PGA Tour: "Wells Fargo Championship" in Charlotte: Notes from the Ballwasher

First topic message reminder :

1).The Zurich Classic of New Orleans continued it's new lease on life last weekend with a decent field, a fine leaderboard, exciting finish and a deserving winner - first-timer Jason Dufner, the third first-time winner of the season.
New Orleans was once a popular Tour stop but a change of course, continued messing around of the dates, and some awful weather resulted in progressively weaker fields and uncertainty about its future. Thankfully "Zurich" stepped in, the course has matured somewhat (looked really good last week) and fields are steadily improving. Credit also to the Tour veterans who have supported the tournament through thick and mostly thin: David Toms, Jerry Kelly and Stricker among them. Now the future is looking very bright.

2).A rare appearance from Stricker in an increasingly light schedule. He's just playing The Players and (defending at) Memorial before his return to Olympic Club for the US Open, where he contended in 1998 before finishing 5th.

3).Despite the best efforts of Ernie Els (a limp conclusion to a fine tournament) we are still to see the first "International" win on Tour this season - six runner-up finishes from those eligible for Presidents Cup selection, but nary a winner.

4).Consolation for Ernie will almost certainly be a berth in the owgr Top 60 in three weeks time and qualification for the US Open. And that will save the USGA from having to offer him an invitation, for this year at least.

5).Another good week for Luke Donald as he put Augusta and Hilton Head disappointments behind him. No doubt that Luke is one of my favourite golfers, but I see he's leaving himself open to criticism in his statement that "it would be great to have more (events) in England". "With myself, Lee, Justin Rose, Ian Poulter and others from Britain, it makes sense to me to push for another event."
No question about that but Celtic Manor is only just across the border and recent support by these players has been conspicuous by its absence, Luke's sop to Montgomerie in 2010 apart. And there's the rub for sponsors: If you build it, will they come? And the answer from "Luke, Lee, Justin Rose, Ian Poulter" and so many others (McDowell excepted) has been a resounding "No!".
Come on Luke, time to put your money (or at least your itinerary) where your mouth is.

6).Wells Fargo has come a long way from its early days running the westbound part of the Pony Express delivering express mail and banking services to California, its stagecoaches now replaced by a glittering banking empire and the successor to Wachovia, the original sponsor of the Charlotte stop on the PGA Tour. The Lone Ranger and all those who protected those mail runs would doubtless turn over in their graves had they seen the extent to which Wells Fargo has been the sinner, rather than the sinned against, these past few years, but none of the 156-strong field this week will give a monkey's about banking irregularities, taxing avoidance scandals and forced foreclosures as they tee it up at Quail Hollow for a few $mill of Wells Fargo's (or is it America's tax-payers'?) petty cash.

7).But you can't buy Tiger Woods. Oh no, no, no!
Tiger's had enough of inquisitions by the media prior to tournament play so now conducts a question/answer session via social media instead.
Read Geoff Shackleford's take on this latest snub to journalists in GolfWorld:
"It seems Team Tiger believes taking the questions you want and answering them in an edited video is the most effective way to use social media. But one of the main attractions of Twitter and Facebook - especially when it invloves the famous and admired - is the sense by participants that the interaction is genuine, spontaneous and open. 'We're probably a little bit behind with social media,' admitted (Tiger's agent Mark) Steinberg.
With this latest move, Team Tiger will continue to be so."
Sponsors must be delighted . . . . . .

8).Quail Hollow (the course, not a commentary on the first Bush's Vice President's understanding of international affairs) is an early 60's design by George Cobb redesigned by Tom Fazio in the nineties. CBS will wax orgasmic about the course, but it's not universally popular and its short par-4 eighth is a borderline ridiculous hole (though the short par-4 14th is a good 'un).
Phil Mickelson described the greens as "by far the worst-designed greens we play on Tour", and others have been equally uncharitable resulting in a somewhat disappointing field. Regardless, the PGA Championship is due here in 2017 and the tournament has the reputation as one of the best run of the year.

9).Rory, Lee, Hunter, Tiger and Phil lead the entry, but no other European-based pros are on hand, nor Scott, Els, Schwartzel, Poulter, McDowell, Garcia, Oosthuizen, Rose etc, etc. The list of Champions here includes Toms, Vijay, Furyk, Woods, McIlroy and Lucas Glover, while Mickelson has arguably the best record here among the non-winners. Some of the top pros are based in the Carolinas, but very few of them are showing much recent form and this looks a wide open event.

10).I wrote last week about one son of the Carolinas who sadly won't be with us this week, the Legend of Willie Mac (Will MacKenzie). A postscript to his costly double bogey on the last hole at San Antonio: In last week's Nationwide tournament in Georgia he outdid himself by falling from a lead halfway through his final round, six over par the rest of the way concluding with a triple bogey on the last. Of such stuff are careers made. And lost.

i think it only fits into golf due to the massive depth of southern american golfers.

America is infact the only developed nation that has highish levels of religion.

