowler who I believe will struggle to notch a win. I think we can assume that Augusta will be different and see some stella golf, so lets hope our european contingent have been getting some worthwhile practice in. Not long now and Lee Westwood will hopefully show up with his A game, but I think I'm going to miss the BBC coverage this year.

Stella golf, Doc? Sounds dangerous!

Well done to Laird, although for a good while it really was looking like it was the tournament that no-one wanted to win. Very nice 2 putt on 18, when most mortals wouldn't have faniced 86 feet in 2 for the win.

Thought the coverage was about the worst yet - at one point Rickie Fowler was in the middle of making a mess of the 8th and they cut to an infomercial about AP's hospital with a schmaltzy appearance from Poulter, and then a cheesy interview between Annika Sorenstam and AP over video link about her new baby.

And then they didn't bother even letting us know how Fowler had finished up on 8, let alone show us

Desperado wrote:Well done to Laird, although for a good while it really was looking like it was the tournament that no-one wanted to win. Very nice 2 putt on 18, when most mortals wouldn't have faniced 86 feet in 2 for the win.

Thought the coverage was about the worst yet - at one point Rickie Fowler was in the middle of making a mess of the 8th and they cut to an infomercial about AP's hospital with a schmaltzy appearance from Poulter, and then a cheesy interview between Annika Sorenstam and AP over video link about her new baby.

And then they didn't bother even letting us know how Fowler had finished up on 8, let alone show us

Why do some European cry about ad breaks in the America network? No ad no tournament to watch plus all your complain isn't going to change how they do things. Unless you have had a premature baby or baby born with a disadvantage then you couldn't possibly understand the reasoning behind showing effect of AP hospital.

neutral07 wrote:Why do some European cry about ad breaks in the America network? No ad no tournament to watch plus all your complain isn't going to change how they do things. Unless you have had a premature baby or baby born with a disadvantage then you couldn't possibly understand the reasoning behind showing effect of AP hospital.

They don't cry, they just find moronic advertising a pain. By all means have a schmaltzy break for whatever reason but there's no excuse for, frankly, pathetic production where they don't actually cater to their audience properly.

navyblueshorts wrote:

neutral07 wrote:Why do some European cry about ad breaks in the America network? No ad no tournament to watch plus all your complain isn't going to change how they do things. Unless you have had a premature baby or baby born with a disadvantage then you couldn't possibly understand the reasoning behind showing effect of AP hospital.

They don't cry, they just find moronic advertising a pain. By all means have a schmaltzy break for whatever reason but there's no excuse for, frankly, pathetic production where they don't actually cater to their audience properly.

If you dislike their production so much then dont watch the pgatour and just focus on European tour coverage on SKY because this is how Golf channel, NBC, CBS & ABC do their coverage and it ain't gonna change

Neutral - I think we are all well aware that it isn't going to change. That doesn't stop people wanting to vent their frustration about it. Just saying "don't watch it" does nothing to add to the conversation. The fact is we WANT to watch it, but expect to see golf instead of some of the diversions they throw in. The sycophancy shown towards "Mr Palmer" over the weekend was quite sickening at times.

I'm very happy that Anneka had the best care available for her baby that was born 13 weeks prematurely, and wish her and her family all the best of luck. The segment was nice to see - just not at that moment

Great win for Laird, was well impressed with pretty much every shot after the drive on 14.

neutral07 wrote:

Desperado wrote:

Why do some European cry about ad breaks in the America network? No ad no tournament to watch plus all your complain isn't going to change how they do things. Unless you have had a premature baby or baby born with a disadvantage then you couldn't possibly understand the reasoning behind showing effect of AP hospital.

I wouldn't presume to advise people you don't know on experiences you are unsure if they have had or not.

I tuned in wanting to watch the golf. If I had wanted to find out about sick children or premature babies there are other channels I could have switched to.

The adverts are a necessary evil but this was something else entirely

Agree, please stop this sickening, self righteous patronising back-slapping TV. When watching the coverage surrounding Arnold Palmer (and Jack Nicklaus) one should think the Messiah has returned. It has come to a point where it has started to remind me of some David Lynch movie, where you actually begin to suspect dodgy stuff going on behind the scenes.

Davie wrote:Neutral - I think we are all well aware that it isn't going to change. That doesn't stop people wanting to vent their frustration about it. Just saying "don't watch it" does nothing to add to the conversation. The fact is we WANT to watch it, but expect to see golf instead of some of the diversions they throw in. The sycophancy shown towards "Mr Palmer" over the weekend was quite sickening at times.

I'm very happy that Anneka had the best care available for her baby that was born 13 weeks prematurely, and wish her and her family all the best of luck. The segment was nice to see - just not at that moment

If people are aware of the situation will not change and keep venting their frustration, it does become annoying after a while. Also them gravitating towards Palmer or Jack @ their tourneys may be over-the-top in some peolple's eyes however dont you think terms like "sickening" "messiah" are over-the-top too in describing the situation.

