Thoughts On Phil

Phil Mickelson and Jim Furyk played in the same group today. Phil had 3 holes where he broke par. Furyk had 7. Furyk only beat Phil by 2 strokes. That's because Phil had zero bogeys and one eagle, while Furyk had one bogey and no eagles. This is not the way things are supposed to be: yes, it makes sense for Phil to have more eagles than Furyk, but you'd never pick Phil to be the one of those two to have the bogey-free round. Except that recently, it's been the other way around (not particularly about Furyk, but about Phil). His final round at Augusta was bogey-free. It wasn't his first spotless round this year: he'll get four or five strokes from par on the holes where he breaks par, but give nothing away. And that results in the same thing as a nine birdie, four bogey round. It's also a lot easier to do when you just don't have the spark, and I think that's what Phil's gotten a lot better at: making sure that in the rounds where he only has a handful of strokes under par in him, he doesn't give anything away, and so he can still put up a really good score, 68 in this case, when he's not making very many putts. I wouldn't be shocked to see him take over the #1 spot before too long.

Also: apparently 27% of surveyed professional golfers think Tiger took performance-enhancing drugs. Really, guys? Really? I seem to remember some golfer saying that he'd love to see someone come out on tour juiced because he'd just get crushed: no one's made a good PED for golf yet. Pure strength isn't an advantage, when it comes with reduced flexibility and a worse temper. He's just that good: get over it. You might not like his sex life, but that doesn't change the fact that he's been kicking your ass for a decade-plus.