Michelle Wie 24/7

[Wazmankg]

Originally Posted by mr3856a

Indeed. Morgan shot one of two rounds in the 60's on Sunday - I believe they were both 69's. She also shot 139 on the weekend, whereas the next best score on the weekend was a 142. I'm not sure how that's "backing into" a win.

It was funny yesterday how starting around 10, 11, 12, somewhere in there, the commentators starting saying (paraphrasing), "Ya know, if Brittany can just keep making pars here, who knows what's goin gto happen to the leaders." Turns out they were right.

That was a tough course they were on and the conditions were difficult. I wouldn't say Brittany "backed into" the win yesterday, no more than Morgan did at the Kraft Nabisco. I mean, if you're going to make that argument, you could say Geoff Ogilvy "backed into" the U.S. Open last year. Fact is, he was the only guy among the leaders who parred the last 4 holes.

A matter of interpretation, to be sure, but just because other people went backwards towards the end, doesn't mean the person who won didn't deserve it

Brittany played the best golf yesterday. I believe the average score Sunday was around 77. But Lorena made a mess of 3 very short shots in a row, that should not have been overly affected by the wind, on 18 to hand Brittany the win. Even if Lorena had managed a bogey on 18 (5 was a decent score at that hole yesterday) Brittany had out-played her all day and I imagine would've continued to do so in a playoff.

[mr3856a]

Originally Posted by Wazmankg

Brittany played the best golf yesterday. I believe the average score Sunday was around 77. But Lorena made a mess of 3 very short shots in a row, that should not have been overly affected by the wind, on 18 to hand Brittany the win. Even if Lorena had managed a bogey on 18 (5 was a decent score at that hole yesterday) Brittany had out-played her all day and I imagine would've continued to do so in a playoff.

I'm squarely in the "Brittany won it" camp, for the record, as opposed to the "she backed into it" camp.

[rodney_c]

Originally Posted by Texas Wedge

Didn't I read a post on here somewhere that Pressel won her Major because the rest of the field collapsed, even though she had one of the best scores (if not the best) for the weekend? That Ms. Pressel was just "lucky"? Well, let's look at this weekend's winner, Ms. Lincicome. She shot even par on Sunday and won because Ochoa and Davies both shot worse (+5 and +7 I think). I guess that means she didn't WIN the tournament as much as she just had it handed to her, huh?
:

The circumstances were very different. When Brittany made the scores she knew what she had to do. She was playing with Laura and Lorena and Brittany knew when she was making those shots that they were putting her in a winning position. She still played better than the other players with that knowledge of knowing how important the shots were. In other words she played well, with the pressure of knowing that she was winning.
Another good example of where some people claim a backdoor win is Geoff Ogilvy. However in Geoff's case he posted a score one off the lead, with Phil Mickelson facing one of the most difficult holes in golf. That example is also far away from Morgan's example.
In Morgan's case, she posted a score 3 off the lead, a score which was likely not to even get in a playoff not to mind win the thing.

Some might say, does that mean Morgan would have to be in the last group in order to prove that she had the mettle down the stretch to win it. No it doesn't, but she would certainly have to shoot better than 3 off the lead.

[rodney_c]

Originally Posted by Wazmankg

Brittany played the best golf yesterday. I believe the average score Sunday was around 77. But Lorena made a mess of 3 very short shots in a row, that should not have been overly affected by the wind, on 18 to hand Brittany the win.

There is no doubt that Lorena and Laura should have played better. In that sense they did hand Brittany the win because they let her back into the contest, but Brittany still shot a very good round as you said, and she played some good shots down the stretch knowing that those shots would give her the win.

[Game Face]

Originally Posted by rodney_c

In that sense they did hand Brittany the win because they let her back into the contest,

That, my friend, is sports in this great big world! It happens in ALL of SPORTS!!


Good gawd . . . there's an excuse for every win/lose situation!

[mr3856a]

Originally Posted by rodney_c

Some might say, does that mean Morgan would have to be in the last group in order to prove that she had the mettle down the stretch to win it. No it doesn't, but she would certainly have to shoot better than 3 off the lead.

