WEBVTT - Final Insights into Royal Troon and a 2016 Open Lookback

0:00:00.040 --> 0:00:02.520
<v Speaker 1>I miss a green, for example, I'm already upset.

0:00:02.640 --> 0:00:04.920
<v Speaker 2>When I find my ball in the bunker, I'm really upset.

0:00:05.000 --> 0:00:06.960
<v Speaker 1>And when I find my ball in a frid Egg

0:00:07.160 --> 0:00:10.600
<v Speaker 1>Friday egg, the dreaded Friday Friday, Frida egg brid Egg

0:00:10.640 --> 0:00:12.959
<v Speaker 1>Frida egg bride egg Lie, I'm about ready to run

0:00:13.000 --> 0:00:38.560
<v Speaker 1>off of the hump course. Welcome to the FRIDAYGG Golf Podcast.

0:00:38.760 --> 0:00:42.320
<v Speaker 1>I'm Garrett Morrison and at long last, it is Open

0:00:42.600 --> 0:00:46.840
<v Speaker 1>Championship Week, the last men's major championship of twenty twenty four.

0:00:47.360 --> 0:00:51.280
<v Speaker 1>We'll be starting tomorrow at Royal Troon Golf Club in Scotland.

0:00:51.720 --> 0:00:54.440
<v Speaker 1>So today Joseph Lamannia and I thought we'd look back

0:00:54.480 --> 0:00:57.120
<v Speaker 1>on the last Open held at Royal Troon, which was

0:00:57.280 --> 0:01:01.200
<v Speaker 1>in twenty sixteen and which everyone remember for the incredible

0:01:01.400 --> 0:01:06.880
<v Speaker 1>Sunday duel between Phil Nicholson and Henrik Stenson. So Joseph

0:01:06.880 --> 0:01:09.679
<v Speaker 1>and I rewatched that final round, which is available for

0:01:09.720 --> 0:01:12.800
<v Speaker 1>free on YouTube, to see what, if anything, it can

0:01:12.880 --> 0:01:15.959
<v Speaker 1>tell us about what to expect this week at Troon.

0:01:16.600 --> 0:01:19.480
<v Speaker 1>We'll also discuss some early reports on the condition of

0:01:19.520 --> 0:01:22.000
<v Speaker 1>the course and the outlook of the weather, and we'll

0:01:22.000 --> 0:01:25.480
<v Speaker 1>offer a few picks and predictions to wrap up the episode,

0:01:25.920 --> 0:01:29.040
<v Speaker 1>But first a quick word from our sponsor, Club Champion.

0:01:29.280 --> 0:01:32.319
<v Speaker 1>Club Champion helps golfers of any skill level play better

0:01:32.400 --> 0:01:36.440
<v Speaker 1>golf through custom fitted and custom built equipment. They have

0:01:36.600 --> 0:01:40.640
<v Speaker 1>extensively trained master fitters who use an in depth, data

0:01:40.720 --> 0:01:45.480
<v Speaker 1>driven tour level fitting process. They use industry leading technology

0:01:45.520 --> 0:01:48.520
<v Speaker 1>like track Man and sam Putt Lab to record your

0:01:48.600 --> 0:01:52.640
<v Speaker 1>data in real time. They have sixty five thousand hitable

0:01:52.680 --> 0:01:56.080
<v Speaker 1>head and shaft combos in the shop, including all of

0:01:56.120 --> 0:01:59.160
<v Speaker 1>the new twenty twenty four brands, and they're pretty easy

0:01:59.200 --> 0:02:00.960
<v Speaker 1>to find. They have a one hundred and twenty plus

0:02:01.000 --> 0:02:06.040
<v Speaker 1>studios nationwide. Club Champions fittings produce real results for every

0:02:06.200 --> 0:02:10.200
<v Speaker 1>level of player, including an average of twenty extra yards

0:02:10.280 --> 0:02:14.079
<v Speaker 1>off the tee. Finally, they offer a perfect fit guarantee,

0:02:14.120 --> 0:02:17.320
<v Speaker 1>so if you're Club Champion custom built clubs don't deliver

0:02:17.480 --> 0:02:19.640
<v Speaker 1>what you see in the hitting bay, you can go

0:02:19.720 --> 0:02:22.840
<v Speaker 1>back within ninety days and get them adjusted so that

0:02:22.919 --> 0:02:25.880
<v Speaker 1>they perform how you want them to. So, for Frida

0:02:25.880 --> 0:02:28.720
<v Speaker 1>Egg listeners, this is the deal the Club Champion is

0:02:28.760 --> 0:02:31.640
<v Speaker 1>offering right now. You can use the code fried Egg

0:02:32.040 --> 0:02:34.720
<v Speaker 1>to get fifty percent off the cost of your fitting

0:02:35.120 --> 0:02:37.760
<v Speaker 1>with the purchase of a club, So go to club

0:02:37.880 --> 0:02:41.880
<v Speaker 1>champion dot com and book You're fitting today again. That's

0:02:41.919 --> 0:02:52.040
<v Speaker 1>code fried Egg all one word. All right, Joseph, Let's

0:02:52.080 --> 0:02:55.880
<v Speaker 1>get into our discussion of Royal Troon as the Open

0:02:55.960 --> 0:03:00.320
<v Speaker 1>Championship approaches. First, I want to talk a lot little

0:03:00.320 --> 0:03:03.600
<v Speaker 1>bit about what we've heard about the course so far

0:03:03.800 --> 0:03:07.720
<v Speaker 1>this week. We are recording this on Tuesday, and of

0:03:07.760 --> 0:03:12.200
<v Speaker 1>course the tournament starts on Thursday. What we've heard so

0:03:12.360 --> 0:03:16.640
<v Speaker 1>far is that the course is in good condition, that

0:03:16.680 --> 0:03:19.480
<v Speaker 1>there's a little bit of bounce in the fairways, but

0:03:19.520 --> 0:03:22.480
<v Speaker 1>that the greens are going to be softer and maybe

0:03:22.600 --> 0:03:26.720
<v Speaker 1>slower than expected because it's been a wet spring in

0:03:26.800 --> 0:03:29.640
<v Speaker 1>the UK, it has not been hot and so the

0:03:29.680 --> 0:03:34.160
<v Speaker 1>course hasn't really had a chance to bake out yet.

0:03:35.000 --> 0:03:38.600
<v Speaker 1>It's also possible that, you know, the RNA just hasn't

0:03:38.640 --> 0:03:42.120
<v Speaker 1>pushed the greens super far so far. But if the

0:03:42.160 --> 0:03:45.080
<v Speaker 1>greens are a little bit softer than expected, how do

0:03:45.120 --> 0:03:47.920
<v Speaker 1>you think that that changes things going into the tournament.

0:03:48.640 --> 0:03:51.520
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, I would love to see it firm, obviously, I

0:03:51.560 --> 0:03:55.760
<v Speaker 2>think most people would Windy Firm thinks test is probably

0:03:55.760 --> 0:03:59.360
<v Speaker 2>the best version, but I think the main things it

0:03:59.480 --> 0:04:03.760
<v Speaker 2>changes is that short sightedness is not as much of

0:04:03.760 --> 0:04:07.160
<v Speaker 2>a penalty, so it allows you to be a little

0:04:07.160 --> 0:04:09.760
<v Speaker 2>bit more aggressive on some of your approach shots, and

0:04:09.800 --> 0:04:13.040
<v Speaker 2>then there's just a little bit more predictability on your

0:04:13.080 --> 0:04:15.560
<v Speaker 2>iron shots and getting your distances right because it's not

0:04:16.120 --> 0:04:20.200
<v Speaker 2>as subject to the bounces that the greens might generally

0:04:20.240 --> 0:04:22.960
<v Speaker 2>have otherwise, and if they're a little bit slower, it's

0:04:22.960 --> 0:04:25.159
<v Speaker 2>just a little bit easier to get your numbers correct.

0:04:25.200 --> 0:04:27.880
<v Speaker 2>So we'll see how they play. I'd love to see

0:04:27.880 --> 0:04:29.839
<v Speaker 2>it get a little bit firmer and faster, but as

0:04:29.839 --> 0:04:32.080
<v Speaker 2>you mentioned, given the conditions this summer and the weather

0:04:32.160 --> 0:04:35.160
<v Speaker 2>that they've had in that area of the world, it's

0:04:35.200 --> 0:04:36.839
<v Speaker 2>probably not a realistic expectation.

0:04:38.160 --> 0:04:40.760
<v Speaker 1>The other thing we've heard is that the weather can

0:04:40.839 --> 0:04:46.839
<v Speaker 1>be will be probably a bit unpredictable. There's low confidence

0:04:46.880 --> 0:04:51.520
<v Speaker 1>in the details of the forecast so far. But right

0:04:51.560 --> 0:04:54.240
<v Speaker 1>now what we're hearing is that there could be some

0:04:54.360 --> 0:05:00.840
<v Speaker 1>kind of storm or some windiness Wednesday evening leading into morning,

0:05:01.560 --> 0:05:05.400
<v Speaker 1>and just general kind of like rains here and there,

0:05:05.560 --> 0:05:09.640
<v Speaker 1>winds here and there. We don't know really what to expect.

0:05:09.720 --> 0:05:12.039
<v Speaker 1>So what have you seen from the forecast so far?

0:05:12.120 --> 0:05:15.159
<v Speaker 1>And how has that been factoring into your thinking about

0:05:15.200 --> 0:05:17.000
<v Speaker 1>the about what to expect.

0:05:17.240 --> 0:05:19.040
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, I'm not putting too much stock in the weather

0:05:19.080 --> 0:05:22.440
<v Speaker 2>reports at this moment because as we know, that can

0:05:22.520 --> 0:05:26.440
<v Speaker 2>change quickly. I think a unique feature of Royal Troon

0:05:26.520 --> 0:05:30.080
<v Speaker 2>that's worth spending time thinking about is the routing and

0:05:30.120 --> 0:05:34.720
<v Speaker 2>how generally the prevailing wind your downwind on the front

0:05:34.839 --> 0:05:37.560
<v Speaker 2>nine and into the wind on the back nine, and

0:05:37.560 --> 0:05:41.680
<v Speaker 2>so just thinking about weather and timing of when you're

0:05:41.680 --> 0:05:44.039
<v Speaker 2>playing is a big deal. That's something that was that

0:05:44.080 --> 0:05:47.120
<v Speaker 2>played a crucial role in the twenty sixteen Open Championship

0:05:47.120 --> 0:05:50.039
<v Speaker 2>that I'm guessing we'll talk about. It kind of reminds

0:05:50.080 --> 0:05:53.160
<v Speaker 2>me a little bit of the ocean course at Kiowa

0:05:53.240 --> 0:05:56.000
<v Speaker 2>Island in the way that the routing like you're headed

0:05:56.040 --> 0:05:58.400
<v Speaker 2>one direction for one nine and then another direction for

0:05:58.440 --> 0:06:01.760
<v Speaker 2>the other for another nine another tournament, Phil Mickelson did

0:06:01.760 --> 0:06:06.440
<v Speaker 2>pretty well, And so it's not the best comparison necessarily

0:06:06.680 --> 0:06:09.480
<v Speaker 2>the Ocean Course and Royal Troon, but in thinking about

0:06:09.520 --> 0:06:12.560
<v Speaker 2>weather patterns and how that can impact play, I don't

0:06:12.560 --> 0:06:14.000
<v Speaker 2>think it's an unreasonable comparison.

0:06:14.600 --> 0:06:17.880
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, And the unpredictability is a common thread right at

0:06:18.000 --> 0:06:22.520
<v Speaker 1>at Kiowa the weather can be one thing in the

0:06:22.560 --> 0:06:27.040
<v Speaker 1>morning and another thing in the afternoon very easily, and

0:06:27.440 --> 0:06:32.320
<v Speaker 1>none of it typically matches the forecast exactly, so it's

0:06:32.320 --> 0:06:34.359
<v Speaker 1>tough to put too much stock into it. But we

0:06:34.400 --> 0:06:36.880
<v Speaker 1>could see a wave split again, right, That's a distinct

0:06:36.920 --> 0:06:40.960
<v Speaker 1>possibility whenever you have an open championship, but especially one

0:06:41.200 --> 0:06:44.559
<v Speaker 1>on the west coast of Scotland where things just seem

0:06:44.640 --> 0:06:48.720
<v Speaker 1>to be a little bit dicey and hour to hour

0:06:49.360 --> 0:06:53.560
<v Speaker 1>out there by the ocean. So in any case, we

0:06:53.880 --> 0:06:56.600
<v Speaker 1>have heard a couple of things from players so far

0:06:56.680 --> 0:07:01.400
<v Speaker 1>this week about the golf course, things from press conferences

0:07:01.400 --> 0:07:04.720
<v Speaker 1>that I found interesting. The first is that a lot

0:07:04.720 --> 0:07:07.960
<v Speaker 1>of players seem to agree that it is a tale

0:07:07.960 --> 0:07:10.800
<v Speaker 1>of two nines. In fact, a couple of different players

0:07:11.000 --> 0:07:14.440
<v Speaker 1>use this exact phrase, a tale of two nines, that

0:07:14.560 --> 0:07:18.200
<v Speaker 1>if you're going to score at Royal Troon, then you'd

0:07:18.200 --> 0:07:22.800
<v Speaker 1>better do it on the opening nine, because the closing nine,

0:07:22.840 --> 0:07:26.120
<v Speaker 1>the homeword nine, is going to be really tough. There

0:07:26.240 --> 0:07:30.640
<v Speaker 1>aren't a whole lot of opportunities for easy birdies coming home.

0:07:31.280 --> 0:07:34.160
<v Speaker 1>Has that been your general impression looking at the course?

0:07:34.960 --> 0:07:38.200
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, And I really like this quote that friend of

0:07:38.200 --> 0:07:42.200
<v Speaker 2>the pod Sean Martin, the PGA Tour had tweeted, he's

0:07:42.840 --> 0:07:46.640
<v Speaker 2>apparently this is a quote from Tom Watson that he

0:07:46.680 --> 0:07:48.800
<v Speaker 2>said of Royal Troon. It's sort of like playing the

0:07:48.880 --> 0:07:50.920
<v Speaker 2>Chicago Bulls. You know, at the end of the game,

0:07:50.920 --> 0:07:52.480
<v Speaker 2>they're going to be coming back at you, so you

0:07:52.520 --> 0:07:54.880
<v Speaker 2>better get off to a pretty big lead. And yeah,

0:07:54.920 --> 0:07:58.680
<v Speaker 2>I think that's appropriate. It's being echoed by players some

0:07:58.760 --> 0:08:03.440
<v Speaker 2>pretty gentle handshake type holes to start, and then you're

0:08:03.480 --> 0:08:05.800
<v Speaker 2>playing into some beefy holes on the back nine that

0:08:05.920 --> 0:08:08.160
<v Speaker 2>often play into the wind. So I agree that that's

0:08:08.160 --> 0:08:09.760
<v Speaker 2>how I envision it playing out as well.

0:08:10.560 --> 0:08:14.000
<v Speaker 1>I really liked how Iona Stephen put it in the

0:08:14.160 --> 0:08:19.400
<v Speaker 1>Golf Digest every whole video the script was written by others,

0:08:19.400 --> 0:08:23.040
<v Speaker 1>but she was the narrator of the video, and what

0:08:23.120 --> 0:08:28.160
<v Speaker 1>she said was that the first six holes are heaven,

0:08:29.120 --> 0:08:32.880
<v Speaker 1>the next six holes are purgatory, and the final six

0:08:32.920 --> 0:08:36.400
<v Speaker 1>holes are hell. That's not an exact quote, but that's

0:08:36.440 --> 0:08:39.480
<v Speaker 1>the spirit of what she was saying. Basically, those holes

0:08:39.480 --> 0:08:42.839
<v Speaker 1>going out along the coastline are your opportunities, you know,

0:08:42.920 --> 0:08:46.160
<v Speaker 1>a few sub four hundred yard par fours and just

0:08:46.200 --> 0:08:49.120
<v Speaker 1>some opportunities to get up near the green with your

0:08:49.160 --> 0:08:53.000
<v Speaker 1>tee shot, especially for these players. And then the middle

0:08:53.040 --> 0:08:55.280
<v Speaker 1>stretch of the course, things get tougher and tougher. You're

0:08:55.280 --> 0:08:59.479
<v Speaker 1>in some more choppy land, you have some more uncomfortable

0:08:59.520 --> 0:09:04.080
<v Speaker 1>tea shot and looks on your approaches into greens. And

0:09:04.120 --> 0:09:07.040
<v Speaker 1>then the holes coming home are just tough, tough, tough,

0:09:07.080 --> 0:09:09.560
<v Speaker 1>a lot of long holes, a lot of long irons,

0:09:09.960 --> 0:09:12.120
<v Speaker 1>and just a lot of trouble that you can get

0:09:12.120 --> 0:09:15.559
<v Speaker 1>into and you know, some incredibly penal bunkers and things

0:09:15.600 --> 0:09:18.160
<v Speaker 1>like that. So I like that way of thinking of

0:09:18.240 --> 0:09:21.560
<v Speaker 1>Royal Train in kind of three phases. But yeah, opening

0:09:21.679 --> 0:09:25.680
<v Speaker 1>nine versus Final nine, that's really gonna be a big

0:09:25.720 --> 0:09:26.400
<v Speaker 1>theme of the week.