Situation is not ideal but both dont host every single tournament on the pgatour and its really Skysports's job to cater to their audience ala back to the old days when they had their own cameras out in the states with their commentary as well instead of Skysports's anchor turning everytime complaining that they dont have feed at the moment.

I don't think 'sickening' is particularly OTT for this. If I wanted to see presenters and commentators fawning over AP or anyone else, I would happily find which week they were to appear on 'This is Your Life' or 'An Audience With'. I have never been watching a live sporting event and found myself thinking - I know what we could do with now - A nice session of sycophancy followed by an infomercial shot through a vaseline lens of a childrens hospital!

Both are ok in their place, but their place is not in the middle of a live sports broadcast while action is being missed.

I am no great fan of Fowler, but he was exciting to watch all weekend, and to show the first half of his debacle at 8, and then not show how he finished, or even refer to it that I could see because of the above, is very poor tv direction in my opinion.

whats wrong with golfers providing a face to a charity they feel strongly about and then having that commercial, featuring said golfers, broadcast during a golf event which is likely watched by people with disposable income in an effort to generate funds for that charity?

You would have the adverts anyway so what difference does it make to your life?

Desperado wrote:I don't think 'sickening' is particularly OTT for this. If I wanted to see presenters and commentators fawning over AP or anyone else, I would happily find which week they were to appear on 'This is Your Life' or 'An Audience With'. I have never been watching a live sporting event and found myself thinking - I know what we could do with now - A nice session of sycophancy followed by an infomercial shot through a vaseline lens of a childrens hospital!

Both are ok in their place, but their place is not in the middle of a live sports broadcast while action is being missed.

I am no great fan of Fowler, but he was exciting to watch all weekend, and to show the first half of his debacle at 8, and then not show how he finished, or even refer to it that I could see because of the above, is very poor tv direction in my opinion.

I think you are being OTT on the situation, as LJ said in his last comment, the segment taken out in other to promote that charity is far more improtant than the little part of golf missed [save more children through more donation to the charity]

I just don't like the love in that seemed to be going on, and also the fact that it took the place of the golf, not the adverts.

I think there is a time and a place, and I'm not convinced that was it

DMRobo wrote:Great win for Laird, was well impressed with pretty much every shot after the drive on 14.

Spot on but he was lucky that the 2 closest to him @ the start were more rookies in terms of winning otherwise things might have been different.

Desperado wrote:I just don't like the love in that seemed to be going on, and also the fact that it took the place of the golf, not the adverts.

I think there is a time and a place, and I'm not convinced that was it

They are golfers with something that they obviously have close to them for a reason.

They are targetting golfers as the demographic who are most likely to be influenced by those particular spokepersons.

They put it out during a high profile golfing broadcast likely to be watched by those with disposable income.



I think that as a charity targetting donations using golfers and wanting to reach golfers as a demographic it was the ideal time to air it. You might think it was a poor time as it interfered with your viewing... fact is that these events are funded to a certain degree by adverts. And I believe there is a requirement for a certain amount of charity broadcasting during peak hours isn't there?

Worst way... go make yourself a cup of tea while it's airing.

LJ, whilst I agree that the advert was very much audience appropriate, I think the point was more that the advert came right in the middle of a players' shot. There was no break in play or replays after the advert that could show the viewer what they have missed and this is the problem.

I think that if broadcasters were more skilled and professional than they are for live sport and actually thought about the timing and flow of their broadcast then there would be no reason to be annoyed by the adverts and viewers might actually watch and be influenced by them rather than storm off to make a tea in disgust...

sharrison01 wrote:LJ, whilst I agree that the advert was very much audience appropriate, I think the point was more that the advert came right in the middle of a players' shot.

Exactly. I think Agent Orange was also T4 at that point in the round. Even more surprising perhaps that young Rickie is one of the US faves at the moment

sharrison01 wrote:LJ, whilst I agree that the advert was very much audience appropriate, I think the point was more that the advert came right in the middle of a players' shot. There was no break in play or replays after the advert that could show the viewer what they have missed and this is the problem.

I think that if broadcasters were more skilled and professional than they are for live sport and actually thought about the timing and flow of their broadcast then there would be no reason to be annoyed by the adverts and viewers might actually watch and be influenced by them rather than storm off to make a tea in disgust...

That's fair enough... but it's a bit harsh to have a go at the advertiser or even the pros who were appearing in it.

It's very much down to the way in which the broadcaster produced the coverage.

I wonder how much "charity" and "giving back to the community" we would see if they didn't get the tax breaks....

pedro wrote:I wonder how much "charity" and "giving back to the community" we would see if they didn't get the tax breaks....

Ask Tiger with his foundation.

