Koepka: Majors are sometimes easiest to win

[Golfer4Life]

Chamblee was right tonight, Koepka gave him a big fat middle finger with that 63, and I loved it!.

[A.Princey]

I could care less for Koepka as a player, but I want my money from the bookie, so go BK, go!

[CaptainRook]

> @dropkicked said:

> I like Bk. But I wouldn't be surprised with a MC, this week. I see that trend on the downward slope and don't see him winning another major anytime soon.

>

>

 

This aged well

[Awsi Dooger]

Koepka has no baggage. He didn't wear himself out with multiple failures before finally winning his first major, and he doesn't wear himself out week to week on tour. I've followed him at Doral, Bay Hill and Players in recent years and never seen a hint of this form. Not a drool of it. Consequently I don't like him. I'm convinced he truly doesn't care in those events. And when he doesn't care his game can be incredibly boring to watch in person.

 

But at least I learned quickly enough to set it aside in majors.

 

The concept of depth is laughable. That's what Koepka understands and is taking advantage of. This is yet another era in which guys build toward top tier status, win maybe one major, and then settle into the pack. It's depth of contentment. Rory was the only one who owned a hint of extra special since he did it at a very young age, which is always the tipoff toward legitimate freak status. But the guy can't putt and can't wedge. Spieth has the inner drive and also did it at a very early age. I expect another run of excellence from him but without elite physical gifts you never know when it will happen.

[MtlJeff]

Hopefully some day , one of the world's top scientists will figure out the formula for the right amount of confidence and openness to display in interviews in order to be well liked

 

I don't find he has said anything too over the top or crazy. He's just a really good player who is confident and doesn't seem to like people criticizing him, though he's not flipping out over it either.

 

Neither his game or his interviews are flashy or extreme. Even the "edgy" stuff he says really isn't....If he was a wrestler he'd definitely have Paul Heyman as a manager

[John K.]

BK is a great player but has zero personality. Seems passive aggressive in interviews...

[OldTomMorris]

Not my idea of zero personality but maybe that's just me

[Golfer4Life]

> @"Awsi Dooger" said:

> Koepka has no baggage. He didn't wear himself out with multiple failures before finally winning his first major, and he doesn't wear himself out week to week on tour. I've followed him at Doral, Bay Hill and Players in recent years and never seen a hint of this form. Not a drool of it. Consequently I don't like him. I'm convinced he truly doesn't care in those events. And when he doesn't care his game can be incredibly boring to watch in person.

>

> But at least I learned quickly enough to set it aside in majors.

>

> The concept of depth is laughable. That's what Koepka understands and is taking advantage of. This is yet another era in which guys build toward top tier status, win maybe one major, and then settle into the pack. It's depth of contentment. Rory was the only one who owned a hint of extra special since he did it at a very young age, which is always the tipoff toward legitimate freak status. But the guy can't putt and can't wedge. Spieth has the inner drive and also did it at a very early age. I expect another run of excellence from him but without elite physical gifts you never know when it will happen.

 

Koepka stated in his press conference that he understands the importance of the regular tour stops and he and his team are ready to train and prepare as they do for the Majors. If he does, these guys better be ready to get their cookies taken away.

 

[pmadden86]

They puttin' the p***y on a pedestal - Brooks keepin' the p***y at head height :smiley:

[John K.]

> @OldTomMorris said:

> Not my idea of zero personality but maybe that's just me

>

>

 

Those are good interviews - I cringe at his tournament interviews (much like I do with DJ)

 

 

[RickK]

I got a good laugh yesterday. Played in a tournament and was in the pro shop doing check-in yesterday AM. The pro overheard someone say their pick for the PGA was Koepka. The pro said, "Koepka has no chance at Bethpage". I asked why. His comment back at me was "Have you ever played Bethpage? You must hit your irons very high and have great distance control to win on that golf course and that simply puts Koepka at a disadvantage." I went back in after the round and asked him what he thought about Koepka's chances now. He laughed and said "well, I have been wrong before!". I had a really good laugh with him and we both agreed there was a lot of golf yet to be played.

[SwooshLT]

> @RickKimbrell said:

> I got a good laugh yesterday. Played in a tournament and was in the pro shop doing check-in yesterday AM. The pro overheard someone say their pick for the PGA was Koepka. The pro said, "Koepka has no chance at Bethpage". I asked why. His comment back at me was "Have you ever played Bethpage? You must hit your irons very high and have great distance control to win on that golf course and that simply puts Koepka at a disadvantage." I went back in after the round and asked him what he thought about Koepka's chances now. He laughed and said "well, I have been wrong before!". I had a really good laugh with him and we both agreed there was a lot of golf yet to be played.

 

Does your friend even watch golf? Kinda asinine statement to make about a guy with 3 almost 4 majors ....

Lacking control?

 

Regardless of his blandness, the guy is a machine! He has recognized the best way to grind out major wins ; either shootouts or even par events , he has it figured.......I think it's awesome to watch someone in complete control and THEN do it multiple times! Can we call him THOR ?