0:09:27.720 --> 0:09:27.880
<v Speaker 2>Now.

0:09:27.920 --> 0:09:30.280
<v Speaker 1>The most interesting thing that I heard from a player,

0:09:30.840 --> 0:09:33.079
<v Speaker 1>and I wanted to get your take on this, Joseph

0:09:33.679 --> 0:09:37.840
<v Speaker 1>was unsurprisingly from Tiger Woods. He always says the most

0:09:37.840 --> 0:09:41.520
<v Speaker 1>interesting things about the courses that they're playing for major championships,

0:09:41.520 --> 0:09:44.280
<v Speaker 1>so it's no surprise that he came out with this one.

0:09:44.320 --> 0:09:47.920
<v Speaker 1>But what he said basically is that you'll see a

0:09:47.960 --> 0:09:50.800
<v Speaker 1>lot of guys laying up to the same spots on

0:09:50.880 --> 0:09:55.320
<v Speaker 1>these holes, especially if it's windy. So you know what

0:09:55.440 --> 0:09:58.240
<v Speaker 1>he said exactly. This is the quote, he says there

0:09:58.280 --> 0:10:01.679
<v Speaker 1>will be occasional areas where with the right wind conditions,

0:10:02.160 --> 0:10:05.160
<v Speaker 1>guys can be aggressive, especially some of the longer hitters,

0:10:05.320 --> 0:10:08.280
<v Speaker 1>they can be aggressive. It does allow for that, but

0:10:08.440 --> 0:10:11.520
<v Speaker 1>in general, if we get the wins we're forecasted, I

0:10:11.559 --> 0:10:13.920
<v Speaker 1>think we're all going to be playing from about the

0:10:14.000 --> 0:10:17.640
<v Speaker 1>same areas. This is kind of something I saw in

0:10:17.679 --> 0:10:20.800
<v Speaker 1>twenty sixteen, something that we saw in that final round,

0:10:21.000 --> 0:10:23.920
<v Speaker 1>the duel between Mickelson and Stenson. A lot of the

0:10:23.960 --> 0:10:25.960
<v Speaker 1>time they were kind of playing to some of the

0:10:26.040 --> 0:10:29.160
<v Speaker 1>same areas and fair ways. Do you think that's going

0:10:29.240 --> 0:10:31.400
<v Speaker 1>to be what we see this week or has the

0:10:31.440 --> 0:10:33.680
<v Speaker 1>game changed a bit since twenty sixteen.

0:10:34.160 --> 0:10:36.240
<v Speaker 2>Didn't know we're going to be getting into this right

0:10:36.240 --> 0:10:38.720
<v Speaker 2>off the top, Garrett, But it's actually one of my

0:10:38.800 --> 0:10:42.439
<v Speaker 2>favorite attributes of Royal Troon. I think people could take

0:10:42.480 --> 0:10:45.680
<v Speaker 2>the other side of this and argue that it's boring

0:10:45.720 --> 0:10:49.360
<v Speaker 2>when people play into similar spots, But it's not as

0:10:49.400 --> 0:10:53.959
<v Speaker 2>if the holes are cut off at driver length. There

0:10:53.960 --> 0:10:57.320
<v Speaker 2>are a couple that play that way, but generally speaking,

0:10:57.440 --> 0:11:01.120
<v Speaker 2>a defining characteristic of Truon is but the fairways are

0:11:01.400 --> 0:11:05.280
<v Speaker 2>relatively narrow, often about twenty eight to thirty yards wide,

0:11:05.679 --> 0:11:10.079
<v Speaker 2>but then get narrower at driver length, and they don't

0:11:10.640 --> 0:11:13.520
<v Speaker 2>then just widen back up to where you can bash

0:11:13.600 --> 0:11:16.160
<v Speaker 2>driver if you're one of the longest players. So there's

0:11:16.200 --> 0:11:19.800
<v Speaker 2>a lot of penal pot bunkers in the fairways in

0:11:19.880 --> 0:11:23.600
<v Speaker 2>strategic positions that you need to avoid, and that's why

0:11:23.640 --> 0:11:26.680
<v Speaker 2>you're gonna often see players hitting things like iron wood

0:11:26.720 --> 0:11:29.680
<v Speaker 2>off of a lot of the t boxes. But I

0:11:29.679 --> 0:11:31.760
<v Speaker 2>don't view it as a negative. I think those shots

0:11:31.760 --> 0:11:34.640
<v Speaker 2>in and of themselves, the firmer the golf courses and

0:11:34.640 --> 0:11:38.280
<v Speaker 2>if there's wind, are demanding shots in their own rights,

0:11:38.880 --> 0:11:42.640
<v Speaker 2>and it's not like everyone's just getting up and hitting

0:11:42.640 --> 0:11:45.559
<v Speaker 2>a simple four iron into a generous landing area and

0:11:45.600 --> 0:11:47.960
<v Speaker 2>then everyone's flipping a wedge, and so I think it's

0:11:47.960 --> 0:11:51.240
<v Speaker 2>a little bit more dynamic than that. Wind is a

0:11:51.360 --> 0:11:54.160
<v Speaker 2>massive factor, and to Tiger's point, there are a couple

0:11:54.200 --> 0:11:59.960
<v Speaker 2>opportunities where, especially if you're downwind which tightens your dispersion,

0:12:00.840 --> 0:12:03.000
<v Speaker 2>there are some opportunities to let it rip a little bit.

0:12:03.040 --> 0:12:05.000
<v Speaker 2>I think the third hole is a good example to

0:12:05.080 --> 0:12:08.040
<v Speaker 2>look at, and in the right condition, some of the

0:12:08.040 --> 0:12:10.320
<v Speaker 2>longest hitters may be able to push their tee shots

0:12:10.400 --> 0:12:12.640
<v Speaker 2>up near the green, which is a risk worth taking,

0:12:12.679 --> 0:12:15.720
<v Speaker 2>right if you take on a risk with a driver

0:12:15.800 --> 0:12:18.520
<v Speaker 2>in it. It's the difference between having one hundred and

0:12:18.559 --> 0:12:20.920
<v Speaker 2>twenty yards in or one hundred and sixty like that's

0:12:21.000 --> 0:12:22.560
<v Speaker 2>not as good of a risk to take. But if

0:12:22.600 --> 0:12:24.920
<v Speaker 2>it can be the difference between having one hundred and

0:12:24.920 --> 0:12:28.000
<v Speaker 2>thirty yards in and having like thirty yards in, like

0:12:28.160 --> 0:12:32.000
<v Speaker 2>going over a hazard versus laying back behind it, that's

0:12:32.040 --> 0:12:35.760
<v Speaker 2>a risk that there's quite a bit of payoff involved in.

0:12:35.800 --> 0:12:38.680
<v Speaker 2>So in the right conditions, especially downwind, which again does

0:12:38.720 --> 0:12:41.119
<v Speaker 2>tighten your dispersion, there are going to be some opportunities

0:12:41.160 --> 0:12:42.720
<v Speaker 2>to be aggressive off some of the teas.

0:12:43.000 --> 0:12:45.559
<v Speaker 1>Now, a final thing that Tiger said that I wanted

0:12:45.600 --> 0:12:49.520
<v Speaker 1>to note. This is an observation just about links golf

0:12:49.600 --> 0:12:51.480
<v Speaker 1>in general, I think, but I like the way that

0:12:51.520 --> 0:12:54.439
<v Speaker 1>he put it. He said, over here, you can run

0:12:54.480 --> 0:12:56.440
<v Speaker 1>the golf ball one hundred yards if you get the

0:12:56.520 --> 0:13:00.160
<v Speaker 1>right wind and the right trajectory. It negates some one

0:13:00.200 --> 0:13:03.200
<v Speaker 1>of the high launch conditions that most of the times

0:13:03.240 --> 0:13:07.080
<v Speaker 1>you see on the tour that populate the world nowadays.

0:13:07.720 --> 0:13:10.560
<v Speaker 1>And so maybe this is sort of wishful thinking on

0:13:10.600 --> 0:13:13.600
<v Speaker 1>Tiger's part, but I think there's a kernel of truth

0:13:13.640 --> 0:13:18.160
<v Speaker 1>to it that you know, distance off the tee on

0:13:18.600 --> 0:13:21.880
<v Speaker 1>a links course where there's wind and firm turf is

0:13:21.960 --> 0:13:26.640
<v Speaker 1>not so much a factor of high launch and pure

0:13:26.679 --> 0:13:32.000
<v Speaker 1>ball speed as it is situational awareness, the ability to

0:13:32.080 --> 0:13:37.160
<v Speaker 1>control trajectory and the ability to maximize your distance in

0:13:37.280 --> 0:13:40.679
<v Speaker 1>any given situation depending on the conditions of the ground

0:13:41.200 --> 0:13:43.520
<v Speaker 1>and the wind. And so I think that's something that

0:13:43.920 --> 0:13:47.280
<v Speaker 1>gets at something that I really appreciate about the Open Championship,

0:13:47.679 --> 0:13:51.280
<v Speaker 1>and it's that you see players, older players who truly

0:13:51.320 --> 0:13:55.800
<v Speaker 1>know how to control their shot shape and everything else

0:13:55.840 --> 0:13:59.079
<v Speaker 1>off the tee being able to compete with some of

0:13:59.120 --> 0:14:03.000
<v Speaker 1>the bombers because they're able to get distance in different ways.

0:14:03.800 --> 0:14:06.600
<v Speaker 1>I don't think it's an original observation about links golf.

0:14:06.840 --> 0:14:09.400
<v Speaker 1>This is often said, but I just like the way

0:14:09.400 --> 0:14:12.720
<v Speaker 1>that he phrased that. That's something that I do like

0:14:13.520 --> 0:14:15.120
<v Speaker 1>when it comes to this tournament.

0:14:15.280 --> 0:14:18.240
<v Speaker 2>And I think as part of that it's important to

0:14:18.280 --> 0:14:21.400
<v Speaker 2>recognize that part of the reason that that works at

0:14:21.400 --> 0:14:24.120
<v Speaker 2>Truon is because the gorse bushes, which often sit off

0:14:24.160 --> 0:14:28.120
<v Speaker 2>the fairways, impose a very stiff penalty. It's not like

0:14:28.240 --> 0:14:30.840
<v Speaker 2>finding just a little bit of rough like we see

0:14:30.920 --> 0:14:34.120
<v Speaker 2>on a lot of PGA Tour weekend and week out

0:14:34.160 --> 0:14:37.320
<v Speaker 2>tests where you still have a shot. It's a scary

0:14:37.360 --> 0:14:39.640
<v Speaker 2>penalty when you go into the gorse bush, especially on

0:14:39.680 --> 0:14:43.160
<v Speaker 2>some of the holes out there. So just another another

0:14:43.200 --> 0:14:46.040
<v Speaker 2>thing to motivate players from being a little bit more

0:14:46.080 --> 0:14:48.160
<v Speaker 2>conservative off the tea. I think off the t this

0:14:48.200 --> 0:14:49.200
<v Speaker 2>golf course is amazing.

0:14:49.480 --> 0:14:54.080
<v Speaker 1>All right, let's get into the twenty sixteen rewatch. You

0:14:54.120 --> 0:14:57.800
<v Speaker 1>and I went through the final round telecast, which I

0:14:57.840 --> 0:15:00.600
<v Speaker 1>believe was the sky Sports telecast. I think that sky

0:15:00.640 --> 0:15:06.040
<v Speaker 1>Sports this was like their first effort at an Open

0:15:06.160 --> 0:15:09.800
<v Speaker 1>Championship Final round telecast. I think before that it was BBC.

0:15:10.000 --> 0:15:12.760
<v Speaker 1>But so we got the sky Sports version of it,

0:15:12.880 --> 0:15:16.080
<v Speaker 1>not the US version of the telecast, and so it

0:15:16.120 --> 0:15:20.080
<v Speaker 1>was quite good, you know. It's this is something that

0:15:19.320 --> 0:15:23.520
<v Speaker 1>you notice when you switched to what people across the

0:15:23.560 --> 0:15:26.440
<v Speaker 1>pond have access to, that it's a very good and

0:15:26.560 --> 0:15:31.080
<v Speaker 1>insightful piece of television. But in any case, I came

0:15:31.200 --> 0:15:34.880
<v Speaker 1>up with a few categories to go through, some awards

0:15:34.880 --> 0:15:38.000
<v Speaker 1>that we could give to different aspects of the final

0:15:38.080 --> 0:15:40.760
<v Speaker 1>round and the play that we saw, you know, is

0:15:40.800 --> 0:15:44.920
<v Speaker 1>this copying the rewatchables podcast, who could say, you know,

0:15:45.280 --> 0:15:49.680
<v Speaker 1>it might be inspired by a segment on The Rewatchables,

0:15:49.680 --> 0:15:52.960
<v Speaker 1>but we're doing our own version of it here. So

0:15:53.040 --> 0:15:55.200
<v Speaker 1>I wanted to start with what you think is the

0:15:55.280 --> 0:15:58.760
<v Speaker 1>coolest hole based on what we saw in the twenty

0:15:58.800 --> 0:16:01.840
<v Speaker 1>sixteen final round. And I want to talk about a

0:16:01.880 --> 0:16:04.680
<v Speaker 1>hole other than the postage stamp, which we kind of

0:16:04.840 --> 0:16:08.360
<v Speaker 1>went into in depth in the podcast that I did

0:16:08.400 --> 0:16:11.560
<v Speaker 1>with with Sam Cooper a few days ago. So what

0:16:11.640 --> 0:16:12.800
<v Speaker 1>was the coolest hole that you saw?

0:16:14.080 --> 0:16:18.160
<v Speaker 2>I think the eleventh hole at Royal Troon might be

0:16:18.200 --> 0:16:22.240
<v Speaker 2>one of my favorite golf holes in professional golf, not

0:16:22.440 --> 0:16:27.160
<v Speaker 2>just at Royal Troon obviously. It's a burly par four,

0:16:27.240 --> 0:16:31.320
<v Speaker 2>plays almost five hundred yards, often plays into a prevailing wind,

0:16:31.840 --> 0:16:37.240
<v Speaker 2>and that tee shot is incredibly intimidating. You've railroad down

0:16:37.280 --> 0:16:40.960
<v Speaker 2>the right side, that's out of bounds, gorse on either

0:16:41.040 --> 0:16:43.840
<v Speaker 2>side of the fairway, kind of a little bit of

0:16:43.840 --> 0:16:47.840
<v Speaker 2>an awkward angle to hit the tee shot we saw

0:16:47.840 --> 0:16:50.480
<v Speaker 2>in twenty sixteen in in Rewatching It that Henrik Stenson

0:16:50.640 --> 0:16:53.360
<v Speaker 2>believe he took threewood off the tee pulled it a

0:16:53.400 --> 0:16:56.560
<v Speaker 2>little bit but not much, and was basically in the

0:16:56.600 --> 0:16:59.520
<v Speaker 2>first cut not too far from the gorse that lines

0:16:59.520 --> 0:17:02.479
<v Speaker 2>the left side, and his view of the green was obscured.

0:17:02.960 --> 0:17:06.399
<v Speaker 2>There's so much going on on that whole visual intimidation

0:17:06.520 --> 0:17:10.240
<v Speaker 2>off the tea, some obscured site lines into the green.

0:17:11.280 --> 0:17:15.000
<v Speaker 2>Super difficult hole, probably one of the most intimidating tea

0:17:15.040 --> 0:17:19.439
<v Speaker 2>shots in professional golf. Maybe in an Open championship Rhoda

0:17:20.000 --> 0:17:24.080
<v Speaker 2>up there. You know, I remember Thomas Peters snapping his

0:17:24.160 --> 0:17:27.000
<v Speaker 2>club and throwing it into the gorse bush in this championship.

0:17:27.000 --> 0:17:30.000
<v Speaker 2>That wasn't shown on the telecast, but like, it's a

0:17:30.000 --> 0:17:31.639
<v Speaker 2>hole where you're going to see some blow up. So

0:17:31.800 --> 0:17:34.639
<v Speaker 2>I think that's one of the coolest holes in professional golf. Garrett,

0:17:34.720 --> 0:17:36.280
<v Speaker 2>I'd be curious your opinion on the eleventh.

