Tweet
Where to begin this morning. Actually the answer is easy: in Akron where Tiger Woods’ return to the PGA Tour is being treated (naturally) as slightly more important than the government not shutting down earlier this week.
Which is fine. While 99 percent of my colleagues will be chronicling Tiger’s every practice swing, deep breath and glance at his new caddie this afternoon, I’m going to walk for a while with Rickie Fowler and Matteo Manassero. I haven’t seen much of Fowler this year and I have never seen Manassero in person—something I’d really like to do. Plus, there should be plenty of room to walk around the golf course since they tee off 30 minutes prior to Tiger and Darren Clarke.
The big news yesterday—when Woods hit balls and practiced but didn’t speak to the media since he had done so on Tuesday—was that he was spotted with a Scotty Cameron putter in his bag. There was a great deal of analysis in the media center about what that meant or might mean when he gets out on the golf course.
As I listened to the discourse I was reminded of something Nick Faldo said years ago after he’d struggled on the greens during a PGA Championship:
“Nick, was the putter your biggest problem?” someone asked.
“The problem,” Faldo answered, “was the puttee.”
Exactly. If Tiger Woods is putting like Tiger Woods he could be using my old bent-shaft two-way (I putt lefty) putter and he’d make everything. If he’s not confident on the greens it doesn’t matter if he’s got a Scotty Cameron putter or a Scottie Pippen putter. It isn’t going to matter.
I actually wrote a column on Golfchannel.com yesterday (click here for the article) kind of mocking the media for their Tiger-obsession. I understand how important he is and, as I’ve said before, I’ve never seen anyone play golf the way he has played golf for very long stretches in the past. That’s said with all due respect to Jack Nicklaus.
But on a day when Woods hit balls for an hour and played nine practice holes, the announcement that Rory McIlroy has decided to come back to The PGA Tour next year was far more important than standing on the range trying to guess Tiger’s weight—which some guys were, quite literally, doing.
McIlroy’s decision to pass up a few appearance fees in Europe—he’s going to make so much as a U.S. Open champion when he does play there it really doesn’t matter—to come and play in the U.S. is a big deal. He likes the golf courses here and he likes the weather here. And, as his dad Gerry, who is traveling with him this week pointed out, there’s a tendency for people to assume a kid from Northern Ireland grew up playing links golf. Rory didn’t. Holywood Golf Club isn’t a links and McIlroy has always been a high-ball hitter. (That said I still think he’ll win a British Open and next year’s site, Royal Lytham and St. Anne’s might be his favorite British Open venue).
It’s simply impossible not to like McIlroy. On Tuesday night when I got here, I walked across the street from my hotel to grab a quick dinner at the fabulous TGI-Friday’s. Who was sitting two seats down from me at the bar? The McIlroy’s. Rory posed for photos with anyone who asked, chatted with people who came up to tell him exactly where they were when he holed out during the second round at Congressional and got out of his chair so he could lean down and chat with the little kids who wanted his autograph.
If anyone can be a 22-year-old multi-millionaire and come close to being normal, McIlroy is the guy. I know he’s been criticized for his comments about the weather at The British Open. The British media acted as if he had suggested the monarchy be abandoned.
He doesn’t like cold and rainy weather. Seriously, tell me golfers who do like cold and rainy weather? Tom Watson. That’s about the list. The notion that because he grew up in Northern Ireland so he should like bad weather is silly. I grew up in New York City. That doesn’t mean I like traffic.
Then last week he got into a twitter-exchange with Jay Townsend, who does European Tour golf for Golf Channel. Townsend was critical of McIlroy’s course-management and took some shots at his caddie along the way. McIlroy ripped him on twitter—probably going too far by calling Townsend a “failed golfer.” That’s not germane to the argument. You don’t have to be a U.S. Open champion to recognize poor course management. On the other hand, Townsend also went too far when he said he expected that sort of course management from a 10-year-old.
Okay fellas, break it up. McIlroy got a little nuts because he thought Townsend was ripping his caddie. If that’s his worst sin this year then he’s had a really good year.
What was interesting about yesterday’s column were some of the responses from Golfchannel.com readers. A couple of people wondered if I was trying to make nice with Tiger because I’m hoping he’ll start talking to me. Seriously? Others said I was still angry because he doesn’t talk to me. Again: Seriously? Folks, honestly, I don’t expect Tiger Woods to talk to me and, even if he did (ha!) what would he tell me? That he and Steiny had a really good dinner last night?
So we’ll see how Woods plays today. If he’s in the hunt the networks might break in with live coverage tomorrow. Forget the stock market being down a million points.
