« No easier place to play two rounds in a winter day than Phoenix-ScottsdaleDifference between Phil Mickelson & Michelle Wie: He buys fan's watch, she crassly pimps hers »

47 comments

Comment from: Paul W [Visitor]
Maybe Paula Creamer should be out practicing instead of going to Hollywood parties. I heard there is the girl 3 years younger than her who has beat her 9-3-1 head to head. Can't remember her name.
2006-03-07 @ 13:01
Comment from: One-Putt [Visitor]
Congrats to the LPGA for taking the heat off the Hollywood Madams. They managed to field a team of maybe the six worst dressed attendees at this years Oscar celebration.



2006-03-07 @ 13:08
Comment from: One-Putt [Visitor]
Now if the designers from Addidas had someone like this to work with.........

http://www.andongkim.com/articles/2005/08/michellewielettermandebut.htm

2006-03-07 @ 13:47
Comment from: george [Visitor]
** Comment from: Paul W [Visitor]
Maybe Paula Creamer should be out practicing instead of going to Hollywood parties. I heard there is the girl 3 years younger than her who has beat her 9-3-1 head to head. Can't remember her name. **

Hint: It's the girl who has has all zeroes in her "Wins" column and 32 in her "Losses" column. Her nickname is "Bubbles."

-George
2006-03-07 @ 14:09
Comment from: george [Visitor]
** Comment from: One-Putt [Visitor]
Congrats to the LPGA for taking the heat off the Hollywood Madams. **

I admit I'm not as attuned to the Tinseltown crowd as 1-putt purports to be, so maybe I missed a nuance in 1-putt's "Hollwood Madam" reference. Perhaps we now know the source of One-putt's crotch rash.

But it sure sounds like One-putt is saying Paula Creamer and friends dressed like whores.

"De gustibus non est disputandum," to be sure.

But at least the next time 1-putt and the other Wie Warriors bitch about skepticism directed at The Deified Michelle Wie, we'll have 1-putt's claim that "Six LPGA golfers dress like prostitutes" as a handy reference.

-George
2006-03-07 @ 14:33
Comment from: putt4par [Visitor]
Wooh boy, georgie is back. Had any more Elvis sightings lately, george? You poor deluded soul, what with a seeing eye dog etc, I'm surprised you see anything.
As for `De gustibus non est disputandum', we all know you have no taste at all, heck you follow Baldie around, drooling at his every bash at Ms. Wie. I'd explain to the good folks what you've been kissing to get that bad breath but I'm sure they'v got you figured out already.
Go find another golf course and see if you can get enough experience to hack for Baldies barfly journals.
Oh, and don't forget your pooper scooper. Clean up your droppings as you leave the building, bud.
2006-03-07 @ 15:50
Comment from: george [Visitor]
Comment from: putt4par [Visitor]

[...]

What, p4p, no comment from you about 1-putt's declaration about the young LPGA golfers looking like whores? Not that I'm surprised you have that belief, but feel free to distance yourself from 1-putt's bottom-of-the-barrel comments.

Until then, however... t

... that makes two Wie Warriors, 1-putt and p4p, who agree with 1-putt's statement that Paula Creamer, Natalie Gulbis, Christie Kerr, Christina Kim, Jimin Kang, and Stephanie Louden dress like whores.

According to 1-putt:

** Comment from: One-Putt [Visitor]
Congrats to the LPGA for taking the heat off the Hollywood Madams. **

The cream of the Wie Warriors rises yet again.

-George
2006-03-07 @ 17:37
Comment from: putt4par [Visitor]
Comment from: george [Visitor]
**Comment from: putt4par [Visitor]

[...]

What, p4p, no comment from you about 1-putt's declaration about the young LPGA golfers looking like whores? Not that I'm surprised you have that belief, but feel free to distance yourself from 1-putt's bottom-of-the-barrel comments.**
---
Ok, lets look at his post.
---
Comment from: One-Putt [Visitor]
Congrats to the LPGA for taking the heat off the Hollywood Madams. They managed to field a team of maybe the six worst dressed attendees at this years Oscar celebration.

