PGA Tour: HE'S BACK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! The Masters: Notes from the Ballwasher

First topic message reminder :

1).Martin Laird of course; you didn't think I was talking about the guy who's on the cover of every golf magazine and even some others did you? Or even that young Northern Irishman we've heard so much about?

No, Martin Laird's fantastic final round last Sunday in San Antonio not only stuck two fingers through the Ballwasher who doubted his resolve after a dismal nine-month spell. But also earned a ticket to Augusta National and finds himself in the "long shot, stranger things have happened, but not many" category for The Masters. More on that later.

2).The TPC San Antonio, ("Greg Norman designs golf courses to test professional golfers, not to please professional golfers," said Padraig Harrington), certainly looked much easier on the eye than in years past and it seemed that most pros who turned up enjoyed their week; some will hopefully even be back.
But play was dreadfully slow and one young American is just another guilty party who I hadn't spotted before. Daniel Summerhays, good lord, how long does it take you to hit the golf ball? Summerhays seemed to turn to Winterhays during some of his pre-shot routines.

3).And, while our thoughts turn to Magnolia Drive, our annual word in tribute to the Welshman from Bangor, Errie Ball, who played in the first Masters and is still alive today, hopefully to tell the tale, at 102.

4).Billy Payne has two new members this year, one who's just gone up one rung, presumably, on the list of the World's most evil women, the other who got her invite the old-fashioned way, thru' connections. (Have a personal interest in Darla Moore's richly endowed University of South Carolina's Moore School Of Business, so pleased to see her being honoured with a membership.)

5).With McIlroy and Woods striking form, I'd say this Masters, more than most, is almost certain to go to a favourite if, not necessarily, THE favourite. So let's look at some long shots and the owgr Top 25 for a form guide, with all the usual biases of course:

"Long shots, stranger things have happened, but not many":

#269: Angel Cabrera: You may think there's more chance of him attending Thatcher's funeral but, hey, this man hasn't forgotten how to play the game, he's physically fitter, has shown glimpses of form, and knows how to win - and how many can say that?

#56: Well, Martin Laird certainly can! 20th first time around Augusta, 50-something last year, but if he can putt like last week who knows? He hits the ball perfectly for the course, but it will be all about course management and his short game for Martin. The Laird of San Antonio with 22 Sunday putts, or the Laird of Florida when he took eight 3-putts each at Bay Hill and Tampa?

#41: Henrik Stenson: Eccentric as ever but plenty long enough and can putt well. On my e.w. list at 75/1.

#38: Scott Piercy: Thinks he's the best golfer the world has ever seen. Still seething at the perceived injustice of not being interviewed on TV after his demolition of Luke Donald at the MatchPlay. The favourite, in his eyes anyway, and don't you dare discount his chances!

6).21 - 25:
#25: Furyk: Planning to attack Augusta with two drivers but hasn't done better than 4th here and not likely to this week.

#24: Els: Terrible year so far, seems to have lost confidence just when he needs it most.

#23: Watney: Jekyll and Hyde, Would love to see him take the proverbial next step but don't see it this week.

#22: Hanson: 3rd last year but in much better form coming in than this year's version. Wouldn't count him out completely, top ten material.

#21: Mahan: A couple of Masters' top tens under his belt, but something's been missing this past year and I can't see him finding it at Augusta.

7).16 - 20:
#20: Simpson: His US Open win apart, hasn't really had that great a last 18 months. Can't see it improving here.

#19: Dustin Johnson: Augusta National is made for Dustin - no par 5's here for him, but nothing inside the Top 30 here yet, and his dodgy short game will frustrate him again this week.

#18: Dufner: Good start a year ago but faded. If his Dufnering pic's are anything to go by he's still asleep.

#17: McDowell: Top 15 material, doesn't fancy some of the tee shots here and, until he does, can't see him contending.

#16: Garcia: This place frustrates the sh1t out of him. Shame, might get close, but not close enough.

8).11 - 15:
#15: Schwartzel: 2011 winner and no reason to think he can't win another one. Except none of the five South African Major (and Players) winners these past eight years have won since on the PGA Tour. Top three candidate.

#14: Bubba Watson: It's all about his emotions - I fancy a left-hander but perhaps not this one.