0:17:36.920 --> 0:17:40.600
<v Speaker 1>I wonder if Thomas Peters club is still there, if

0:17:40.640 --> 0:17:42.360
<v Speaker 1>they made like a little statue out of it. That's

0:17:42.400 --> 0:17:43.879
<v Speaker 1>the kind of plaque though, I'd like to see on

0:17:43.920 --> 0:17:49.320
<v Speaker 1>a golf course. Yeah, yeah, I love eleven. You know,

0:17:49.359 --> 0:17:51.679
<v Speaker 1>I just I like the way the fairway moves, you know,

0:17:51.720 --> 0:17:54.040
<v Speaker 1>in the landing zone, the way it kind of starts

0:17:54.080 --> 0:17:57.520
<v Speaker 1>away from the railroad and then moves on a diagonal

0:17:57.560 --> 0:18:01.400
<v Speaker 1>to the railroad. So Basically, the more aggressive you want

0:18:01.400 --> 0:18:03.119
<v Speaker 1>to get, the farther up you want to get on

0:18:03.160 --> 0:18:06.600
<v Speaker 1>the whole, the more you kind of have to adjust

0:18:06.640 --> 0:18:09.200
<v Speaker 1>your line toward the rail roat, which is super uncomfortable,

0:18:09.520 --> 0:18:11.520
<v Speaker 1>and it's all blind like you can see a little

0:18:11.560 --> 0:18:13.160
<v Speaker 1>bit more out to the left there, but if you're

0:18:13.200 --> 0:18:16.640
<v Speaker 1>going to the right, if you're going straight down the fairway,

0:18:16.680 --> 0:18:19.600
<v Speaker 1>then then you're basically completely blind. And I think that's

0:18:19.640 --> 0:18:25.160
<v Speaker 1>a that's a t shot that's so uncomfortable for players

0:18:25.160 --> 0:18:27.959
<v Speaker 1>these days, because it's just hard to come up with

0:18:28.200 --> 0:18:30.880
<v Speaker 1>a point to aim at. Even on the tenth hole,

0:18:30.880 --> 0:18:33.640
<v Speaker 1>which is also a blind tea shot, you're hitting over

0:18:33.800 --> 0:18:38.320
<v Speaker 1>like a big set of dunes and like waste area

0:18:38.400 --> 0:18:41.040
<v Speaker 1>type bunkers, and so there are various things that you can,

0:18:41.160 --> 0:18:43.919
<v Speaker 1>various reference points that you have you can once you

0:18:44.000 --> 0:18:46.520
<v Speaker 1>know the course, you know the basic dimensions of the fairway,

0:18:47.080 --> 0:18:49.280
<v Speaker 1>But on eleven, I think that it's just kind of barren,

0:18:49.600 --> 0:18:53.080
<v Speaker 1>like there's not much to hook into when you're when

0:18:53.119 --> 0:18:55.359
<v Speaker 1>you're trying to come up with an aiming point, and

0:18:55.440 --> 0:18:57.960
<v Speaker 1>that's that's a tough thing for players who are more

0:18:58.080 --> 0:19:01.240
<v Speaker 1>used to kind of certainty and everything being out in

0:19:01.280 --> 0:19:07.080
<v Speaker 1>front of you, as the phrase goes, So it wasnother hole, Yeah,

0:19:07.160 --> 0:19:10.600
<v Speaker 1>another hole that I like. Seven. I just think it's

0:19:10.680 --> 0:19:13.800
<v Speaker 1>a This is a fun drive and pitch hole. This

0:19:14.080 --> 0:19:16.680
<v Speaker 1>was I believe, the most famous hole at Royal Troom

0:19:16.720 --> 0:19:21.119
<v Speaker 1>before the postage stamp was designed for or took on

0:19:21.200 --> 0:19:25.919
<v Speaker 1>its current form for the nineteen twenty three Open. But

0:19:26.480 --> 0:19:30.000
<v Speaker 1>really fun t shot with lots of different options. Off

0:19:30.040 --> 0:19:33.720
<v Speaker 1>the tee. The fairway kind of wraps around a dune

0:19:33.760 --> 0:19:36.959
<v Speaker 1>that's on the right side of the whole corridor, So

0:19:37.000 --> 0:19:39.439
<v Speaker 1>the fairway kind of swings out to the left and

0:19:39.480 --> 0:19:42.960
<v Speaker 1>then slants back to the right before straightening out for

0:19:43.040 --> 0:19:46.920
<v Speaker 1>the approach to the green. Short left is kind of

0:19:46.960 --> 0:19:50.560
<v Speaker 1>the safest spot to be, but it's the least advantageous.

0:19:50.960 --> 0:19:54.200
<v Speaker 1>Short right requires challenging some bunkers on the right side,

0:19:54.680 --> 0:19:56.800
<v Speaker 1>and maybe your approach is kind of blind from over

0:19:56.800 --> 0:19:59.439
<v Speaker 1>there because you're hitting over the dune, and then you

0:19:59.520 --> 0:20:01.480
<v Speaker 1>have options to go long and I think a lot

0:20:01.520 --> 0:20:04.240
<v Speaker 1>of the players in this tournament are going to look

0:20:04.640 --> 0:20:06.520
<v Speaker 1>to get up by the green, depending on where the

0:20:06.560 --> 0:20:09.399
<v Speaker 1>tea is and what the wind is doing. But I

0:20:09.400 --> 0:20:12.600
<v Speaker 1>think we'll see some variety of play on seven. But

0:20:12.720 --> 0:20:17.320
<v Speaker 1>in twenty sixteen. Both Phil and Henrik laid up on

0:20:17.400 --> 0:20:19.320
<v Speaker 1>this hole. Were kind of laid up on this hole.

0:20:19.560 --> 0:20:21.680
<v Speaker 1>I'll have to look at my notes. I know Henrick did,

0:20:22.119 --> 0:20:23.760
<v Speaker 1>and he was kind of out to the right a

0:20:23.760 --> 0:20:26.800
<v Speaker 1>little bit on his layup. Phil actually, I remember now

0:20:26.880 --> 0:20:29.440
<v Speaker 1>pushed up a little bit more, but he was kind

0:20:29.440 --> 0:20:31.560
<v Speaker 1>of on the left side and ended up with kind

0:20:31.560 --> 0:20:33.879
<v Speaker 1>of a weird lie where he wasn't able to get

0:20:33.920 --> 0:20:36.480
<v Speaker 1>any spin on the ball, and so there was some

0:20:36.680 --> 0:20:40.080
<v Speaker 1>variety of play there. Laying up was a legitimate option

0:20:40.200 --> 0:20:43.680
<v Speaker 1>for players in twenty sixteen. Maybe we'll see players being

0:20:43.680 --> 0:20:46.760
<v Speaker 1>more aggressive this year with the hole because the fairway

0:20:46.880 --> 0:20:50.080
<v Speaker 1>is fairly wide up by the green, and I think that,

0:20:50.600 --> 0:20:53.880
<v Speaker 1>you know, players will see an advantage and getting up there.

0:20:54.440 --> 0:20:57.720
<v Speaker 1>But that's a very interesting hole, and the green side

0:20:57.800 --> 0:20:59.880
<v Speaker 1>is just beautiful. It's kind of set between these two

0:21:00.040 --> 0:21:02.439
<v Speaker 1>dunes and kind of benched in there, and it's a

0:21:02.440 --> 0:21:05.800
<v Speaker 1>classic Links Golf green site. So I really like seven.

0:21:06.080 --> 0:21:08.080
<v Speaker 2>I can't speak too much on it, Gere, because I'd

0:21:08.080 --> 0:21:10.679
<v Speaker 2>be getting ahead of myself and to potentially the next

0:21:11.160 --> 0:21:12.440
<v Speaker 2>award that we're doing here.

0:21:12.520 --> 0:21:16.440
<v Speaker 1>So okay, so the next award is coolest green complex.

0:21:18.520 --> 0:21:22.240
<v Speaker 2>I picked the seventh, and of all the awards we did,

0:21:22.880 --> 0:21:26.400
<v Speaker 2>this was probably the most challenging one for me because it's.

0:21:26.200 --> 0:21:28.800
<v Speaker 1>Hard to see the greens on the telecast, right, Yeah,

0:21:29.000 --> 0:21:30.959
<v Speaker 1>and maybe you just see where the pen is and

0:21:31.000 --> 0:21:33.000
<v Speaker 1>you see where the ball lands, and it's a little

0:21:33.000 --> 0:21:33.480
<v Speaker 1>bit hard.

0:21:33.359 --> 0:21:36.280
<v Speaker 2>To tell, and you might have a differing view. I

0:21:36.280 --> 0:21:38.679
<v Speaker 2>don't think the appeal of Royal Truon, at least for me,

0:21:39.200 --> 0:21:43.159
<v Speaker 2>is the green complexes. Necessarily they're pretty small and they

0:21:43.160 --> 0:21:46.080
<v Speaker 2>don't have a ton of contouring then at least to

0:21:46.160 --> 0:21:46.639
<v Speaker 2>my eye that.

0:21:46.960 --> 0:21:49.879
<v Speaker 1>I it's subtle contouring, it's there, right, And some of

0:21:49.920 --> 0:21:52.480
<v Speaker 1>them are a little bit modernized, which is you know

0:21:52.520 --> 0:21:54.719
<v Speaker 1>what we see at Open Championship venues these days. Some

0:21:54.760 --> 0:21:57.760
<v Speaker 1>of the greens aren't don't don't quite feel antique. They

0:21:57.760 --> 0:22:00.160
<v Speaker 1>have some of those little runoffs and stuff that Mackenzie

0:22:00.240 --> 0:22:03.160
<v Speaker 1>but like to put into green complexes that they rebuild.

0:22:03.560 --> 0:22:06.480
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, I don't think they strike fear. The green complexes

0:22:06.480 --> 0:22:08.679
<v Speaker 2>strike fear into players the way that a lot of

0:22:08.720 --> 0:22:11.679
<v Speaker 2>green complex is doing professional golf. But what I like

0:22:11.720 --> 0:22:17.000
<v Speaker 2>about the seventh recurring feature of this golf course is

0:22:17.000 --> 0:22:20.080
<v Speaker 2>that generally the greens are narrower in the front and

0:22:20.119 --> 0:22:24.040
<v Speaker 2>then expand in the back. They often have a pop

0:22:24.080 --> 0:22:26.720
<v Speaker 2>bunker short right and short left and like a little

0:22:26.760 --> 0:22:29.199
<v Speaker 2>neck that you can run the ball up. Running ball

0:22:29.240 --> 0:22:31.960
<v Speaker 2>up is not a great option, but it's possible. The

0:22:32.000 --> 0:22:34.800
<v Speaker 2>seventh is is different. Like you mentioned, it's set in

0:22:34.880 --> 0:22:38.480
<v Speaker 2>a beautiful dune escape, but it's a little bit more.

0:22:39.080 --> 0:22:41.000
<v Speaker 2>It's wider in the front and then a little bit

0:22:41.080 --> 0:22:44.919
<v Speaker 2>narrower towards the back of the green, and I just

0:22:45.000 --> 0:22:50.239
<v Speaker 2>find it visually appealing, really cool and completely different than

0:22:50.280 --> 0:22:52.240
<v Speaker 2>the rest of the golf course. I think it stands

0:22:53.040 --> 0:22:56.200
<v Speaker 2>kind of by itself. There's not another green that looks

0:22:56.200 --> 0:22:58.359
<v Speaker 2>like it on the golf course, so it scores a

0:22:58.400 --> 0:23:01.280
<v Speaker 2>lot of points for me in the variety category and

0:23:01.480 --> 0:23:03.960
<v Speaker 2>just it's aesthetically pleasing. So that's the one that I

0:23:04.240 --> 0:23:08.439
<v Speaker 2>will nominate. It's not really a contour based how putts

0:23:08.480 --> 0:23:10.920
<v Speaker 2>are going to play based argument, but I just think

0:23:10.920 --> 0:23:11.880
<v Speaker 2>it's a beautiful golf hole.

0:23:12.160 --> 0:23:14.600
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, and something to watch out for I think on

0:23:14.720 --> 0:23:17.840
<v Speaker 1>seven is if the pin is in the back, how

0:23:17.920 --> 0:23:20.000
<v Speaker 1>aggressive are player is going to be? Because I think

0:23:20.000 --> 0:23:21.720
<v Speaker 1>a lot of players are going to be want to

0:23:21.760 --> 0:23:24.680
<v Speaker 1>be really short of that pin, because you know, going

0:23:24.720 --> 0:23:26.880
<v Speaker 1>over the back to a back pin would be very

0:23:27.000 --> 0:23:30.280
<v Speaker 1>very bad on that specific golf hole, and so that's

0:23:30.440 --> 0:23:33.080
<v Speaker 1>that's a place where players will have a real choice

0:23:33.080 --> 0:23:36.320
<v Speaker 1>about what distance they're hitting their kind of short approach

0:23:36.359 --> 0:23:39.200
<v Speaker 1>into that hole. I think like, for instance, if they

0:23:39.240 --> 0:23:42.040
<v Speaker 1>if they decide to move the tee up a particular

0:23:42.119 --> 0:23:45.200
<v Speaker 1>day and make the hole almost drivable, then they might

0:23:45.240 --> 0:23:48.680
<v Speaker 1>put that back pin in there to create a little

0:23:48.680 --> 0:23:52.440
<v Speaker 1>bit more difficulty and give the players another question to answer.

0:23:52.880 --> 0:23:55.159
<v Speaker 1>So we'll see what they do with that. For me,

0:23:55.280 --> 0:23:57.640
<v Speaker 1>the coolest green complex, the one that I really liked,

0:23:58.080 --> 0:24:01.440
<v Speaker 1>is another pretty subtle one in terms of internal contour,

0:24:01.520 --> 0:24:06.200
<v Speaker 1>but it's ten ok. No bunkers on ten. It's oriented

0:24:06.320 --> 0:24:10.080
<v Speaker 1>so that the deepest you know look that you have

0:24:10.160 --> 0:24:11.960
<v Speaker 1>at the green, the way that the green is deepest

0:24:12.000 --> 0:24:15.440
<v Speaker 1>for you from the fairway is from the left side,

0:24:15.600 --> 0:24:19.080
<v Speaker 1>and there's just this massive falloff on the right side

0:24:19.119 --> 0:24:23.040
<v Speaker 1>of the green that's very very intimidating. But then missing

0:24:23.160 --> 0:24:27.640
<v Speaker 1>left leaves you this kind of tricky recovery over some

0:24:27.720 --> 0:24:31.600
<v Speaker 1>contours that run along the left edge of the green.

0:24:32.560 --> 0:24:36.440
<v Speaker 1>On the little you know Veritaid documentaries that the RNA

0:24:36.520 --> 0:24:39.159
<v Speaker 1>posts on their YouTube channel during Open week, which I

0:24:39.160 --> 0:24:42.520
<v Speaker 1>absolutely love and really recommend. It's called Inside the Open

0:24:42.600 --> 0:24:45.240
<v Speaker 1>or something like that, just a little series of very

0:24:45.359 --> 0:24:50.840
<v Speaker 1>kind of like slice of life footage of players preparing

0:24:50.840 --> 0:24:54.240
<v Speaker 1>for the Open. But there was some footage of players

0:24:54.320 --> 0:24:58.520
<v Speaker 1>including Tiger and I think Justin Thomas, practicing some chip

0:24:58.560 --> 0:25:02.280
<v Speaker 1>shots from the left side of the tenth Green, and

0:25:02.320 --> 0:25:05.840
<v Speaker 1>they're very, very tough. You know, it's trying to figure

0:25:05.880 --> 0:25:08.320
<v Speaker 1>out how high to play your ball and what kind

0:25:08.359 --> 0:25:10.359
<v Speaker 1>of spin to put on it and where to land it.

0:25:10.800 --> 0:25:13.159
<v Speaker 1>All that stuff is super tricky from the left side

0:25:13.200 --> 0:25:15.680
<v Speaker 1>of the tenth Green. So something to look out for

0:25:15.920 --> 0:25:19.680
<v Speaker 1>is if players want to avoid that right side fall off,

0:25:19.720 --> 0:25:22.159
<v Speaker 1>which is so obvious, like it's like ten feet, you know,

0:25:22.240 --> 0:25:25.480
<v Speaker 1>it's like I can't go there, do they? You know,

0:25:25.720 --> 0:25:28.760
<v Speaker 1>hedge toward that left side and then end up with

0:25:29.160 --> 0:25:32.480
<v Speaker 1>a very tough up and down situation. I also really

0:25:32.560 --> 0:25:35.240
<v Speaker 1>like the sixth Green, not so much for the shaping

0:25:35.320 --> 0:25:38.359
<v Speaker 1>of the green itself, which looks a little bit modern

0:25:38.359 --> 0:25:41.879
<v Speaker 1>to me, but the way the approach to that green works.

