What up with Jordan?

[Kdaniel72]

And on que he bogies. I jinked him! Sorry JS!

[straightshot7]

> @bladehunter said:

> > @straightshot7 said:

> > > @Kdaniel72 said:

> > > > @straightshot7 said:

> > > > Realistic over/under for Spieth today? 73?

> > >

> > > I would love for him to have a clean scorecard today.

> > >

> > >

> >

> > I'd love for John Daly to be in contention. We're both dreaming ?

>

> I don’t think hoping for a solid round is anything but realistic. Nobody said anything about winning , or going super low. 68 is only 2 under. And I think it gets into the final pairing tomorrow.

 

? Was responding to the clean scorecard comment....

[bladehunter]

> @straightshot7 said:

> > @bladehunter said:

> > > @straightshot7 said:

> > > > @Kdaniel72 said:

> > > > > @straightshot7 said:

> > > > > Realistic over/under for Spieth today? 73?

> > > >

> > > > I would love for him to have a clean scorecard today.

> > > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > I'd love for John Daly to be in contention. We're both dreaming ?

> >

> > I don’t think hoping for a solid round is anything but realistic. Nobody said anything about winning , or going super low. 68 is only 2 under. And I think it gets into the final pairing tomorrow.

>

> ? Was responding to the clean scorecard comment....

 

Gotcha. My bad.

 

I agree there. He’s not ever been the “ clean scorecard “ kind of player. Just like phil he makes more birdies to cover up the bogeys that will happen. ( when he’s on .... not necessarily saying he’s on now ).

[straightshot7]

> @bladehunter said:

> > @straightshot7 said:

> > > @bladehunter said:

> > > > @straightshot7 said:

> > > > > @Kdaniel72 said:

> > > > > > @straightshot7 said:

> > > > > > Realistic over/under for Spieth today? 73?

> > > > >

> > > > > I would love for him to have a clean scorecard today.

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > >

> > > > I'd love for John Daly to be in contention. We're both dreaming ?

> > >

> > > I don’t think hoping for a solid round is anything but realistic. Nobody said anything about winning , or going super low. 68 is only 2 under. And I think it gets into the final pairing tomorrow.

> >

> > ? Was responding to the clean scorecard comment....

>

> Gotcha. My bad.

>

> I agree there. He’s not ever been the “ clean scorecard “ kind of player. Just like phil he makes more birdies to cover up the bogeys that will happen. ( when he’s on .... not necessarily saying he’s on now ).

 

I was thinking more about the golf course. It's hard. I'd be very surprised if even Koepka finished with a clean scorecard.

[bladehunter]

> @straightshot7 said:

> > @bladehunter said:

> > > @straightshot7 said:

> > > > @bladehunter said:

> > > > > @straightshot7 said:

> > > > > > @Kdaniel72 said:

> > > > > > > @straightshot7 said:

> > > > > > > Realistic over/under for Spieth today? 73?

> > > > > >

> > > > > > I would love for him to have a clean scorecard today.

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > I'd love for John Daly to be in contention. We're both dreaming ?

> > > >

> > > > I don’t think hoping for a solid round is anything but realistic. Nobody said anything about winning , or going super low. 68 is only 2 under. And I think it gets into the final pairing tomorrow.

> > >

> > > ? Was responding to the clean scorecard comment....

> >

> > Gotcha. My bad.

> >

> > I agree there. He’s not ever been the “ clean scorecard “ kind of player. Just like phil he makes more birdies to cover up the bogeys that will happen. ( when he’s on .... not necessarily saying he’s on now ).

>

> I was thinking more about the golf course. It's hard. I'd be very surprised if even Koepka finished with a clean scorecard.

 

True. To me on a course like this. No double or worse is “ clean”. Bogeys will happen.

