Tiger at 15 at the Masters vs. Phil at 18 at the Open

« **on:** April 09, 2007, 09:59:09 AM »

I was wondering if there is a comparison between Tiger's second at 15 at the Masters vs. Phil's second at the 18th at the Open. What I am suggesting is that many questioned Phil's decision to try a cut 3 iron second shot at #18 at last year's open - does the same group question Tiger's decision to try a cut into the 15th green at the Masters. Tiger could've punched out and hit it close for a good shot at birdie, which many other players chose to do, but instead, he tried a nearly impossible cut shot into a very firm green with water in front. Clearly, what Tiger tried to do was far more difficult than what Phil tried.

« **Reply #1 on:** April 09, 2007, 10:04:48 AM »

Jerry - I raised the same point on another Augusta thread

while it may have been a mistake by Tiger, it wasn't so obvious or fatal as Phil's mistake, where par on the last wins

« **Reply #2 on:** April 09, 2007, 10:11:00 AM »

It's a good comparison. The only caveat I would have is that Tiger has pulled off the ridiculous swing-out-of-his-shoes, 75-yard banana fade to a front right pin an improbable number of times. I think it's one of those shots he is just really comfortable with.

« **Reply #3 on:** April 09, 2007, 10:17:05 AM »

Difference #1:
Phil was leading by 1 on the 18th, Tiger was trailing by 3 on the 15th.

Difference #2:
Phil was on a par 4, Tiger was on a par 5.

Difference #3:
Phil compounded his problems with his next two shots, Tiger recovered from his problems with his next two shots.

Difference #4:
Phil made double bogey, Tiger made par.

Difference #5:
Phil changed the outcome of the tournament, Tiger tried to but didn't.

« **Reply #4 on:** April 09, 2007, 10:18:00 AM »

Quote from: A.G._Crockett on April 09, 2007, 10:17:05 AM

Difference #1:
Phil was leading by 1 on the 18th, Tiger was trailing by 2 on the 15th.

Difference #2:
Phil was on a par 4, Tiger was on a par 5.

Difference #3:
Phil compounded his problems with his next two shots, Tiger recovered from his problems with his next two shots.

Difference #4:
Phil made double bogey, Tiger made par.

Difference #5:
Phil changed the outcome of the tournament, Tiger tried to but didn't.

My thoughts exactly.

« **Reply #5 on:** April 09, 2007, 10:20:28 AM »

I 3rd that...there is no comparison...situations were completely different...

« **Reply #6 on:** April 09, 2007, 10:21:43 AM »

Dan: Perhaps Tiger is losing sight of what is reasonable under the circumstances. He said that he lost the tournament because of his bogey bogey finishes on Thursday and Saturday rather than admitting his failure to execute on 15. I'm trying to remember where Johnson was when Tiger parred 15 but a birdie on 15 would've put even more pressure on him - Tiger didn't need eagle.

« **Reply #7 on:** April 09, 2007, 10:22:55 AM »

Quote from: A.G._Crockett on April 09, 2007, 10:17:05 AM

Difference #1:
Phil was leading by 1 on the 18th, Tiger was trailing by 2 on the 15th.

Difference #2:
Phil was on a par 4, Tiger was on a par 5.

Difference #3:
Phil compounded his problems with his next two shots, Tiger recovered from his problems with his next two shots.

Difference #4:
Phil made double bogey, Tiger made par.

Difference #5:
Phil changed the outcome of the tournament, Tiger tried to but didn't.

If you figure 15 as a birdie hole, they are both really par 4's to the players.

If you start with the drive as the first bad shot, both compounded their difficulties with the second shot (both tried big fades that didn't work.

In any event, what about his approaches on 17 & 18. If Phil had ended up with those results, I am sure we would be hearing about the ghosts of Winged Foot now....

« **Reply #8 on:** April 09, 2007, 10:24:34 AM »

I think Tiger was just trying to win, knowing that this was best chance to make a move. 16 was a possibility for birdie, but 17 and 18 are not generally birdie-fests, plus Tiger would have had to get drives in play on both holes. I think he made the right decision.

« **Reply #9 on:** April 09, 2007, 10:25:52 AM »

Are you guys saying that the shot that Tiger was trying to pull off was a good decision - I don't see it. He was two behind with 4 to go - a birdie puts him 1 behind. He had a clear birdie opportunity on 16 and guys were hitting it long enough on 17 to have wedges in which again, is a birdie opportunity. There simply was no need to put it all on the line there with a nearly impossible shot.

« **Reply #10 on:** April 09, 2007, 10:29:05 AM »

For all the talk about Tiger's missed shots, the difference on the back 9 was in putting. Tiger and Zach had very similar putts for birdie on 14 and 16. Zach made both of his. Tiger missed. Two shot difference. Zach got it done when it mattered and Tiger didn't.