******
The most important news of the week as far as I’m concerned took place on Monday when voters in Nassau County voted overwhelmingly against funding a new arena for my beloved New York Islanders. The vote may have been the last nail in the coffin for the Islanders because I know NHL Commissioner Gary Bettman will shed few tears if the team moves to Quebec or Kansas City or even Las Vegas (!!) when the current lease in The Nassau Coliseum is up in 2015.
This is a classic chicken-and-egg deal: Owner Charles Wang says he doesn’t want to sink big money into his payroll until and unless he has the guarantee of a new arena. The fans, who have watched bad hockey for close to 20 years now—the Islanders last won a playoff series in 1993—just don’t find the Islanders compelling enough to commit public funds to them at a time when the economy is what it is.
There’s no question the team needs a new building. I’ve got lots of fond memories of The Coliseum but it is ridiculously outdated and trying to convince any top-line free agent to come and play there is just about impossible even if Wang was willing to open his wallet.
Garth Snow has actually done a nice job as general manager making deals—like the signing of Michael Grabner last fall—without a lot of flexibility. But no one is going to get all that excited if the Islanders are in contention for the 8th playoff spot next spring. Last year they were eliminated from playoff contention by Thanksgiving.
I’m biased. I don’t want to see the Islanders leave. But unless some private investor comes along and makes a deal with Wang to help him come up with the funds to get a new building built the Islanders are likely to go the way of the Atlanta Flames (who they came into the league with 39 years ago) and the Atlanta Thrashers.
Where in the world are Billy Smith, Brian Trottier, Mike Bossy, Denis Potvin and my favorite Islander, Bob Bourne when you really need them? Sigh.
Showing posts with label Rory McIlroy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Rory McIlroy. Show all posts
Thursday, August 4, 2011
Monday, June 20, 2011
McIlroy near perfect, has all the intangibles to be The Next One
I woke up this morning shortly after 6 o’clock, blinked at the clock and thought to myself: ‘What time do I need to be at the golf course?’ Then I realized I didn’t have to be at the golf course at all. The U.S. Open is over. For me, having the event a few miles from my house at Congressional was great, but it also made for a hectic week.
In all though, it was fantastic. If there was one player in the field I wanted to see win it was Rory McIlroy. Here’s a simple fact: he’s a wonderful golfer who has the potential to be a truly elite player—as in winning a half-dozen major championships or perhaps even more—before he’s done. But I honestly think he may be a better person than he is a golfer.
Seriously.
I think everyone who follows golf marveled at the way he handled himself after his Sunday meltdown at The Masters. He answered every question; never snapped at anyone; kept his sense of humor intact and made no attempt to rush off at any point. His behavior was in direct contrast to You-Know-Who.
Look, I don’t want to turn this into a “Rory-is-good-Tiger-is-bad,” deal. But it is impossible not to see the differences between the two. Tiger plays clenched-teeth golf and has played it at a level never seen before in the game. If he doesn’t break Jack Nicklaus’s record of 18 major titles it won’t be because he didn’t have the ability, it will be because he self-destructed.
I think McIlroy is sneaky competitive. He doesn’t clench his teeth and he doesn’t bark at people but the fact that he came back from The Masters disaster to not only win the next major but to absolutely dominate it from start-to-finish says a lot about him as a competitor. A lot of players would have subconsciously held back, not wanting the spotlight again so soon, not wanting to face all the questions about, ‘well what if you blow THIS lead.’ McIlroy embraced it.
If you watch the kid play golf, you have to love his game. He’s got a swing that makes other pros sigh. He’s got a smile that makes young girls sigh. He has about him a star quality that you just don’t see very often. It is no knock on guys like Graeme McDowell, Louis Oosthuizen, Martin Kaymer and Charl Schwartzel—all major champions—to say that they are champions and McIlroy is a star—who is now also a champion. It’s just a fact, one that they would probably all agree with.
That’s NOT to say—as some inevitably will because of all the record-breaking numbers he produced—that he is the “next Tiger.” There is no next Tiger. There are only four players in the history of the game who have won double-digit major titles: Nicklaus, Woods, Bobby Jones and Walter Hagen.
The likelihood that anyone will join that list anytime soon is slim. Padraig Harrington was way over the top on Saturday when he said that McIlroy could break Nicklaus’s record. The kid, who sounds more like 42 when he talks than 22, just shook his head when he heard that and said, “Oh Paddy, Paddy Paddy….I’d just like to win my first one.”
Exactly right. Now that he’s done that we can all revel in that victory and hope there will be more to come. But let’s not say the Jack or Tiger words yet. As of this moment he’s got ONE major title.
