The Masters 2020

obi604 · 16-11-2020 10:55am

GreeBo wrote: »

While you might not like Bryson as a person (hands up who on here knows him?!) knocking him for bulking up is crazy. He tried something and has had great success with it, sure it didnt work out this week, but the same is true for 50% of the field!

Rory did another Rory and stormed up the leaderboard when it was all over. Its a shocking state of affairs for a golfer where they freely admit that they struggle to hit anything less than a full shot, thats pretty basic stuff right there.

hi, what do you mean by the above?

tyivpc5qjx0f2b · 16-11-2020 11:01am

GreeBo wrote: »

I think we could see Koepka and DJ battle it out for years like Jack and Tom.
Would be great to watch.

DJ is playing fantastic and well deserved that victory lbut the above scenario wont happen.

The gap between Jack & Tom vs the field was far greater than the gap between DJ & Brooks vs the field.

Additionally DJ is 36 and this is only his 2nd major perhaps the floodgates will open but I'm pessimistic that they will.

Perhaps some great rivalry will come around that mirrors Jack & Tom but I dont think it'll be between DJ & Brooks.

zf0wqv9oemuasj · 16-11-2020 11:05am

obi604 wrote: »

Thanks. But is Dustin Johnson, Rory Mcilroy etc not doing the whole weights thing too......or are they just less vocal about it.

Bryson is extremely dis-likeable and always has in my opinion long before his bodybuilder phase. He plays slow, he over analyses, the whole same length shaft thing is silly, he talks a lot of rubbish and so on. Kopkea is another I have absolutely no time for, his interview yesterday was a pain to listen to, no respect at all for the tournament (though I've disliked his arrogance since he came on the scene not based on yesterday).

B-D-P-- · 16-11-2020 11:38am

Ariya Stale Soul wrote: »

the whole same length shaft thing is silly, .

I agree with everything except this.

I always wondered if golf was always played with the same length club with different lofts, and a player came to the game and said, Not only do you need a different loft, you also need a different size shaft.

How many people would laugh at him & say sure you'll keep topping if your not used to shaft length..

TheRiverman · 16-11-2020 2:50pm

obi604 wrote: »

Thanks. But is Dustin Johnson, Rory Mcilroy etc not doing the whole weights thing too......or are they just less vocal about it.

They are less vocal, of course they have to keep fit and look after their bodies, but they look normal compared to DeChambeau. Also his belittling of one the most famous courses in the World just stinks.

eagle eye · 16-11-2020 3:10pm

TheRiverman wrote: »

They are less vocal, of course they have to keep fit and look after their bodies, but they look normal compared to DeChambeau. Also his belittling of one the most famous courses in the World just stinks.

And then there's the mini tantrums, stamping his putter hard on the green is a regular thing, throwing clubs.

And on top of that he is so slow.

Too many things not to like about him.

GreeBo · 16-11-2020 3:41pm

obi604 wrote: »

hi, what do you mean by the above?

He has said (more than once if memory serves) this week that basically when he tries to take something off it he loses control of it (left, right, long short)

I've said it before also, his game seems to be aimed around swinging flat out, which is great, but <50% of golf shots are hit at full pelt. As a top golfer you need to be able to hit multiple distance with the same club, if you cant then you will only win when you get lucky and have more full shots than partial shots, its no way to dominate.

blue note · 16-11-2020 4:07pm

GreeBo wrote: »

He has said (more than once if memory serves) this week that basically when he tries to take something off it he loses control of it (left, right, long short)

I've said it before also, his game seems to be aimed around swinging flat out, which is great, but <50% of golf shots are hit at full pelt. As a top golfer you need to be able to hit multiple distance with the same club, if you cant then you will only win when you get lucky and have more full shots than partial shots, its no way to dominate.

I have the exact same problem. I see a lot of similarities with us from a golfing sense.

Trouser Snake · 16-11-2020 4:30pm

blue note wrote: »

I have the exact same problem. I see a lot of similarities with us from a golfing sense.

Me too, but we're only discussing top top golfers here. The real top 1%.

GreeBo · 16-11-2020 5:40pm

blue note wrote: »

I have the exact same problem. I see a lot of similarities with us from a golfing sense.