More sour grapes. She actually shot 1 better than everyone else, perhaps you missed it.

[Leaguegolf]

Originally Posted by rodney_c

The circumstances were very different. When Brittany made the scores she knew what she had to do. She was playing with Laura and Lorena and Brittany knew when she was making those shots that they were putting her in a winning position. She still played better than the other players with that knowledge of knowing how important the shots were. In other words she played well, with the pressure of knowing that she was winning.
Another good example of where some people claim a backdoor win is Geoff Ogilvy. However in Geoff's case he posted a score one off the lead, with Phil Mickelson facing one of the most difficult holes in golf. That example is also far away from Morgan's example.
In Morgan's case, she posted a score 3 off the lead, a score which was likely not to even get in a playoff not to mind win the thing.

Some might say, does that mean Morgan would have to be in the last group in order to prove that she had the mettle down the stretch to win it. No it doesn't, but she would certainly have to shoot better than 3 off the lead.

Does telling us Pressel didn't have the knowledge that her score would win somehow make the win less deserved? Pressel wouldn't have had to shoot better than 3 off the lead. Her score, despite being 3 off the lead at one point, was still low enough to win. I understand that the pressure is different in the last group but players outside the last few groups win tournaments all the time. Pressel, like Ogilvy, did what she needed to do to win. She posted a score that made her the clubhouse leader. Players in that last group knew the score to beat and couldn't match it. It can be argued that Pressel was the one that put pressure on the last groups and thereby contributed to their poor performance in the closing holes.

Your tenacity in detracting from Pressel's win only further demonstrates the jealousy you have for her and her history making LPGA major championship victory. History will show that Pressel outplayed everyone on the weekend and won the tournament. Maybe someday, history will record the same for Wie.

[mr3856a]

Originally Posted by rodney_c

There is no doubt that Lorena and Laura should have played better. In that sense they did hand Brittany the win because they let her back into the contest, but Brittany still shot a very good round as you said, and she played some good shots down the stretch knowing that those shots would give her the win.

She shot 5 shots better than Lorena or Laura. She shot more than "a very good round".

I don't understand your need to degrade others. Lord knows if it were Michelle who had played the exact same round yesterday to win you certainly wouldn't be saying she backed into it...

[rodney_c]

Originally Posted by Leaguegolf

Does telling us Pressel didn't have the knowledge that her score would win somehow make the win less deserved?
.

No, it just means that she hasn't proved yet if she can make the clutch shots when she knows they are for a win.

Originally Posted by Leaguegolf

Pressel, like Ogilvy, did what she needed to do to win.

Very different. Ogilvy shot 1 off the lead, not 3 off the lead. There was also only one guy on the course who could beat Ogilvy's score and he was facing a hole where bogey was a very respectable score.

[mr3856a]

Originally Posted by rodney_c

No, it just means that she hasn't proved yet if she can make the clutch shots when she knows they are for a win.

Sour grapes.

Originally Posted by rodney_c

Very different. Ogilvy shot 1 off the lead, not 3 off the lead. There was also only one guy on the course who could beat Ogilvy's score and he was facing a hole where bogey was a very respectable score.

Furyk, Montgomery and Mickelson all could have beat his score.

[Leaguegolf]

Originally Posted by rodney_c

No, it just means that she hasn't proved yet if she can make the clutch shots when she knows they are for a win.

Very different. Ogilvy shot 1 off the lead, not 3 off the lead. There was also only one guy on the course who could beat Ogilvy's score and he was facing a hole where bogey was a very respectable score.

So now it's the number of shots a player is off the lead that determines whether the winner has proven she/he can hit the shots it takes to win?

[mr3856a]

Originally Posted by Leaguegolf

So now it's the number of shots a player is off the lead that determines whether the winner has proven she/he can hit the shots it takes to win?

