Decent Poultry Interview ....

First topic message reminder :

...quite a good read this, much as I dont warm to him its a good, interesting read. Intriguing to hear his take as to why he doesnt take advice.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/golf/17577069
That said I do like this more typical Poulter comment -
"I've come close; I've finished second in majors."
Should maybe read
"I finished a distant 2nd once in a major 4 years and apart from that my record is very average"
But this is Ian Poulter after all, we cant expect too much modesty.

lee westwood is a much better player-however a player that had a big slump in the middle of his carrer. a player that isnt as good a putter- however lee has been in place to win a major more that crenshaw- but the first few times was trumped by good play(good putters and bad putters and average putters win majors), the fact that he is a nearly man is puting more and more pressure on him to the point that it is affecting his game in the majors.

if you just wanna talk about putting then no i think you are simplifiing it- putting is as key as anything and has its own skill levels- there are good, bad, indifferent, and streaky. However touch is the hardest thing to pull off under pressure. The best golfers of all time have been good putters(well at least good at some points).

That is a very big call to say Westwood is a much better player than Crenshaw Mysti. 19 PGA wins, 2 Masters and something like 12 other major top 5's is an exceptional record.
I cant remember how many of those 12 top 5's Crenshaw was in true contention for, even Im not that old, but I would be suprised if it wasnt a good few.

Yes putting has skill levels mysti, I'm just curious why some players have such a hard time with it. Ultimately it's just line and speed.

Agree Incontent. Putting is something that an 80 year old could potentially be as good as a tour pro. It doesn't require strength, much coordination and much skill. Don't understand why some pros struggle with all the time they have to practice.

super_realist wrote:Agree Incontent. Putting is something that an 80 year old could potentially be as good as a tour pro. It doesn't require strength, much coordination and much skill. Don't understand why some pros struggle with all the time they have to practice.

I have a theory. I think it's harder to putt well if you do it purely mechanically and rigidly - I think it needs a bit of skill/flare and relaxation. I'm aware this sounds counter-intuiative, but I seem to putt better when I relax and "let it flow", and that means my putting stroke is not exactly the same for short putts as it is for longer ones. I think Westwood is so good tee to green because he's made himself very rigid and mechanical, and his putting suffers for it. Like I said, just a theory.

"Nearly man for long enough"? Faldo won his first major at the age of 30 which is younger than Westwood,Donald & Poulter. At least 3 years you can take out because he was rebuilding his swing. He had been in contention for a few in his early twenties, but obviously knew that his swing was not up to the pressure which is why he changed it. He has always been mentally tough & LW could do worse that chatting to the man. He has been unlucky a couple of times, but Lee has shown a weakness mentally down the stretch which, like others have said, has shown itself in his weakest areas.

putting is like crown green balls, darts or snooker- anyone could potentially do it- but there will still be good ones and bad ones, feel and touch are still a skill set.

anyway people are forgetting westwoods real problem which is still feel and touch but its his short game, not his putting

Faldono1fan wrote:...He has been unlucky a couple of times, but Lee has shown a weakness mentally down the stretch which, like others have said, has shown itself in his weakest areas.

Just out of interest, where has he shown weakness down the stretch?

i dont think he has shown that much wekness done the stretch- he did okish final 9 rd 4 this masters- however could have holed another 2 10 footers(but still was 4 under last 9!)

v mickleson he still shot a 71 final round- but pmick played out of this world.


however in the open.. when he 3 putted the last- could have been a weakness down the stretch- however he was assuming he needed birdie to make play off down the last and rushed his first putt- watson ended up bogeying anyway!!- so a par would have had him in the play off!

plenty of other times the same has happened- he hasnt completly choked at all- however just not done enough- sadly he could have performed in the same way in other majors and won- but that is luck of the draw

Kind of how I saw it. Mixture of bad luck and dodgy putting but nothing reall y approaching a Norman collapse or similar.

Navy - Open when Cink won. He was in a position to win & had some course management & putting issues on the back nine. The 3 putt on the last was not the only mistake it's just the one that's remembered. He has had more than his fair share of bad luck, but it can't be all down to that. He had to hole those putts at 15 & 16 at the masters to have a chance & he missed. It's hard, but that's what others have done in the past. The greats found ways of holing those.

I want Lee to do well, but he has to find a way of getting over the line.

