What up with Jordan?

[bladehunter]

edited for clarity.

[straightshot7]

> @bladehunter said:

> > @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?

>

> Nope. It’s called conjecture. And most of this site consists of just that. The fact that I said it before the round meant that it was a half prediction half wish I had for the round. If I had said it after. Sure. You could claim “ coulda woulda shoulda “ for sure. But that’s not what happened. We couldn’t speak in facts before the round. The facts hadn’t taken place yet.

 

The definition of conjecture and prediction is that you do it before the event occurs (in this case the third round). You don't double down on it as if it actually happened, when it turned out to be incorrect. That's when you venture into Looney tunes land.

[bladehunter]

> @straightshot7 said:

> > @bladehunter said:

> > > @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?

> >

> > Nope. It’s called conjecture. And most of this site consists of just that. The fact that I said it before the round meant that it was a half prediction half wish I had for the round. If I had said it after. Sure. You could claim “ coulda woulda shoulda “ for sure. But that’s not what happened. We couldn’t speak in facts before the round. The facts hadn’t taken place yet.

>

> The definition of conjecture and prediction is that you do it before the event occurs (in this case the third round). You don't double down on it as if it actually happened, when it turned out to be incorrect. That's when you venture into Looney tunes land.

 

Go back and look at the original time stamp

[North Texas]

Jordan just needs to get his driving back to his "normal" from a few years ago. Do that and he's definitely back.

[bladehunter]

> @bladehunter said:

> > @straightshot7 said:

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

>

> Anyone who is a fan just wants to see a solid round. Brooks has this won if he doesn’t puke the bed. I’d love to see Jordan shoot 68 and get into the final group tomorrow. Just for the confidence.

@straightshot7

And here it is 301 on the 18th. I believe Jordan was on Hole 1 in the fairway.

[straightshot7]

> @bladehunter said:

> > @straightshot7 said:

> > > @bladehunter said:

> > > > @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?

> > >

> > > Nope. It’s called conjecture. And most of this site consists of just that. The fact that I said it before the round meant that it was a half prediction half wish I had for the round. If I had said it after. Sure. You could claim “ coulda woulda shoulda “ for sure. But that’s not what happened. We couldn’t speak in facts before the round. The facts hadn’t taken place yet.

> >

> > The definition of conjecture and prediction is that you do it before the event occurs (in this case the third round). You don't double down on it as if it actually happened, when it turned out to be incorrect. That's when you venture into Looney tunes land.

>

> Go back and look at the original time stamp. I said it before the round. Goodness people. This isn’t hard.

 

Yeah I know you did. You're not comprehending what I'm saying. It's the fact that you repeated it after the round, as if it had happened. But it didn't.

 

You repeated your incorrect prediction and hope as if it mattered, after it turned out to be incorrect. Were we supposed to be impressed that you were right that a 68 would have gotten him in the final group?

 

"If Tiger had shot 4 shots better, as I had hoped, he would have made the cut. And I'd consider that a great step forward for him".

---can you see how the response to this is, "okay, thanks captain obvious"

[North Texas]

Just a quick comment on the sideshow going on in this thread. You must be pretty insecure to put someone on the ignore list.

[bladehunter]

> @straightshot7 said:

> > @bladehunter said:

> > > @straightshot7 said:

> > > > @bladehunter said:

> > > > > @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?

> > > >

> > > > Nope. It’s called conjecture. And most of this site consists of just that. The fact that I said it before the round meant that it was a half prediction half wish I had for the round. If I had said it after. Sure. You could claim “ coulda woulda shoulda “ for sure. But that’s not what happened. We couldn’t speak in facts before the round. The facts hadn’t taken place yet.

> > >

> > > The definition of conjecture and prediction is that you do it before the event occurs (in this case the third round). You don't double down on it as if it actually happened, when it turned out to be incorrect. That's when you venture into Looney tunes land.

> >

> > Go back and look at the original time stamp. I said it before the round. Goodness people. This isn’t hard.

>

> Yeah I know you did. You're not comprehending what I'm saying. It's the fact that you repeated it after the round, as if it had happened. But it didn't.

>

> You repeated your incorrect prediction and hope as if it mattered, after it turned out to be incorrect. Were we supposed to be impressed that you were right that a 68 would have gotten him in the final group?