[tsecor]

Spieth is struggling on moving day......seems very frustrated

[rafal]

+2 is exactly indicative of his playing shape. He’s miles away. There are flashes of brilliance yes but also so many WTF shots. Putting seems ok but he’s stuck with his long game, it’s dreadful.

[bladehunter]

Eh. I’d take it as a better sign than not. If he had gotten into final group , that would have been a big win in my book. Oh well. I agree he’s still a ways off. But I don’t think it’s trending anywhere but up. Albeit it slowly.

[straightshot7]

> @bladehunter said:

> Eh. I’d take it as a better sign than not. 72 is 4 shots from where I hoped he’d shoot. And that 68 would have been 2 clear of the current 2nd place. So it would have him in the final group. And that would have been a big win in my book. Oh well. I agree he’s still a ways off. But I don’t think it’s trneding anywhere but up. Albeit it slowly.

 

So as long as he's within 4 shots of what you hoped for that's a good sign? Sorry that's just total malarkey. We can rewrite all of the golf history books if you give us 4 shots on a Saturday to work with. 4 shots is an eternity, especially in major championship golf.

 

This is just another example of Spieth failing to perform on a Saturday. It's been his pattern all year. I'm sure he will break it eventually.

[bladehunter]

> @straightshot7 said:

> > @bladehunter said:

> > Eh. I’d take it as a better sign than not. 72 is 4 shots from where I hoped he’d shoot. And that 68 would have been 2 clear of the current 2nd place. So it would have him in the final group. And that would have been a big win in my book. Oh well. I agree he’s still a ways off. But I don’t think it’s trneding anywhere but up. Albeit it slowly.

>

> So as long as he's within 4 shots of what you hoped for that's a good sign? Sorry that's just total malarkey. We can rewrite all of the golf history books if you give us 4 shots on a Saturday to work with. 4 shots is an eternity, especially in major championship golf.

>

> This is just another example of Spieth failing to perform on a Saturday. It's been his pattern all year. I'm sure he will break it eventually

 

 

The field knows they are playing for second place money unless he fails. So said the goal should be to win the runner up place. And to start would try to get into the final group. This game is about small goals. I said a good sign. Not a “ win”. Huge difference. As opposed to some of the blowups he’s had. Very few shot under par today.

[Kdaniel72]

Respectfully I disagree. IMO his mid to long Irons are all left. He gets that fixed and he is within striking distance of the leader. He moves too much prior to his backswing. I think he looks nervous and uncomfortable.

 

Confidence issues more than mechanics IMO. He does not have to be the longest driver on tour to win. Just consistently hit fairways.

[straightshot7]

> @bladehunter said:

> > @straightshot7 said:

> > > @bladehunter said:

> > > Eh. I’d take it as a better sign than not. 72 is 4 shots from where I hoped he’d shoot. And that 68 would have been 2 clear of the current 2nd place. So it would have him in the final group. And that would have been a big win in my book. Oh well. I agree he’s still a ways off. But I don’t think it’s trneding anywhere but up. Albeit it slowly.

> >

> > So as long as he's within 4 shots of what you hoped for that's a good sign? Sorry that's just total malarkey. We can rewrite all of the golf history books if you give us 4 shots on a Saturday to work with. 4 shots is an eternity, especially in major championship golf.

> >

> > This is just another example of Spieth failing to perform on a Saturday. It's been his pattern all year. I'm sure he will break it eventually.

>

> Lol. Nope it’s just someone trying to continue the current narrative. Nobody including Jordan has mentioned him catching Brooks. So for you to put that expectation on him is the true malarkey. And I mean that as nicely as I can.

>

> It’s entirely unrealistic to expect a guy coming off of such a slump to catch a guy 7 plus shots clear. The field knows they are playing for second place money unless he fails. So I simply said the goal should be to win the runner up place. And to start would try to get into the final group. This game is about small goals. I said a good sign. Not a “ win”. Huge difference. As opposed to some of the blowups he’s had. Very few shot under par today.

