PGA Tour: Double-Header: Notes from the Ballwasher

First topic message reminder :

1).Two PGA Tournaments this week.
Riding in first class are the WGC-HSBC Champions competitors, 78 of la creme de la creme, or gold tops at least.
Then there are the economy class runners and riders travelling to Jackson, Mississippi, for the Sanderson Farms Championship.
I'm much more interested in the latter, may even be able to watch it without setting my alarm clock.

2).Last week Justin Thomas may (not sure really) have set a PGA Tour record by winning a second event without yet getting a W in the USA. I'm sure the media obsessed with the early 20-something generation (yup, they're back at it in next month's Golf Digest) will be thrilled, but Thomas has yet to convince the Ballwasher that he's the real deal. Regardless, it's doubtful that any first-time double has been watched by fewer US viewers.

3).But wait, the Tour thinks this type of event is just the business, so much so that we'll be going for the treble next year with an event in South Korea. Back-to-back-to-back with CIMB & HSBC.
There were stories earlier in the year of initiatives by the Tour to reduce the "All Exempt" Tour from 125 to something lower, perhaps 100. It sounds as if the players nixed that, but perhaps this is the next best/worst thing.
I would think a strong rank-and-file on Tour is a big positive, but this sends messages in the exact opposite direction - if you're a Top 50 US-based pro you have to play really, really badly, or at least be unlucky with injuries, to lose your card; you could play at least nine no-cut tournaments, come last in every one, and bank about $386K plus the Korean money-for-nothing. Amazing.

4).Russell Knox enjoyed his breakthrough to the winners' enclosure at last year's HSBC and established himself as a proven winner by adding August's Travelers Championship to his record. Plenty of Europeans in this week's field, many of them in pretty good form. Hatton, Rafa, Casey, Kaymer, Wiesberger, Noren - a win for any of them would scarcely be a surprise.

5).We've morphed from a lengthy Indian Summer here in the North Country to winter without the pleasure of autumn to ease the transition. Killington is open and others will follow if this lot carries on; 20% chance of rain forecast by the Weather Channel here this morning - the idiots didn't mention the 100% chance of snow. (Why can't the US get a decent weather forecasting system? Answers to/in the New York Times.)
But none of that will be on the Tournament Director's mind in Mississippi where the autumn continues warm and dry, with not much wind. In other words perfect for golf, and there's a decent turn-out for the "opposite field" event.

6).Poulter brought home a T17 from CIMB and 48 FedEx points so well on pace to satisfy the requirements of his Medical "extension". He's teeing it up Thursday & Friday with Chris Kirk who is my idea of a contender this week - Russell Henley, Badds and Kizzire are among others who look good to me.

7).The PGA Tour seems to have redesigned parts of its website over the past few weeks and the good news is that graphics are even better than before.
Bad news is that navigation is tortuous, and seemingly incomplete - designed to do one's head in. Or at least use google. Is that a good idea, Tim?
Wouldn't it be great if their website designers actually followed golf?

8).Let's have some Senior moments as the Champions Tour season concludes with three "Play-Off" tournaments.
72 golfers have qualified for Round 1 (71 expected to actually play), which is contested over three rounds at California's Sherwood Country Club. For many years this was the site of Greg Norman's Shark Shoot Out, then subsequently for Tiger's "World" Challenge (and site of absolutely brilliant golf by some guy called Harrington when he won in 2002. Whatever happened to him?).

Don't know what the course is like to play, but it's surely one of the more photogenic courses around, with plenty of risk/reward and three Par-5's in the final seven holes.
The 54 money-list leaders after this week travel cross-country to Virginia for Round 2, after which the leading 36 backtrack across country to Arizona for the finale.
As for the PGA Tour's FedEx Cup, the numbers are adjusted for the Final to ensure that it's not a foregone conclusion that Bernhard Langer will win.

9).Ian Woosnam starts in 50th place but the good news for Woosie is that his election to the World Golf Hall Of Fame entitles him to a place in all "regular season" Champions Tour events. Sandy Lyle's already comfortably seated on the same gravy train and I think this is utterly ludicrous, guys who only sporadically played on the PGA Tour (altho' Sandy did have a card for about ten years) queue-jumping Tour regulars.

