I’m kind of psyched about that 14 year old kid-Andy Zhang-who managed to get in by being an alternate when another player withdrew.
Amazing Golf Factoid of the Year: there currently isn’t a single male player 35 or younger who has 2 or more majors. When you consider that most majors are won at or before that age, that is pretty astounding. Heck, there is only one guy younger than 40 who qualifies (Tiger, of course, age 36)-the next is Padraig Harrington with 2 (turns 41 in August), followed by Phil (age 41). I went back and checked and the last time that was true was some time around the years 1900-1920. I don’t know if that is a function of our new era of parity, the lack of consistently excellent younger players who can rise above the field, or both, or what, but it’s still very strange. 12 of the last 14 major winners, and the last 8, haven’t won another.
Sounds like one of those stats beloved by sports writers - means nothing but seems like it should. Over my time watching golf there is usually the odd player under 35 with more than one major, but not many. Mostly they seem to follow one another.
Nicklaus would cover from the 60s to the mid 70s before he was 35. Then Watson won a couple early and covered into the 80s. Seve likewise won 2 while young and wasn’t 35 until '92. Ernie Els was before Tiger and Tiger covered 11 years.
If McIlroy wins a major this year he’ll cover up to 2024.
Golf is a sport that is much more enjoyable to play than to watch on TV, but I do take interest in rooting against Tiger. Always have. Unfortunately, I don’t know of any real likeable figures in the PGA now, although I usually root for Phil. I guess Bubba Watson seems pretty cool, too.
The USGA did a good job of setting up the course this year - tough but fair. Scores are averaging just under 75, and few golfers are completely blowing up. Those at the top of the leaderboard are good golfers. This is the way it should be, not all tricked up like in some recent years.
Before John Daly won at St Andrews, I don’t know what golfer age 35 or younger had two majors circa 1994-1995. Unless I am missing someone totally obvious
I think Sandy Lyle, (born Feb 1958) would have been the youngest of Lyle, Faldo, Seve, Stewart, Norman, Price, Langer, and Strange and he would have been age 35
in 1993.
Ollie, and Janzen would have not won their second major until after Daly won at St Andrews in 1995.
Point taken on my observation-just because someone has won only 1 major before 36 doesn’t mean that will be the only major they will win. I still think it indicates just how deep the fields are anymore and how hard it is for the truly talented golfers to rise above the norm. That could change of course; in your list Olazabal won his 2nd in 1999, as did Els (2002), and said lull was the calm before the Tiger storm, natch.
I can’t believe they put Tiger and Phil together in the same grouping. That would never have happened pre-Fire Hydrant incident.
Well, after careful thought, I decided not to trudge up to SF to watch live. Maybe I’m just getting old, but the crowds just seem like too much of a hassle, and with HDTV, you get to see so much more good golf. I’ll keep my golf outings to the AT&T at Pebble.
I think Rory will definitely win another major before age 36. Keegan, Bubba, Lucas Glover all have a chance.
Heck, GMac could do it this week. he is great position after round 1.
There are several golfers in their twenties who have not yet won a major who I can definitely see winning multiple majors before age 36. Fowler, Watney, Mahan, and I think there is going to be someone young gun from Asia to break out and become a World Beater.
Not a course that I would enjoy playing. I don’t like reverse tilt fairways, We got one on my course, a long par 5 and the ball just seems to always bouncing away from the green.
I generally do not like US Open courses or their setup. Mike Davis is 100% better than Tom Meeks in course setups.
And I do not like that the USGA eliminated the 10 shot rule on the cut.
Tiger did today what he’s done in most of his majors over the past three years; with a chance to lock down the lead with a solid round, he instead plays indifferently and drifts out of contention. Today the issue was his absolutely awful distance control on his irons-constantly 30 feet short of the pin, or 30 feet past it.
Tiger looked like he’d settled down nicely after a rough start. But bogies on 16 and 18 hurt bad. He’ll now need a brilliant - not simply a solid - final round.
San Francisco (June 18 - AP): Tiger Woods says he still has a good chance of winning the 2012 U.S. Open.
“I’m striking the ball really well” Tiger said. “A fraction of an inch here or there and I’d have the lead. It’s not over yet.”
Reminded by reporters that Webb Simpson has already won the tournament and taken home the trophy, Woods insisted that his game is “almost there” and “if I can put up a really low number anything can happen”.
When Lee Westwood lost his ball in a tree on Sunday he was given a ride back to the tee in a cart and then driven back in a cart to the location of his third shot. Is this a special dispensation to save time? It seems like a rule violation.
Also when the officials put Furyk and McDowell on notice for slow play, it seemed as if they played even slower. Anyone know how that works?