But there’s no doubt he is going to be looked at as The Next One in golf and that’s good because of all the non-golf qualities he brings along with him. He’s smart and he’s funny. The other players don’t just respect him, they like him—really like him.
Last Tuesday, I bumped into him in The Congressional locker room. I hadn’t seen him in Charlotte and I told him right away that I wanted to be the millionth person to tell him how remarkable his post-Augusta behavior had been.
He smiled. “Well, I certainly had plenty of time to think about what I was going to say didn’t I?” he said, laughing since his collapse had been pretty much complete by the 13th hole.
Then he shrugged. “Honestly, I meant it when I said I was disappointed but in the end it was a golf tournament. I would think I’ll get to play in plenty more.”
That’s just a little different from, “second place sucks.”
He had just finished playing so I asked him what he thought of the golf course. “I think,” he said, “that it’s very score-able.”
I guess he had that right. He didn’t so much score as he overwhelmed. Sure, the golf course was soft and there will be some questions if—amazingly—the USGA went TOO far in trying to give the players birdie chances since 20 players finished under par. None were within shouting distance of McIlroy although I will say this: If you don’t take note of Jason Day, who now has two second place finishes in majors this year, you’re missing something.
Day is also very likeable but he plays at a snail’s pace. That’s another thing about McIlroy: he plays FAST. Woods always copied Nicklaus and plays as if he is being paid by the hour. McIlroy is more like Tom Watson: pick a club, check your target, stand up and swing. My dream final twosome in a major would be McIlroy and Rickie Fowler, not just because having the two most like-able kids in golf going head-to-head would be great, but because they might play through the entire field.
Put those two on a golf course with no one in front of them and they’ll play 18 holes in under three hours with time to spare. And both will probably shoot in the 60s.
For now though, Fowler is still about potential. McIlroy is here and we can only hope he is here to stay for a long, long time. My wife, who knows me very well, said to me on Sunday night, “I just know you cried when he hugged his father and said, “Happy Father’s Day.”
Damn right I did. It was one of those sweet, genuine moments—the word genuine is important here—that make sports and the people in them worth caring about. (By the way, am I the only one who thinks Mr. McIlroy looks like a Bill Parcells double?).
Honestly, I’m not sure how the week could have turned out much better than it did. Okay, I do have one complaint: Why couldn’t McIlroy’s six-iron at No. 10 on Sunday have gone in? That would have been one of the most amazing moments ever in major championship golf. He missed by about 10 inches.
So, as it turns out, he's not perfect. But boy does he come close.
In all though, it was fantastic. If there was one player in the field I wanted to see win it was Rory McIlroy. Here’s a simple fact: he’s a wonderful golfer who has the potential to be a truly elite player—as in winning a half-dozen major championships or perhaps even more—before he’s done. But I honestly think he may be a better person than he is a golfer.
Seriously.
I think everyone who follows golf marveled at the way he handled himself after his Sunday meltdown at The Masters. He answered every question; never snapped at anyone; kept his sense of humor intact and made no attempt to rush off at any point. His behavior was in direct contrast to You-Know-Who.
Look, I don’t want to turn this into a “Rory-is-good-Tiger-is-bad,” deal. But it is impossible not to see the differences between the two. Tiger plays clenched-teeth golf and has played it at a level never seen before in the game. If he doesn’t break Jack Nicklaus’s record of 18 major titles it won’t be because he didn’t have the ability, it will be because he self-destructed.
I think McIlroy is sneaky competitive. He doesn’t clench his teeth and he doesn’t bark at people but the fact that he came back from The Masters disaster to not only win the next major but to absolutely dominate it from start-to-finish says a lot about him as a competitor. A lot of players would have subconsciously held back, not wanting the spotlight again so soon, not wanting to face all the questions about, ‘well what if you blow THIS lead.’ McIlroy embraced it.
If you watch the kid play golf, you have to love his game. He’s got a swing that makes other pros sigh. He’s got a smile that makes young girls sigh. He has about him a star quality that you just don’t see very often. It is no knock on guys like Graeme McDowell, Louis Oosthuizen, Martin Kaymer and Charl Schwartzel—all major champions—to say that they are champions and McIlroy is a star—who is now also a champion. It’s just a fact, one that they would probably all agree with.
That’s NOT to say—as some inevitably will because of all the record-breaking numbers he produced—that he is the “next Tiger.” There is no next Tiger. There are only four players in the history of the game who have won double-digit major titles: Nicklaus, Woods, Bobby Jones and Walter Hagen.
The likelihood that anyone will join that list anytime soon is slim. Padraig Harrington was way over the top on Saturday when he said that McIlroy could break Nicklaus’s record. The kid, who sounds more like 42 when he talks than 22, just shook his head when he heard that and said, “Oh Paddy, Paddy Paddy….I’d just like to win my first one.”