#13: Westwood: Nope, not this year, Lee, not until your short game and your long game are on the same page. But, if he can somehow be -10 on the par fives, he'll be right there. Nah.

#12: Poulter: Would love to see Poults win a Biggie but reckon Augusta National is too long for him, too much pressure on his mid and long irons. Top 15 though.

#11: Bradley: Lots of top tens this year and may score another one. Plenty long enough but can't see that short game winning a Green Jacket.

9).6 - 10:
#10: Kuchar: 3rd last year, plods along with that inane-looking, sh1t-eating grin of his and, hey presto, he's right there. Top 5 perhaps, but Green Jacket? Perhaps not, e.w. value though at 33/1 or 40's.

#9: Mickelson: My choice last year and should've, would've and certainly could've . . . . Those triple bogeys did him in. My idea of the man to beat, not scared to win and probably doesn't want it so manically much as Number One.

#8: Stricker: Says he's "still trying to figure out Augusta". I bracket him with Poults, his long game puts too much pressure on his world-class short game; top 20 probable but can't see him in the shake-up.

#7: Scott: No form to speak of this season; plays a bizarre schedule and who knows if he's up for this? Not worth the risk.

#6: Oosthuizen: Difficult for me to separate the two South African Kings: He was devastated by last year's play-off defeat, but can he bounce back? Sh1t or bust I'd think - at his best a sure-fire contender.

10).1 - 5:
#5: Snedeker: Has been out injured for most of the past two months, no cuts made since his early season super form. Certainly has the game, but feel he's still slightly under-cooked for this week. The Sneds of the past year a certain Major winner - just not this week.

#4: Donald: No form for ages. The 2011 model Luke would be a contender anywhere, but not the short-and-crooked version of years ago which has made an unwelcome return - might get away with it at Hilton Head but not 150 miles up the road at Augusta.

#3: Rose: Which Justin will we see? The winner at such top courses as Aronomink and Muirfield Village, or the strutter who flatters only to deceive, but then burns up the final nine holes for a back-door podium finish? Until he can prove that he won't wilt when the heat turns up, I'd have him down as a likely top tenner, not a winner.

#2: And then there's Rory. If his confidence right now was as high as Scott Piercy's I'd ink him in to his first Green Jacket, but his driver left him a bit last Sunday and he won't be "back" until he's back. Not many would be surprised to see him win; me neither, but perhaps not this year.

#1: Tiger: The only person who can beat Tiger is Tiger, and his ambition and anxiety to earn his next Major. Until he does it, I'd bet against him and gamble that Tiger will beat Tiger. As we saw at Bay Hill, though, the old intimidation factor is back and, if he putts like he did in Orlando and hits 60% of the fairways, he'll win this. For me, I'd bet the field against him.


Can't wait though, although we'll have to put up with the unctuous, over-reverential tones of CBS - would be nice to think they'll have a commentator under the age of 50, a breath of fresh air so sorely needed, but no chance of that. The weather should have the course in perfect condition, but there's a chance of severe storms Thursday p.m. into Friday, after which the sun will shine.

I fancy Phil to win, but Bones (perhaps the only born-in-Britain winner this year?) has to keep him focussed. Reckon Louis and Charl will be right there and fancy Kuchar as best outsider, Stenson best complete long-shot.

kwinigolfer wrote:Must admit, I had assumed Rule 27-1 (b) as shown on-line allowed you to take the ball further back provided you maintained the line, "with no limit to how far behind the water hazard the ball may be dropped".

I've been reading this incorrectly then . . . ..

Maintaining the line is only applicable when you take the relief from point of entry.
Tiger was required to drop at exactly same spot (as is practically possible). I assume he made a mistake and mixed up the 2 rules. Nontheless,it's a DQ........................

It will be a shame though...............

Furyk's drop was ok, as he dropped it on the same line the ball crossed the hazard. Tiger didn't, nor did he drop it at the original spot.

Do we know for sure that the spot he played the original shot did not coincide with the line between pin and point of crossing the hazard?

If so, he may have chosen to play from near his original shot (because he had a yardage and knew the swing needed) but having actually chosen 26-1b.