Unfortunately for him, so does he!

You often hear Bryson talking about specific times corresponding to the length of backswing used to control distance, I think the majority of players (including am's) work this way but McIlroy seems to struggle with it.
To me that implies that he is relying a huge amount on timing which isn't a good place to be imo.

Its funny to think that he has only 1 more major than Harrington.

tyivpc5qjx0f2b · 16-11-2020 6:22pm

GreeBo wrote: »

Unfortunately for him, so does he!
You often hear Bryson talking about specific times corresponding to the length of backswing used to control distance, I think the majority of players (including am's) work this way but McIlroy seems to struggle with it.
To me that implies that he is relying a huge amount on timing which isn't a good place to be imo.

Its funny to think that he has only 1 more major than Harrington.

Almost as funny-at least to me- that DJ can now say he's an accomplished in Majors as Martin Kaymer who he's the same age as.

GreeBo · 17-11-2020 10:57am

Calliope Billions Snooper wrote: »

Almost as funny-at least to me- that DJ can now say he's an accomplished in Majors as Martin Kaymer who he's the same age as.

100%, but who would you rather be: the guy who has just started winning them or the guy who hasnt won one in forever?

Kaymer won one as recently as Rory did, theres another funny stat!

djr15 · 17-11-2020 11:05am

I think its worth mentioning the depth of field in golf at the moment.

A lot of 300+ yard bombers between the age of 20 and 35.
Play with little or no fear.
No major weaknesses.

For example:
Keopka, Rory, Fowler, JT, Rahm, Rose, Garcia, Reed, Cantlay, Morikawa, Wolfe, Champ, DJ, Schauffle, Simpson, Bryson, Fleetwood, Finau, Hediki, Cameron Smith, Lowry, Woodland.

and there are many more ouside of that...

not all fall into the exact age bracket, but the worlds top 75 on their day could probably win a major.

Even the guy who won low amateur at the masters, he performed and spoke like a pro of 10 years FFS....

The talent is scary.

Conclusion: We are too hard on Rory - I'm sure he will pick up a few more majors though.

Roger_007 · 17-11-2020 11:48am

GreeBo wrote: »

100%, but who would you rather be: the guy who has just started winning them or the guy who hasnt won one in forever?

Kaymer won one as recently as Rory did, theres another funny stat!

The number of ‘majors’ that any golfer wins is often down to luck. Sometimes a major is won or lost on someone having, or not having, an outrageous slice of luck. Many majors are won by players who have not won much else but who just have a purple patch at the right time combined with a bit of good fortune.
Many of the best players in the history of the game may not have won many majors but have won many other tournaments.
There are, of course, a few players who were so much better than most other players of their day that luck was virtually a non-factor, (I.E. Woods, Nicklaus, Palmer). Otherwise its mostly down to being in the right form at the right time........and some help from Lady Luck.
I think the best way to compare players is by the number of tournaments that they have won overall.

GreeBo · 17-11-2020 12:23pm

Roger_007 wrote: »

The number of ‘majors’ that any golfer wins is often down to luck. Sometimes a major is won or lost on someone having, or not having, an outrageous slice of luck. Many majors are won by players who have not won much else but who just have a purple patch at the right time combined with a bit of good fortune.

I think a lot of that is down to us as humans ascribing more weight to luck on the back 9 on Sunday and forgetting about the luck on Thursday morning.
Golf is all about purple patches, thats how anyone wins anything, you play well for the majority of that tournament, it doesnt matter if you play crap right before and right after.

Many of the best players in the history of the game may not have won many majors but have won many other tournaments.
There are, of course, a few players who were so much better than most other players of their day that luck was virtually a non-factor, (I.E. Woods, Nicklaus, Palmer). Otherwise its mostly down to being in the right form at the right time........and some help from Lady Luck.
I think the best way to compare players is by the number of tournaments that they have won overall.

If its down to luck for the majors then isnt it also down to luck for all the regular tournaments also? And since there are far more of them than majors, you dont need as much luck to pick up some tournament wins?

I think 95% of the time there is luck involved in winning anything, the other 5% of the time is when someone just plays great golf and dominates the field by 3+ strokes.