10).Back to the present and a couple of items in the Tour's fine print:
~It's looking likely that the season-opening Tournament of Champions will be without a title sponsor.
~The LA Open is now called the "Genesis Open" - not clear if this is about a bunch of lads from Charterhouse or a brand of ugly looking imported cars.
~The MatchPlay event will now be the "WGC Dell Technologies Match Play".
~And the former Deutsche Bank Championship, initially renamed the EMC Championship, is now the "Dell Technologies Championship" following Dell's takeover of EMC.
That's it. (And it's tough to find that "fine print" on the mess that is pgatour.com.)

GPB wrote:...IMO

Westwood could have Missed every cut after the last VC was appointed and he would have still been a wildcard.

There was no way Clarke was leaving his best buddy off the RC Team.  5 rookies had nothing to do with it, it was just a convenient excuse to justify the Westwood pick.

I take your point, but it's just your opinion. There's no actual evidence to suggest that's the truth. Just an assumption of the worst case.

McLaren wrote:Other than the players who missed out have the views of any of the players on Clarke's selections been reported since the RC.  Do we have a sense of whether or not the players on the team thought Westwood was a good captains pick?

Maybe they don't think it's politic to release changing room gossip (even if there is any) that may create any sort of nonsensical row? Maybe they're adults.

Westwood was not very good at the ryder cup. That much is agreed, but on the world points list he was only behind Kjeldsen and Knox who didnt play, and the Euro points list, Kjeldsen, Hatton, Dubuison, Olesen and Lowry. He was not way out of the reckoning to auto qualify, the fact that he was poor and is dunlop mates with Clarke, are making the decision look worse than it actually was.

The people mentioned as above ahead of him that missed out dont really stand out as being massively missed.

I think Rory's recent comments about going strictly off the OWGR's 12 highest ranked players was a subliminal slam at the Westwood Pick.

How could it be when Peters (also a pick) was the best player at the RC?

There is no guarantee that the players who qualified 1-6 in any OWGR selected team wouldn't also score zilch. Rose, Willett, Sullivan and Fitzpatrick didn't do well and they qualified by right, so it wouldn't be consistent to blame the current selection set up as a reason for failure.

Sometimes you just lose and it's nothing to do with the selection procedure. I doubt McIlroy was praising the selection procedure when they won 8 of the last 11.

To blame the selection process and picks is just a bad workman blaming their tools. It's how Mac sees it, but I can't see how Mcilroy would see it that way.

I would just say you have 2 captains and they pick the 12 players they want.

Considering the Ryder Cup is a product of the European Tour, they would be stupid to take away that stipulation. And I really dont see that they should.

Westwood ticks off most pre-event categories of a perceived successful RC player. Too bad he didn't score any points. But nobody on here really questioned the pick when it was announced. It is, and it was, a far greater risk picking a player who nobody knew and who knew nobody (Knox) when the team was already full of rookies, whom nobody knew how would react to the RC pressure. Or picking somebody who gave the middle finger to the ET and who reportedly has a hard time with several personalities in and around the RC team (Casey).

I still think it was a mistake to select the last VC so early, as Westy probably could have contributed with just as much (i.e. not less than 0 points) as a VC. Fact is, Westy's form was OK prior to the summer when the VC pick was announced, but it dropped like Ronaldo in the penalty area soon hereafter.

I am pretty sure I questioned the Westwood pick. I was glad he was picked.

I know I made the point that not picking Knox might have sent a signal to Jon Rahm to not join the Euro Tour as Europeans Players who do not have EuroTour Roots will be considered outsiders.

pedro

Are you kidding? One of the first comments I made after the picks were announced was that he was only picked due to being Clarke's mate.

When I say 'question' I mean that noone had better ideas, maybe Knox. But Knox was also questioned over Pieters and Kaymer. It wasn't really like the shortlist was, well, long.

Rory on No laying up podcast if anyone is interested.

http://nolayingup.com/2016/11/01/nlu-podcast-episode-56-rory-mcilroy/

Interesting interview.

Mac, you are an utter plank. Have you not listened to a single reason as to why he was picked?

I would agree with your claim of nepotism if he was ranked 100 in both the World and European Tour tables, hadn't been in half decent form and didn't have a Ryder Cup record that any of the US players would spunk over, yet you keep on banging the same old tired and debunked drum again and again.

super_realist wrote:Mac, you are an utter plank.

Does it make you feel better when you resort to Ad hominem insults.

When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser.

Get lost GPB. Mac IS a plank and he demonstrates it virtually every time he writes something.