If it's not Michelle Wie, yes. If it's Michelle Wie she dominated the field on her way to the win

[rodney_c]

Originally Posted by Leaguegolf

So now it's the number of shots a player is off the lead that determines whether the winner has proven she/he can hit the shots it takes to win?

The whole learning how to win concept is a myth. Players can learn how to play well under pressure and that gives them the chance of winning. 15 players could do exactly what Morgan did and get nothing for their efforts. Would that mean that they didn't know how to win?

[Leaguegolf]

Originally Posted by mr3856a

If it's not Michelle Wie, yes. If it's Michelle Wie she dominated the field on her way to the win

That's pure speculation on your part. We'll have to wait to see if that ever happens. Don't hold your breath.

[Texas Wedge]

Originally Posted by rodney_c

No, it just means that she hasn't proved yet if she can make the clutch shots when she knows they are for a win.

Anytime you're within a few strokes of the lead with more than 1 hole left (and sometimes with only one hole left), EVERY shot counts...if you don't believe that, then you don't play golf.

Originally Posted by rodney_c

Very different. Ogilvy shot 1 off the lead, not 3 off the lead. There was also only one guy on the course who could beat Ogilvy's score and he was facing a hole where bogey was a very respectable score.

Even if there was only one guy who could beat Ogilvy's score (though I thought were 2), Ogilvy had to count on PHIL MICKELSON to collapse on the last hole. Since Phil had been having such a good year, that was looking like a nice 2nd place finish for Geoff. I'll bet he wasn't thinking..."I've got him now". But things happen in golf and Geoff won by posting the best 4 day total. So did Pressel. She played 4 days of golf and had the least strokes taken when all was said and done. She WON. Period. That can't be changed.

So let me ask you this hypothetical...
If Tiger Woods is in 30th place to start the final day of the US Open, 10 shots off the lead and he shoots a 63 (9 under and the best round of the day) and all 29 players ahead of him shoot worse than him and he ends up winning... Did he win or did everyone else lose?

Based on your method of thinking, he lucked into it and everyone else in the field gave it to him because they didn't want it. He shot the 63 with no real thought that his score would win the tournament since there were so many people ahead of him who could quite easily beat him. I say, YES, he won because that gave him the lowest score for the tournament. If the rest of the field can't post the same 4 day total, then they didn't lose it...he won it. Same with Pressel.

You know, I hope Pressel goes out in the next major and leads the tournament all 4 days...just so we can see how that will be spun by the Wie-team. (yeah, I know it won't happen, but still...)

[mr3856a]

Originally Posted by rodney_c

The whole learning how to win concept is a myth. Players can learn how to play well under pressure and that gives them the chance of winning. 15 players could do exactly what Morgan did and get nothing for their efforts. Would that mean that they didn't know how to win?

So now Morgan knows how to win? Is a 69 to win just as good as a 69 to get into 63rd place?

There appears to be a staggering lack of consistency here. Not a lack of transparency, mind you, just consistency.

[rodney_c]

Texas Wedge,
I have started a new thread in which I explain what I think of the concept of winning and learning to win. Hopefully in that thread I have explained my position on the issues.

[rodney_c]

Originally Posted by Texas Wedge

You know, I hope Pressel goes out in the next major and leads the tournament all 4 days...just so we can see how that will be spun by the Wie-team. (yeah, I know it won't happen, but still...)

By that statement it's as if you are suggesting that Team Wie has spun Pressel's Kraft win. Team Wie has made no negative statements whatsoever on Pressel's Kraft win.

[Leaguegolf]

Originally Posted by rodney_c

The whole learning how to win concept is a myth. Players can learn how to play well under pressure and that gives them the chance of winning. 15 players could do exactly what Morgan did and get nothing for their efforts. Would that mean that they didn't know how to win?

It would if they've never won. Everyone thinks they know how to win but the proof is in actually winning.

[mr3856a]

Originally Posted by rodney_c

By that statement it's as if you are suggesting that Team Wie has spun Pressel's Kraft win. Team Wie has made no negative statements whatsoever on Pressel's Kraft win.

Ok, can we all just please collectively laugh at this?