>

> "If Tiger had shot 4 shots better, as I had hoped, he would have made the cut. And I'd consider that a great step forward for him".

> ---can you see how the response to this is, "okay, thanks captain obvious"?

>

> This is why people had you on their ignore list man. You make dumb posts and then continue to defend them. I won't comment further.

 

Well I’m sorry that I have offended yet another.

 

Edit - in the interest of not arguing , especially over a disagreement that I don’t clearly understand, I’m editing anything I’ve said leading to this after the 3rd round. Not much else I can do. Pm inbound

[Warrick]

Not sure I get why he was fist pumping his way around the course today

[Pent08]

Spieth with a T3 in a major. A total non factor, but likely a contender if not for the major machine.

[North Texas]

> @Pent08 said:

> Spieth with a T3 in a major. A total non factor, but likely a contender if not for the major machine.

 

Likely a contender if just hits his driver like he hit it several years ago. He T3's, just 6 strokes back, while hitting his driver like crap.

[Dave230]

Spieth will be fine, too much golfing nous. He can manufacture scores without hitting the ball that well and putts like a dream when on form. If Rory hit it as bad as he has, he'd be losing his Tour card but still he can grind out finishes. As soon as he hits the ball anywhere near well again, he'll be winning and contending majors again. He's only 25.

[iteachgolf]

> @"North Texas" said:

> > @Pent08 said:

> > Spieth with a T3 in a major. A total non factor, but likely a contender if not for the major machine.

>

> Likely a contender if just hits his driver like he hit it several years ago. He T3's, just 6 strokes back, while hitting his driver like crap.

 

He gained 0.6 strokes on the field with his driver for the week. His iron play was the issue, he was arguably the best iron player in the world for 3 years and he’s been average lately.

[Kdaniel72]

> @iteachgolf said:

> > @"North Texas" said:

> > > @Pent08 said:

> > > Spieth with a T3 in a major. A total non factor, but likely a contender if not for the major machine.

> >

> > Likely a contender if just hits his driver like he hit it several years ago. He T3's, just 6 strokes back, while hitting his driver like crap.

>

> He gained 0.6 strokes on the field with his driver for the week. His iron play was the issue, he was arguably the best iron player in the world for 3 years and he’s been average lately.

 

Spot on.

 

 

[2ball]

He has money, a lady, and a few trophies now so the fire isn't burning as bright. It happens to a lot of golf pros. They make so much money these days.

 

[North Texas]

> @iteachgolf said:

> > @"North Texas" said:

> > > @Pent08 said:

> > > Spieth with a T3 in a major. A total non factor, but likely a contender if not for the major machine.

> >

> > Likely a contender if just hits his driver like he hit it several years ago. He T3's, just 6 strokes back, while hitting his driver like crap.

>

> He gained 0.6 strokes on the field with his driver for the week. His iron play was the issue, he was arguably the best iron player in the world for 3 years and he’s been average lately.

 

Where can I find the final stats for the field? I was just going off the driving accuracy stats. Thanks.

[dlygrisse]

> @iteachgolf said:

> > @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

>

 

I remember him playing a fade almost exclusively when he won the Masters. Either way it seems he plays a lot of curvature on his shots compared to a lot of the guys. He's not real long, and he is crooked. But damn, what a short game! I suppose driving will never be his strong suit, if he gets the irons a little more dialed in I think we will see him go on another streak.

[Kdaniel72]

> @"North Texas" said:

> > @iteachgolf said:

> > > @"North Texas" said:

> > > > @Pent08 said:

> > > > Spieth with a T3 in a major. A total non factor, but likely a contender if not for the major machine.

> > >

> > > Likely a contender if just hits his driver like he hit it several years ago. He T3's, just 6 strokes back, while hitting his driver like crap.

> >

> > He gained 0.6 strokes on the field with his driver for the week. His iron play was the issue, he was arguably the best iron player in the world for 3 years and he’s been average lately.

>

> Where can I find the final stats for the field? I was just going off the driving accuracy stats. Thanks.

PGAtour.com> Leaderboard > Ckick on players name > then click on full scorecard> scroll down.

 

[dlygrisse]

> @iteachgolf said:

> > @"North Texas" said:

> > > @Pent08 said:

> > > Spieth with a T3 in a major. A total non factor, but likely a contender if not for the major machine.