Cries of "ad hominem" are just laughable. It's a bloody forum not the Oxford debates, I've got no reason to be polite to Mac when he has deliberately missed the point at least a dozen times on this particular topic.
You sound like him being "offended" on his behalf. If anyone has lost the debate it's Mac by continually peddling a ridiculous assertion of nepotism despite there being plenty good reasons why it wasn't nepotism.

You are nasty women.

Super

I have not missed the point but rather I just have a different hypothesis about the reasons for Westwoods selection. I understand the other views but disagree with them.

You can have that hypothesis if you like, but it completely goes against all the other EVIDENCE on which you are usually so keen.

Yes, it would be nepotism had he not been on the fringes of qualifying, had he not had an exemplary record, had there not been 6 rookies and had he not been a leader on the course. You can't ignore those elements.

What you are doing is being a science denier.

The absolute best you can do is say Westwood was picked because of his proximity to being picked, because of his record, because of his experience because there was 6 rookies AND because he was Clarke's mate. You cannot isolate in light of the evidence that it is purely nepotism.

mac, who other than Knox was seriously in the mix amongst the armchair experts? Kjeldsen perhaps, even if DC said he wasn't on his mind.

I link to our poll, where I think it's pretty evident that Westy wasn't a nepotism pick. As far as I recall our poll was a mix of who "will" and "should" get a pick, but it's still pretty clear that Clarke was "right" in picking Westy.

But you can say that Westy was picked / should be picked due to lack of better alternatives and that the last VC was named too early, effectively making Westy a 'lock' too early. Maybe next time we'll see a European Horschel rule, but applied to VC picks, saving experienced players on the qualification bubble as potential last minute VC's?

https://www.606v2.com/t63828-ryder-cup-european-picks

In an apples to apples comparison, Knox earned more than twice the OWGR points of Westwood in the Qualifying period,. About 80 of Knox's points didn't count because he was not part of the Eurotour and the ET did not grandfather the points he earned from Sept - Nov.

I was always lobbying for a Knox pick.

Knox did a rotten job of showing he was committed to making the team. He acknowledged that himself.

I think we are in danger of Captain Hindsight here. It's only because Westwood (amongst others) didn't play well. He's not the first captains pick to have poor Ryder Cups (America have a raft of them, as do Europe , e.g. Poulter and Gallagher in 2014)

Whoever you pick, if your top guns like Rose, Stenson, Willett, Garcia, Kaymer finish with losing records, your team is up against it, whoever the Captain's picks are. Even Rory messed up his first match, and that could have set the tone for the rest of the week.

Also, remember that Thomas Pieters was essentially the Horschel pick, and that worked out rather well.

Lobbying for Knox does not mean lobbying for Knox over Westwood. Some on here preferred Knox over Pieters, or Kaymer. We are discussing the Westwood pick, not the not-Knox pick. In the context and in the situation it was not wrong to pick Westwood. If our consensus shortlist consisted of 4-5 players (which I strongly believe it did - both the 606 shortlist and DC's), and only 3 could be picked, you cannot cherry-pick one over another in hindsight. Obviously it doesn't hurt Lee to be drinking buddies with DC but it'd be different if the shortlist consisted of 10 players. And it wasn't like Kaymer was stellar either, yet nobody seems to be questioning his pick despite him being low in the rankings too.

If I've learned anything over the last few years of watching Ryder Cup captains picks on both sides.... I don't put near the emphasis on picking experience over a rookie if I believe that rookie is in even marginally better form. I used to think it was very important, but I don't anymore.

This new crop of "kids" coming out over the last few years don't seem 'scared of nuttin'. Sure they're gonna have the heebie jeebies on the first tee... but from my observations no more than the experienced players.  

Let me pick the players IN BEST FORM on either the USA or Euro side... rookies or not... and I believe I'll beat your "veterans picked for their experience" a lot more often than not...

PS:  I didn't have an issue with the Westwood pick in the least at the time it was made. But I was dead WRONG for exactly the reasons outlined above. I'll not be making that mistake again.