PabloAndRoy · 17-11-2020 12:35pm

I like Bryson. A breath of fresh air. Why are people attacking the guy for hitting it long? I don't get it.

Sure he's cocky, but I find that funny. The par 67 comment was clearly ridiculous and hilarious in equal measure. He's very analytical, that's how he rolls. He has a bit of a hot head at times, again a bit funny for me.

He is not nearly as slow as he was a couple of seasons back. After a lot of criticism, he made an effort to speed up and he has done that.

Also, he has a lot more to his game than long hitting. His touch around the green is amazing when he is on form.

DJ, while obviously a fantastically consistent and excellent player, for me he lacks a bit of personality. My SO calls him "the machine".

Bryson is the Alex Higgins of modern golf. Golf is better with him than without him. Long live Bryson.

eagle eye · 17-11-2020 12:39pm

GreeBo wrote:

I think 95% of the time there is luck involved in winning anything, the other 5% of the time is when someone just plays great golf and dominates the field by 3+ strokes.

Dustin Johnson has four wins and three runner-up finishes, including losing a playoff, since lockdown. That's out of the thirteen tournaments he has played in.

Panrich · 17-11-2020 12:41pm

PabloAndRoy wrote: »

I like Bryson. A breath of fresh air. Why are people attacking the guy for hitting it long? I don't get it.

Sure he's cocky, but I find that funny. The par 67 comment was clearly ridiculous and hilarious in equal measure. He's very analytical, that's how he rolls. He has a bit of a hot head at times, again a bit funny for me.

He is not nearly as slow as he was a couple of seasons back. After a lot of criticism, he made an effort to speed up and he has done that.

Also, he has a lot more to his game than long hitting. His touch around the green is amazing when he is on form.

DJ, while obviously a fantastically consistent and excellent player, for me he lacks a bit of personality. My SO calls him "the machine".

Bryson is the Alex Higgins of modern golf. Golf is better with him than without him. Long live Bryson.

I can't see that his green books and incessant checks and re-checks bring any fresh air to golf. It's actually infuriating to watch. I do like see him bomb it from the tee but that 's when the fun stops with Bryson.

sheroman01 · 17-11-2020 12:41pm

Bryson Dechambeau: 27 years old. 340 yards avg. driving distance.

Bernhard Langer: 63 years old. 260 yards avg. driving distance.

And Langer finishes ahead of Dechambeau in the Masters, of all majors! After all his sh1te talk. Absolutely love to see it!

djr15 · 17-11-2020 12:45pm

The guy blamed the caddy’s for slow play.

The same guy took 4 mins to miss a 10-foot put in Germany a couple of years back. The same tournament i believe he gave a half-hearted handshake to the eventual winner on the 18th green.

The same guy wanted a free drop recently over ants being near his ball.

The same guy questioned and sulked at a rules official in the last few months when he hit the ball OOB and the ruling was clear that the main poles were the OOB line, not the fence.

The same guy asked a rules official the other day, "if we can't find the ball, that’s a lost ball right"

He's a clown that is used to getting things his own way and throws his toys out of the pram when things go bad.

I'm all for characters in the game but he's a real piece of work.

PabloAndRoy wrote: »

I like Bryson. A breath of fresh air. Why are people attacking the guy for hitting it long? I don't get it.

DuckSlice · 17-11-2020 1:07pm

Tiger is one lucky person so!! is it 82 times he has been lucky now?

tyivpc5qjx0f2b · 17-11-2020 1:21pm

I think Roger007's point -correct me if I'm wrong- is that major's only account for a relatively small proportion of tournaments throughout the year. Luck/Variance/Volatility whatever you want to call it plays a factor in every tournament but generally evens itself out more and more over time which is why you see DJ, Rory, Rahm etc consistently rank so highly.

By happenstance it may simply be that certain players outperform -get lucky- at more prestigious events rather than more run of the mill tournaments.
This "luck" factor tends to arise less often in other individual sports like Men's Tennis because the format is more conducive to better players ie 5 sets vs 3 sets so variance is less of a factor.

I see the point he's trying to make and there is some validity to it but majors are more difficult to win because players prepare more for them and courses are generally tougher.
I do think that variance plays a role and that variance can lead to certain players overachieving in more prestigious events and better players underachieving.