0:25:42.040 --> 0:25:44.800
<v Speaker 1>This is a long par five and a lot of

0:25:44.800 --> 0:25:46.480
<v Speaker 1>players might be able to go for the green in

0:25:46.560 --> 0:25:49.159
<v Speaker 1>two it's six hundred and twenty something yards, but they'll

0:25:49.359 --> 0:25:50.719
<v Speaker 1>they'll still be able to go for it if they

0:25:50.760 --> 0:25:53.520
<v Speaker 1>get a good t shot. The approach to that green

0:25:53.840 --> 0:25:58.560
<v Speaker 1>is really smart. Basically, there's a bunker kind of short

0:25:58.680 --> 0:26:01.640
<v Speaker 1>left of the green the green. It's where a lot

0:26:01.640 --> 0:26:04.760
<v Speaker 1>of players might want to be landing their second shots

0:26:04.800 --> 0:26:08.399
<v Speaker 1>to run them up onto the green from distance, you

0:26:08.400 --> 0:26:10.119
<v Speaker 1>don't want to be in that bunker. It leaves just

0:26:10.280 --> 0:26:13.359
<v Speaker 1>such a such a savage bunker shot. And so some

0:26:13.400 --> 0:26:15.240
<v Speaker 1>players who might want to be a little bit safer

0:26:15.240 --> 0:26:18.040
<v Speaker 1>but still get their ball up by the green might

0:26:18.080 --> 0:26:21.320
<v Speaker 1>go a little bit left. But from there the approach

0:26:21.359 --> 0:26:23.520
<v Speaker 1>to the green kind of falls off to the left

0:26:23.880 --> 0:26:27.840
<v Speaker 1>and will kickballs down into this little area that leaves

0:26:27.880 --> 0:26:31.240
<v Speaker 1>a very tough pitch shot over a short left bunker.

0:26:31.840 --> 0:26:34.679
<v Speaker 1>And so the choices that players make in approaching the

0:26:34.680 --> 0:26:38.200
<v Speaker 1>sixth green will be very interesting to me. All Right,

0:26:38.320 --> 0:26:41.080
<v Speaker 1>let's talk a little bit about players in the twenty

0:26:41.160 --> 0:26:45.600
<v Speaker 1>sixteen Championship. Let's start with the category. I was shocked

0:26:45.720 --> 0:26:49.040
<v Speaker 1>to see this name. Who did you not expect to

0:26:49.040 --> 0:26:50.520
<v Speaker 1>see involved in this championship?

0:26:51.320 --> 0:26:55.160
<v Speaker 2>For me, it was Tyrril Hatton. I had no idea

0:26:55.680 --> 0:26:58.000
<v Speaker 2>honestly that he was involved in this tournament at all.

0:26:58.080 --> 0:27:02.680
<v Speaker 2>I didn't really realize that his career was even as

0:27:02.760 --> 0:27:07.760
<v Speaker 2>promising back in twenty sixteen. He hadn't had it too

0:27:07.800 --> 0:27:09.640
<v Speaker 2>much of a professional career at that point. I think

0:27:09.640 --> 0:27:13.720
<v Speaker 2>he'd missed four straight Open Championship cuts in a row

0:27:13.840 --> 0:27:15.120
<v Speaker 2>coming into that tournament, but.

0:27:16.000 --> 0:27:18.520
<v Speaker 1>Might have been even less than that. But it was like, yes,

0:27:18.600 --> 0:27:20.360
<v Speaker 1>he three or four missed cuts.

0:27:20.160 --> 0:27:21.960
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, yeah, and those were the only I think he

0:27:22.000 --> 0:27:25.040
<v Speaker 2>played in one PGA a few Opens and that was it.

0:27:25.480 --> 0:27:27.320
<v Speaker 1>And he hadn't won on the European Tour yet.

0:27:27.800 --> 0:27:30.800
<v Speaker 2>He's twenty four at the time. Yeah, finishes T five.

0:27:32.240 --> 0:27:34.720
<v Speaker 2>I just don't didn't expect to see him at all,

0:27:34.800 --> 0:27:37.800
<v Speaker 2>and now seeing how much better he's gotten and how

0:27:37.840 --> 0:27:41.400
<v Speaker 2>successful his career is now, like he's a legitimate name

0:27:41.440 --> 0:27:44.320
<v Speaker 2>to consider in the twenty twenty four Open Championship, didn't

0:27:44.320 --> 0:27:45.040
<v Speaker 2>expect to see him.

0:27:45.560 --> 0:27:48.680
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, my pick was baby faced. Tyrrel Hatton as well,

0:27:49.720 --> 0:27:52.119
<v Speaker 1>did not remember that this was kind of his coming

0:27:52.119 --> 0:27:56.720
<v Speaker 1>out party, his first top twenty in a major. Even

0:27:57.280 --> 0:28:01.560
<v Speaker 1>T five really really strong finish, but Stenson and Phil

0:28:01.960 --> 0:28:04.240
<v Speaker 1>were so far out in front. It's understandable that you

0:28:04.240 --> 0:28:07.080
<v Speaker 1>would miss some of the guys who came third, fourth,

0:28:07.359 --> 0:28:14.400
<v Speaker 1>fifth in twenty sixteen. Another player who placed solo fourth

0:28:14.840 --> 0:28:18.639
<v Speaker 1>in his case was Steve Stricker, forty nine years old.

0:28:18.680 --> 0:28:21.359
<v Speaker 1>At the time, I didn't remember that he played so

0:28:21.440 --> 0:28:24.240
<v Speaker 1>well in this championship, or I mean, I of course

0:28:24.280 --> 0:28:26.399
<v Speaker 1>remember that he had a lot of longevity and that

0:28:26.440 --> 0:28:28.960
<v Speaker 1>he had some good performances into his late forties, but

0:28:29.600 --> 0:28:32.639
<v Speaker 1>this was one of his last real appearances on a

0:28:32.680 --> 0:28:36.880
<v Speaker 1>big major stage solo forth. He did pretty well, all right,

0:28:36.960 --> 0:28:38.840
<v Speaker 1>And of course identify.

0:28:39.000 --> 0:28:41.640
<v Speaker 2>This was the beef Johnston Major, which I think people

0:28:41.680 --> 0:28:44.680
<v Speaker 2>probably do remember, but it was just interesting to kind

0:28:44.720 --> 0:28:46.400
<v Speaker 2>of revisit that this was.

0:28:46.400 --> 0:28:49.320
<v Speaker 1>The height of beef mania. The announcers had a bunch

0:28:49.400 --> 0:28:52.080
<v Speaker 1>of beef puns at the ready. You know that that

0:28:52.160 --> 0:28:55.400
<v Speaker 1>approach was a little undercooked. That was undercooked beef and

0:28:56.120 --> 0:28:58.840
<v Speaker 1>things like that. So people were really having fun with beef.

0:28:59.320 --> 0:29:04.200
<v Speaker 1>All right, category, let's identify one thing that would not

0:29:04.480 --> 0:29:08.560
<v Speaker 1>happen in twenty twenty four that did happen in twenty sixteen.

0:29:09.760 --> 0:29:11.440
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, I think this is going to be an interesting

0:29:11.480 --> 0:29:15.480
<v Speaker 2>litmus test because the game of golf has changed radically

0:29:16.160 --> 0:29:20.680
<v Speaker 2>since twenty sixteen ton of speed now and there aren't

0:29:20.680 --> 0:29:24.640
<v Speaker 2>too many short hitters. Yes you can, of all majors,

0:29:24.640 --> 0:29:26.920
<v Speaker 2>this might be one that invites it is one that

0:29:26.960 --> 0:29:30.120
<v Speaker 2>invites a variety of playing styles. But there's a lot

0:29:30.160 --> 0:29:33.400
<v Speaker 2>of long hitters out there now. So what I picked was,

0:29:33.840 --> 0:29:35.840
<v Speaker 2>you're not going to see a lot of driver five

0:29:35.920 --> 0:29:40.160
<v Speaker 2>iron into the fifteenth hole, which is five hundred yard

0:29:40.160 --> 0:29:44.160
<v Speaker 2>par four that often plays into a prevailing wind. I

0:29:44.200 --> 0:29:46.160
<v Speaker 2>think this will be a good litmus test drive Phil

0:29:46.240 --> 0:29:49.320
<v Speaker 2>hits driver five iron in the final round into a

0:29:49.400 --> 0:29:54.560
<v Speaker 2>slight breeze, pretty mild conditions in that final round, so

0:29:55.640 --> 0:29:57.840
<v Speaker 2>that tea box should be the same as it was

0:29:57.880 --> 0:30:00.720
<v Speaker 2>in twenty Some holes have been extended, but the fifteenth

0:30:00.760 --> 0:30:04.400
<v Speaker 2>I believe, is, if not an identical location, very close.

0:30:04.440 --> 0:30:06.920
<v Speaker 2>So I think that's a good one that's held constant

0:30:07.000 --> 0:30:12.200
<v Speaker 2>over time. Let's see, in reasonably calm conditions what a

0:30:12.360 --> 0:30:16.120
<v Speaker 2>player like even Phil today, Like I bet he's hitting

0:30:16.200 --> 0:30:19.160
<v Speaker 2>driver seven iron today, So I'm interested to see what

0:30:19.200 --> 0:30:21.880
<v Speaker 2>those distances kind of look like compared to the almost

0:30:21.920 --> 0:30:24.280
<v Speaker 2>a decade ago. But it's going to be radically different.

0:30:24.480 --> 0:30:27.600
<v Speaker 1>For my thing. That wouldn't happen in twenty twenty four

0:30:28.480 --> 0:30:32.040
<v Speaker 1>I looked at the clubs that Stenson and Phil hit

0:30:32.160 --> 0:30:37.000
<v Speaker 1>in the final round off of each te and what

0:30:37.120 --> 0:30:39.880
<v Speaker 1>I came up with at the end was that Stenson

0:30:40.000 --> 0:30:43.840
<v Speaker 1>hit seven irons off of the non par three t's

0:30:44.120 --> 0:30:46.680
<v Speaker 1>at Royal Truon in the final round in twenty sixteen.

0:30:47.400 --> 0:30:51.080
<v Speaker 1>He hit five three woods right his famous three wood,

0:30:51.160 --> 0:30:53.520
<v Speaker 1>his bomb three wood that would go as far as

0:30:53.520 --> 0:30:56.640
<v Speaker 1>some players drivers. He hit five of those and then

0:30:56.680 --> 0:31:01.600
<v Speaker 1>he hit two drivers. Phil hit seven irons off the tee,

0:31:02.600 --> 0:31:07.880
<v Speaker 1>hit two fairway woods and hit five drivers. I'm gonna

0:31:07.880 --> 0:31:11.720
<v Speaker 1>say that whoever wins this year is not going to

0:31:11.800 --> 0:31:14.520
<v Speaker 1>hit just two drivers off the tee in the final

0:31:14.600 --> 0:31:17.320
<v Speaker 1>round as Stenson did in twenty sixteen. I might be

0:31:17.360 --> 0:31:19.760
<v Speaker 1>wrong about that. I you know, it could be that

0:31:19.800 --> 0:31:21.719
<v Speaker 1>players hit a lot of irons off these tees. As

0:31:21.760 --> 0:31:25.200
<v Speaker 1>you were expressing earlier, there are reasons to lay up

0:31:25.320 --> 0:31:28.960
<v Speaker 1>in some of the same areas as other players at

0:31:29.000 --> 0:31:33.480
<v Speaker 1>Royal Troon. There are reasons to to, you know, let

0:31:33.520 --> 0:31:36.440
<v Speaker 1>your foot off the accelerator a bit on some of

0:31:36.480 --> 0:31:38.040
<v Speaker 1>these teas. But I just don't think we're going to

0:31:38.080 --> 0:31:41.080
<v Speaker 1>see a winner who hits only two drivers. What do

0:31:41.120 --> 0:31:41.760
<v Speaker 1>you think about that.

0:31:42.800 --> 0:31:45.480
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, Stenson's a little bit of a unique case, and that.

0:31:45.800 --> 0:31:49.080
<v Speaker 1>It is, it's kind of cheating. I mean, maybe we

0:31:49.120 --> 0:31:51.200
<v Speaker 1>won't see a winner who hits five drivers off the tee,

0:31:51.200 --> 0:31:53.240
<v Speaker 1>which which filled it in twenty sixteen.

0:31:53.400 --> 0:31:55.880
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, I will say, I think you're gonna see a

0:31:55.920 --> 0:31:58.960
<v Speaker 2>decent amount of iron and three wood off of T's.

0:31:59.080 --> 0:32:01.160
<v Speaker 2>But to your point, yes, I think the chance is

0:32:01.200 --> 0:32:03.960
<v Speaker 2>that there are only two drivers hit in the final

0:32:04.040 --> 0:32:07.000
<v Speaker 2>round by the winner. Are close to zero, right, because

0:32:07.000 --> 0:32:09.520
<v Speaker 2>you're gonna get them on both the part five well

0:32:09.680 --> 0:32:11.520
<v Speaker 2>not necessarily both the part fives on the front, but

0:32:11.640 --> 0:32:15.320
<v Speaker 2>likely there are more than two expected drives. I mean,

0:32:15.320 --> 0:32:16.239
<v Speaker 2>there's no doubt about that.

0:32:16.680 --> 0:32:19.360
<v Speaker 1>All right, let's talk about our shots of the day.

0:32:19.720 --> 0:32:21.480
<v Speaker 1>What was your shot of the day.

0:32:21.920 --> 0:32:24.440
<v Speaker 2>A few different ones stand out here, I mean, Garrett,

0:32:24.440 --> 0:32:27.200
<v Speaker 2>I'm sure you had a similar takeaway, but there were

0:32:27.240 --> 0:32:30.880
<v Speaker 2>almost no missed shots the entire day, like both of

0:32:30.880 --> 0:32:31.520
<v Speaker 2>these kinds.

0:32:32.400 --> 0:32:35.040
<v Speaker 1>Were they a single bunker? I was trying to remember this,

0:32:35.520 --> 0:32:38.440
<v Speaker 1>don't anybody phil or Henrik. I don't think they were

0:32:38.440 --> 0:32:39.400
<v Speaker 1>in any bunkers.

0:32:39.640 --> 0:32:41.240
<v Speaker 2>I don't remember. I mean, there's a little bit of

0:32:41.280 --> 0:32:43.680
<v Speaker 2>them in the fescue, but just over all, they step

0:32:43.800 --> 0:32:46.520
<v Speaker 2>up and flush it over and over again. It's it's

0:32:46.560 --> 0:32:49.720
<v Speaker 2>absolutely incredible. So yeah, I highly recommend people going back

0:32:49.760 --> 0:32:52.040
<v Speaker 2>and watching it. It's just an unbelievable display of golf.

0:32:52.600 --> 0:32:55.160
<v Speaker 2>The one that stood out to me is the iron

0:32:55.240 --> 0:32:58.680
<v Speaker 2>that Phil hits into the fourth hole, the par five.

0:32:59.400 --> 0:33:01.520
<v Speaker 2>He hits a two hundred and thirty seven yard long

0:33:01.560 --> 0:33:05.320
<v Speaker 2>iron to about ten feet and makes eagle. And so

0:33:05.440 --> 0:33:08.440
<v Speaker 2>that is at the forty five and a half minute

0:33:08.480 --> 0:33:12.080
<v Speaker 2>mark on YouTube on the YouTube clip. The reason I

0:33:12.120 --> 0:33:15.440
<v Speaker 2>pick it is because a minute later on the telecast

0:33:15.520 --> 0:33:18.520
<v Speaker 2>they show his swing from kind of straight on, like

0:33:18.520 --> 0:33:21.360
<v Speaker 2>you're looking at his chest, and they do the swing

0:33:21.400 --> 0:33:26.640
<v Speaker 2>in slow motion. It is remarkable how fluid and impressive

0:33:26.960 --> 0:33:30.680
<v Speaker 2>Phil swing is in that round, in that particular swing.

0:33:31.320 --> 0:33:34.680
<v Speaker 2>I'm not a student of the golf swing, like I'm

0:33:34.720 --> 0:33:36.840
<v Speaker 2>not very knowledgeable about the golf swing, but you when

0:33:36.880 --> 0:33:40.640
<v Speaker 2>you watch that, it's unbelievable to see his club position

0:33:40.680 --> 0:33:44.800
<v Speaker 2>and how well he generates speed, Like just a magnificent swing.