Only exception I "might" make to my new mantra....  is if some veteran has demonstrated some ridiculously efficient affinity for the specific venue or type of venue being played. IMO the "horses for courses" thing is a legitimate consideration.  But at this point... I'm not seeing anyone I would put in that category for Le Golf National in France.  Maybe if Franny wins there next summer...  with a 1 and 2 in his pocket... I might reach down the list to pick him up for RC 2018 if he's showing ANY legitimate signs of life in his game at the time

The only thing I would say in mitigation for that, robo, is that there is little doubt that Westwood and Willett were designated as a pair, probably from the time that Danny was Champion of Billy Payne's World.
Fast forward a few weeks, following DC's "picks", and Willett's brother puts Danny under unbelievably uncalled for scrutiny and DC mixes up the pairings.
Don't think anyone could've seen that.
No excuses, but possible reasons.
Winning is a team effort.
So is losing.
And so it proved.

I was definitely lobbying for Knox over Westwood. And Kaymer had some form over the summer with Top 10s in France, Baltusrol and Denmark.

and maybe Knox didn't go out of his way to ingratiate himself into the Euro Ryder Cup but what exactly did Darren Clarke do to welcome him to the European Tour.

Darren Clarke = Eric Stratton

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lGGt1t8bLtg

So if the Westwood pick was made on nepotism, nobody forced DC to pick Kaymer. You cannot say Kaymer was in better form than Knox.

One of the points of Captain's picks which people seem to be overlooking is that a captain isn't required to pick on the basis of anyone's form.
A captains pick gives the captain to choose someone with attributes which might be of benefit to the team, regardless of the form that they are in.

Kaymer, like Westwood, was not a "rookie" like Knox, and has had good Ryder Cups and added experience to a lopsided team.

If Captains had to use "form" as the defining factor as to who they pick, there isn't any point in having picks at all, and you might as well have 12 qualifiers.

That exactly my point super. But GPB doesn't seem to understand. He'd rather have fumbled in the dark with Knox. Ok I understand if Knox was a world beater but apart from his Travelers win he didn't exactly impress in the last few months before the picks. So why pick somebody who may have been in ok form but who was a big question mark in all the other aspects of team matchplay?

Exactly Pedro. People tend to look on form only, yet, there's much more to a players dynamic and worth in a team event than form.

Super... I agree with you entirely regarding captain's picks. They should be to fill in the gaps of what he thinks his team needs. All I'm suggesting is picking experience for experience sake is not as important as I previously that was.

Kwini... And WHY was Westwood the supposed automatic partner for Willett? As much because of his experience than anything else. Now maybe a rookie like Willett who's a little older needs.that experienced shoulder to lean on. Perhaps I too greatly equate the term rookie with young gun. IMO this new breed of guys like Spieth, Reed & Pieters for example don't need no "veteran" to hold their hand and tell 'em how good they are.... Whereas a "rookie" in his 30s might.

No coincidence that Willett played with Westwood in the final round at Augusta, and then helped kept DJ's feet on the ground at Oakmont. Plus DW & lw1 are from the same neck of the woods (straddling the Notts/Yorks border I think) and seem good mates - a good place to start.
(Sergio continues to praise Jesper for helping him cope in 1999, probably down to personalities really.)

As far as I know Willett, Westwood and Fitzpatrick are all from the Sheffield area. And apparantly the gel'ed so well they managed to bring back 3 x 0 points.

pedro wrote:So if the Westwood pick was made on nepotism, nobody forced DC to pick Kaymer. You cannot say Kaymer was in better form than Knox.

Kaymer had three top 10's (including one in a major) over the summer. His pick was a lot more justified than Westwood.

Westwood last top 10 (prior to the WC selection) was at the Nordea Masters (with a very low SoF)

Guys no stress.Westy was a gamble on form more reliable in theory but not in form Ryder cup foursomes and singles need individuals on top of their game .Fourballs not so much. Sulliivan and Fitz will have gained some valuable experience .
I would be moving on to who are the next captains and team?

Way too early to say who would make the team. This time last year it looked like Lowry was a certainty. Now you wouldn't even know he even plays golf he's become so anonymous.

I really can't guess who'd be captain right now, I can't even think of many options given that it's probably too soon for Poulter or Westwood and that they are still playing plus I think Poulter would probably love to do it in America, so 2020 more likely for him.

I might have thought MAJ, but he wasn't involved in this years Ryder Cup, so perhaps more realistically Thomas Bjorn or even The Cyclops Penguin.

I would say Bjorn, Thomas Levet as vice captain?

I would say spot on!
Just surprised that Levet was not brought into the fold this year.

What about a foreign manager? It works in other sports. Woods probably not getting the USA job next time around.