John - Good question. Is "as nearly as possible" two yards, two feet, two inches? Did he gain a competitive advantage with his drop? (A rule breaker.) Regardless, the Green Jackets should issue a statement. That I'm sure you can count on.

DQ Tiger? That would be something!

Thanks for the explanation regarding Furyk.

I'll be interested to see how this plays out then; to paraphrase Jim Furyk's interview, "I had laid up too far and the slope was quite steep so I took it back (unspecified how far) to a flatter lie."

McLaren wrote:Do we know for sure that the spot he played the original shot did not coincide with the line between pin and point of crossing the hazard?

If so, he may have chosen to play from near his original shot (because he had a yardage and knew the swing needed) but having actually chosen 26-1b.

Mc, that can be his only "get out". Didn't see it but from what im reading he is nowhere near the line of crossing the hazard.
It is a real shame, but looks like hi is a goner

Guys, watch the videos at www.masters.com. Here you can also see where Furyks and Tigers balls crossed the hazard. You'll see Tigers ball hitting the pin and crossing the hazard at an angle of at least 30 degrees away from the line.

I see Michael Breed tweeting about it on golfchannel.com now.
His take will be instructive as to how this plays out. What does he think? We'll see!

Unfortunate whatever happens - let's just hope there's an unambiguous resolution.

kwinigolfer wrote:I'll be interested to see how this plays out then; to paraphrase Jim Furyk's interview, "I had laid up too far and the slope was quite steep so I took it back (unspecified how far) to a flatter lie."

Didn't see Furyk but from im reading, he took relief from point of entry so he can go back as far as he wants

The thing is, the rules are asking for a grey area to arise. For example as I mentioned earlier "as nearly as possible" is not defined and neither do they set out what degree if accuracy you must determine the line between the hole and point of entry.

McLaren wrote:The thing is, the rules are asking for a grey area to arise. For example as I mentioned earlier "as nearly as possible" is not defined and neither do they set out what degree if accuracy you must determine the line between the hole and point of entry.

What's the alternative.Make them play from the water!!

McLaren wrote:The thing is, the rules are asking for a grey area to arise. For example as I mentioned earlier "as nearly as possible" is not defined and neither do they set out what degree if accuracy you must determine the line between the hole and point of entry.

Mac, "intent" is important in golf. It'll cost you a shot not hitting the ball, as long as you intend to hit it. Tiger himself said he "took" two yards - that's "intent" to me.
And 30 degrees off is NOT on the line, and will never be.

pedro

I always think it is your actions in golf that determine intention. Not sure post round interviews come into it.



John

What I mean is that both options fail to mention the accuracy expected. so the rough line might be ok.

Robert Lusetich ‏@RobertLusetich
I've just been told by a high-ranking source that Augusta National is reviewing Tiger's drop but "it may take a little while"

OK, I have circled his old divot

Spoiler:

Is this close enough?

I see the most aptly named Jay Coffin is all over it for golfchannel.com . . . . . .

Well, firs tee time in just over an hour so we don't have long to wait on a decision.

mac, it doesn't matter. Golf is a gentlemans sport. You sign your own score cards. Brian Davis gave himself a penalty at Hilton Head a few years ago, even when nobody saw it.

Tiger admitted he mixed up therules up when dropping. The ref probably also. But why shouldn't he be dq'ed?

I agree the rules are crazy, but that's how it is.

If he admits he "mixed up the rules when dropping", you'd think it's an open and shut case then. But surely he must have known that when he was playing?

Well I guess he was just p155ed off and couldn't beleive what was happening. And how often does it happen that balls cross the hazard 30 degrees off the line?

Just heard that the engines of TW airlines have been fired up at augusta regional airport.

Wouldn't have thought that plane would need engines . . . .

How does he explain to Lindsey that he's already been unfaithful, albeit to the rules of golf?

Surely a decision will be made before first tee time, so they can re-shuffle the tee times if Woods gets dqed.

McLaren wrote:OK, I have circled his old divot

Spoiler:

Is this close enough?

No. Especially given his post-round comments. He's gone...or at least he should be.

kwinigolfer wrote:Wouldn't have thought that plane would need engines . . . .

ehh?