GreeBo · 17-11-2020 2:37pm

eagle eye wrote: »

Dustin Johnson has four wins and three runner-up finishes, including losing a playoff, since lockdown. That's out of the thirteen tournaments he has played in.

He is playing great golf, no doubt about it.
I was talking more about anyone winning anything, there is usually a stroke of luck (good or bad) involved in someone winning a tournament.

GreeBo · 17-11-2020 2:39pm

Calliope Billions Snooper wrote: »

but majors are more difficult to win because players prepare more for them and courses are generally tougher.

I dont get this bit tbh, I think they are trying to win everything they enter (other than a handful of events where they are playing in Dubai for sponsorship reasons)

newport2 · 17-11-2020 2:58pm

Calliope Billions Snooper wrote: »

I see the point he's trying to make and there is some validity to it but majors are more difficult to win because players prepare more for them and courses are generally tougher.

I think it was Nicklaus who said they are easier to win than normal events because 90% of the field don't believe they can win them (something along those lines) So I guess you could say for 90% of players they are harder, but not for the other 10%!

blue note · 17-11-2020 3:01pm

newport2 wrote: »

I think it was Nicklaus who said they are easier to win than normal events because 90% of the field don't believe they can win them (something along those lines) So I guess you could say for 90% of players they are harder, but not for the other 10%!

That's spot on. The pressure is greater in them than in any other event. But like every other event, 1 guy will win them at the end of the day.

Brooks said something similar - half the field are out of contention before they hit a ball, because they don't have the bottle for it. Sounds harsh, but it's true.

tyivpc5qjx0f2b · 17-11-2020 3:07pm

newport2 wrote: »

I think it was Nicklaus who said they are easier to win than normal events because 90% of the field don't believe they can win them (something along those lines) So I guess you could say for 90% of players they are harder, but not for the other 10%!

Seems like he and maybe Tiger are probably the only people who could actually make that claim.

GreeBo wrote: »

I dont get this bit tbh, I think they are trying to win everything they enter (other than a handful of events where they are playing in Dubai for sponsorship reasons)

I never said they're not trying to win everything they enter but for elite players their goal is to peak at certain events.

When other players are entering the Houston Open in order to gain ranking points, the likes of Rory is afforded the luxury of taking time off to gear themselves up for The Masters.

Similarly as mentioned, Brooks has dismissed the value of other tournaments in order to prepare for Majors.

No elite golfer isn't trying to win every event they enter but majors are more difficult to win because many golfers build their game around peaking at that time.

zf0wqv9oemuasj · 17-11-2020 3:18pm

I think a lot of the time majors are won by the best golfers but like any tournament a player can be lucky enough to peak for a major rather than some run of the mill tournament. While they are harder to win physiologically and are sometimes more difficult they are not that much more challenging than many non-majors. They even use the same courses as normal comps in many cases.

Danny Willet winning the masters comes to mind in this conversation, a very average pro by any measure who just happened to get it right at the right time. DJ on the other hand I would not say had much luck, if anything he is fighting a lot of bad look throughout majors with questionable rules decisions, one poor shot getting punished and so on.

eagle eye · 17-11-2020 3:24pm

Ariya Stale Soul wrote:

Danny Willet winning the masters comes to mind in this conversation, a very average pro by any measure who just happened to get it right at the right.

Danny Willett was no.11 in the world entering the 2016 Masters.

GreeBo · 17-11-2020 4:07pm

eagle eye wrote: »

Danny Willett was no.11 in the world entering the 2016 Masters.

I always think of Shaun Micheel and Beemer

Augme · 17-11-2020 4:07pm

The difference between the majors and other tournaments is pressure. So people thrive under pressure while some people buckle. It is the same in every sports and area of life really. Mostly the difference between GOATs in most individual sports in their ability to handle the pressure and how they perform when the pressure is on.

yaboya1 · 17-11-2020 6:04pm

Calliope Billions Snooper wrote: »

Seems like he and maybe Tiger are probably the only people who could actually make that claim.

Koepka makes the same claim all the time. He's been in contention and won more majors than he has regular tournaments.