I think a foreign manager would be better for USA Mac.
Europe doesn't really need one.

Can't imagine that any sane person would give 9C the Captaincy at any time.

super_realist wrote:I think a foreign manager would be better for USA Mac.
Europe doesn't really need one.

Can't imagine that any sane person would give 9C the Captaincy at any time.

I can't imagine that any sane person wouldn't.

robopz wrote:

super_realist wrote:I think a foreign manager would be better for USA Mac.
Europe doesn't really need one.

Can't imagine that any sane person would give 9C the Captaincy at any time.

I can't imagine that any sane person wouldn't.

Neither can I - and that's insane. Because it'd be a pretty bad choice.

Why would you put 9C in there?

1. Poor Ryder Cup Record.
2. Doesn't appear to care about it.
3. Isn't a team player.
4. Isn't especially articulate judging by his press conferences and interviews, can't imagine he could motivate a team.
5. Is divisive amongst his playing peers.
6. He's a loner.
7. Is a complete has been.

I really can't think of any attributes he has which would make him good for the role of VC captain.

Would be like putting Lowry in charge of a cake shop, or Zach Johnsen in charge of a bible shop.

A foreign manager for the US Ryder Cup team? Highly unlikely.

And I could never figure out why England did that so often with their football team. Seems like every Englishman I spoke to could go on endlessly about the game. Can't imagine there's a lack of managerial talent and experience.

Shotrock wrote:A foreign manager for the US Ryder Cup team? Highly unlikely.

And I could never figure out why England did that so often with their football team. Seems like every Englishman I spoke to could go on endlessly about the game. Can't imagine there's a lack of managerial talent and experience.

There is a MASSIVE lack of managerial talent and experience in England. There are no English football managers of International Class.

I've said it many times that the US Ryder Cup team is very much an analogue of the England Football Team. Lots of names, not good at playing as a team, think they're a lot better than they are , pick on name and reputation rather than suitability etc etc.

Although, obviously the US team did one thing different this year that England will never do, actually won.

Shotrock wrote:
And I could never figure out why England did that so often with their football team. Seems like every Englishman I spoke to could go on endlessly about the game. Can't imagine there's a lack of managerial talent and experience.

sr. But I just guess most Englishmen are too sane to take the job. That's why you'll see that the Englishmen who has actually had the job are either drunks, depraved, village idiots, or a combination.

Shotrock wrote:A foreign manager for the US Ryder Cup team? Highly unlikely.

And I could never figure out why England did that so often with their football team. Seems like every Englishman I spoke to could go on endlessly about the game. Can't imagine there's a lack of managerial talent and experience.

Umm. I'm not sure that's a good qualification for the role though!

navyblueshorts wrote:

Shotrock wrote:A foreign manager for the US Ryder Cup team? Highly unlikely.

And I could never figure out why England did that so often with their football team. Seems like every Englishman I spoke to could go on endlessly about the game. Can't imagine there's a lack of managerial talent and experience.

Umm. I'm not sure that's a good qualification for the role though!

yet you see some who apparently get the job based on just that

pedro wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:

Shotrock wrote:A foreign manager for the US Ryder Cup team? Highly unlikely.

And I could never figure out why England did that so often with their football team. Seems like every Englishman I spoke to could go on endlessly about the game. Can't imagine there's a lack of managerial talent and experience.

Umm. I'm not sure that's a good qualification for the role though!

yet you see some who apparently get the job based on just that

Really? Such as?

navyblueshorts wrote:

pedro wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:

Shotrock wrote:A foreign manager for the US Ryder Cup team? Highly unlikely.

And I could never figure out why England did that so often with their football team. Seems like every Englishman I spoke to could go on endlessly about the game. Can't imagine there's a lack of managerial talent and experience.

Umm. I'm not sure that's a good qualification for the role though!

yet you see some who apparently get the job based on just that

Really? Such as?

Woy

super_realist wrote:Why would you put 9C in there?

1. Poor Ryder Cup Record.
2. Doesn't appear to care about it.
3. Isn't a team player.
4. Isn't especially articulate judging by his press conferences and interviews, can't imagine he could motivate a team.
5. Is divisive amongst his playing peers.
6. He's a loner.
7. Is a complete has been.

I really can't think of any attributes he has which would make him good for the role of VC captain.

Would be like putting Lowry in charge of a cake shop, or Zach Johnsen in charge of a bible shop.

Oh stop it... you're killing me....