[redfirebird08]

> @DatSliceDoe said:

> Brooks mentality baffles me. He doesn't seem to "try" in regular tour stops, so why even play them? Take the Tiger approach, play four regular stops a year, and four majors. Then again, he's a linebacker, so he can play week in and week out without any issues.

 

Why play them? So you don't show up to a major with a ton of rust like we just saw with Tiger this week. Brooks got himself into contention last weekend at a regular event, but didn't expend too much energy trying to win the thing. Top 5 finish and good preparation for the big show this week. It's paying off very well for him now.

[sdandrea]

BK makes majors look EZ. #golfmachine.

[Cwebb]

Every team wants a "big game player". This guy has that in him. The bigger the moment, the more dangerous he is.

Those questioning him, because of the "regular season",... compare his career to guys like David Duval, Davis Love, and Fred Couples

[SwooshLT]

> @redfirebird08 said:

> > @DatSliceDoe said:

> > Brooks mentality baffles me. He doesn't seem to "try" in regular tour stops, so why even play them? Take the Tiger approach, play four regular stops a year, and four majors. Then again, he's a linebacker, so he can play week in and week out without any issues.

>

> Why play them? So you don't show up to a major with a ton of rust like we just saw with Tiger this week. Brooks got himself into contention last weekend at a regular event, but didn't expend too much energy trying to win the thing. Top 5 finish and good preparation for the big show this week. It's paying off very well for him now.

 

Can't please'em.....you win majors, "why don't you play well in regular events" .....you don't win majors but regular events; "yeah but you don't or can't do it when it counts" ......ugh

[MMB1500]

> @" SwooshLT" said:

> > @redfirebird08 said:

> > > @DatSliceDoe said:

> > > Brooks mentality baffles me. He doesn't seem to "try" in regular tour stops, so why even play them? Take the Tiger approach, play four regular stops a year, and four majors. Then again, he's a linebacker, so he can play week in and week out without any issues.

> >

> > Why play them? So you don't show up to a major with a ton of rust like we just saw with Tiger this week. Brooks got himself into contention last weekend at a regular event, but didn't expend too much energy trying to win the thing. Top 5 finish and good preparation for the big show this week. It's paying off very well for him now.

>

> Can't please'em.....you win majors, "why don't you play well in regular events" .....you don't win majors but regular events; "yeah but you don't or can't do it when it counts" ......ugh

 

This.

[cdnglf]

> @MMB1500 said:

> > @" SwooshLT" said:

> > > @redfirebird08 said:

> > > > @DatSliceDoe said:

> > > > Brooks mentality baffles me. He doesn't seem to "try" in regular tour stops, so why even play them? Take the Tiger approach, play four regular stops a year, and four majors. Then again, he's a linebacker, so he can play week in and week out without any issues.

> > >

> > > Why play them? So you don't show up to a major with a ton of rust like we just saw with Tiger this week. Brooks got himself into contention last weekend at a regular event, but didn't expend too much energy trying to win the thing. Top 5 finish and good preparation for the big show this week. It's paying off very well for him now.

> >

> > Can't please'em.....you win majors, "why don't you play well in regular events" .....you don't win majors but regular events; "yeah but you don't or can't do it when it counts" ......ugh

>

> This.

 

"Can’t win the Canadian Open"

"Can’t win at Riviera"

[legitimategolf]

Brooks Koepka is a pretty interesting* case because despite his domination of the golf, he still has very little appeal. Not to say that he doesn't have any fans, or isn't a cool dude. But you cannot imagine any other player winning majors at this rate and not moving the needle. Rickie Fowler winning a single major would probably get more attention than Brooks Koepka winning 4, 5, 6 or whatever.

 

In that sense Brooks Koepka is re-writing the book on golf and success. He is winning all these major titles, while not really winning regular tour events, and not really winning much popularity either.

 

*in theory

[Ronnie Mundt]

> @RickKimbrell said:

> I got a good laugh yesterday. Played in a tournament and was in the pro shop doing check-in yesterday AM. The pro overheard someone say their pick for the PGA was Koepka. The pro said, "Koepka has no chance at Bethpage". I asked why. His comment back at me was "Have you ever played Bethpage? You must hit your irons very high and have great distance control to win on that golf course and that simply puts Koepka at a disadvantage." I went back in after the round and asked him what he thought about Koepka's chances now. He laughed and said "well, I have been wrong before!". I had a really good laugh with him and we both agreed there was a lot of golf yet to be played.

That’s pretty funny, considering all Brooks Koepka does is hit his irons high and long and straight with insanely good distance control. Maybe that guy was talking about Chase Koepka? I agree that Chase Koepka won’t win at Bethpage. But Brooks Koepka is turning this monster into a 9-hole executive course right off the expressway.