 

Okay. I never said anything about catching Brooks. So I'm not sure why you're saying all of that in response to me.

 

My statement about malarkey was in response to giving a guy 4 imaginary shots and pontificating about how he would be in the final group if he only shot 4 shots lower, etc. That is just imaginary fluff. Everyone in the field could have shot 4 shots lower. So what? You have no point there. It's just your own ramblings.

 

As far as catching Brooks, again, I never said anything about that.

 

I'm simply suggesting we look at Jordan's round for what it ACTUALLY was: +2 and not what he was hoping for

 

He was -5 for the first two rounds, and he shot +2 in the third round . . .therefore, it was a disappointing 3rd round. We aren't allowed to give our favorite players 4 free shots, unfortunately.

[bladehunter]

> @straightshot7 said:

> > @bladehunter said:

> > > @straightshot7 said:

> > > > @bladehunter said:

> > > > Eh. I’d take it as a better sign than not. 72 is 4 shots from where I hoped he’d shoot. And that 68 would have been 2 clear of the current 2nd place. So it would have him in the final group. And that would have been a big win in my book. Oh well. I agree he’s still a ways off. But I don’t think it’s trneding anywhere but up. Albeit it slowly.

> > >

> > > So as long as he's within 4 shots of what you hoped for that's a good sign? Sorry that's just total malarkey. We can rewrite all of the golf history books if you give us 4 shots on a Saturday to work with. 4 shots is an eternity, especially in major championship golf.

> > >

> > > This is just another example of Spieth failing to perform on a Saturday. It's been his pattern all year. I'm sure he will break it eventually.

> >

> > Lol. Nope it’s just someone trying to continue the current narrative. Nobody including Jordan has mentioned him catching Brooks. So for you to put that expectation on him is the true malarkey. And I mean that as nicely as I can.

> >

> > It’s entirely unrealistic to expect a guy coming off of such a slump to catch a guy 7 plus shots clear. The field knows they are playing for second place money unless he fails. So I simply said the goal should be to win the runner up place. And to start would try to get into the final group. This game is about small goals. I said a good sign. Not a “ win”. Huge difference. As opposed to some of the blowups he’s had. Very few shot under par today.

>

> Okay. I never said anything about catching Brooks. So I'm not sure why you're saying all of that in response to me.

>

> My statement about malarkey was in response to giving a guy 4 imaginary shots and pontificating about how he would be in the final group if he only shot 4 shots lower, etc. That is just imaginary fluff. Everyone in the field could have shot 4 shots lower. So what? You have not point there. It's just your own ramblings.

>

> As far as catching Brooks, again, I never said anything about that.

>

> I'm just suggesting we look at Jordan's round for what it ACTUALLY was: +2 and not what he was hoping for

 

I haven’t a clue what you're saying compared to what I said. As in I don’t see the mutual exclusivity

[Titleist_PT23]

Not sure what to think of Jordan's round. Maybe not surprising - he hasn't been able to put it together for four rounds, and this wasn't the ideal situation to start to do it. He had to fire a near perfect round to make this tournament interesting, which may have been part of it. I don't think it was simply the fact of playing in the final group / with a guy that's killing it though.

 

Will see how he does tomorrow, but it's definitely a better showing than most would have predicted. He seemed to be trying to hit a lot of big draws early, which also matches what he said about the final round at the Byron Nelson. I'm not sure why other than this seemed to be his more natural shot a few years ago. But it lead to the ball going both ways again today.

 

I think he's probably stabilized/bottomed. Will be interesting to see if he books a win somewhere the rest of the year. The real question to me is whether he will get back to being a top 5 player or if he'll be in the second tier of very very good players.

[Kdaniel72]

> @agolf1 said:

> Not sure what to think of Jordan's round. Maybe not surprising - he hasn't been able to put it together for four rounds, and this wasn't the ideal situation to start to do it. He had to fire a near perfect round to make this tournament interesting, which may have been part of it. I don't think it was simply the fact of playing in the final group / with a guy that's killing it though.