> >

> > Likely a contender if just hits his driver like he hit it several years ago. He T3's, just 6 strokes back, while hitting his driver like crap.

>

> He gained 0.6 strokes on the field with his driver for the week. His iron play was the issue, he was arguably the best iron player in the world for 3 years and he’s been average lately.

 

Yeah, round 3 I expected him to make a move, he dumped several irons from the fairway in bunkers or in the rough. His front 9 especially was about the worst iron play I have ever seen from him. When he was winning his mid irons were the best in the world. Putting and iron play are what makes him play well, much like a certain 43 year old who won a major recently.

[TaddNOhio]

did this all start when the fiance and then wife came in the picture? Maybe he has a lot on his mind? I think in time he will get his game back, i am just wondering how much time

[bladehunter]

> @TaddNOhio said:

> did this all start when the fiance and then wife came in the picture? Maybe he has a lot on his mind? I think in time he will get his game back, i am just wondering how much time

 

Same girl since high school.

[Golfer4Life]

I think he’s getting better. His putting was spot on, and the rest according to him, is a work in progress. Personally, I wish he just fire everyone and start from scratch. Sometimes a change of scenery does a soul some good.

[bladehunter]

I’d say more likely he needs to “ fire” himself and wake up.( which I think he has done ) Blaming other folks such as support staff isn’t usually the proper way out. They only do what he allows them to do.

[MattyO1984]

Definitely positive signs from Spiethy last couple of weeks. The putter seems to be co-operating more than it had been and there didn't seem to be as many off the face of the earth misses as there has been. He'll round the rest of the year out well enough I believe.

[Titleist_PT23]

Yeah, apparently the caddie and swing coach did an OK job last week...

 

For those that have followed Jordan's swing over the years, when exactly did it start to get flatter? So Yeon Ryu, McCormick's main LPGA player, also changed her swing to be flatter after moving over to McCormick in 2016. The following article was from 2017 when she was playing well (yes, the coach was a genius then). Since, her driving accuracy stats started to slide in 2018 and then have fallen off a cliff in 2019 (sound familiar)?

 

Anyways, question being McCormick has worked with Spieth forever as far as I know. Theoretically, he could have made his swing flatter at any point in the past. I wonder if he tried something with Ryu, it worked gems (at least for a bit), and then he suggested it for Spieth (note, I have no proof of any of this - just asking).

 

Also, did Spieth's swing look any different this last week or he just timed it better than he has been?

 

https://www.golfchannel.com/article/randall-mell/ryu-making-her-own-legend

 

[bladehunter]

> @agolf1 said:

> Yeah, apparently the caddie and swing coach did an OK job last week...

>

> For those that have followed Jordan's swing over the years, when exactly did it start to get flatter? So Yeon Ryu, McCormick's main LPGA player, also changed her swing to be flatter after moving over to McCormick in 2016. The following article was from 2017 when she was playing well (yes, the coach was a genius then). Since, her driving accuracy stats started to slide in 2018 and then have fallen off a cliff in 2019 (sound familiar)?

>

> Anyways, question being McCormick has worked with Spieth forever as far as I know. Theoretically, he could have made his swing flatter at any point in the past. I wonder if he tried something with Ryu, it worked gems (at least for a bit), and then he suggested it for Spieth (note, I have no proof of any of this - just asking).

>

> Also, did Spieth's swing look any different this last week or he just timed it better than he has been?

>

> https://www.golfchannel.com/article/randall-mell/ryu-making-her-own-legend

>

 

I’m very curious about this too.

 

To me last week. It went back and forth from upright to flatter. Like he’d revert to what felt natural and then catch it. And I still think he hits it better when it’s upright. If I fired anybody it would be McCormick if he’s pushing that change and won’t bsck off. It’s just simple common sense. Flat requires more timing.

[JAMH03]

Just thought I might mention their is an ignore feature available now.

 

Click on profile name then their posts become "grayed" out.

 

 

 

 

[lowheel]

> @Warrick said:

> Not sure I get why he was fist pumping his way around the course today

 

hard to understand that he was grinding for 2 days and tried his best and was gathering momentum for the rest of his season?

[Titleist_PT23]

Spieth tied for the lead early. On his way to becoming a two-time champ at Colonial and the John Deere...

[Pent08]

There he is again, top of the leaderboard on a Thursday, making 150ft of putts and chipping in for birdie.