« **Reply #11 on:** April 09, 2007, 10:41:25 AM »

Quote from: Jerry Kluger on April 09, 2007, 10:25:52 AM

Are you guys saying that the shot that Tiger was trying to pull off was a good decision - I don't see it. He was two behind with 4 to go - a birdie puts him 1 behind. He had a clear birdie opportunity on 16 and guys were hitting it long enough on 17 to have wedges in which again, is a birdie opportunity. There simply was no need to put it all on the line there with a nearly impossible shot.

Wasn't Tiger 3 behind at that point? I don't think that Johnson's bogey at 17 had been posted yet.. At 3 back you gotta go.

« **Reply #12 on:** April 09, 2007, 11:13:56 AM »

If I recall, he also had something like 195 to the flag? No way he lays up from that distance, but it probably would have been a better choice. That was just a very poor execution.

« **Reply #13 on:** April 09, 2007, 11:19:22 AM »

Quote from: Dan_Callahan on April 09, 2007, 10:29:05 AM

For all the talk about Tiger's missed shots, the difference on the back 9 was in putting. Tiger and Zach had very similar putts for birdie on 14 and 16. Zach made both of his. Tiger missed. Two shot difference. Zach got it done when it mattered and Tiger didn't.

Goosen had the same putt on 14 and he also missed. That's the ball game right there.

« **Reply #14 on:** April 09, 2007, 11:24:11 AM »

John: I don't know if I would call it poor execution or poor choice of shot. The question is from where he was what chance did he have to put himself in position for eagle - I would say that it was far less than Phil had for putting himself into postion for par. Tiger's chances of pulling it off were far less than Phil's chances - Phil didn't even need to hit the green, short or in the bunker would've been okay. If Tiger doesn't hit it on the green close, he would have a tough time making birdie.

« **Reply #15 on:** April 09, 2007, 11:27:32 AM »

Does anyone else have the impression that Hank Haney heard that old line about Jack Grout - "He couldn't have stopped Jack from winning 18 majors" - and viewed it as a personal challenge?

« **Reply #16 on:** April 09, 2007, 11:29:48 AM »

Johnson hadn't even made the bogey on 17 at that point, in fact I think he hadn't even hit his approach (which wasn't bad either). Tiger's three behind with three holes and the rest of the 15th to go, and Zach Johnson hasn't stumbled at all in the back nine - in fact he's just made birdie at 16 and seems to be all but uncatchable.

It was a no-brainer for him to go for it, considering he's probably pulled that shot off before countless times (and certainly pulled off more difficult shots). He just didn't quite catch it properly.

I don't see any similarities between that and Phil's mistake at Winged Foot. Phil could play conservatively and force a playoff, and Tiger was pulling out all the stops in the hopes of getting to a playoff.

My impression from the week was that once again, Tiger could play his C game all week and still almost win, while it took a uniquely heroic and well-timed performance from someone else to just edge him out.

Congrats to Zach Johnson, though, what a gutsy performance down the stretch. He really didn't miss a shot aside from the three-putt on 17 (which technically wasn't even a three-putt since the first was from the fringe), and he made all the shots he had to. I wonder where this will take his game from here.

« **Reply #17 on:** April 09, 2007, 11:37:35 AM »

Quote from: Jerry Kluger on April 09, 2007, 10:21:43 AM

He said that he lost the tournament because of his bogey bogey finishes on Thursday and Saturday rather than admitting his failure to execute on 15.

Jack never missed a short putt to lose a tournament either.

Mentally he will say that he is money on Sunday for a title.

« **Reply #18 on:** April 09, 2007, 11:39:20 AM »

I don't think that anyone played their "A" game all week as the course simply didn't allow anyone to really shine. It was all about recoveries and that includes putting. I admire Johnson for what he did and he deserved to win but not because he brought his "A" game. He 3 putted under pressure and he missed the green on 18 and then made a great chip that made him a winner. Tiger needed to put it in the fairway on 15 and he didn't - he then had to try and pull of a shot that even for him was nearly impossible. Does anyone really think that even if he had hit the 15th green that it would've stopp close to the hole, come on, be realistic, the percentages there were just totally against even Tiger - this isn't a good lie in a bunker over water - this is a cut shot out of the tree line into a very firm green.

« **Reply #19 on:** April 09, 2007, 11:42:09 AM »

Quote from: Brian_Sleeman on April 09, 2007, 11:29:48 AM

Johnson hadn't even made the bogey on 17 at that point, in fact I think he hadn't even hit his approach (which wasn't bad either). Tiger's three behind with three holes and the rest of the 15th to go, and Zach Johnson hasn't stumbled at all in the back nine - in fact he's just made birdie at 16 and seems to be all but uncatchable.

It was a no-brainer for him to go for it, considering he's probably pulled that shot off before countless times (and certainly pulled off more difficult shots). He just didn't quite catch it properly.