>

> Will see how he does tomorrow, but it's definitely a better showing than most would have predicted. He seemed to be trying to hit a lot of big draws early, which also matches what he said about the final round at the Byron Nelson. I'm not sure why other than this seemed to be his more natural shot a few years ago. But it lead to the ball going both ways again today.

>

> I think he's probably stabilized/bottomed. Will be interesting to see if he books a win somewhere the rest of the year. The real question to me is whether he will get back to being a top 5 player or if he'll be in the second tier of very very good players.

 

Great comments. I see him getting back to his winning ways and breaking out. Not sure when! Golf is very fickle and you make major gains and losses (in your swing) in an instant. When he breaks out he will go on a run....IMHO. But let’s say he does fall back that 2nd tier. Would that be equivalent to a Ricky Fowler? Who are the 2nd tier group in your opinion?

 

[gvogel]

Danny Willet playing better this week.

[bladehunter]

> @gvogel said:

> Danny Willet playing better this week.

 

Mmmkay. Score says otherwise.

[Titleist_PT23]

> @Kdaniel72 said:

> > @agolf1 said:

> > Not sure what to think of Jordan's round. Maybe not surprising - he hasn't been able to put it together for four rounds, and this wasn't the ideal situation to start to do it. He had to fire a near perfect round to make this tournament interesting, which may have been part of it. I don't think it was simply the fact of playing in the final group / with a guy that's killing it though.

> >

> > Will see how he does tomorrow, but it's definitely a better showing than most would have predicted. He seemed to be trying to hit a lot of big draws early, which also matches what he said about the final round at the Byron Nelson. I'm not sure why other than this seemed to be his more natural shot a few years ago. But it lead to the ball going both ways again today.

> >

> > I think he's probably stabilized/bottomed. Will be interesting to see if he books a win somewhere the rest of the year. The real question to me is whether he will get back to being a top 5 player or if he'll be in the second tier of very very good players.

>

> Great comments. I see him getting back to his winning ways and breaking out. Not sure when! Golf is very fickle and you make major gains and losses (in your swing) in an instant. When he breaks out he will go on a run....IMHO. But let’s say he does fall back that 2nd tier. Would that be equivalent to a Ricky Fowler? Who are the 2nd tier group in your opinion?

>

I'm not sure exactly who. It also changes by the week how someone is classified so maybe best to leave open-ended.

 

But when people mention Spieth's record (which is amazing) and how great he is (based on the record), the type of player we are talking about is someone that's at/near the top for many years. Best way I can describe it is how Phil was from mid-2000s through 2013. Winning at least once a year and grabbing more than 1 major (Spieth already has three so hard to say exactly what the measuring stick is but I would say it's 1-2 more).

 

For example, Jason Day was great for 12-18 months. Then he fell, and has since come back to win again twice. But he's not "back" and I wouldn't consider Jordan to be if he just logs a few wins here and there (which I believe he will eventually). But the "told you so" statements will definitely start as soon as he wins one again. The question is whether this is the correct measuring stick (I'd say no).

 

Rightly or wrongly, the benchmark for this guy (Spieth) is higher. I.e. Rory has 6 wins since 2015, yet most would say he's "failed" (to meet this high bar). Since then, at times he's probably been on the edge of who the top 5 players are. So not saying it's easy but I think that's what Jordan is up against.

[ray9898]

> @gvogel said:

> Danny Willet playing better this week.

 

well....other than being 3 shots worse.

[Titleist_PT23]

Didn't realize Spieth blew-off the media after yesterday's round. I don't really care (he probably should have talked to them, but in general the guy is more than generous with his time), but it probably shows that he thought he had a chance to do something yesterday. Whether it was for a major, the career slam, or just to show everyone he's not dead, he obviously cares. It would have been easy to just answer "yeah, Brooks playing great...I'm still working on things, not the greatest day but feel it's in the right direction, etc, etc." Obviously he was pissed - which is probably a good thing.