Exactly right. Now that he’s done that we can all revel in that victory and hope there will be more to come. But let’s not say the Jack or Tiger words yet. As of this moment he’s got ONE major title.
But there’s no doubt he is going to be looked at as The Next One in golf and that’s good because of all the non-golf qualities he brings along with him. He’s smart and he’s funny. The other players don’t just respect him, they like him—really like him.
Last Tuesday, I bumped into him in The Congressional locker room. I hadn’t seen him in Charlotte and I told him right away that I wanted to be the millionth person to tell him how remarkable his post-Augusta behavior had been.
He smiled. “Well, I certainly had plenty of time to think about what I was going to say didn’t I?” he said, laughing since his collapse had been pretty much complete by the 13th hole.
Then he shrugged. “Honestly, I meant it when I said I was disappointed but in the end it was a golf tournament. I would think I’ll get to play in plenty more.”
That’s just a little different from, “second place sucks.”
He had just finished playing so I asked him what he thought of the golf course. “I think,” he said, “that it’s very score-able.”
I guess he had that right. He didn’t so much score as he overwhelmed. Sure, the golf course was soft and there will be some questions if—amazingly—the USGA went TOO far in trying to give the players birdie chances since 20 players finished under par. None were within shouting distance of McIlroy although I will say this: If you don’t take note of Jason Day, who now has two second place finishes in majors this year, you’re missing something.
Day is also very likeable but he plays at a snail’s pace. That’s another thing about McIlroy: he plays FAST. Woods always copied Nicklaus and plays as if he is being paid by the hour. McIlroy is more like Tom Watson: pick a club, check your target, stand up and swing. My dream final twosome in a major would be McIlroy and Rickie Fowler, not just because having the two most like-able kids in golf going head-to-head would be great, but because they might play through the entire field.
Put those two on a golf course with no one in front of them and they’ll play 18 holes in under three hours with time to spare. And both will probably shoot in the 60s.
For now though, Fowler is still about potential. McIlroy is here and we can only hope he is here to stay for a long, long time. My wife, who knows me very well, said to me on Sunday night, “I just know you cried when he hugged his father and said, “Happy Father’s Day.”
Damn right I did. It was one of those sweet, genuine moments—the word genuine is important here—that make sports and the people in them worth caring about. (By the way, am I the only one who thinks Mr. McIlroy looks like a Bill Parcells double?).
Honestly, I’m not sure how the week could have turned out much better than it did. Okay, I do have one complaint: Why couldn’t McIlroy’s six-iron at No. 10 on Sunday have gone in? That would have been one of the most amazing moments ever in major championship golf. He missed by about 10 inches.
So, as it turns out, he's not perfect. But boy does he come close.
Friday, May 7, 2010
Tiger still draws all eyes, but to make quick judgment on his game right now is silly
There’s a golf tournament going on this week—an important one. It isn’t a major but it is one that players do care about; in part because they are playing for a lot of money; in part because a win carries a five year exemption on tour (as opposed to two years for other non-majors); in part because it is called “The Players,” and makes the tour a lot of money.
But I’m not sure anyone who isn’t a golf geek really cares that much. Oh sure, the whole world wants to know everything that Tiger Woods does all day, every day. But he could be playing in Charlotte, the way he was last week, or in Milwaukee—where he played his first tournament as a pro—and the same would be true.
There might be a little bit of extra interest in Phil Mickelson because, at least in theory, he has a chance to pass Woods as the world’s number one player this week. If Mickelson wins here and Woods finishes outside the top five, Mickelson will go to No. 1 in the world rankings.
Seriously though, if you aren’t a golf geek, do you really care about that? You might look up and take note of it, but if you stop and think about the fact that Woods has only played in three tournaments this year and his life is a complete mess, what’s the big deal? What Mickelson has done that’s truly important this year is win The Masters.
The next truly important moment in golf will come at Pebble Beach next month at the U.S. Open. If Woods doesn’t play well THERE, a place where he won the Open by fifteen shots 10 years ago, then it will be time to begin wondering if he’s going to make it back close to the level he was at as recently as two years ago when he won the Open while playing on one leg at Torrey Pines.
For now though, all the analysis of his swing and his mindset and his game and his life is kind of moot. As he correctly pointed out after shooting a two-under-par 70 on Thursday, he had only played six rounds of golf this year before arriving at The Players. So, to make any kind of judgment on his game RIGHT NOW, is just plain silly. Sure he was awful in Charlotte last week—all that does is prove that he’s human; that the carnage he has left in his wake the last six months has had some affect on him.