[pheenomz4774]

Koepka is right. The way they've built courses and set them up to keep scores low vs. these PGA pro's, he's perfectly built for them. He hits the ball hard, high, long, and fairly straight. He can hit is so far he doesn't have to really move it left to right or right to left. He hits his wedges over whatever trouble they can throw at him, and land them soft. And he can putt fast greens very well. He and maybe 15 others have those characteristics to win PGAs, U.S. Opens, and other tight fast courses with punishing rough. Brooks might be the ultimate counter to the way golf courses are set up. And that's going to give him a TON of chances in the next few years.

[Doyouevenblade]

They are going to have to start Keopka proofing these things.

[DatSliceDoe]

> @Doyouevenblade said:

> They are going to have to start Keopka proofing these things.

 

Need some more land on this planet for 9000 yard courses.

[L29]

> @legitimategolf said:

> Brooks Koepka is a pretty interesting* case because despite his domination of the golf, he still has very little appeal. Not to say that he doesn't have any fans, or isn't a cool dude. But you cannot imagine any other player winning majors at this rate and not moving the needle. Rickie Fowler winning a single major would probably get more attention than Brooks Koepka winning 4, 5, 6 or whatever.

>

> In that sense Brooks Koepka is re-writing the book on golf and success. He is winning all these major titles, while not really winning regular tour events, and not really winning much popularity either.

>

> *in theory

 

It is kind of an interesting phenomenon. If he keeps winning though I think he will eventually be beloved by the masses at some point. He's a guy that it will just take longer to get to know on some level due to his subdued personality, etc. For various reasons Jack and Tiger were not liked by lots of folks when they first came on scene either. There are definitely lots of golf fans that are hard to please early when you're the new great golfer in town. If he keeps winning though, everyone will get to know him a little better and most will eventually come around.

 

[JD3]

> @"John K." said:

> BK is a great player but has zero personality. Seems passive aggressive in interviews...

 

Only player in history I still watched with a big lead was tiger.

[tiderider]

> @L29 said:

> > @legitimategolf said:

> > Brooks Koepka is a pretty interesting* case because despite his domination of the golf, he still has very little appeal. Not to say that he doesn't have any fans, or isn't a cool dude. But you cannot imagine any other player winning majors at this rate and not moving the needle. Rickie Fowler winning a single major would probably get more attention than Brooks Koepka winning 4, 5, 6 or whatever.

> >

> > In that sense Brooks Koepka is re-writing the book on golf and success. He is winning all these major titles, while not really winning regular tour events, and not really winning much popularity either.

> >

> > *in theory

>

> It is kind of an interesting phenomenon. If he keeps winning though I think he will eventually be beloved by the masses at some point. He's a guy that it will just take longer to get to know on some level due to his subdued personality, etc. For various reasons Jack and Tiger were not liked by lots of folks when they first came on scene either. There are definitely lots of golf fans that are hard to please early when you're the new great golfer in town. If he keeps winning though, everyone will get to know him a little better and most will eventually come around.

>

 

your recollection is different from mine ... tiger was a hit the minute he started winning ...

[SwooshLT]

> @legitimategolf said:

> Brooks Koepka is a pretty interesting* case because despite his domination of the golf, he still has very little appeal. Not to say that he doesn't have any fans, or isn't a cool dude. But you cannot imagine any other player winning majors at this rate and not moving the needle. Rickie Fowler winning a single major would probably get more attention than Brooks Koepka winning 4, 5, 6 or whatever.

>

> In that sense Brooks Koepka is re-writing the book on golf and success. He is winning all these major titles, while not really winning regular tour events, and not really winning much popularity either.

>

> *in theory

 

Golf's version of Ivan Lendl......

[KrazyTrain18]

Brooks is certainly great, but is also certainly boring. I don't view it as a negative trait, he's getting the job done but from a viewer perspective his game doesn't translate well.

[SwooshLT]

> @pheenomz4774 said:

> Koepka is right. The way they've built courses and set them up to keep scores low vs. these PGA pro's, he's perfectly built for them. He hits the ball hard, high, long, and fairly straight. He can hit is so far he doesn't have to really move it left to right or right to left. He hits his wedges over whatever trouble they can throw at him, and land them soft. And he can putt fast greens very well. He and maybe 15 others have those characteristics to win PGAs, U.S. Opens, and other tight fast courses with punishing rough. Brooks might be the ultimate counter to the way golf courses are set up. And that's going to give him a TON of chances in the next few years.

 

Can't like this one enough!

[legitimategolf]

> @" SwooshLT" said:

> > @legitimategolf said:

> > Brooks Koepka is a pretty interesting* case because despite his domination of the golf, he still has very little appeal. Not to say that he doesn't have any fans, or isn't a cool dude. But you cannot imagine any other player winning majors at this rate and not moving the needle. Rickie Fowler winning a single major would probably get more attention than Brooks Koepka winning 4, 5, 6 or whatever.

> >

> > In that sense Brooks Koepka is re-writing the book on golf and success. He is winning all these major titles, while not really winning regular tour events, and not really winning much popularity either.

> >

> > *in theory

>

> Golf's version of Ivan Lendl......

 

Lendl had a personality, sort of.