Faldono1fan wrote:Navy - Open when Cink won. He was in a position to win & had some course management & putting issues on the back nine. The 3 putt on the last was not the only mistake it's just the one that's remembered. He has had more than his fair share of bad luck, but it can't be all down to that. He had to hole those putts at 15 & 16 at the masters to have a chance & he missed. It's hard, but that's what others have done in the past. The greats found ways of holing those.

I want Lee to do well, but he has to find a way of getting over the line.

I'd disagree with the Cink thing. He and everyone else assumed he needed a birdie down the last as Watson wasn't going to drop a shot. Was a shame it didn't work out that way but I doubt many other players would have done different. To me he's not got a good enough short game to dominate the way his long game says he should. Therefore it's likely he's going to need a number of other things to fall into place which he can't control i.e. other players not to challenge strongly. If he could come up with the sort of game he had when he spread-eagled the field (inc. McIlroy) the year he won the R2D, he'll win comfortably one day. Basically Lee, get better at chipping/putting. Easy!

People go on about him failing to win the Masters but to have beaten Mickelson that day he would have had to shoot his fourth round in the 60's,meaning all four of his rounds were sub 70 and no one has ever done that at Augusta. Similarly at the open, it wasn't a course management issue, he knew that it was almost certain he required a birdie at the last. He went for it and it didn't come off. Those are the breaks, these guys aren't robots. Sometimes someone else is just better on the day despite how close you come. It doesn't mean you're a bottler, choker or make bad decisions. I'm sure even fans of the ghastly Faldo would say that he beat Norman just as much as Norman threw it away.

And also, I think it's notable re: 2009 Open that he played an amazing shot out of fairway bunker which seemed miles from the green... in order to allow him to miss the eagle [to win] and then the birdie [for playoff] putts.

I wonder if he would have felt as disappointed if he hadn't actually landed on the green in the first place?

thats westwoods problem.

as much as we know how good his long game is - he does as well. it gets to him that he doesnt convert and is like a virus.. if he can get one win- the pressure will be off and he will probally win a few

Skydriver wrote:And also, I think it's notable re: 2009 Open that he played an amazing shot out of fairway bunker which seemed miles from the green... in order to allow him to miss the eagle [to win] and then the birdie [for playoff] putts.

I wonder if he would have felt as disappointed if he hadn't actually landed on the green in the first place?

those puts were for birdie and par no?

You might be right, hend. My recollection though was that he said afterward he knew he needed to make eagle at the last to win and felt he had no choice but to play that risky shot out of the deep bunker and then make the putt (i.e. not wanting to leave it short was the reason it went too far). If memory is slightly incorrect, presumably it was birdie to win / par for playoff?

Anyway, my point is that the sublime approach shot under pressure, and arguably also the bold mindset described above I suppose, were not classic signs of choking for me. I'm therefore not one of those people who say he'll never win a major, won't have a chance etc.

he is way to good to come under a player that wont win a major- even the americans say he is the best not to win one.. i could name 30 major winners worse!

ok you are ujudged on the W's however i think everyone gets the point when it comes to westy.

I do remember plenty on the old 606 that said otherwise- but i think even them now are converted.. Blimey i used to argue for him to no avail on here years ago!! i think the only person to argree was LW1 at the time

You would imagine that over the course of Westwoods career he would have managed to impose his game on either a major or a WGC, have a few strokes lead and be able to control his own destiny to a degree.
For whatever reason, his win ratio in the States isn't good and clearly that is where most of the big events are held. Two PGA wins and I cant remember clearly but didnt he very nearly throw away his last one, or have it gifted to him andt he first was back in 98.
For whatever reason I dont think he is as confident a golfer in the States or indeed when there is a full strength global field.

He has never concentrated on the states like others like rose or donald. I am sure his time will come, but he could look at his carrer as abit wasted- all the same the guy has been one of the major assets to golfs major in recent years- he has had a major riole in the show!

As it stands he is a nearly man, still time to change that though. Id be happier if he could at least win a few WGC's and say look, the best in the world were here and I beat them. I think if he could do that it would help his confidence in the majors a lot.

I think Westwood could be like Mickelson. Get that one major win (finally) and then unleash a number more. But father time marches on, so he better get started and this year would be nice.

super_realist wrote:meaning all four of his rounds were sub 70 and no one has ever done that at Augusta.

Couldn't believe that, so I looked it up. It's true. A few players have come close, but no four rounds in the 60's.

(How could I doubt you S_R? )