This week there are all sorts of rumors going around that he’s fired Hank Haney, his swing coach. It was the talk of the range on Wednesday and Woods’ denials don’t sound all that convincing. Maybe he hasn’t fired Haney, but technically he never fired Butch Harmon back in 2002. He just stopped working with him during The British Open and hasn’t worked with him since.
There was also a Woods-Haney joke making the rounds on the range on Thursday: “If Tiger keeps working with Hank for another few months, his swing will look like Ray Romano’s.” For those of you who aren’t Golf Channel geeks, Haney is involved in a show in which he is trying to coach Romano to the point where he can break 80. The good news in Charlotte was that one of his clients—Woods—did break 80, shooting 79 on Friday.
What is remarkable to me is the continuing fascination with all things Tiger. Maybe nowadays it is just people rubbernecking at the scene of a car accident but no one can seem to take their eyes off of Woods—regardless of how he’s playing or what he happens to be doing. Vanity Fair just came out with a SECOND story on Tiger’s various trysts (the first one did some serious damage to Mark Steinberg’s, “I know nothing,” claims not to mention to the late Earl Woods) and people are acting like the news that Woods is getting a divorce is going to be news.
It will be, sort of along the lines of tomorrow being Saturday.
On Thursday, I was on The Golf Channel set as part of their, “Live From,” show. We went into a break and the plan was to come back and talk about, I think, Vijay Singh, who has dropped to No. 42 in the world and could actually be in jeopardy of dropping out of the top 50 between now and May 23d—which would knock him out of the U.S. Open for the first time since 1994.
Suddenly, mid-break, the producer’s voice came into our ears saying, “Change of plan guys. We have video of Tiger walking in from the parking lot so we’re going to that.”
Yup, Tiger walking in from the parking lot. Look, I get why Golf Channel wants to cover every move he makes. It is what people want to see. I may have written this before but Tommy Roy, who has produced golf on NBC forever, once told me that a survey he’d seen showed that more golf fans would prefer to see Tiger Woods leaning on his bag than another golfer hitting a shot.
Last week in Charlotte, with Mickelson in contention, with Rory McIlroy playing a spectacular round of golf, ratings on CBS were down 37 percent from a year ago—when Woods was in contention. To we golf geeks that’s unfathomable. I sit here looking at the names in the field here at ‘The Players,’ and I can literally find 100 stories I find interesting. Most people would have little interest in at least 99 of them.
The Players, as I said, is a big-time tournament. But if Henrik Stenson defends his title or if my buddy Paul Goydos somehow wins or if Jim Furyk wins—or if any of the 154 players in the field not named Woods or Mickelson wins—very few people will remember two weeks from now who the champion was in 2010.
But they’ll know there were Tiger Woods-used golf clubs on E-Bay this week. There’s no sense rolling our eyes about any of that, it’s just the way of the world. It was before November 27, 2009, it is now and it is going to be for a long time to come.
Tiger may not be the hero he used to be but he’s still the guy no one can take their eyes off.
-----------
John's new book: "Moment of Glory--The Year Underdogs Ruled The Majors,"--is now available online and will be in bookstores nationwide May 13th. Visit your favorite retailer, or click here for online purchases
But I’m not sure anyone who isn’t a golf geek really cares that much. Oh sure, the whole world wants to know everything that Tiger Woods does all day, every day. But he could be playing in Charlotte, the way he was last week, or in Milwaukee—where he played his first tournament as a pro—and the same would be true.
There might be a little bit of extra interest in Phil Mickelson because, at least in theory, he has a chance to pass Woods as the world’s number one player this week. If Mickelson wins here and Woods finishes outside the top five, Mickelson will go to No. 1 in the world rankings.
Seriously though, if you aren’t a golf geek, do you really care about that? You might look up and take note of it, but if you stop and think about the fact that Woods has only played in three tournaments this year and his life is a complete mess, what’s the big deal? What Mickelson has done that’s truly important this year is win The Masters.
The next truly important moment in golf will come at Pebble Beach next month at the U.S. Open. If Woods doesn’t play well THERE, a place where he won the Open by fifteen shots 10 years ago, then it will be time to begin wondering if he’s going to make it back close to the level he was at as recently as two years ago when he won the Open while playing on one leg at Torrey Pines.
For now though, all the analysis of his swing and his mindset and his game and his life is kind of moot. As he correctly pointed out after shooting a two-under-par 70 on Thursday, he had only played six rounds of golf this year before arriving at The Players. So, to make any kind of judgment on his game RIGHT NOW, is just plain silly. Sure he was awful in Charlotte last week—all that does is prove that he’s human; that the carnage he has left in his wake the last six months has had some affect on him.