0:33:44.880 --> 0:33:47.080
<v Speaker 2>So I would highly recommend people go back and watch

0:33:47.200 --> 0:33:49.080
<v Speaker 2>that slow most swing at the forty six and a

0:33:49.120 --> 0:33:52.360
<v Speaker 2>half minute mark. Again, you could pick so many different

0:33:52.360 --> 0:33:54.240
<v Speaker 2>shots from that day but that one really stands out

0:33:54.240 --> 0:33:56.680
<v Speaker 2>to me as just an unbelievable golf shot. How about you, Garrett.

0:33:57.280 --> 0:34:01.400
<v Speaker 1>Well, for anybody who doesn't remember that Phil Mickelson was

0:34:01.440 --> 0:34:05.080
<v Speaker 1>one of the greatest iron players of all time, go

0:34:05.160 --> 0:34:07.760
<v Speaker 1>and watch this final round because this is a good

0:34:07.880 --> 0:34:11.960
<v Speaker 1>demonstration of what he was capable of. Yeah, his chips

0:34:11.960 --> 0:34:16.000
<v Speaker 1>and pitches were very impressive and kind of flashy, but

0:34:16.080 --> 0:34:19.760
<v Speaker 1>his iron play is really what I think made him

0:34:20.320 --> 0:34:24.400
<v Speaker 1>a many time major winner, made him the second best

0:34:24.400 --> 0:34:29.120
<v Speaker 1>player of his generation. Those irons that he hit at

0:34:29.120 --> 0:34:32.320
<v Speaker 1>Troon were absolutely incredible. Why it just happened to be

0:34:32.400 --> 0:34:34.960
<v Speaker 1>the case that Stenson was up to that challenge, right

0:34:35.000 --> 0:34:38.000
<v Speaker 1>because Stenson also one of the greatest iron players of

0:34:38.040 --> 0:34:41.759
<v Speaker 1>all time. And maybe that's a kind of theme that

0:34:41.800 --> 0:34:44.360
<v Speaker 1>we'll see it for many players who do well at Troon.

0:34:44.920 --> 0:34:48.000
<v Speaker 1>But my shot other day, I had a few candidates.

0:34:48.239 --> 0:34:53.560
<v Speaker 1>I ultimately chose Phil's approach into ten. He was in

0:34:53.640 --> 0:34:57.560
<v Speaker 1>the fescue, the ball was way below his feet and

0:34:58.000 --> 0:35:02.040
<v Speaker 1>he couldn't complete is his follow through. He had to

0:35:02.120 --> 0:35:04.520
<v Speaker 1>kind of hit a sod off fall through because he

0:35:04.520 --> 0:35:06.719
<v Speaker 1>didn't have the balance to go all the way through

0:35:06.760 --> 0:35:09.840
<v Speaker 1>the ball, and he hit it to I don't remember

0:35:09.920 --> 0:35:12.000
<v Speaker 1>exactly how close it was, but maybe ten feet or

0:35:12.000 --> 0:35:12.839
<v Speaker 1>something like that, like.

0:35:12.800 --> 0:35:14.840
<v Speaker 2>One seventy right, hit about one seventy in.

0:35:15.960 --> 0:35:20.600
<v Speaker 1>Absolutely incredible shot, like just given the circumstances, given the pressure,

0:35:21.120 --> 0:35:23.640
<v Speaker 1>and given his lie. I mean a lot of players

0:35:23.640 --> 0:35:26.520
<v Speaker 1>would be happy to be kind of left of the

0:35:26.560 --> 0:35:31.440
<v Speaker 1>green on ten with that shot, but no, he was

0:35:31.560 --> 0:35:36.960
<v Speaker 1>attacking the flag from that position. Just an incredible shot.

0:35:37.320 --> 0:35:39.080
<v Speaker 1>There were you know, I think a lot of people

0:35:39.080 --> 0:35:41.360
<v Speaker 1>probably remember a couple of shots that Phil hit on

0:35:41.400 --> 0:35:44.640
<v Speaker 1>the first two holes. This is this was the indication

0:35:44.800 --> 0:35:47.040
<v Speaker 1>right right out of the gate on Sunday in twenty

0:35:47.080 --> 0:35:49.959
<v Speaker 1>sixteen that this was going to be a legendary duel.

0:35:50.000 --> 0:35:53.239
<v Speaker 1>I remember these shots. It was Phil's approach into one

0:35:53.640 --> 0:35:55.960
<v Speaker 1>where he hit it to a couple of inches right,

0:35:56.320 --> 0:35:59.279
<v Speaker 1>big statement. He was one back of Stenson. And then

0:35:59.360 --> 0:36:01.359
<v Speaker 1>there was a two showing on the first hole because

0:36:01.360 --> 0:36:04.880
<v Speaker 1>Stenson bogie the hole and Phil stuck it to literally

0:36:04.920 --> 0:36:08.560
<v Speaker 1>a few inches and made birdie. And then Phil's chip

0:36:08.760 --> 0:36:13.640
<v Speaker 1>on two after missing the green to the right right, Yeah, yeah,

0:36:13.680 --> 0:36:16.760
<v Speaker 1>he had to hit this little chip from a tight

0:36:16.880 --> 0:36:20.600
<v Speaker 1>lie over a short right bunker to a pin that

0:36:20.680 --> 0:36:23.719
<v Speaker 1>was pretty tight to that bunker, there was no backstop

0:36:24.040 --> 0:36:28.000
<v Speaker 1>and he just hit a beautiful crisp Phil Mickelson chip

0:36:28.640 --> 0:36:32.960
<v Speaker 1>that lipped out that that shot could have gone in easily,

0:36:33.480 --> 0:36:35.920
<v Speaker 1>So you know, the Phil. It's funny. The Phil shots

0:36:35.920 --> 0:36:38.600
<v Speaker 1>are the ones that stand out. Even though Stenson ended

0:36:38.680 --> 0:36:41.080
<v Speaker 1>up putting him away in the last few holes, and

0:36:41.120 --> 0:36:44.759
<v Speaker 1>obviously Stenson making some big putts down the stretch, the

0:36:44.800 --> 0:36:48.720
<v Speaker 1>one on fifteen from twenty twenty five feet was totally

0:36:48.760 --> 0:36:51.680
<v Speaker 1>unexpected and maybe it was even longer. I think it

0:36:51.680 --> 0:36:53.799
<v Speaker 1>was longer, but yeah, it might have been might have

0:36:53.800 --> 0:36:55.880
<v Speaker 1>been more like thirty to forty, but it was he

0:36:55.960 --> 0:36:58.439
<v Speaker 1>was across the green from from the from the hole

0:36:58.520 --> 0:37:02.719
<v Speaker 1>and that one was not expected to go in. And

0:37:02.760 --> 0:37:05.479
<v Speaker 1>then his tea shot on seventeen, the long par three

0:37:06.719 --> 0:37:09.480
<v Speaker 1>four iron from t twenty, So there must have been

0:37:09.480 --> 0:37:12.719
<v Speaker 1>some interesting wind conditions happening, or you know, just the

0:37:12.719 --> 0:37:15.160
<v Speaker 1>game has changed a lot from twenty sixteen, but we

0:37:15.200 --> 0:37:19.479
<v Speaker 1>would see Bryson hitting a pitching wedge these days. Yeah,

0:37:19.520 --> 0:37:21.680
<v Speaker 1>that tea shot he hit on seventeen was just a

0:37:21.680 --> 0:37:26.319
<v Speaker 1>classic Hendrickxtenson iron that it's a little explosion at the

0:37:27.680 --> 0:37:30.279
<v Speaker 1>at impact when he hits an iron well, and that

0:37:30.440 --> 0:37:33.080
<v Speaker 1>was one of those irons, and you know something about

0:37:33.080 --> 0:37:34.799
<v Speaker 1>that shot. I know I'm talking about like a lot

0:37:34.800 --> 0:37:37.400
<v Speaker 1>of shots here, so I'm super cheating on these categories.

0:37:38.880 --> 0:37:43.160
<v Speaker 1>My bad. But there's this video that Live Golf put

0:37:43.200 --> 0:37:47.480
<v Speaker 1>out with Phil and Stenson discussing the twenty sixteen final round.

0:37:47.920 --> 0:37:50.279
<v Speaker 1>They put this out a couple of days ago, and

0:37:50.320 --> 0:37:52.359
<v Speaker 1>it's pretty good. I wish they had gone a little

0:37:52.360 --> 0:37:54.600
<v Speaker 1>bit more in depth, but they do talk about certain

0:37:54.640 --> 0:37:59.520
<v Speaker 1>shots and Phil talks about being stunned on seventeen, specifically

0:37:59.560 --> 0:38:03.560
<v Speaker 1>that shot that hendrikitt because it was so high and

0:38:03.600 --> 0:38:06.480
<v Speaker 1>Phil was thinking, he can't possibly hit it that high

0:38:07.200 --> 0:38:10.480
<v Speaker 1>and have the ball reach the green because he's putting

0:38:10.520 --> 0:38:13.040
<v Speaker 1>the ball way up in the air where the wind

0:38:13.120 --> 0:38:15.040
<v Speaker 1>is going to act on it and he's going to

0:38:15.120 --> 0:38:17.239
<v Speaker 1>come up short. He can't get all the way there

0:38:17.400 --> 0:38:19.960
<v Speaker 1>hitting the ball that high. But it got all the

0:38:19.960 --> 0:38:22.160
<v Speaker 1>way there, And there was just something about Stenson's ball

0:38:22.239 --> 0:38:25.120
<v Speaker 1>flight that was so penetrating, where he hit the ball

0:38:25.200 --> 0:38:28.200
<v Speaker 1>so solid and maybe just kept some spin off of

0:38:28.239 --> 0:38:30.719
<v Speaker 1>it and it didn't get caught up in the wind.

0:38:30.760 --> 0:38:33.640
<v Speaker 1>He just hit these shots that bore their way through

0:38:33.680 --> 0:38:39.480
<v Speaker 1>the wind and that's what made him almost unbeatable at Troon,

0:38:39.719 --> 0:38:41.919
<v Speaker 1>and the fact that Phil got anywhere close to him

0:38:42.480 --> 0:38:46.080
<v Speaker 1>is a testament to how spectacular he was on certain

0:38:46.480 --> 0:38:49.120
<v Speaker 1>shots in that final round and really on those final

0:38:49.120 --> 0:38:53.759
<v Speaker 1>two days. All right, finally, not finally, but you know,

0:38:53.800 --> 0:38:56.879
<v Speaker 1>we would have a couple of final big categories here,

0:38:57.840 --> 0:39:02.040
<v Speaker 1>but the final kind of you know, detailed category. Let's

0:39:02.040 --> 0:39:06.160
<v Speaker 1>talk about the biggest what if moment in the final round.

0:39:07.000 --> 0:39:10.120
<v Speaker 2>I might have interpreted this question a little bit differently

0:39:10.200 --> 0:39:13.799
<v Speaker 2>as a broader what if, So forgive me if I

0:39:13.920 --> 0:39:17.520
<v Speaker 2>deep from the points, but yeah, my biggest what if

0:39:17.600 --> 0:39:20.120
<v Speaker 2>is just if players had gotten different tea times. And

0:39:20.320 --> 0:39:26.440
<v Speaker 2>this is a historic wave split. Of the eleven golfers

0:39:26.440 --> 0:39:29.920
<v Speaker 2>that finished T nine or better, nine were from the

0:39:29.960 --> 0:39:34.000
<v Speaker 2>early wave. Yeah, both Stenson and four shots, right, it

0:39:34.040 --> 0:39:35.400
<v Speaker 2>was a lot of shots and I don't have the

0:39:35.440 --> 0:39:37.560
<v Speaker 2>exact count in front of me, but it was a

0:39:37.560 --> 0:39:41.000
<v Speaker 2>lot of shots. Both Stenson and Phil were late tyro

0:39:41.080 --> 0:39:43.799
<v Speaker 2>Hatton was one of the last tea times on Thursday. Like,

0:39:43.840 --> 0:39:47.160
<v Speaker 2>that's the side that got the beneficial draw. So we

0:39:47.200 --> 0:39:49.920
<v Speaker 2>wouldn't I mean, if Phil or Stenson had received a

0:39:49.920 --> 0:39:52.279
<v Speaker 2>different draw, like, we would not be talking about this

0:39:52.400 --> 0:39:54.600
<v Speaker 2>championship the same way. It might have been a snoozer,

0:39:55.040 --> 0:39:58.320
<v Speaker 2>one player completely running away from it. Right if Rory

0:39:58.560 --> 0:40:00.960
<v Speaker 2>or Jason Day, who was number one at the time,

0:40:01.000 --> 0:40:02.680
<v Speaker 2>had been on the right end of the draw, then

0:40:03.080 --> 0:40:05.600
<v Speaker 2>we might just be talking about a completely different championship.

0:40:05.640 --> 0:40:07.799
<v Speaker 2>So this is one that stands out as an all

0:40:07.880 --> 0:40:13.319
<v Speaker 2>time draw, Garrett, of the top seventeen, there were two

0:40:13.360 --> 0:40:16.920
<v Speaker 2>more in the late wave. Sorry, only two more on

0:40:16.960 --> 0:40:20.280
<v Speaker 2>the wrong side of the split, Gary Woodland. And then

0:40:20.520 --> 0:40:22.320
<v Speaker 2>do you want to guess the other player, who.

0:40:22.120 --> 0:40:26.000
<v Speaker 1>Of course going to be our lad from Northern Ireland.

0:40:26.840 --> 0:40:31.200
<v Speaker 2>Well, so yes, you're correct that Rory was. But sorry,

0:40:31.200 --> 0:40:35.520
<v Speaker 2>of the players between like T nine behind T nine

0:40:35.600 --> 0:40:39.560
<v Speaker 2>and T like seventeen, the other one was Patrick Reid,

0:40:39.600 --> 0:40:41.600
<v Speaker 2>which I just find amusing, okay for being on there.

0:40:42.120 --> 0:40:44.800
<v Speaker 1>I mean that was intentional on the part.

0:40:45.280 --> 0:40:49.000
<v Speaker 2>So not immune to a bad draw there, So I

0:40:49.000 --> 0:40:50.800
<v Speaker 2>thought it was an amusing tidbit.

0:40:51.080 --> 0:40:54.880
<v Speaker 1>Life in the line drive section. That's that's Patrick Reid's

0:40:55.280 --> 0:40:59.360
<v Speaker 1>autobiography title. I believe the biggest what if for me

0:41:00.160 --> 0:41:04.840
<v Speaker 1>was a little more specific, what if Phil's putt on

0:41:04.960 --> 0:41:09.200
<v Speaker 1>sixteen dropped so he lipped out a putt on the

0:41:09.239 --> 0:41:14.000
<v Speaker 1>sixteenth hole, and Henrik had a putt for Bertie that

0:41:14.160 --> 0:41:16.160
<v Speaker 1>this was a putt for eagle that Phil had on

0:41:16.200 --> 0:41:18.799
<v Speaker 1>the part on the par five he had a spectacular

0:41:19.440 --> 0:41:22.880
<v Speaker 1>fairway would into the screen, just one of his incredible

0:41:22.880 --> 0:41:26.000
<v Speaker 1>strikes of the R two seventy Right. Yeah, I mean,

0:41:26.120 --> 0:41:28.359
<v Speaker 1>just like this was Phil Mickelson on that day. He's

0:41:28.440 --> 0:41:33.520
<v Speaker 1>just flushing the ball unbelievably at historic levels. He almost

0:41:33.560 --> 0:41:36.920
<v Speaker 1>made this putt. This putt kind of like died just

0:41:37.000 --> 0:41:40.080
<v Speaker 1>across the hole, right. He didn't quite get it there,

0:41:40.120 --> 0:41:43.480
<v Speaker 1>and so the ball just sort of, you know, veered

0:41:43.520 --> 0:41:45.680
<v Speaker 1>off course right as it was getting to the hole

0:41:45.719 --> 0:41:48.520
<v Speaker 1>and went right across the front of it. If that

0:41:48.600 --> 0:41:51.960
<v Speaker 1>putt had dropped, Stenson has like a three four footer

0:41:52.040 --> 0:41:55.320
<v Speaker 1>for Bertie. I think that puts more pressure on Stenson

0:41:55.400 --> 0:41:58.440
<v Speaker 1>because he knows he needs to make that putt in

0:41:58.520 --> 0:42:01.680
<v Speaker 1>order to stay one up on Phil at that point

0:42:02.120 --> 0:42:05.480
<v Speaker 1>going into seventeen. The part three where Stenson ended up

0:42:05.560 --> 0:42:08.680
<v Speaker 1>hitting an incredible t shot, But if Phil's pett goes in,

0:42:09.560 --> 0:42:12.840
<v Speaker 1>Stenson might miss that putt and then they might be

0:42:13.000 --> 0:42:16.560
<v Speaker 1>even going into seventeen. I think that math is right.