For people saying that it comes down to luck, I'll leave you with another Nicklaus quote:

"The harder I practice, the luckier I get."

GreeBo · 17-11-2020 6:17pm

yaboya1 wrote: »

Koepka makes the same claim all the time. He's been in contention and won more majors than he has regular tournaments.

For people saying that it comes down to luck, I'll leave you with another Nicklaus quote:

"The harder I practice, the luckier I get."

Everyone has good and bad luck on the course, especially throughout 72 holes, the difference is that having great luck when you are in contention is much more useful than having great luck when you are not. (or rather it seems that way)

Personally it would be rare enough that I win something by having a perfect round of golf, there is always some shot that could have gone much, much worse.

tyivpc5qjx0f2b · 17-11-2020 6:22pm

yaboya1 wrote: »

Koepka makes the same claim all the time. He's been in contention and won more majors than he has regular tournaments.

For people saying that it comes down to luck, I'll leave you with another Nicklaus quote:

"The harder I practice, the luckier I get."

I don't think anyone thinks that winning "comes down to luck" but to deny luck/variance is often a factor is simply untrue.

Also, that isnt a Nicklaus quote, maybe he said it at some point but it's usually attributed to Palmer.

yaboya1 · 17-11-2020 6:23pm

GreeBo wrote: »

Everyone has good and bad luck on the course, especially throughout 72 holes, the difference is that having great luck when you are in contention is much more useful than having great luck when you are not. (or rather it seems that way)

Personally it would be rare enough that I win something by having a perfect round of golf, there is always some shot that could have gone much, much worse.

That's the point he's making.
If you're always in contention, when the good luck falls your way it can be the winning of the tournament.
It's not going to make a difference to somebody languishing in 45th place.

yaboya1 · 17-11-2020 6:28pm

Calliope Billions Snooper wrote: »

I don't think anyone thinks that winning "comes down to luck" but to deny luck/variance is often a factor is simply untrue.

Also, that isnt a Nicklaus quote, maybe he said it at some point but it's usually attributed to Palmer.

As above, good luck will have a bigger impact if you're in contention. If you work hard/practice, you're more likely to be in contention more often, hence the good luck will matter more than if you weren't.
Nicklaus was 2nd in 19 majors, so didn't have things fall his way on those occasions but he was there to take advantage if they did.

Re: the quote, you're probably right but I'm sure I've heard Nicklaus use it even if it's not his.

tyivpc5qjx0f2b · 17-11-2020 6:43pm

yaboya1 wrote: »

As above, good luck will have a bigger impact if you're in contention. If you work hard/practice, you're more likely to be in contention more often, hence the good luck will matter more than if you weren't.
Nicklaus was 2nd in 19 majors, so didn't have things fall his way on those occasions but he was there to take advantage if they did.

Re: the quote, you're probably right but I'm sure I've heard Nicklaus use it even if it's not his.

Largely I agree, I think that's a fair way of describing it.

It's relative to your ability. An amateur making a cut, a web.com player getting a tour card, an elite player winning a major, the margins are often so small.

The difference with Nicklaus is that he was so far ahead that no matter how his luck may have broke, he'd still have won his fair share.

GreeBo · 17-11-2020 6:47pm

yaboya1 wrote: »

As above, good luck will have a bigger impact if you're in contention. If you work hard/practice, you're more likely to be in contention more often, hence the good luck will matter more than if you weren't.
Nicklaus was 2nd in 19 majors, so didn't have things fall his way on those occasions but he was there to take advantage if they did.

Ah but he didnt win those 19 majors, maybe it was just because he didnt have any luck those days (or the other guys had more)

note that I am not *in any way* saying that everyone is equal and some are just luckier than others, but in every round of golf played there is luck involved, its an imperfect game played in imperfect conditions.

GreeBo · 17-11-2020 6:51pm

Calliope Billions Snooper wrote: »

The difference with Nicklaus is that he was so far ahead that no matter how his luck may have broke, he'd still have won his fair share.