This week there are all sorts of rumors going around that he’s fired Hank Haney, his swing coach. It was the talk of the range on Wednesday and Woods’ denials don’t sound all that convincing. Maybe he hasn’t fired Haney, but technically he never fired Butch Harmon back in 2002. He just stopped working with him during The British Open and hasn’t worked with him since.
There was also a Woods-Haney joke making the rounds on the range on Thursday: “If Tiger keeps working with Hank for another few months, his swing will look like Ray Romano’s.” For those of you who aren’t Golf Channel geeks, Haney is involved in a show in which he is trying to coach Romano to the point where he can break 80. The good news in Charlotte was that one of his clients—Woods—did break 80, shooting 79 on Friday.
What is remarkable to me is the continuing fascination with all things Tiger. Maybe nowadays it is just people rubbernecking at the scene of a car accident but no one can seem to take their eyes off of Woods—regardless of how he’s playing or what he happens to be doing. Vanity Fair just came out with a SECOND story on Tiger’s various trysts (the first one did some serious damage to Mark Steinberg’s, “I know nothing,” claims not to mention to the late Earl Woods) and people are acting like the news that Woods is getting a divorce is going to be news.
It will be, sort of along the lines of tomorrow being Saturday.
On Thursday, I was on The Golf Channel set as part of their, “Live From,” show. We went into a break and the plan was to come back and talk about, I think, Vijay Singh, who has dropped to No. 42 in the world and could actually be in jeopardy of dropping out of the top 50 between now and May 23d—which would knock him out of the U.S. Open for the first time since 1994.
Suddenly, mid-break, the producer’s voice came into our ears saying, “Change of plan guys. We have video of Tiger walking in from the parking lot so we’re going to that.”
Yup, Tiger walking in from the parking lot. Look, I get why Golf Channel wants to cover every move he makes. It is what people want to see. I may have written this before but Tommy Roy, who has produced golf on NBC forever, once told me that a survey he’d seen showed that more golf fans would prefer to see Tiger Woods leaning on his bag than another golfer hitting a shot.
Last week in Charlotte, with Mickelson in contention, with Rory McIlroy playing a spectacular round of golf, ratings on CBS were down 37 percent from a year ago—when Woods was in contention. To we golf geeks that’s unfathomable. I sit here looking at the names in the field here at ‘The Players,’ and I can literally find 100 stories I find interesting. Most people would have little interest in at least 99 of them.
The Players, as I said, is a big-time tournament. But if Henrik Stenson defends his title or if my buddy Paul Goydos somehow wins or if Jim Furyk wins—or if any of the 154 players in the field not named Woods or Mickelson wins—very few people will remember two weeks from now who the champion was in 2010.
But they’ll know there were Tiger Woods-used golf clubs on E-Bay this week. There’s no sense rolling our eyes about any of that, it’s just the way of the world. It was before November 27, 2009, it is now and it is going to be for a long time to come.
Tiger may not be the hero he used to be but he’s still the guy no one can take their eyes off.
-----------
John's new book: "Moment of Glory--The Year Underdogs Ruled The Majors,"--is now available online and will be in bookstores nationwide May 13th. Visit your favorite retailer, or click here for online purchases
Monday, May 3, 2010
Rory McIlroy’s bravura performance; Tennis schedule reminds me of a player in the past
I’m not sure who to write about this morning: Rory McIlroy or Andrei Chesnokov.
Andrei Chesnokov?
Let me come back to him in a minute. It is impossible to ignore McIlroy this morning given his performance on Sunday at The Quail Hollow Club in Charlotte. Looking up at a leaderboard that included Phil Mickelson, Davis Love III, Angel Cabrera and Jim Furyk—to name a few—McIlroy went out on Sunday and shot 62—finishing his round with six straight 3’s—to win The Quail Hollow Championship by four shots over Mickelson and five over Cabrera.
It was a bravura performance, climaxing with a 40-foot birdie putt on 18 that was never going anywhere but the middle of the hole almost from the moment it left his putter. I just finished writing my weekly Golf Channel essay and the thing I kept coming back to wasn’t so much the brilliant golf but the absolute joy McIlroy clearly brings to the golf course.
The kid turns 21 on Tuesday, which means he’s about the same age that Tiger Woods and Mickelson were when they burst onto the scene—Mickelson by winning a tournament while still a junior in college; Woods by winning twice on tour at the end of 1996 a few months before his 21st birthday.
Woods was always a golf prodigy, a genius on the golf course—and still is in spite of his performance this past week—but one thing he never was going to be was fun. Mickelson tried a little harder. He’s always made a point of signing autographs and smiling back at people but it has never been something that has come naturally to him.