0:42:16.960 --> 0:42:20.160
<v Speaker 1>My apologies if it's not, it's right. So that was

0:42:20.200 --> 0:42:22.520
<v Speaker 1>a big wef moment. And then Stenson almost put it

0:42:22.520 --> 0:42:26.080
<v Speaker 1>into the Greg Norman bunker on eighteen. That was something

0:42:26.080 --> 0:42:28.640
<v Speaker 1>that I actually totally forgotten, the bunker on the right

0:42:28.680 --> 0:42:31.600
<v Speaker 1>side of the fairway that Greg Norman made famous in

0:42:31.680 --> 0:42:36.319
<v Speaker 1>nineteen eighty nine. His three would nearly got to it,

0:42:36.360 --> 0:42:40.839
<v Speaker 1>I mean, just in an adrenaline fueled strike, and if

0:42:40.840 --> 0:42:44.080
<v Speaker 1>he had found that bunker, then things could have definitely

0:42:44.120 --> 0:42:47.920
<v Speaker 1>gone differently, because at that point, I believe the separation

0:42:48.000 --> 0:42:50.920
<v Speaker 1>between the two players was two shots, and so certainly

0:42:50.960 --> 0:42:53.480
<v Speaker 1>there could have been a two shot swing there all right,

0:42:53.520 --> 0:42:56.640
<v Speaker 1>Before we get to the big final categories here, Joseph,

0:42:56.760 --> 0:42:59.279
<v Speaker 1>any stray notes or tidbits that you just wanted to

0:42:59.280 --> 0:43:02.319
<v Speaker 1>touch on, anything in your notes that you thought was

0:43:02.320 --> 0:43:04.600
<v Speaker 1>interesting that you just want to get out there.

0:43:05.520 --> 0:43:07.239
<v Speaker 2>I have a bunch of notes. I'll keep it. I

0:43:07.280 --> 0:43:10.600
<v Speaker 2>won't go through all of them. I did not remember this,

0:43:11.040 --> 0:43:14.080
<v Speaker 2>and I'm curious if you picked up on this, Garrett.

0:43:14.360 --> 0:43:18.760
<v Speaker 2>In the telecast, walking off the thirteenth tee, the RNA

0:43:18.880 --> 0:43:23.279
<v Speaker 2>tells Stenson and Phil to pick up the pace as

0:43:23.320 --> 0:43:25.320
<v Speaker 2>they'd fallen a little bit behind, and you can barely

0:43:25.360 --> 0:43:27.600
<v Speaker 2>hear it on the telecast, but it's interesting. They're in

0:43:27.800 --> 0:43:30.799
<v Speaker 2>the middle of this epic duel, no one's near them

0:43:30.800 --> 0:43:33.920
<v Speaker 2>on the leader board, and they don't get put on

0:43:33.960 --> 0:43:36.640
<v Speaker 2>the clock, at least that I remember, but they're told

0:43:36.719 --> 0:43:40.000
<v Speaker 2>to pick up the pace, and kind of just an

0:43:40.000 --> 0:43:44.600
<v Speaker 2>interesting anecdote about that as I've reflected on it. I

0:43:44.640 --> 0:43:48.680
<v Speaker 2>remember being at Dell match play in Austin and Phil

0:43:48.800 --> 0:43:52.600
<v Speaker 2>was playing against Stenson. Years later, obviously, I don't remember

0:43:52.640 --> 0:43:56.720
<v Speaker 2>exactly which year, and after walking off one of the greens,

0:43:56.840 --> 0:43:58.879
<v Speaker 2>Phil said to his caddy and I was standing there

0:43:58.920 --> 0:44:03.800
<v Speaker 2>and heard it in slightly more colorful language, Man, Hendrik

0:44:03.840 --> 0:44:07.680
<v Speaker 2>Stenson is so freaking slow. And I've always kind of

0:44:07.760 --> 0:44:12.400
<v Speaker 2>wondered if any of the twenty sixteen Open Championship lingers

0:44:12.480 --> 0:44:15.720
<v Speaker 2>a little bit there. Hendrick Stenson's not the speediest golfer,

0:44:16.080 --> 0:44:17.719
<v Speaker 2>and Phil does look ready to hit a lot of

0:44:17.760 --> 0:44:19.920
<v Speaker 2>the shots in this twenty sixteen Open Championship.

0:44:19.960 --> 0:44:22.320
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, he pulls the trigger quickly on a couple.

0:44:22.080 --> 0:44:24.640
<v Speaker 2>Of them, he does, and so it's just interesting.

0:44:24.360 --> 0:44:27.560
<v Speaker 1>Even especially I remember he hit his approach like right

0:44:27.600 --> 0:44:29.360
<v Speaker 1>on top of Stenson's approach.

0:44:29.080 --> 0:44:31.200
<v Speaker 2>And some of the putts like as Hendrick Stenton's hitting them,

0:44:31.200 --> 0:44:33.920
<v Speaker 2>Phil's already prepared to hit. He kind of steps in

0:44:34.000 --> 0:44:36.280
<v Speaker 2>pretty quickly and hits them. There's one where he even finishes.

0:44:36.680 --> 0:44:38.240
<v Speaker 2>I don't know if you remember that from the telecast,

0:44:38.280 --> 0:44:40.120
<v Speaker 2>but he hits a good chip shot and decides he

0:44:40.120 --> 0:44:42.680
<v Speaker 2>wants to finish like a three footer instead of letting

0:44:42.680 --> 0:44:45.560
<v Speaker 2>Stenson hit his six or seven footer. So really interesting

0:44:45.560 --> 0:44:47.120
<v Speaker 2>to see the RNA tell them to pick up the

0:44:47.120 --> 0:44:48.600
<v Speaker 2>pace a little bit. And then maybe some of that

0:44:48.640 --> 0:44:51.680
<v Speaker 2>additional context was delighting me as I watched through that

0:44:52.160 --> 0:44:53.640
<v Speaker 2>twenty sixteen Open Championship.

0:44:54.160 --> 0:44:57.439
<v Speaker 1>I like that note, especially because then three years later,

0:44:58.120 --> 0:44:59.920
<v Speaker 1>no not three years later, more than three years l

0:45:00.560 --> 0:45:03.760
<v Speaker 1>this was in twenty twenty one, I guess at pgaj

0:45:03.840 --> 0:45:08.080
<v Speaker 1>ap and Chata Kiwa. Famously, Phil sort of slow played

0:45:08.800 --> 0:45:12.120
<v Speaker 1>brooks Kopka in the final round and frustrated Koepka. So

0:45:12.239 --> 0:45:16.000
<v Speaker 1>maybe Phil was taken a tip from Stenson there from

0:45:16.000 --> 0:45:20.680
<v Speaker 1>the twenty sixteen final round. That's pretty funny. All right,

0:45:20.760 --> 0:45:22.680
<v Speaker 1>Let's get to the last couple of categories here, some

0:45:23.120 --> 0:45:26.440
<v Speaker 1>general big picture categories. First of all, what do you

0:45:26.440 --> 0:45:30.200
<v Speaker 1>think is the overwhelming key to success on this golf

0:45:30.200 --> 0:45:31.359
<v Speaker 1>course royal trend.

0:45:31.800 --> 0:45:34.640
<v Speaker 2>For me, it's just premiere iron play. I think you

0:45:34.680 --> 0:45:36.480
<v Speaker 2>see it with Phil and you see it with Stenson.

0:45:37.400 --> 0:45:39.239
<v Speaker 2>When you're hitting your irons well, you have a lot

0:45:39.280 --> 0:45:44.120
<v Speaker 2>of opportunities to make birdie and hit some approach shots close,

0:45:44.160 --> 0:45:45.680
<v Speaker 2>and even if you're not super close, a lot of

0:45:45.680 --> 0:45:48.279
<v Speaker 2>those putts are makeable. I think that's a huge key

0:45:48.280 --> 0:45:50.960
<v Speaker 2>to success, not just for what I just mentioned, but

0:45:51.360 --> 0:45:54.360
<v Speaker 2>you're hitting iron off a lot of teas, and given

0:45:54.400 --> 0:45:57.360
<v Speaker 2>how easy the driver has become to hit, and you

0:45:57.360 --> 0:46:00.560
<v Speaker 2>can hit the ball basically anywhere on the club and

0:46:00.600 --> 0:46:05.120
<v Speaker 2>it flies relatively straight, I think it's pretty difficult off

0:46:05.120 --> 0:46:07.440
<v Speaker 2>the tee to hit a flush a bunch of irons

0:46:07.480 --> 0:46:10.440
<v Speaker 2>and woods, especially if wind is a factor. So I'm

0:46:10.480 --> 0:46:12.080
<v Speaker 2>really hoping we get a little bit of wind, and

0:46:12.120 --> 0:46:15.279
<v Speaker 2>I think you will see some of those premier ball strikers,

0:46:16.120 --> 0:46:19.080
<v Speaker 2>especially the best iron players in the world, rise to

0:46:19.120 --> 0:46:22.560
<v Speaker 2>the top. Obviously, like wind can create some variants and

0:46:22.600 --> 0:46:26.520
<v Speaker 2>some unpredictability in ways, that is also relevant, and some

0:46:26.600 --> 0:46:28.960
<v Speaker 2>of those iron players could get taken out just by

0:46:28.960 --> 0:46:31.440
<v Speaker 2>being on the wrong side of a draw. But to me,

0:46:31.840 --> 0:46:33.880
<v Speaker 2>I would be targeting the best iron players in the

0:46:33.880 --> 0:46:36.319
<v Speaker 2>world when thinking about who's gonna win this championship? How

0:46:36.320 --> 0:46:36.640
<v Speaker 2>about you?

0:46:37.239 --> 0:46:39.520
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, I mean that was my number one note for

0:46:39.560 --> 0:46:44.280
<v Speaker 1>this category as well. It is totally conspicuous, totally obvious

0:46:45.080 --> 0:46:49.480
<v Speaker 1>in this final round that the main differentiating factor between

0:46:50.080 --> 0:46:53.839
<v Speaker 1>Stenson and Phil and everybody else is that those two

0:46:53.880 --> 0:46:57.120
<v Speaker 1>players were hitting greens from distance with irons and striking

0:46:57.160 --> 0:47:00.880
<v Speaker 1>their irons with a flushness and a purity that the

0:47:00.920 --> 0:47:05.440
<v Speaker 1>other players simply were not matching. You saw other players

0:47:05.520 --> 0:47:10.360
<v Speaker 1>missing greens scrambling. You hardly ever saw Stenson and Phil

0:47:10.440 --> 0:47:13.960
<v Speaker 1>in a position of scrambling, especially after they hit a

0:47:13.960 --> 0:47:17.560
<v Speaker 1>fairway right. If they were in the fairway, you could

0:47:17.560 --> 0:47:21.160
<v Speaker 1>pretty much bank on ten fifteen feet in a birdy opportunity.

0:47:21.640 --> 0:47:24.840
<v Speaker 1>And these were not the easiest conditions, and other players

0:47:24.840 --> 0:47:28.759
<v Speaker 1>were showing that nobody else was anywhere in the vicinity

0:47:29.320 --> 0:47:31.960
<v Speaker 1>of Stenson and Phil in that final round. I mean, Stenson,

0:47:32.000 --> 0:47:35.839
<v Speaker 1>what did he shoot sixty three and Phil was sixty five.

0:47:36.920 --> 0:47:38.719
<v Speaker 1>We probably should know these numbers off the top of

0:47:38.760 --> 0:47:43.680
<v Speaker 1>our heads, but nobody was close to those numbers, and

0:47:43.760 --> 0:47:46.680
<v Speaker 1>it was because of the iron play. If I had

0:47:46.719 --> 0:47:49.040
<v Speaker 1>to choose another key to success on this golf course.

0:47:49.080 --> 0:47:50.960
<v Speaker 1>It would just have to be avoiding bunkers off the

0:47:50.960 --> 0:47:54.840
<v Speaker 1>tee and having a solid strategy for avoiding those bunkers.

0:47:55.280 --> 0:47:58.960
<v Speaker 1>We didn't see Phil and Stenson in bunkers off the tee.

0:47:59.000 --> 0:48:00.919
<v Speaker 1>Part of that may have been a little bit of luck,

0:48:01.000 --> 0:48:03.719
<v Speaker 1>because you always need that luck, but also part of

0:48:03.760 --> 0:48:06.319
<v Speaker 1>it was that they were thoughtful about their choices off

0:48:06.360 --> 0:48:08.239
<v Speaker 1>the tea, about their lines, about the clubs that they

0:48:08.239 --> 0:48:11.760
<v Speaker 1>are hitting, so that they gave themselves the best chances

0:48:11.840 --> 0:48:14.960
<v Speaker 1>possible not to be in those bunkers. And I think

0:48:14.960 --> 0:48:17.600
<v Speaker 1>that that's probably going to be another theme that we

0:48:17.640 --> 0:48:18.839
<v Speaker 1>see in twenty twenty four.

0:48:19.480 --> 0:48:22.600
<v Speaker 2>It was sixty three and sixty five respectively.

0:48:21.960 --> 0:48:24.160
<v Speaker 1>Just mean that she did look up. I think it's

0:48:24.280 --> 0:48:25.200
<v Speaker 1>absolutely incredible.

0:48:26.560 --> 0:48:29.000
<v Speaker 2>We had one more category, which was something to the

0:48:29.040 --> 0:48:33.520
<v Speaker 2>effect of biggest lesson, and mine was avoid trouble. So

0:48:33.640 --> 0:48:38.560
<v Speaker 2>I would echo that that staying out of the fairway bunkers,

0:48:38.600 --> 0:48:40.880
<v Speaker 2>like taking lines off of the te's that aren't going

0:48:40.960 --> 0:48:43.200
<v Speaker 2>to put you in trouble, even if it means hitting

0:48:43.200 --> 0:48:46.799
<v Speaker 2>an ironer would instead of pushing driver trying to hit

0:48:46.840 --> 0:48:49.799
<v Speaker 2>shots like on eleven that off the tea, stay out

0:48:49.880 --> 0:48:52.680
<v Speaker 2>of the gorse and that's obviously easier said than done,

0:48:52.719 --> 0:48:55.080
<v Speaker 2>but you're going to get your scoring opportunities if you

0:48:55.080 --> 0:48:57.960
<v Speaker 2>stay out of trouble. It's not the type of golf

0:48:58.000 --> 0:49:00.799
<v Speaker 2>course that you're going to be able to overpay. There's

0:49:00.840 --> 0:49:03.440
<v Speaker 2>certain holes where you may be able to in the

0:49:03.520 --> 0:49:07.040
<v Speaker 2>right conditions, especially if it's downwind, but generally speaking, this

0:49:07.200 --> 0:49:09.520
<v Speaker 2>is a golf course to be a little bit conservative

0:49:09.520 --> 0:49:12.200
<v Speaker 2>off of many of the tea's and then just avoiding

0:49:12.239 --> 0:49:14.200
<v Speaker 2>some of those most penal bunkers on the golf course.

0:49:14.200 --> 0:49:15.960
<v Speaker 2>So that was my biggest lesson for twenty twenty four.

0:49:16.920 --> 0:49:19.399
<v Speaker 1>Agree with that. My biggest lesson for twenty twenty four

0:49:19.480 --> 0:49:21.759
<v Speaker 1>is something that we've already referred to, and that is

0:49:21.800 --> 0:49:25.480
<v Speaker 1>that the wave split is god in the Open Championship,

0:49:25.520 --> 0:49:28.719
<v Speaker 1>and we might see another one with unsettled weather in

0:49:28.760 --> 0:49:31.320
<v Speaker 1>the forecast this year, we could see another wave split.

0:49:31.880 --> 0:49:34.239
<v Speaker 1>I'm not sure which way it's going. I'm going to

0:49:34.280 --> 0:49:37.120
<v Speaker 1>make a guess on that in a minute, but when

0:49:37.120 --> 0:49:40.720
<v Speaker 1>the weather is volatile, then the wave split really does

0:49:41.200 --> 0:49:44.799
<v Speaker 1>help determine who has the best chance at contending on

0:49:44.840 --> 0:49:46.920
<v Speaker 1>the weekend. And that's just something that we see in

0:49:46.960 --> 0:49:50.719
<v Speaker 1>the Open Championship. More than any other tournament in the world,

0:49:50.840 --> 0:49:52.680
<v Speaker 1>and it's something that you either love or hate. I

0:49:52.719 --> 0:49:57.000
<v Speaker 1>happen to love it. Any form of randomness and chaos

0:49:57.040 --> 0:50:00.440
<v Speaker 1>that can be introduced to this professional game that has

0:50:00.480 --> 0:50:05.000
<v Speaker 1>become so rationalized and predictable in some ways, I'm all for.