Scientology is like a more glamorous Masons. The likes of Tom Cruise pay millions to get various roles etc from it. Not sure why they came up with such a ridiculous idea behind it all. But then again I think every religion has a ludicrous fairytale in it somewhere...

if you look at south american footballers- many are also religious. Normally the poorer the nation the more religious the country is. This makes alot of sense for many reasons. But the fact is the USA is an anonomly when it comes to religion and wealthier nations

Why do certain golfers mention "it" as a reason for their success?

Because they believe it.

Shove a microphone under someone's mouth, ask questions, expect answers.

Feel free to be critical of their every response, but surely one can understand their reason.

Very well Shotrock, But i've never heard an interviewer ask what helped them win.

ALso, if someone said that the fairies at the bottom of the garden helped them win they would be roundly and deservedly ridiculed, but religion gets off Scot free, despite having no basis in fact at all.
I can only assume religion has indoctrinated more people than I thought.

SR most of the world is religious- its just you/we live in a country (like most of western europe) that isnt on the whole religious.

You go to a southern american town- if your not religious - you are the odd one out!

Fine, if people are religious then fine, just keep it private. A god doesn't help someone get a ball in a hole, regardless of how hard they believe it. It's an incredibly naive and arrogant belief to hold.

America has got "religion" upside down.

Instead of representing sound values, life lessons, and peace and goodwill to fellow man/woman, the "religious right" is now just code for racism, white-supremacy, intolerance, anti-government, anti-gay, anti-union, anti-working class, mysogyny, force+strength, etc, etc.

That has now translated itself into the politics of the right and any sense of reason that is in any way in realistic touch with the rest of the world has long since been abandoned.
Unfortunately, there's a very strong probability that it will also be the sentiment that wins the upcoming Presidential election. Most Europeans have no sense of the depth of hatred stirred up by these people against Obama, Hillary Clinton, etc, etc.
Get used to it or do something about it.
There's no sense of outrage here at all.

Kwin - I hope you are wrong about November!

We need only to look at the Scottish famine and economical ruin of the late 17th century to see what turning radical religious views into vile politics can do for a nation.

+1 for hoping you are wrong about November Kwini.

To be fair though Mac, I think that only affects the part of the country that lives in the past. I.e Glasgow.

Wasn't it Elron Hubbard that founded scientology and he was a science fiction writer! So any followers of a religion that was founded by that type of guy must be dumb not stop and think about what their faith is in!

There was a discussion on the radio yesterday about the religion of Jedi being a recognised faith in the latest Census. Some christian fellow claiming it was based on fiction a series of sciene fiction stories enforced upon mankind by George Lucas. Last time I checked Lucas never said the religion of Jedi or Sith actually existed though some nutjob probably has witten a Force bible!

What made me smile was how the Christian guy couldn't accept that even faith in god/jesus/the divine is based on a series of stories written by the hand of man in a book called the BIBLE. Fact is all religion somewhere is based on a storey and no 2 faiths are all that different really, all believing in a higher power they cannot see or touch and all are based on stories told by man!

As I've said I come from a catholic family but I can't get my head around devouts that cannot see the word of god is actually the word of man and is really no more than a collection of stories based around good values.

The thing is the bible that is most widely used is only a translation, of what was presumably a translation. It was also heavily edited during the first translations into English to ensure the Church and monarchy still had sufficient control over the masses.

Mac: even the very first holy book was a collection of passages that were only allowed to be viewed as the first bible after emporer Constantine formed the council of Nicaea, and that group of bishops put in on fables, stories and scripture that favoured what they wanted people to see as Christian faith. There were hundreds of passages that were not allowed to be seen as it would have shattered the early church's illusion of divinity.

They've even in as recent as the last century had to update it to no longer shows mary magdalene as a prostitute. Something which the Nicaean council made up to discredit her closeness to their messiah! The crowning glory that all massively devout bible thumpers struggle to come to terms with along with the fact the first bible that came out of Nicaea was actually 325 years after the so called miracles of christ. So to say even Christianity which puts all its history down to the holy book is merely based of the retelling of tales right up until 325AD when it was first written down by the Council of Nicaea.

God I sound like a right boring historian! But it just bugs me when I hear people say its the word of god! No its the word of man, diluted by a bunch of political bishops that decided what to put in it at the order of a Roman emporer who only agreed to create the bible as Christianity was taking hold over pagan belief during his reign and he didn't want to lose the crowd. So its all chinese whispers and tall tales, there maybe and in some ways I hope there is some truths in what's written but is it truly divine or simply a guide of how to conduct oneself admirably.

Fact is the bible due to the holes in its history lends itself to untold number of conspiracies and further tall tales like Dan Browns Da Vinci code and the like. End of the day all faiths are based on trust of what were told to be true but to believe your god wins you a sporting title is just ridiculous.

Fader

Not sure about historian but it sounds like you took a lot of the Da Vinci code on board.

On that point I am convinced there is an opus dei centre not far from me.