This kid has a little Arnold Palmer in him. He’s got all the shots but he’s also got a natural way of connecting with the fans that you rarely see on the golf course. A lot of players complain that it is unfair for fans to expect them to smile or acknowledge them when they’re working—which is what they’re doing on the golf course. I get that. But when a player is naturally inclined to be that way it is all the better for him, for the fans and for the game.
McIlroy walking up 18 on Sunday applauding for the fans was cool. It also was natural, not concocted in any way. Fans like him; other players like him; the media likes him and he can flat out play. If Tom Watson doesn’t win the U.S. Open at Pebble Beach next month, a McIlroy victory might be the next best thing. That’s no knock on Mickelson by the way, it would just be a fresh new story line.
Okay, onto Chesnokov. Unless you are a real tennis geek you have no idea who I’m talking about. In fact, unless you are a real tennis geek you are probably wondering why in the world tennis would be on my mind at all right now. I do keep up with the tour, at least enough to know who is winning week-to-week. This past week, the men were in Rome for what was once known as The Italian Open. Now, thanks to some marketing silliness it is called The Rome Masters or some such thing. Rafael Nadal won for, I think the sixth time.
When I was a kid, NBC used to televise The Italian Open, The French Open and Wimbledon. Only Wimbledon was actually on live, but I watched raptly anyway. Bud Collins called it, “The Old World Triple.” I still remember Vitas Gerulaitis winning The Italian one year and how big a deal it was back then.
I dreamed back then of someday doing the “Old World Triple,” in the same year. Not only did I get to do it in 1990 when I was researching, “Hard Courts,” I got to do it while hanging out with Bud a lot of the time which only made it about 1,000 times more fun. Bud believes he is part-Italian and traveling around Rome with him was a little bit like being with Vito Corleone at Connie’s wedding—except Luca Brasi was nowhere in sight.
My fondest memories of that week in Rome though center on Chesnokov—who liked to be called Chezzy. He was then a solid clay court player, the first really good player to come out of the Soviet Union in years. He liked to pretend he didn’t speak much English but in truth he spoke it about as well as I did. He and Natalia Zvereva were in a battle back then with the Soviet Tennis Federation about purses. The federation was getting about 90 percent of the money they were making on tour. Chezzy and Zvereva didn’t see that as fair.
It took a while for me to get Chezzy to trust me—which was understandable. At first when I told him I was writing a book on life on the tennis tour, he was suspicious. “Why do you want to talk to me?” he asked. “I never win anything important.”
He never did win a major, but he had beaten Mats Wilander at The French in 1986—the first time I encountered him—and had been in the French semis in 1989, losing in four sets to Michael Chang. He won at Monte Carlo in 1990 and made it to the Italian final a couple of weeks later. What was amazing was HOW he made it to the final. He kept losing the first set, falling behind in the second and then rallying—somehow—to win. The matches took longer and longer--Chezzy was a classic stay-back clay-courter who simply wore you down—but he kept winning.
Every time he was asked in a press conference what he was going to do to get ready for his next match he would smile and say, “I go to disco.”
He was joking. He was very serious about his tennis, but not about much else. When I finally got him to sit down and talk to me over a long breakfast that week, he talked in detail about how he had fallen in love with the game as a kid and had known early on that it was his ticket out of a rudimentary job in Moscow.
“I know this because of the Olympics,” he said. “Once they say tennis will be in Olympics (1988) I know the government will put serious money into the tennis programs and I will have a chance. If not for the Olympics, they don’t let us travel to compete.”
I like to think that Chezzy and I found common ground that year. He became one of the non-star stars of “Hard Courts,” much the same way Paul Goydos did in “A Good Walk Spoiled.” Unlike with Goydos, who I am still friends with and see all the time on tour, I haven’t seen Chezzy for years. There aren’t that many people I’d like to sit down with at length again from my years covering tennis, but Chezzy would be right near the top of that short list.
He was a very good player. And a better guy, though I doubt he ever did see the inside of a disco.
Andrei Chesnokov?
Let me come back to him in a minute. It is impossible to ignore McIlroy this morning given his performance on Sunday at The Quail Hollow Club in Charlotte. Looking up at a leaderboard that included Phil Mickelson, Davis Love III, Angel Cabrera and Jim Furyk—to name a few—McIlroy went out on Sunday and shot 62—finishing his round with six straight 3’s—to win The Quail Hollow Championship by four shots over Mickelson and five over Cabrera.