0:50:05.360 --> 0:50:07.920
<v Speaker 1>And so give me a wave split, even if it

0:50:08.360 --> 0:50:12.680
<v Speaker 1>happens to hurt my favorite players the best or the worst,

0:50:12.800 --> 0:50:17.160
<v Speaker 1>I should say, all right, let's get into some picks

0:50:17.160 --> 0:50:19.880
<v Speaker 1>and predictions. Now that we've done our categories for twenty sixteen,

0:50:19.920 --> 0:50:23.640
<v Speaker 1>I think we've talked about that final round thoroughly enough. Again,

0:50:23.760 --> 0:50:26.000
<v Speaker 1>going to recommend that people go see it because it's

0:50:26.040 --> 0:50:28.719
<v Speaker 1>just such a fun, fun final round and there are

0:50:28.719 --> 0:50:30.319
<v Speaker 1>probably a lot of things, even if you watch it

0:50:30.360 --> 0:50:32.600
<v Speaker 1>at the time, probably a lot of things that you

0:50:32.640 --> 0:50:35.400
<v Speaker 1>don't remember about what happened that day and how excellent

0:50:35.840 --> 0:50:40.400
<v Speaker 1>the play from Phil and Henrik was. Let's do some

0:50:40.480 --> 0:50:43.560
<v Speaker 1>picks and predictions. Who are you looking at this week for,

0:50:44.440 --> 0:50:49.640
<v Speaker 1>you know, possible players who can set themselves apart in

0:50:49.640 --> 0:50:51.920
<v Speaker 1>the way that Phil and Henrick did in twenty sixteen.

0:50:52.760 --> 0:50:55.759
<v Speaker 2>I listed two names, Garrett, I think there are a

0:50:55.800 --> 0:51:00.040
<v Speaker 2>lot of usual suspects that, yeah, Scottie Rory, Right.

0:51:00.440 --> 0:51:03.040
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, Scotti Scheffler probably gonna be pretty good, right.

0:51:03.560 --> 0:51:06.799
<v Speaker 2>The ones that I felt worth calling out first, I

0:51:06.800 --> 0:51:11.360
<v Speaker 2>think watching this twenty sixteen rewatching it, one name that

0:51:11.480 --> 0:51:15.000
<v Speaker 2>kept kind of getting pounded into my head is Colin Marikawa.

0:51:15.960 --> 0:51:19.680
<v Speaker 2>Colin has had arguably his best season. I mean it

0:51:19.719 --> 0:51:23.319
<v Speaker 2>is his best season statistically. He's been kind of red

0:51:23.400 --> 0:51:26.799
<v Speaker 2>hot as of late. In major So far this year,

0:51:26.840 --> 0:51:30.080
<v Speaker 2>He's finished tied for third at the Masters, tied for

0:51:30.160 --> 0:51:33.400
<v Speaker 2>fourth at the PGA of Ahalla, and tied for fourteenth

0:51:33.800 --> 0:51:38.560
<v Speaker 2>at Pinehurst. Colin Morikawa obviously has already won two majors,

0:51:38.680 --> 0:51:41.200
<v Speaker 2>including an Open Championship. I think the knock on him

0:51:41.280 --> 0:51:44.360
<v Speaker 2>tends to be that he has some struggles in the

0:51:44.400 --> 0:51:45.640
<v Speaker 2>wind and.

0:51:45.520 --> 0:51:47.560
<v Speaker 1>That I was just going to bring this up. What

0:51:47.600 --> 0:51:48.000
<v Speaker 1>do you make that?

0:51:48.239 --> 0:51:51.719
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, that really tight cut that he hits and he

0:51:51.760 --> 0:51:53.879
<v Speaker 2>goes to on every shot can turn into a little

0:51:53.920 --> 0:51:56.480
<v Speaker 2>bit of a wipeye fade. If you watched the Farmer's

0:51:56.560 --> 0:52:00.600
<v Speaker 2>Insurance this year at Tory Pines, like that fade did

0:52:00.600 --> 0:52:03.319
<v Speaker 2>not work super well when it got windy. But I

0:52:03.400 --> 0:52:06.279
<v Speaker 2>still trust Colin, especially on a golf course that takes

0:52:06.360 --> 0:52:09.400
<v Speaker 2>driver out of your hands fairly often if he's standing

0:52:09.480 --> 0:52:12.200
<v Speaker 2>up on tees ripping a lot of irons and woods.

0:52:12.440 --> 0:52:14.880
<v Speaker 2>There's not too many golfers that I trust more on

0:52:14.920 --> 0:52:18.120
<v Speaker 2>that type of setup. And he's crafty with his irons.

0:52:18.160 --> 0:52:20.879
<v Speaker 2>He has the default stock fade that he likes to hit.

0:52:20.960 --> 0:52:23.080
<v Speaker 2>But Colin Moricala's got a little bit more in his

0:52:23.160 --> 0:52:27.680
<v Speaker 2>bag than just a white bee fade. Unbelievable iron player

0:52:27.760 --> 0:52:30.279
<v Speaker 2>can make a case that he's, if not the best

0:52:30.280 --> 0:52:33.680
<v Speaker 2>iron player in the world, certainly top five. His short

0:52:33.719 --> 0:52:36.200
<v Speaker 2>games come a long way this year, by far having

0:52:36.280 --> 0:52:39.640
<v Speaker 2>the best short game season. I also think some of

0:52:39.640 --> 0:52:41.960
<v Speaker 2>the putting on these slow greens is probably a little

0:52:42.000 --> 0:52:46.080
<v Speaker 2>bit more of what he's used to on the West coast. Man.

0:52:46.120 --> 0:52:48.400
<v Speaker 2>This kind of screams Colin Morikala to me.

0:52:49.320 --> 0:52:51.680
<v Speaker 1>It's not the hardest putting course, right, It's if you're

0:52:51.760 --> 0:52:56.360
<v Speaker 1>on the green, then two putts are very achievable for

0:52:56.680 --> 0:52:59.360
<v Speaker 1>most people. And so putting is going to be like

0:52:59.400 --> 0:53:01.759
<v Speaker 1>a tough different ferentiator this week, or less of a

0:53:01.760 --> 0:53:05.080
<v Speaker 1>differentiator than than it usually might be, because it's always

0:53:05.120 --> 0:53:08.040
<v Speaker 1>a differentiator, but but it might deemphasize it a little

0:53:08.080 --> 0:53:11.279
<v Speaker 1>bit this week. All right, call him Markawa. Now what

0:53:11.360 --> 0:53:14.280
<v Speaker 1>I like about Marikawa. I am a little bit worried

0:53:14.320 --> 0:53:17.840
<v Speaker 1>about the the wind thing. I mean, hitting that fade

0:53:18.120 --> 0:53:21.279
<v Speaker 1>in the wind is tough. But maybe it's a bit

0:53:21.400 --> 0:53:25.759
<v Speaker 1>of an overemphasized theme with mari Kawa at this point,

0:53:25.800 --> 0:53:27.880
<v Speaker 1>because he is he's a good golfer, he can he

0:53:27.920 --> 0:53:32.280
<v Speaker 1>can handle the wind. He is in that later wave

0:53:32.600 --> 0:53:35.879
<v Speaker 1>on Thursday, and something that I'm looking at, I'm not sure.

0:53:36.280 --> 0:53:40.279
<v Speaker 1>It's it's not advisable to make predictions based on forecasts.

0:53:40.560 --> 0:53:42.960
<v Speaker 1>I will just say that. But since I'm not a

0:53:43.000 --> 0:53:45.719
<v Speaker 1>betting expert, I'm just gonna go ahead and put all

0:53:45.800 --> 0:53:50.319
<v Speaker 1>my chips in the uh in the forecast bucket, put

0:53:50.320 --> 0:53:54.960
<v Speaker 1>all my eggs in that basket. I think that Thursday

0:53:55.000 --> 0:53:57.640
<v Speaker 1>morning is going to be tough. I think there's some

0:53:57.760 --> 0:54:00.680
<v Speaker 1>weather coming in late Wednesday and it's going to be

0:54:00.800 --> 0:54:03.840
<v Speaker 1>kind of clearing out on Thursday morning. I think that

0:54:03.920 --> 0:54:07.239
<v Speaker 1>players could have a harder time on Thursday morning than

0:54:07.280 --> 0:54:10.920
<v Speaker 1>they do on Thursday afternoon. And so I'm mainly looking

0:54:10.960 --> 0:54:14.520
<v Speaker 1>at players who go out on Thursday afternoon. Now, some

0:54:14.560 --> 0:54:16.680
<v Speaker 1>of the players who go out in the morning on Thursday,

0:54:17.560 --> 0:54:22.840
<v Speaker 1>justin Thomas Joaquin Neeman Tony Final, John Rahm, Tommy Fleetwood,

0:54:22.960 --> 0:54:25.360
<v Speaker 1>Brian Harmon. This is starting to get a little bit

0:54:25.440 --> 0:54:27.880
<v Speaker 1>later in the morning, but Ry McElroy's going out at

0:54:28.160 --> 0:54:32.440
<v Speaker 1>about ten am, Tyrol Hatton, Max Homer, Keegan Bradley are

0:54:32.480 --> 0:54:37.400
<v Speaker 1>going out in kind of mid morning. Now afternoon players

0:54:37.840 --> 0:54:45.200
<v Speaker 1>would include Corey Connors, Jason Day, Phil Nicholson. He had

0:54:45.239 --> 0:54:48.560
<v Speaker 1>an afternoon tea time in twenty sixteen on Thursday and

0:54:49.120 --> 0:54:53.000
<v Speaker 1>worked to his advantage. Then it could again this time, Wyndham, Clark,

0:54:53.160 --> 0:54:59.959
<v Speaker 1>Hideki Brooks, Xander can't Ley, Morikawa, Sam Burns, Shane Lower,

0:55:00.200 --> 0:55:05.680
<v Speaker 1>Cameron Smith, Matt Fitzpatrick, Scotti, Scheffler, few other names there,

0:55:05.680 --> 0:55:09.040
<v Speaker 1>but that's basically the pool of players that I'm looking at.

0:55:09.280 --> 0:55:13.480
<v Speaker 1>I like Morikawa in that group of players. Tell me

0:55:13.520 --> 0:55:16.279
<v Speaker 1>if this is stupid, but I'm kind of looking at

0:55:16.280 --> 0:55:20.880
<v Speaker 1>Shane Lowry. I like that name. I think he's not

0:55:20.920 --> 0:55:24.480
<v Speaker 1>really good with his men and long irons. He did

0:55:24.680 --> 0:55:25.680
<v Speaker 1>well last.

0:55:25.400 --> 0:55:29.040
<v Speaker 2>Week, He's playing pretty well coming in and if there's

0:55:29.080 --> 0:55:31.560
<v Speaker 2>somebody that can brave the elements. I know this always

0:55:31.600 --> 0:55:34.800
<v Speaker 2>gets brought up with Shane Lowry, but former Open champion,

0:55:34.880 --> 0:55:36.880
<v Speaker 2>he's done it. He'll be very comfortable no matter what

0:55:36.880 --> 0:55:38.680
<v Speaker 2>weather it gets thrown at him. I don't think it's

0:55:39.040 --> 0:55:41.200
<v Speaker 2>a crazy pick. Also interesting to me that you mentioned

0:55:41.239 --> 0:55:43.000
<v Speaker 2>Corey Connors because I didn't know that he'd get the

0:55:43.000 --> 0:55:46.359
<v Speaker 2>first bill shout out there. But Corey Connors is an

0:55:46.400 --> 0:55:49.720
<v Speaker 2>elite ball striker and he's having a really good season,

0:55:49.719 --> 0:55:51.480
<v Speaker 2>so he is kind of an interesting name to keep

0:55:51.480 --> 0:55:51.880
<v Speaker 2>an eye on.

0:55:52.480 --> 0:55:54.640
<v Speaker 1>I feel like people always bring up Corey Connors when

0:55:54.680 --> 0:55:56.920
<v Speaker 1>it comes to major championships because it's a lot of

0:55:56.960 --> 0:56:00.919
<v Speaker 1>courses that reward great ball striking right, mid and long

0:56:00.960 --> 0:56:04.480
<v Speaker 1>iron play more than PGA Tour courses tend to reward

0:56:04.520 --> 0:56:07.400
<v Speaker 1>that skill, and Corey Connors is your ultimate example of

0:56:07.440 --> 0:56:11.879
<v Speaker 1>somebody who has an outsize skill in that area. But yeah,

0:56:11.920 --> 0:56:13.640
<v Speaker 1>Corey Connor is The reason I mentioned him first is

0:56:13.680 --> 0:56:16.200
<v Speaker 1>he's going out earliest in the afternoon, but he is

0:56:16.239 --> 0:56:17.200
<v Speaker 1>in the afternoon wave.

0:56:17.640 --> 0:56:20.480
<v Speaker 2>It's a draw. Yeah, He's one of the few players

0:56:20.480 --> 0:56:22.279
<v Speaker 2>in professional helps that hits a tight draw.

0:56:22.840 --> 0:56:24.400
<v Speaker 1>You would think he plays well in the wind. I

0:56:24.719 --> 0:56:26.960
<v Speaker 1>don't know if there's evidence that he plays well in

0:56:27.400 --> 0:56:30.839
<v Speaker 1>windy conditions, because we just don't get that much in

0:56:30.880 --> 0:56:33.879
<v Speaker 1>the way of windy conditions anywhere on the schedule. I mean,

0:56:33.880 --> 0:56:38.120
<v Speaker 1>Matt Fitzpatrick is another, you know, legendary mutter who can

0:56:38.239 --> 0:56:41.160
<v Speaker 1>play well in various conditions. I don't know if he's

0:56:41.200 --> 0:56:44.040
<v Speaker 1>in the greatest form of his career or anything like that,

0:56:44.280 --> 0:56:46.879
<v Speaker 1>but then obviously Scotti Scheffler is going out late on

0:56:46.960 --> 0:56:49.919
<v Speaker 1>Thursday and that could be a major advantage for him.

0:56:50.360 --> 0:56:53.000
<v Speaker 1>Brooks Cupya is somebody that I've brought up in every

0:56:53.000 --> 0:56:55.680
<v Speaker 1>major so far this year. It hasn't really worked out

0:56:55.719 --> 0:56:58.879
<v Speaker 1>for me that well in any of the majors this year,

0:56:59.280 --> 0:57:02.160
<v Speaker 1>but I'm always his name because it's it's not wise

0:57:02.200 --> 0:57:06.920
<v Speaker 1>to doubt him in a major championship. Now, Bryce into

0:57:06.920 --> 0:57:10.719
<v Speaker 1>Shambeau the most talked about player of the year, probably

0:57:10.880 --> 0:57:14.560
<v Speaker 1>maybe other than Rory, but talked about for different reasons.

0:57:15.640 --> 0:57:17.400
<v Speaker 1>Do you think he struggles at this course? Is it

0:57:17.920 --> 0:57:20.160
<v Speaker 1>like a too easy of a take to say that

0:57:20.240 --> 0:57:23.320
<v Speaker 1>he might struggle here? I think it is, And let

0:57:23.360 --> 0:57:26.800
<v Speaker 1>me just say why. Sure, he's a great long iron player,

0:57:27.200 --> 0:57:31.040
<v Speaker 1>he I mean, if we're looking at long and mid

0:57:31.120 --> 0:57:35.640
<v Speaker 1>irons as the differentiating factor, then he could be great.

0:57:35.680 --> 0:57:37.440
<v Speaker 1>But I'm not sure how much he's looking to hit

0:57:37.520 --> 0:57:40.560
<v Speaker 1>driver on this course. But if it's a long iron contest,

0:57:40.920 --> 0:57:42.880
<v Speaker 1>and for Bryson, the long irons are like the seven

0:57:42.920 --> 0:57:46.600
<v Speaker 1>and eight irons. But if it's a contest from those distances,

0:57:47.080 --> 0:57:49.640
<v Speaker 1>he does really, really well from those distances. Now his

0:57:49.720 --> 0:57:52.800
<v Speaker 1>ball might be a little bit high, but I don't know.