Thats the point I was making when I said that baring the guys who win at a canter (like DJ last week and Tiger has done a few times)

It doesnt matter what luck you have if you are 5 ahead of everyone else!

yaboya1 · 17-11-2020 6:52pm

GreeBo wrote: »

Ah but he didnt win those 19 majors, maybe it was just because he didnt have any luck those days (or the other guys had more)

That's exactly what I'm saying?

blue note · 17-11-2020 9:41pm

yaboya1 wrote: »

As above, good luck will have a bigger impact if you're in contention. If you work hard/practice, you're more likely to be in contention more often, hence the good luck will matter more than if you weren't.
Nicklaus was 2nd in 19 majors, so didn't have things fall his way on those occasions but he was there to take advantage if they did.

Re: the quote, you're probably right but I'm sure I've heard Nicklaus use it even if it's not his.

From a golfing sense it's attributed to Gary player. But I'm pretty sure even he says he didn't invent it.

It's a good line though.

eagle eye · 17-11-2020 9:55pm

GreeBo wrote:

Personally it would be rare enough that I win something by having a perfect round of golf, there is always some shot that could have gone much, much worse.

The real difference has nothing to do with luck it's about consistency in every area. The better you are the better your bad shots are, the better you are the more putts you hole from ten feet, the more chips you put stone dead etc.
Dustin Johnson had four bogeys in the tournament, that wasn't down to luck, it was down to great play.

Roger_007 · 18-11-2020 1:32am

eagle eye wrote: »

The real difference has nothing to do with luck it's about consistency in every area. The better you are the better your bad shots are, the better you are the more putts you hole from ten feet, the more chips you put stone dead etc.
Dustin Johnson had four bogeys in the tournament, that wasn't down to luck, it was down to great play.

I agree that you have to play well to be in a position to avail of a bit of good luck. When Fred Couples won the Masters, (his one and only major), he had a huge bit of luck at the 12th when his ball ran down the bank towards the water but stopped half way down the bank. Nobody had ever seen a ball stop there before or since. He made a par and went on to win.
Nobody could deny that Couples deserved a major but he needed that bit of luck to do it.

fearruanua · 18-11-2020 9:56am

Only 141 days to the Masters!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

GreeBo · 18-11-2020 11:01am

eagle eye wrote: »

The real difference has nothing to do with luck it's about consistency in every area. The better you are the better your bad shots are, the better you are the more putts you hole from ten feet, the more chips you put stone dead etc.
Dustin Johnson had four bogeys in the tournament, that wasn't down to luck, it was down to great play.

I think we have all agreed (several times now!) that there are scenarios where someone just beats everyone else significantly and its down to skill that week, they may have had some luck but it didnt determine the outcome of the event.

18-11-2020 2:39pm

Can anyone figure out why masters wont allow more TV coverage. It makes very little sense to me. Particularly when they have an online feature allowing you to watch each shot a player hits anyway.

The lack of early coverage has been annoying me increasingly over the last few years. To the point it has become the least enjoyable major for me now.

zf0wqv9oemuasj · 18-11-2020 2:56pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Can anyone figure out why masters wont allow more TV coverage. It makes very little sense to me. Particularly when they have an online feature allowing you to watch each shot a player hits anyway.

The lack of early coverage has been annoying me increasingly over the last few years. To the point it has become the least enjoyable major for me now.

They basically say they don’t want a saturation of coverage and they feel only allowing a few hours is better for that or some nonsense along them lines.

The masters app is a thing of beauty though, especially run through a USA vpn as you can watch all the coverage on the app but even without that showing every shot and so on is great.

I wonder is there any hope of the pga tour app ever getting this good, surely they would have most of the shots covered to show them and so on if they had the desire.

eagle eye · 18-11-2020 3:52pm

Ariya Stale Soul wrote:

I wonder is there any hope of the pga tour app ever getting this good, surely they would have most of the shots covered to show them and so on if they had the desire.

Problem is tv coverage rights around the world.

zf0wqv9oemuasj · 18-11-2020 3:55pm

eagle eye wrote: »

Problem is tv coverage rights around the world.

That is true but I don’t see the shot tracker shot replays as being a risk to tv coverage. It’s not really able to replace live coverage but rather for following a particular player (I suppose those of us who have a bet really appreciate it or seeing a player that’s not in main coverage much and so on).

Even a shot tracker as good as the masters without the videos would be much appreciated.

The Masters 2020

Comments