[gvogel]

> @bladehunter said:

> > @gvogel said:

> > Danny Willet playing better this week.

>

> Mmmkay. Score says otherwise.

 

No, I meant compared to the way that Danny has been playing for a few years. Nice to see him currently in the top 20 of a major.

[bladehunter]

> @gvogel said:

> Danny Willet playing better this week.

 

Mmmkay. Score says otherwise. > @gvogel said:

> > @bladehunter said:

> > > @gvogel said:

> > > Danny Willet playing better this week.

> >

> > Mmmkay. Score says otherwise.

>

> No, I meant compared to the way that Danny has been playing for a few years. Nice to see him currently in the top 20 of a major.

 

Gotcha. I thought you meant compared to Jordan.

[tsecor]

who is Danny Willet?> @gvogel said:

> Danny Willet playing better this week.

 

 

[lowheel]

He should be very proud of his play this week. This was almost vintage Spieth, scrappy play with timely putting. No give up.Could be a turning point

[00steven]

Really good stuff out of Jordan, he’ll make it back.

[dlygrisse]

Best putter on the course this week. Great short game. Just needs more consistency with the irons. Quit trying to draw the driver, he won majors playing a fade.

[Kdaniel72]

> @lowheel said:

> He should be very proud of his play this week. This was almost vintage Spieth, scrappy play with timely putting. No give up.Could be a turning point

 

He played much better this week. He is trying to draw it for more distance and it’s not helping. Go back to the chicken wing and win majors Jordan.

 

 

[straightshot7]

> @bladehunter said:

> > @straightshot7 said:

> > > @bladehunter said:

> > > > @straightshot7 said:

> > > > > @bladehunter said:

> > > > > Eh. I’d take it as a better sign than not. 72 is 4 shots from where I hoped he’d shoot. And that 68 would have been 2 clear of the current 2nd place. So it would have him in the final group. And that would have been a big win in my book. Oh well. I agree he’s still a ways off. But I don’t think it’s trneding anywhere but up. Albeit it slowly.

> > > >

> > > > So as long as he's within 4 shots of what you hoped for that's a good sign? Sorry that's just total malarkey. We can rewrite all of the golf history books if you give us 4 shots on a Saturday to work with. 4 shots is an eternity, especially in major championship golf.

> > > >

> > > > This is just another example of Spieth failing to perform on a Saturday. It's been his pattern all year. I'm sure he will break it eventually.

> > >

> > > Lol. Nope it’s just someone trying to continue the current narrative. Nobody including Jordan has mentioned him catching Brooks. So for you to put that expectation on him is the true malarkey. And I mean that as nicely as I can.

> > >

> > > It’s entirely unrealistic to expect a guy coming off of such a slump to catch a guy 7 plus shots clear. The field knows they are playing for second place money unless he fails. So I simply said the goal should be to win the runner up place. And to start would try to get into the final group. This game is about small goals. I said a good sign. Not a “ win”. Huge difference. As opposed to some of the blowups he’s had. Very few shot under par today.

> >

> > Okay. I never said anything about catching Brooks. So I'm not sure why you're saying all of that in response to me.

> >

> > My statement about malarkey was in response to giving a guy 4 imaginary shots and pontificating about how he would be in the final group if he only shot 4 shots lower, etc. That is just imaginary fluff. Everyone in the field could have shot 4 shots lower. So what? You have not point there. It's just your own ramblings.

> >

> > As far as catching Brooks, again, I never said anything about that.

> >

> > I'm just suggesting we look at Jordan's round for what it ACTUALLY was: +2 and not what he was hoping for

>

> I haven’t a clue what you're saying. It’s not ramblings. It’s math. If he shoots one under he’s in the final group. Yes ? That’s literally all I said. Before the round I said I hoped he’d shoot 68. And that I thought ( my opinion based on my opinion ) that it would be good enough for the final group. I said this before the round. Before. And only repeated myself after.