I don't see any similarities between that and Phil's mistake at Winged Foot. Phil could play conservatively and force a playoff, and Tiger was pulling out all the stops in the hopes of getting to a playoff.

My impression from the week was that once again, Tiger could play his C game all week and still almost win, while it took a uniquely heroic and well-timed performance from someone else to just edge him out.

Congrats to Zach Johnson, though, what a gutsy performance down the stretch. He really didn't miss a shot aside from the three-putt on 17 (which technically wasn't even a three-putt since the first was from the fringe), and he made all the shots he had to. I wonder where this will take his game from here.

Brian,

You make a bunch of excellent points. Tiger's predominance is such that he was a threat to win the toonamint even as late as the 16th hole when he missed his makable birdie putt. He was struggling with his swing which the world saw because he kept tinkering with swing mechanics on the tee box before swinging on Sunday. So whether it's his B game or his C game, he almost won anyway. This is no discredit to Zach Johnson who bested the golf course and two major championship winners to get the green jacket. I don't know how many other trophies he'll get, but he earned this one. He didn't back into it in any way.

« **Reply #20 on:** April 09, 2007, 11:45:46 AM »

I honestly thought Tiger would birdie 17 and 18 after his excellent drive on 17. I was even thinking of the crap I would take for saying there have been no historical short iron shots hit in the game. Tiger dumping the ball into the trap on 17 was either a mental mistake or a bad swing. I would guess one of the worst shots in his life. Can you imagine how golf might be different today if he had done something of the sort in his charges to win the three US AMs.

« **Reply #21 on:** April 09, 2007, 11:55:21 AM »

Tiger seemed to think he stiffed it on #17, and really, catching the lip as he did meant that if he'd only gotten a few more feet out of it, he would've been right. Downwind out of the light rough, he again went for the perfect shot and in this case only barely missed. His line was certainly perfect if his goal was to hit it to tap-in range.

It wouldn't have taken much more from him on only a shot or two and we'd all be bowing down to his performance.

Looking at it with a bit more perspective, consider now that Tiger had two chances in the last two Masters to come from behind and get the job done on the back nine, and he narrowly missed both while battling an inconsistent putter in 2006 and now in 2007 some rather large swing problems. I remember short eagle putts on 13 and 15 last year, plus close birdie attempts on 12 and a few others coming in, and he wasn't able to capitalize on them to put the heat on Phil.

And the year before, he was also battling his swing and still hung on against Chris DiMarco.

For some reason he's not getting his game to peak in April, but he's still having chances every year. What happens once he finally gets his timing right again?

« **Reply #22 on:** April 09, 2007, 12:18:38 PM »

Not having a look at the lie, and being familiar with 15 but not like he is, I'm still gonna say it was a pretty dumb shot, even for him. The odds of him making three from there were almost nil, but four was a real possibility with his short game.

Lay up! Wedge it close and put more pressure on the leader.

His immense talent and heart usually carry the day, but this was some bad thinking by the games best player. However, it certainly doesn't rise to the level of Phil's thinking on eighteen.

« **Reply #23 on:** April 09, 2007, 12:27:58 PM »

Hitting a cut long iron out of the rough was an unnecessary risk. If he wanted to go for it, I don't know why he didn't try to bunt a 5 wood.

in addition to 15, he came up short on at least two other occasions, on 8 and on 17, both of which were bizarre misses for him

« **Reply #24 on:** April 09, 2007, 12:28:45 PM »

Quote from: archie_struthers on April 09, 2007, 12:18:38 PM

Not having a look at the lie, and being familiar with 15 but not like he is, I'm still gonna say it was a pretty dumb shot, even for him. The odds of him making three from there were almost nil, but four was a real possibility with his short game.

Lay up! Wedge it close and put more pressure on the leader.

His immense talent and heart usually carry the day, but this was some bad thinking by the games best player. However, it certainly doesn't rise to the level of Phil's thinking on eighteen.

Archie,
He was three back (not two, as I originally posted; Johnson's bogey on 17 hadn't been posted yet) on the last par five of the tournament. His best chance to make four is to try to make three. If he tries to make 4 and makes 5, then there is no way he catches Johnson. That Johnson did bogey 17 is irrelevant; Tiger can't wait for the only guy in the tournament who is even to make a whole series of mistakes coming in.

News:

Jerry Kluger

PThomas

Dan_Callahan

A.G._Crockett

JR Potts

Kalen Braley

Jerry Kluger

Steve Pozaric

ed_getka

Jerry Kluger

Dan_Callahan

Sean Leary

John Foley

Phil Benedict

Jerry Kluger

George Pazin

Brian_Sleeman

noonan

Jerry Kluger

tlavin

John Kavanaugh

Brian_Sleeman

archie_struthers

Eric Olsen

A.G._Crockett