Just can't believe these idiots... ('04 Masters)

Well, our fine sports media has done it again, turning a spectacular victory by a golfer making an incredible rebound into yet another steaming pile of BS.

First off, this “0 for 42” garbage. (Compounded by that Golf Channel numbnut who joked that he was now 1 for 43, and that’d be really bad if we’re talking batting average, hyuk hyuk hyuk, but never mind.) Something-for-something applies to situations where there’s one negative outcome. An incomplete pass, a clanked free throw, a second serve that misses the box. In golf, “failure to win” can mean anything from missing the cut from second place, which only a total moron would cliam are even remotely similar. Phil Mickelson had finished third at the Masters the past four attempts, and I think he had like seven podium finishes total, so it’s not like he was wallowing in misery all those years. In short, “0 for 42” means jack. If this is evidence of failure of some sort, boy, I’d love to have this failure.

And then of course we need to have all this tripe about how the monkey’s off and he’s finally validaded and he no longer has the stigma of best player blah blah etc. Jesus Christ with a 5-iron. Seven podium finishes! He had more than a few podiums at the other majors too, for that matter, and he has what, 20 “minor” wins total (sorry, ESPN.com doesn’t track career stats)? He’s 33 years old. I remember an interview he did a couple years ago where he stated quite firmly that he wasn’t thinking about winning the first major, because he wanted A WHOLE BUNCH of them. That’s the attitude of a champion. Aim for greatness. Don’t be satisfied with one of anything. And right after his breakthrough win, he pledged that’d he’d be there for as long as he lived. In all, I think it does an enormous disservice to his competitive spirit to point out to this one win as the great redeeming cleansing triumph that finally proved that he wasn’t a pathetic loser wannabe no-name etc.

And for good measure, there’s even the obligatory crap-o-rama about the 2nd place finisher. Yep, I learned just how bitterly disappointed, crushed, dispirited, depressed, and miserable Ernie Els was. And well he should be, seeing that he made enough spectular shots for two highlight reels and was in it right until the very last hole after starting the day completely out of contention. Oh yeah, did I mention that he finished second in a major after accomplishing, oh, NOTHING of note for nearly all of '03? Exactly how the heck is any part of what he did this Sunday DISAPPOINTING?? Does the make “Mike Weir” mean anything to these numbnuts? (To be fair, he was complicit in this. “Yeah, I feel horrible. Yeah, bitter, sad, miserable, etc. Too bad. Can I cash my second place check now?”)

Geez. Phil Mickelson’s ‘03 was seemingly nothing but an endless series of screw-ups, as well as his infamous crackhead blather about Tiger Woods’ “inferior” equipment. And he not only pulled his head completely out of his butt in '04, he recovered from some early mistakes to give us one of the most exciting Masters finsihes ever, culminating in a final shot that’s the stuff of sports legends. The story’s phenomenal on its own. Why dress it up with this schlock?

Whether it is fair or not, golf history is divided into the “greatest players in the history of the game” and everyone else. While there are a few in the second group that have won a major, no one in the first group hasn’t. So it is assumed that to join the “greatest players” group you must win a major.

I believe it was Greg Norman that was at a press conference a few years ago and made the comment that “there have been a lot of great players to never win a major.” One of the reporters said “name one.” Norman paused for a moment then said “well, there are a lot of good players that have never won a major.”

Agreed. In golf and tennis, you are defined by wins in the 4 big tournaments. It is almost as if the others don’t count. This would be a tragedy if it weren’t for the fact that the majors almost always produce worthy champions. I mentioned in another thread that you have to go back to the mid 80’s to find a Masters champion that isn’t an all-time great (Sandy Lyle and Larry Mize).