Or Ernie with his work in Autism.

Or Gary Player in relation to his global work with children living in poverty.

LondonJonnyO wrote:

pedro wrote:I wonder how much "charity" and "giving back to the community" we would see if they didn't get the tax breaks....

Ask Tiger with his foundation.

Or Ernie with his work in Autism.

Or Gary Player in relation to his global work with children living in poverty.

Ask them how much tax they have saved?

such a cynical bunch.

The most valuable thing that anyone owns is their time. For each cause that these people are supporting the time is something they can never replace. You might donate cash or whatever... but giving your time to something you believe in is more valuable than a 20 quid donation.


And if you asked Ernie if he was active is Autism charity work due to the tax breaks he might be obtaining I think he'd knock you out!

LondonJonnyO wrote:

sharrison01 wrote:LJ, whilst I agree that the advert was very much audience appropriate, I think the point was more that the advert came right in the middle of a players' shot. There was no break in play or replays after the advert that could show the viewer what they have missed and this is the problem.

I think that if broadcasters were more skilled and professional than they are for live sport and actually thought about the timing and flow of their broadcast then there would be no reason to be annoyed by the adverts and viewers might actually watch and be influenced by them rather than storm off to make a tea in disgust...

That's fair enough... but it's a bit harsh to have a go at the advertiser or even the pros who were appearing in it.

It's very much down to the way in which the broadcaster produced the coverage.

I did say above that I thought it was very poor TV direction, and I stand by that.

Clearly I have no issue with celebrities or sportspeople using their profile to raise awareness of issues or cash for charity - it should be welcomed, but not in the middle of a live sporting event.

Apparently Rio Ferdinand does a lot of good work for various charities - would it be appropriate in the middle of a cup final to cut away from the live action and see a short film about one of his foundations?

And then not show highlights of what happened while the film had been on?

I completely agree that people should give up their time to help those less fortunate but then why do all of these charities want my £20?

I am fortunate enough to work for myself so can take time out for charitable purposes but I do find most of the celebrities that are putting their face to a camera and asking for money a bit annoying. There are plenty of rich and famous people that do just as much for charities without feeling the need to go on TV. I am not for one moment saying that this is the case with Tiger, Ernie or Player because I truly believe that they are not there for self promotion and most of their work is done away from the media. Phil Mickelson is another one that does a huge amount anonymously. It's more of your Fern Cotton types on comic relief that annoy me.

Sadly I think that a lot of charities in the UK are not run properly and serve to keep the unemployment level down as much as anything. The number of people employed by charities and the very competitive salaries that they are on help the tax free element to make sense - it's better for the stats if someone works for a charity rather than claiming benefits. For most people though, it's easier to sleep if you've donated your £20 despite how little of it actually helps people.

LondonJonnyO wrote:And if you asked Ernie if he was active is Autism charity work due to the tax breaks he might be obtaining I think he'd knock you out!

Yes he probably would. Doesn't mean there couldn't be an element of truth in it though

I hate the bucket wielding muggers at underground stations and recently at the exit to my local Tesco Express Store (and they are only there on the days the old folks collect their pension from the post office at the back of the store which is disgraceful)

Davie wrote:

LondonJonnyO wrote:And if you asked Ernie if he was active is Autism charity work due to the tax breaks he might be obtaining I think he'd knock you out!

Yes he probably would. Doesn't mean there couldn't be an element of truth in it though

Davie. You have to think why people get involved in a particular charity to start with. Those are the reasons for it. If someone has no affliation or reason then it's going to be image and probably bank balance related. In Ernies case, and Sorenstams, you have to think that the other benefits are secondary at best.

We have a couple of elderly nuns who sit on chairs at the exit of our local Tesco from time to time. Short of laying a dying orphan or similar at the door it would be hard to come up with something to make you feel more obliged to put your hand in your pocket.

I think most people I know give and usually regularly to charity, but these charity ambushes do not help their cause

My worst are the post graduates that get you to sign up for a monthly payment in the middle of the street- if they'd have done a proper degree then they wouldn't have to collect £10 per hour for a charity to cover their £7 per hour salary.

Tell them that you do not wish to donate money to some "save the donkey" charity and they make you feel like a murderer. Argue with them in the middle of the street and you look particularly uncharitable!

we had a recent bucket mugger collecting for the Pakistan earthquake. She asked me for help... I told her that is she really wanted to help them buy a plane ticket and go dig out some bodies rather than ask me for my cash. (I might have been a bit more aggressive as she never came back to the store)

I hate them with a passion!

Found it interesting that a few celebrities made big donations to the Japan earthquake, most notably $1m from Sandra Bullock. At no point was Japan asking for any money with it being the 3rd biggest economy in the world and one of the biggest savers of money and you would have had to have been living under a rock to not be aware of it. Complete self promotion...