|
|
 |
 |   |
|
EVENTS Fantasy Central Inside Game Video Plus Statitudes Your Turn Message Boards Email Newsletters Golf Guide Cities 
CNNSI.com GROUP
COMMERCE
|  |
Tigerproofing, ball spin and losing 'it'
It's been a couple of weeks since I've answered any of your e-mails, for which I apologize. So this week's space is devoted to responding to some of your more interesting questions. I read your contention stating that Augusta is not trying
to Tigerproof the course. Why, then, is talk of toughening the course only
raised after Woods' victories?
"Tigerproofing" implies alterations that would make it more difficult for Woods to win. But the changes that are being contemplated at Augusta will in all likelihood make it easier for him to win. It's not Woods winning that triggers the discussion about toughening the course, it's the way he -- and others who are dominating the leader board -- play. Employing modern equipment, modern swings and modern physiques, too many players are reducing Augusta's par-4s to a drive and a short iron or wedge approach. I believe what the Masters committee is after is a truer test of golf in which even the longest and straightest players have to hit mid-iron and even long iron approaches into some par-4s. It used to be said that the mark of a great golf course is one that over 18 holes makes a player use every club in his bag. Augusta doesn't come close to doing this for players who hit the ball as long as Woods, Mickelson, Duval, Singh, etc. Real Tigerproofing at Augusta, meanwhile, would involve making the course shorter so that the players he is now outdriving by 30 yards or more could also hit short clubs into the greens. If the people who run the Masters really didn't want Woods to win, that's what they would do. The truth is, though, every tournament loves it when Tiger wins. I wanted to know if there was any special way to get more spin on the ball
going into a green. Or, is it something that people are born
with?
The best way to get adequate spin on your irons shots is to hit the ball solidly. All things being equal, the more clubhead speed a player can generate, the more spin he can produce. Also, players with steeper downswings can get more backspin than those who sweep the ball. Equipment also plays a role. Square grooves on irons impart more backspin than traditional V-grooves. And certain balls spin more than others. A solid-core, hard-cover ball like a Pinnacle will produce maximum distance and minimum spin, while the soft-covered balls used by professionals are much easier to spin. Of course, pros can spin their irons more than anybody, but the power players like Woods and Mickelson are actually trying to reduce the amount of spin they get on their irons. Although it looks great to the fans, a ball that spins backward after landing is harder to hit a precise distance than one that "drops and stops," to borrow the phrase that the sellers of the popular Titlest Pro V1 are using to market their ball. To get that effect, Woods has put a lot of effort into learning how to hit "deadhanded" iron shots, while Mickelson is trying to make his downswing less steep. After watching Cardinals pitcher Rick Ankiel struggle with his wildness, I
thought of Ian Baker-Finch at the British Open. What do you think causes a pro
golfer to suddenly "lose it"? And can they get "it" back?
Although honest professional golfers will confess they have plenty of weak moments when they feel as if the ball could go anywhere, muscle memory usually gets them through the panic. A seasoned tour player has a safety shot that he can fall back on when confidence ebbs or pressure becomes unbearable. It's usually some kind of abbreviated swing that produces a low fade that looks ugly but stays in play and keeps the wheels from falling off. At the same time, my guess is every one of them wakes up every day with the nagging knowledge that the line between having it and losing it is very fine. It wears on golf pros, explains why a lot of them look so cranky, and, for some guys, simply becomes too much. It seems to me that the players who are most susceptible to "losing it" are the sensitive types who take defeats to heart, the thoughtful types who can all too vividly imagine failure, the fearful types who put tremendous pressure on themselves, and especially, the types who lack the athletic arrogance to believe they can beat anybody. Baker-Finch and Chip Beck, two recent examples of players who lost it, are both sensitive, thoughtful people who had trouble believing they were as good as they were. When they started to play badly, they couldn't fight the slide as effectively as a player with a harder core. Of course, tough-minded players, like Curtis Strange, lose it as well. Usually, the root cause in those cases is motivation. Strange had to put so much effort into every facet of his life to be as good as he was that after he won two U.S. Opens, he just couldn't summon up the same intensity again. I think much the same is true of Nick Faldo. By the way, shorter hitters like Beck, Baker-Finch, Strange and Faldo can lose it more easily because their margin for error is smaller than for a talented power player like, say, Fred Couples. All that said, I've learned to be very careful about pronouncing any player -- especially one who was once great -- as finished. There have been numerous examples of Lazarus-like comebacks, but the one that will stay with me forever was Johnny Miller's victory at Pebble Beach in 1994. No one was ever as seemingly done as Miller at that point, but he, mostly through a better mental approach, pulled off a miracle. If a player who has lost it can give himself time to allow the mental scar tissue to heal, find a solution to a key swing flaw, and can get his love for the game back, he can find what was lost. I would be surprised -- but not shocked -- if Beck or Baker-Finch played the tour successfully again. Everyone talks about whether Tiger will exceed Nicklaus' record of 18
majors. I think a more interesting question is whether he could top 100
victories on the PGA Tour. At the age of 25, Tiger has 27, so it doesn't seem
impossible to me. That's just a little over six victories a year for the next 12
years. Do you think it's possible? Would that be a greater accomplishment than
reaching, say, 20 majors?
Although topping Nicklaus' record would garner more attention, I think that winning 100 tournaments would actually be a greater feat. (Sam Snead owns the record for most career PGA Tour wins with 81, while Kathy Whitworth has the LPGA record with 88). If Woods focused on just winning regular tour events, I think it's plausible that he could average six victories a year for the next 12 years. The problem is that his goal is winning majors, which means he will be marshaling his mental energy and working on his swing at regular events. Unless some kind of career total becomes important to him, he will probably win at a less frequent rate on the regular tour as time goes on. Another factor is that Tiger is spawning a lot of cubs who are building their games in his image and will have geared themselves to beat him when they join the circuit. Nicklaus was able to beat back the challengers until he was about 40, when Tom Watson finally surpassed him. But the waves of talent that will come at Tiger will almost certainly be more formidable. So getting 100 PGA Tour wins in a career would be incredible, and in my opinion would stand as the greatest record in golf. My guess is that Tiger has a better chance of catching Nicklaus than catching Snead. Should Tiger win the U.S. Open on June 17, it would be his fifth consecutive
major in "any arbitrary 365 days." Would that be the Grandest Slam?
Great point, and you've begun the scramble among sportswriters to come up with a catchy name for the feat. Grandest Slam isn't bad. It would be a truly unbreakable record. Unless we start counting days, and he wins the British Open on July 22, which would be five in 363 days. Sports Illustrated senior writer Jaime Diaz is a regular contributor to the
magazine's Golf Plus edition. Click here to
send him a question or comment.
| ||||||||||||||||||||