It was a bravura performance, climaxing with a 40-foot birdie putt on 18 that was never going anywhere but the middle of the hole almost from the moment it left his putter. I just finished writing my weekly Golf Channel essay and the thing I kept coming back to wasn’t so much the brilliant golf but the absolute joy McIlroy clearly brings to the golf course.
The kid turns 21 on Tuesday, which means he’s about the same age that Tiger Woods and Mickelson were when they burst onto the scene—Mickelson by winning a tournament while still a junior in college; Woods by winning twice on tour at the end of 1996 a few months before his 21st birthday.
Woods was always a golf prodigy, a genius on the golf course—and still is in spite of his performance this past week—but one thing he never was going to be was fun. Mickelson tried a little harder. He’s always made a point of signing autographs and smiling back at people but it has never been something that has come naturally to him.
This kid has a little Arnold Palmer in him. He’s got all the shots but he’s also got a natural way of connecting with the fans that you rarely see on the golf course. A lot of players complain that it is unfair for fans to expect them to smile or acknowledge them when they’re working—which is what they’re doing on the golf course. I get that. But when a player is naturally inclined to be that way it is all the better for him, for the fans and for the game.
McIlroy walking up 18 on Sunday applauding for the fans was cool. It also was natural, not concocted in any way. Fans like him; other players like him; the media likes him and he can flat out play. If Tom Watson doesn’t win the U.S. Open at Pebble Beach next month, a McIlroy victory might be the next best thing. That’s no knock on Mickelson by the way, it would just be a fresh new story line.
Okay, onto Chesnokov. Unless you are a real tennis geek you have no idea who I’m talking about. In fact, unless you are a real tennis geek you are probably wondering why in the world tennis would be on my mind at all right now. I do keep up with the tour, at least enough to know who is winning week-to-week. This past week, the men were in Rome for what was once known as The Italian Open. Now, thanks to some marketing silliness it is called The Rome Masters or some such thing. Rafael Nadal won for, I think the sixth time.
When I was a kid, NBC used to televise The Italian Open, The French Open and Wimbledon. Only Wimbledon was actually on live, but I watched raptly anyway. Bud Collins called it, “The Old World Triple.” I still remember Vitas Gerulaitis winning The Italian one year and how big a deal it was back then.
I dreamed back then of someday doing the “Old World Triple,” in the same year. Not only did I get to do it in 1990 when I was researching, “Hard Courts,” I got to do it while hanging out with Bud a lot of the time which only made it about 1,000 times more fun. Bud believes he is part-Italian and traveling around Rome with him was a little bit like being with Vito Corleone at Connie’s wedding—except Luca Brasi was nowhere in sight.
My fondest memories of that week in Rome though center on Chesnokov—who liked to be called Chezzy. He was then a solid clay court player, the first really good player to come out of the Soviet Union in years. He liked to pretend he didn’t speak much English but in truth he spoke it about as well as I did. He and Natalia Zvereva were in a battle back then with the Soviet Tennis Federation about purses. The federation was getting about 90 percent of the money they were making on tour. Chezzy and Zvereva didn’t see that as fair.
It took a while for me to get Chezzy to trust me—which was understandable. At first when I told him I was writing a book on life on the tennis tour, he was suspicious. “Why do you want to talk to me?” he asked. “I never win anything important.”
He never did win a major, but he had beaten Mats Wilander at The French in 1986—the first time I encountered him—and had been in the French semis in 1989, losing in four sets to Michael Chang. He won at Monte Carlo in 1990 and made it to the Italian final a couple of weeks later. What was amazing was HOW he made it to the final. He kept losing the first set, falling behind in the second and then rallying—somehow—to win. The matches took longer and longer--Chezzy was a classic stay-back clay-courter who simply wore you down—but he kept winning.
Every time he was asked in a press conference what he was going to do to get ready for his next match he would smile and say, “I go to disco.”
He was joking. He was very serious about his tennis, but not about much else. When I finally got him to sit down and talk to me over a long breakfast that week, he talked in detail about how he had fallen in love with the game as a kid and had known early on that it was his ticket out of a rudimentary job in Moscow.
“I know this because of the Olympics,” he said. “Once they say tennis will be in Olympics (1988) I know the government will put serious money into the tennis programs and I will have a chance. If not for the Olympics, they don’t let us travel to compete.”
I like to think that Chezzy and I found common ground that year. He became one of the non-star stars of “Hard Courts,” much the same way Paul Goydos did in “A Good Walk Spoiled.” Unlike with Goydos, who I am still friends with and see all the time on tour, I haven’t seen Chezzy for years. There aren’t that many people I’d like to sit down with at length again from my years covering tennis, but Chezzy would be right near the top of that short list.
He was a very good player. And a better guy, though I doubt he ever did see the inside of a disco.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)