>

> And how do we know what he was hoping?

 

Yeah and all I'm saying is that what you hope he shoots is completely and totally irrelevant.

 

All that matters is what he shoots.

 

I don't know how else to phrase it.

 

Talking about "well if he had shot 4 shots lower, like I hoped, he'd be in the final group"----you don't see how silly that sounds?

[iteachgolf]

> @dlygrisse said:

> Best putter on the course this week. Great short game. Just needs more consistency with the irons. Quit trying to draw the driver, he won majors playing a fade.

 

He’s always played a draw as a stock shot, including when he won US Open and was number 1 player in the world

 

[bladehunter]

> @straightshot7 said:

> > @bladehunter said:

> > > @straightshot7 said:

> > > > @bladehunter said:

> > > > > @straightshot7 said:

> > > > > > @bladehunter said:

> > > > > > Eh. I’d take it as a better sign than not. 72 is 4 shots from where I hoped he’d shoot. And that 68 would have been 2 clear of the current 2nd place. So it would have him in the final group. And that would have been a big win in my book. Oh well. I agree he’s still a ways off. But I don’t think it’s trneding anywhere but up. Albeit it slowly.

> > > > >

> > > > > So as long as he's within 4 shots of what you hoped for that's a good sign? Sorry that's just total malarkey. We can rewrite all of the golf history books if you give us 4 shots on a Saturday to work with. 4 shots is an eternity, especially in major championship golf.

> > > > >

> > > > > This is just another example of Spieth failing to perform on a Saturday. It's been his pattern all year. I'm sure he will break it eventually.

> > > >

> > > > Lol. Nope it’s just someone trying to continue the current narrative. Nobody including Jordan has mentioned him catching Brooks. So for you to put that expectation on him is the true malarkey. And I mean that as nicely as I can.

> > > >

> > > > It’s entirely unrealistic to expect a guy coming off of such a slump to catch a guy 7 plus shots clear. The field knows they are playing for second place money unless he fails. So I simply said the goal should be to win the runner up place. And to start would try to get into the final group. This game is about small goals. I said a good sign. Not a “ win”. Huge difference. As opposed to some of the blowups he’s had. Very few shot under par today.

> > >

> > > Okay. I never said anything about catching Brooks. So I'm not sure why you're saying all of that in response to me.

> > >

> > > My statement about malarkey was in response to giving a guy 4 imaginary shots and pontificating about how he would be in the final group if he only shot 4 shots lower, etc. That is just imaginary fluff. Everyone in the field could have shot 4 shots lower. So what? You have not point there. It's just your own ramblings.

> > >

> > > As far as catching Brooks, again, I never said anything about that.

> > >

> > > I'm just suggesting we look at Jordan's round for what it ACTUALLY was: +2 and not what he was hoping for

> >

> > I haven’t a clue what you're saying. It’s not ramblings. It’s math. If he shoots one under he’s in the final group. Yes ? That’s literally all I said. Before the round I said I hoped he’d shoot 68. And that I thought ( my opinion based on my opinion ) that it would be good enough for the final group. I said this before the round. Before. And only repeated myself after.

> >

> > And how do we know what he was hoping?

>

> Yeah and all I'm saying is that what you hope he shoots is completely and totally irrelevant.

>

> All that matters is what he shoots.

>

> I don't know how else to phrase it.

>

> Talking about "well if he had shot 4 shots lower, like I hoped, he'd be in the final group"----you don't see how silly that sounds?

 

Again. Not getting how this is turning into an argument. Obviously I was wrong on my hope for the 3rd round. But my honest assessment of a T3 finish this week is a win mentally for the kid. Work aplenty to be done. Sure. But a mental check of a box nonetheless.