If they DQ him it's another sign of racism, isn't it?

Absolutely close enough.

But it's for the Green Jackets to decide!

Pedro

Imo it's close enough. But he admitted dropping under another rule.

Shotrock wrote:Absolutely close enough.

But it's for the Green Jackets to decide!

It is NOT close enough. It's one club max (I would imagine) and TW is nowhere near that. His words damn him post-round into the bargain. As John C said above, it's as clear a DQ as we're likely to come across.

I dunno. Was probably about a cheat sticks length away if he'd had one in the bag.

Navy

When you are boning your wife tonight and need something to think about - that isn't her irksome face - you can think of your overly gleeful comments about tigers DQ.

Navy - Where does it say one club max? How far away is his ball from that divot?

Hope Mac's latest comment gets deleted by the mods . . . . . . .

On a serious note, does it matter what he says post round? Surely the rules don't cover out of round comments.

kwinigolfer wrote:Hope Mac's latest comment gets deleted by the mods . . . . . . .

Come on, navy loves our banter. Anyway, how close is close enough?

I wouldn't be surprised if Guan is DQ'd for Tiger's mistake....

He cannot claim that he gained no advantage because he stated that where he should have dropped was against the grain and a bit muddy, so he went two yards further back implying that the spot he dropped it at was better than where he should have dropped it. As near as possible is just that. The dropped ball should land next to if not on the (replaced) divot of the previous shot. It will not stay there since it is a drop. No way is two yards away as "near as possible". He should be DQ'd I'm afraid. If he isn't, it will smack of one rule for them and a different rule for Tiger, particularly when the 14 year old amateur has been done a shot for slow play! (Not entirely relevant I know)

Well, the rules cover pedantic TV viewers calling in, like with Villegas a few years ago. This is not football, where the game is over when the ref blows the whistle.

The drop was 2-3 ft away from the original spot. Close enough you might think, but dunno. Although that isn't relevant in this case anyway.

Jason Sobel:
"Much like in Abu Dhabi, Woods did not consult rules official. Burned him then, may burn him again."

McLaren wrote:Navy

When you are boning your wife tonight and need something to think about - that isn't her irksome face - you can think of your overly gleeful comments about tigers DQ.

Sod off you loathsome tool.

Shotrock wrote:Navy - Where does it say one club max? How far away is his ball from that divot?

I'm guessing based on a standard one-shot penalty drop length. I never said it was the exact distance in this case. His ball is further away - camera angle in the Tool's picture foreshortens the distance in any case.

Edit: Always assuming the Tool identified TW's previous divot and not some other bit of sod from someone else's shot.

kwinigolfer wrote:Hope Mac's latest comment gets deleted by the mods . . . . . . .

I'm mulling it over!

McLaren wrote:On a serious note, does it matter what he says post round? Surely the rules don't cover out of round comments.

Of course it matters. Be like a murderer saying "I did it" after the event and then expecting the jurors not to take any notice of it.

McLaren wrote:Come on, navy loves our banter.

If you think that's 'banter', you're dafter than I thought.

Navy is married with young twins. Why on earth would he be having sex ?

Where he played it from can be up to a club length from where he dropped it, but he's obliged to drop it as close as possible to that divot. Unless he managed to put as much spin on the drop as he did on the first shot, he's got to go.

I once got my girlfriend to turn round and wear a nike swoosh cap backwards.

Diggers wrote:Navy is married with young twins. Why on earth would he be having sex ?

Good point!

See what he did Mac? Now, that's 'banter'....as opposed to straight insult.

Would be a shame if he goes as its shaping up to be a great weekend. But I don't pretend to know the rules nearly as well as you guys so can't comment too much really.

SmithersJones wrote:Where he played it from can be up to a club length from where he dropped it, but he's obliged to drop it as close as possible to that divot. Unless he managed to put as much spin on the drop as he did on the first shot, he's got to go.

It would actually need to roll more than two club lengths from where it first hit the ground before requiring a re-drop.

Much like Diggers I don't proclaim to know the rules at all, but it does seem the general reaction by so called golf "experts" and pundits on twitter is that he should be DQ'd

Was this tiger's flight?

http://flightaware.com/live/flight/EJA663