Never actually read it Mac, didn't appeal to me to be honest though I do like his latest tome the lost symbol, far less bible reference and a bit more depth to it.

Never in my life have I come across someone I know to be opus dei, that doesn't mean they haven't crossed my path I just haven't known that to be their belief and that's how it should be imo, have your beliefs but don't enforce them on others.

There is just this weird religious conference centre round the corner that seems to have dorms and strange goings on. It has to be Opus Dei or some other cult'ish thing going on.

The pope also went right by the end of my street, sadly I was at work so missed the chance to hung porn from my window.

Opus Dei that could well be then Mac, well known for having followers stay to repent and chastise themselves! Don't get why wearing a silice and flogging yourself shows you have faith in the divinity, if you ask me their are a bit nuts inflicting pain on themselves in gods name!

Now that'd have been something worth seeing, he wouldn't have even batted an eyelid most likely has a huge stash himself, though stick an SS banner outside and you have likely got a far right salute

Fader

If the rumours on here are to be believed i think the pope and I have a liking for a similar age group....

12 Year old boys!

ok, to be fair he would rather burn the witches and I would rather......... You know.

I'm assuming your talking of a certain miss Watson! If so arrest me now because simply put "I would"

can i suggest 'the angels game' by Carlos ruiz zafon to all 'ye heathens' - a fantastic read and should be right down your street - personally think its a far better crafted piece of writing than da vinci code

ban_bam wrote:can i suggest 'the angels game' by Carlos ruiz zafon to all 'ye heathens' - a fantastic read and should be right down your street - personally think its a far better crafted piece of writing than da vinci code

That wouldnt be too hard, Zoo magazine is a better crafted piece of writing than the Di Vinco code. I dont think Ive ever read a book that was so poorly written, one of those instances where the film was equally as awful as the book.

I think I have issues with analysing the quality of fiction as I really didn't notice how badly written the Di Vinci code was. I don’t often read fiction and tend to stick to more educational reading and I think it has harmed me.

I had fun reading the Da Vinci code but have also enjoyed classics such as to kill a mockingbird.

I also like the Sherlock Holmes and Rebus stories. Sadly crime writing is about all the fiction I manage on a more regular basis.

I would be interested to know what was so wrong with the Da Vinci code? Other than the factual inaccuracies of course, but I just assumed you were not meant to take it as a history lesson.

To Kill A Mockingbird is rubbish in my opinion, people often just say they like it because of the issues it covers and therefore assume they have to be seen to say they like it.
It is so boring.

Its not military history thats for sure Super. Thank god.
I read it last year again, its a beautifully wriiten book. Mind you one persons boring is another persons interesting.
The narrative in the Da Vinco code is just poor, about as subtle as a hammer. Plus its just ridden with factual inaccuracies, for instance I think he makes some shocking mistake about how passports work in Europe. Personally I dont really care about that kind of thing but you'd think he would have done some half decent research.
But I guess its a thrilling joyride if you like that kind of thing.

Thats what I dont understand supe, it may not have been subtle but the story was good enough to hold your attention. Why does a book have to offer more?

No doubt it is better when it does but why do people see it as essential?

About time someone mentioned Doak.
I too was slightly underwhelmned by da Vinci code.
I am a great follower of Golf Monthly as studying it will allow me hit a straight drive over 300 yards and give me 50 ways to lower my score.

Mac, what I mean is that while TKAM may be a well written book, I feel people are inclined to hold it in higher esteem than it deserves because of the subject matter. If for example it was about actually killing mockingbird and not racial tension would people give it the time of day?

It's almost as if people feel they HAVE to like it, regardless of what they thought of it.
It's a bit like Tarantino films. I can't stand them, but it seems if you like them you are seen as some sort of well qualified film buff. Film and Book snobbery over-riding actual quality.

Mac, you would criticise journalism on the BBC site as being poorly written or badly reasearched. You also praise Kwinis articles, tehrefore yo ucan recognice that not all writing is the same.
You have skilled authors and you have popular writers who bang out novels. Thats all well and good but it doesnt mean the writing style itself isnt poor.

super_realist wrote:Mac, what I mean is that while TKAM may be a well written book, I feel people are inclined to hold it in higher esteem than it deserves because of the subject matter. If for example it was about actually killing mockingbird and not racial tension would people give it the time of day?

It's almost as if people feel they HAVE to like it, regardless of what they thought of it.
It's a bit like Tarantino films. I can't stand them, but it seems if you like them you are seen as some sort of well qualified film buff. Film and Book snobbery over-riding actual quality.

But the whole point of the book is that it takes an issue like racial tension and it examines it and builds a story around it in a very intelligent way. Thats why its a good book, plus IMO its beautifully written.
By the way I agree, Tarantino films are massively overated.

Diggers

Sadly for me you are talking to the seriously uncultured when it comes to fiction, so it is quite possible I cant carry out any more analysis other than whether I like the book or not.

English was the only subject in school I was rubbish at, even back then I couldn’t work out what I did wrong.