0:57:52.880 --> 0:57:56.080
<v Speaker 1>I mean, like, it seems like he should be able

0:57:56.120 --> 0:57:58.840
<v Speaker 1>to thrive with this kind of test. But I think

0:57:58.840 --> 0:58:00.880
<v Speaker 1>we just assume that when it comes to links golf,

0:58:01.440 --> 0:58:02.520
<v Speaker 1>Bryson is not your man.

0:58:03.400 --> 0:58:05.680
<v Speaker 2>I wouldn't have Bryson quite as high as I would

0:58:05.720 --> 0:58:08.480
<v Speaker 2>have some of these other players. But I do think Bryson,

0:58:09.680 --> 0:58:13.120
<v Speaker 2>I'm not too concerned about the way that he lines

0:58:13.160 --> 0:58:14.800
<v Speaker 2>up with the golf course like this, maybe in the

0:58:14.840 --> 0:58:16.640
<v Speaker 2>way that I would have been in the past. I

0:58:16.720 --> 0:58:21.320
<v Speaker 2>think he has some advantages and that he understands the

0:58:21.360 --> 0:58:23.840
<v Speaker 2>way that his ball interacts with the wind and leans

0:58:23.880 --> 0:58:25.280
<v Speaker 2>into that a little bit more than a lot of

0:58:25.280 --> 0:58:30.479
<v Speaker 2>players probably do. Understanding that, you know, your dispersion gets

0:58:30.520 --> 0:58:32.600
<v Speaker 2>wider when you're playing into the wind, and that just

0:58:32.720 --> 0:58:35.960
<v Speaker 2>bashing driver all the time isn't always the best strategy.

0:58:36.000 --> 0:58:37.600
<v Speaker 2>And I think Bryson went a little bit far in

0:58:37.640 --> 0:58:39.640
<v Speaker 2>that direction when he put on all of his distance.

0:58:39.880 --> 0:58:41.640
<v Speaker 2>I think he's learned to rain that in a little

0:58:41.680 --> 0:58:45.320
<v Speaker 2>bit and has expressed that his caddy, I know that

0:58:45.320 --> 0:58:48.240
<v Speaker 2>he had gone on the Get a Grip podcast of

0:58:48.320 --> 0:58:50.320
<v Speaker 2>Fried Egg Pot and had talked a little bit about

0:58:50.320 --> 0:58:52.720
<v Speaker 2>some of the things, some of the considerations they make,

0:58:52.800 --> 0:58:56.240
<v Speaker 2>and you know this, this is a little bit maybe

0:58:56.320 --> 0:58:59.440
<v Speaker 2>less of a calculated tournament than a lot of other ones.

0:58:59.520 --> 0:59:03.240
<v Speaker 2>But as his caddie Gbo said on that pod, like

0:59:03.280 --> 0:59:06.400
<v Speaker 2>Bryson's a pretty darn good field player, even though he

0:59:06.400 --> 0:59:08.720
<v Speaker 2>has a rap, is being calculated about everything. So I

0:59:08.760 --> 0:59:12.880
<v Speaker 2>think that course management and ability to understand that the

0:59:12.920 --> 0:59:15.320
<v Speaker 2>right shots to hit, and how he's evolved in that

0:59:15.360 --> 0:59:19.120
<v Speaker 2>way is a reason to be optimistic about Bryson. Again,

0:59:19.120 --> 0:59:21.440
<v Speaker 2>I wouldn't put him as high as a McElroy or

0:59:21.440 --> 0:59:24.800
<v Speaker 2>a Scheffler or a shaft Lee or Mori Kala frankly

0:59:24.840 --> 0:59:27.560
<v Speaker 2>in terms of his chances of winning, but certainly wouldn't

0:59:27.560 --> 0:59:29.680
<v Speaker 2>be surprised if he's in the neck. Can I give

0:59:29.720 --> 0:59:33.800
<v Speaker 2>you another name or absolutely? I think one golfer flying

0:59:33.880 --> 0:59:38.280
<v Speaker 2>a little bit under the radar is Louis Ustazan, and

0:59:39.120 --> 0:59:43.800
<v Speaker 2>Louis Ustazen is actually playing really good golf and he's

0:59:43.800 --> 0:59:47.640
<v Speaker 2>getting some respect in the betting markets, but he doesn't

0:59:47.640 --> 0:59:50.040
<v Speaker 2>have the visibility. Right. He's playing on Live, which is

0:59:50.080 --> 0:59:52.760
<v Speaker 2>a tour that just doesn't have nearly as many eyeballs

0:59:52.800 --> 0:59:56.160
<v Speaker 2>on it as the PGA Tour. He hasn't even played,

0:59:56.600 --> 0:59:59.120
<v Speaker 2>hasn't played a major this entire year, but he's been

0:59:59.160 --> 1:00:02.959
<v Speaker 2>playing very solid on live. And he's a golfer who's

1:00:02.960 --> 1:00:05.840
<v Speaker 2>been good in majors pretty much his entire career. I

1:00:05.840 --> 1:00:08.840
<v Speaker 2>think he's finished in eight of his eight top tens

1:00:08.840 --> 1:00:11.120
<v Speaker 2>and thirty two starts since twenty fifteen, like a twenty

1:00:11.120 --> 1:00:15.160
<v Speaker 2>five percent clip, which isn't bad. He's forty one, and

1:00:15.440 --> 1:00:17.680
<v Speaker 2>this is a major that generally some of the more

1:00:17.720 --> 1:00:20.640
<v Speaker 2>seasoned players, Yeah, can I have success?

1:00:20.640 --> 1:00:23.000
<v Speaker 1>Henrikan and Phil were both in their forties when they

1:00:24.600 --> 1:00:25.720
<v Speaker 1>in twenty sixteen, he.

1:00:25.720 --> 1:00:28.040
<v Speaker 2>Finished twenty third in this event. Last year, he finished

1:00:28.040 --> 1:00:32.240
<v Speaker 2>tied for third at Saint Andrews in twenty one. Kind

1:00:32.240 --> 1:00:34.080
<v Speaker 2>of has done well on some courses that like, I

1:00:34.080 --> 1:00:38.280
<v Speaker 2>don't think Chambers Bay is the perfect comparison for Truon,

1:00:38.480 --> 1:00:40.760
<v Speaker 2>Like he he did very well there despite a bad

1:00:40.800 --> 1:00:43.040
<v Speaker 2>opening round, and just I think he's a flusher that

1:00:43.080 --> 1:00:46.480
<v Speaker 2>has a lot of shots. Former Open Champion. I would

1:00:46.560 --> 1:00:48.040
<v Speaker 2>not be rolling out Louius Tasan.

1:00:48.680 --> 1:00:51.080
<v Speaker 1>That's an incredible shout. I would not have picked out

1:00:51.120 --> 1:00:55.120
<v Speaker 1>that name, but Louis says and is Loui Ustasan. I mean,

1:00:55.120 --> 1:00:58.000
<v Speaker 1>he just shows up and performs in majors. It hasn't

1:00:58.000 --> 1:00:59.840
<v Speaker 1>happened for a couple of years at this point, but

1:01:00.080 --> 1:01:02.760
<v Speaker 1>he's one of those players that can just turn it

1:01:02.800 --> 1:01:05.760
<v Speaker 1>on for a week and shock everybody, and nobody picks

1:01:05.800 --> 1:01:07.160
<v Speaker 1>him and all of a sudden he's there.

1:01:07.200 --> 1:01:09.880
<v Speaker 2>So he won twice in December on the DP World Tour.

1:01:10.160 --> 1:01:11.240
<v Speaker 2>Like he's been good.

1:01:12.240 --> 1:01:15.680
<v Speaker 1>Well, okay, what do you think of Cameron Smith? He's

1:01:15.680 --> 1:01:19.360
<v Speaker 1>going out in the afternoon on Thursday. How is he playing?

1:01:19.720 --> 1:01:22.600
<v Speaker 1>Another live player that I just have a hard time assessing.

1:01:23.000 --> 1:01:25.360
<v Speaker 2>I've had a hard time assessing Cameron Smith too. I

1:01:25.400 --> 1:01:28.360
<v Speaker 2>don't think i'd be as optimistic based on what he's

1:01:28.360 --> 1:01:29.080
<v Speaker 2>put out so far.

1:01:29.760 --> 1:01:32.440
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, his form has been kind of non inspiring.

1:01:32.720 --> 1:01:35.680
<v Speaker 2>Yeah. I thought Pinehurst would probably be a better showing

1:01:35.800 --> 1:01:38.240
<v Speaker 2>and he hasn't shown that much. But like, yeah, he's

1:01:38.480 --> 1:01:40.320
<v Speaker 2>I don't know. He finished T two at Live Singapore.

1:01:40.440 --> 1:01:42.640
<v Speaker 2>I don't really know exactly what to make of that

1:01:42.720 --> 1:01:46.080
<v Speaker 2>I think it does have meaning. It was probably for

1:01:46.120 --> 1:01:47.960
<v Speaker 2>too long thought that they had no meaning. Like, I

1:01:47.960 --> 1:01:50.800
<v Speaker 2>think there's some meaning in the results, but it's hard to.

1:01:50.680 --> 1:01:53.720
<v Speaker 1>Exact approximately as much meaning as there is for like

1:01:53.760 --> 1:01:58.120
<v Speaker 1>a signature event, maybe less because the field isn't isn't

1:01:58.200 --> 1:02:00.240
<v Speaker 1>quite as strong as a signature event. But we're also

1:02:00.280 --> 1:02:03.480
<v Speaker 1>we're talking about a you know, a small field kind

1:02:03.480 --> 1:02:03.880
<v Speaker 1>of event.

1:02:04.320 --> 1:02:07.880
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, I think Cam Smith, he's almost thirty one, he

1:02:07.920 --> 1:02:09.600
<v Speaker 2>may end up being the type of player that had

1:02:09.640 --> 1:02:12.880
<v Speaker 2>that surge and it happened a little bit not late

1:02:12.920 --> 1:02:14.520
<v Speaker 2>in his career, but kind of in the middle and

1:02:14.560 --> 1:02:17.880
<v Speaker 2>then maybe flamed I don't want to say flamed out,

1:02:17.920 --> 1:02:21.160
<v Speaker 2>But I'm not as optimistic about camp Smith this year

1:02:21.240 --> 1:02:22.520
<v Speaker 2>until we see a little bit more for him.

1:02:23.120 --> 1:02:26.000
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, he certainly had a run of exceptional form for

1:02:26.040 --> 1:02:29.080
<v Speaker 1>a couple of years, but hasn't necessarily shown that he

1:02:29.120 --> 1:02:32.200
<v Speaker 1>can sustain that. But you know who knows like he's

1:02:32.240 --> 1:02:35.240
<v Speaker 1>a he's obviously a great player. His short game is

1:02:35.280 --> 1:02:39.480
<v Speaker 1>putting amazing, and I just think like when we're when

1:02:39.520 --> 1:02:42.040
<v Speaker 1>we're looking at him, just a couple of years ago

1:02:42.080 --> 1:02:45.400
<v Speaker 1>he was winning an Open championship and now we just

1:02:45.440 --> 1:02:48.080
<v Speaker 1>don't talk about him as much, and maybe maybe for

1:02:48.160 --> 1:02:51.000
<v Speaker 1>some decent reasons because of his recent form, but he

1:02:51.160 --> 1:02:53.440
<v Speaker 1>just is a guy who's who's there and who might

1:02:53.480 --> 1:02:58.160
<v Speaker 1>be a factor. All right, So we have had a

1:02:58.200 --> 1:03:00.520
<v Speaker 1>really good run of major championships this I think the

1:03:00.560 --> 1:03:04.479
<v Speaker 1>majors this year have been absolutely exceptional. Actually, I can't

1:03:04.480 --> 1:03:09.040
<v Speaker 1>remember a year of majors that was this solid across

1:03:09.080 --> 1:03:11.560
<v Speaker 1>the board. I mean, probably there has been one in

1:03:11.600 --> 1:03:14.400
<v Speaker 1>the past ten to fifteen years that I'm forgetting right now.

1:03:14.440 --> 1:03:17.600
<v Speaker 1>But the Masters was great, you know, the PGA Championship

1:03:17.680 --> 1:03:19.959
<v Speaker 1>was really fun to watch, and then the US Open

1:03:20.080 --> 1:03:23.640
<v Speaker 1>was an all timer. I know it's hard to predict

1:03:23.680 --> 1:03:25.919
<v Speaker 1>these things, but do you think we could be set

1:03:26.000 --> 1:03:29.680
<v Speaker 1>up for another really fun major or is this the

1:03:29.760 --> 1:03:33.360
<v Speaker 1>type of course and set up that could maybe lead

1:03:33.440 --> 1:03:36.240
<v Speaker 1>to a little bit of disappointment, maybe kind of a

1:03:36.280 --> 1:03:39.439
<v Speaker 1>low energy major like we saw at last year's Open

1:03:39.480 --> 1:03:40.040
<v Speaker 1>at Hoylake.

1:03:40.440 --> 1:03:42.920
<v Speaker 2>I mean, I would expect it to be an exciting major,

1:03:42.960 --> 1:03:44.760
<v Speaker 2>and I think it's a great golf course that brings

1:03:44.800 --> 1:03:47.360
<v Speaker 2>out a lot of cool shots. So kind of as

1:03:47.400 --> 1:03:49.560
<v Speaker 2>we've talked about before, like some of that Thursday to

1:03:49.640 --> 1:03:52.640
<v Speaker 2>Saturday entertainment value. I think it's going to be really high,

1:03:52.720 --> 1:03:55.200
<v Speaker 2>especially if we get some wind. Given that there's going

1:03:55.280 --> 1:03:59.560
<v Speaker 2>to be some blustery, wet conditions, I think if players

1:03:59.600 --> 1:04:03.520
<v Speaker 2>are playing through that, then it's unlikely that we get

1:04:03.560 --> 1:04:06.800
<v Speaker 2>a runaway unless there's a huge wave split right, Like

1:04:06.840 --> 1:04:09.240
<v Speaker 2>it's blustery and rainy in the morning on Thursday, but

1:04:09.280 --> 1:04:11.880
<v Speaker 2>then in the afternoon the golfers are playing a calm,

1:04:12.480 --> 1:04:15.160
<v Speaker 2>soft course. Then that increases the chances that somebody in

1:04:15.160 --> 1:04:18.120
<v Speaker 2>that wave gets really hot and pulls away. My expectation

1:04:18.160 --> 1:04:20.640
<v Speaker 2>would be that this is a great Major. Sure you

1:04:20.680 --> 1:04:24.000
<v Speaker 2>could have somebody like Brian Harmon, who is a great player,

1:04:24.600 --> 1:04:26.640
<v Speaker 2>run away from it and make it a little bit sleepier,

1:04:26.640 --> 1:04:29.280
<v Speaker 2>but I'm going into it with the expectation of it

1:04:29.280 --> 1:04:30.360
<v Speaker 2>being a great golf tournament.

1:04:30.960 --> 1:04:33.640
<v Speaker 1>All right, Joseph, thanks for coming on the pod. Hoping

1:04:33.840 --> 1:04:35.840
<v Speaker 1>for a great week this week, and I think we'll

1:04:35.840 --> 1:04:39.440
<v Speaker 1>probably reconvene afterwards for a little takeaways podcast.

1:04:39.880 --> 1:04:41.280
<v Speaker 2>Sounds great, Let's have a good tournament.

1:04:53.160 --> 1:04:56.880
<v Speaker 1>This episode of the Friday Golf Podcast was produced by

1:04:56.960 --> 1:05:01.240
<v Speaker 1>PJ Clark. Thank you, PJ. We'd like to support the

1:05:01.240 --> 1:05:06.280
<v Speaker 1>Frida Egg podcast on another level, then consider joining CLUBTFE,

1:05:06.360 --> 1:05:09.360
<v Speaker 1>go to the fridagg dot com slash membership and see

1:05:09.400 --> 1:05:11.480
<v Speaker 1>what we have to offer there. We do a lot

1:05:11.480 --> 1:05:15.640
<v Speaker 1>of exclusive content, course profiles, design notebook, tour guide, all

1:05:15.640 --> 1:05:18.200
<v Speaker 1>that kind of stuff. And we're building a wonderful community

1:05:18.680 --> 1:05:22.000
<v Speaker 1>in CLUBTFE of golf sikos who just love the game,

1:05:22.120 --> 1:05:25.040
<v Speaker 1>love talking about the game, and we're really excited about it.

1:05:25.040 --> 1:05:28.680
<v Speaker 1>So CLUBTFE, the Frida egg dot com slash membership, see

1:05:28.680 --> 1:05:32.479
<v Speaker 1>what it's all about, and in the meantime, enjoy open Week.

1:05:32.800 --> 1:05:47.240
<v Speaker 1>We'll see you on the other side for another episode.