Sorry, wee george, but I don't see any mention of whores in there. What you chose to deduce from his statement is up to you. Although we shouldn't be surprised by what you see. After all, I hear braille translators are not all that accurate. Get your dog to interpret for you. Better yet, get Baldie to tell you what to say.
As for me agreeing or not, it's immaterial to me how they chose to dress. But if it yanks your chain or even better, if it yanks Baldwhines chain, then I'm all for it.

Go back to your pitch and putt with your S E D. Remember your pooper scooper and pick up your droppings as you depart.
2006-03-07 @ 17:59
Comment from: Paul W [Visitor]
Comment from: george [Visitor]

Hint: It's the girl who has has all zeroes in her "Wins" column and 32 in her "Losses" column.

*****

I guess you're right George, Creamer has nothing to worry about from Wie since she's all hype. Paula can just relax and hang out at LA parties.
2006-03-07 @ 18:03
Comment from: Zac [Visitor]
She may have 0 wins but that No2 looks pretty good.
2006-03-07 @ 19:27
Comment from: putt4par [Visitor]
Not bad pocket change for that last tournament either. Thats probably more than Baldie makes in a year. No wonder he's crying.
2006-03-07 @ 20:26
Comment from: jay z [Visitor]
It is interesting that overhyped gulbis is 2-0 against heir apparent of Annika this sason.
2006-03-07 @ 20:33
Comment from: george [Visitor]
** Comment from: One-Putt [Visitor]
Congrats to the LPGA for taking the heat off the Hollywood Madams. **

p4p
*I don't see any mention of whores in there.*

Your posting history proves you obtuse and worse.

But even you should be able to Google "Hollywood Madam."

(0.17 seconds later)

So now that we've cleared that up, the top hits of the 163,000 returned would lead somebody who is not as dense as you are to an inescapable conclusion as to the primary meaning of "Hollywood Madam."

If there's some obscure and non-prostitute, non- Heidi Fleiss reference that only the Tinseltowners know, the wait continues for somebody to step up to provide it.

So once again I dumb down the questions to help you and your fellow Wie Warriors, p4p:

Do you agree or disagree that the six young ladies in question, as your fellow Wie Warrior 1-putt suggested, dressed like whores?

Was your cohort 1-putt classy or despicable to say they looked like prostitutes?

And if that's what your colleague 1-putt meant, have any of the Wie Skeptics disparaged Michelle Wie in a similar way?

-George
2006-03-07 @ 21:06
Comment from: george [Visitor]
Paul W
**I guess you're right George, Creamer has nothing to worry about from Wie since she's all hype. Paula can just relax and hang out at LA parties. **

Because there were so many LPGA tournaments that Paula and the other golfers missed on Sunday night!

And congrats, Paul. It looks as if you correctly identified your mystery winless golfer from my hints. Always glad to help!

-George
2006-03-07 @ 21:11
Comment from: george [Visitor]
**
Comment from: Zac [Visitor]
[Wie] may have 0 wins but that No2 looks pretty good.
**

Well, yeah!

Considering Michelle doesn't know what #1 means, except as a theoretical concept.

(except sometimes after the third round of the U.S. Open. Too bad for Michelle they played a 4th round in 2005)

"We're #2!" Funny how you never hear that cheer during March Madness.

-George
2006-03-07 @ 21:16
Comment from: Paul W [Visitor]
george, is there some point to these constant sarcastic posts from you? you just seem to keep saying the same thing over and over. turn the record over.
2006-03-07 @ 21:46
Comment from: putt4par [Visitor]
Ahh Georgie baby, you don't have to dumb down for anyone, you're already as dumb as they get.
All he said was they took the heat off the Hoolywood madams. Everyone was watching some good looking golf chicks,no one had time to look for the madams. I still don't see where he actually called them whores or madams.
You are just too busy spinning your own interpretations into some one elses post.
Sorry old bud, but you lose.
So lets talk about your lack of wit and your predilection to prove how stupid you really are.
You have yet to come close to making a point in a debate. You are so busy making stupid sarcastic, negative and inultting rmarks, that everyone just laughs at you and carries on.
I, otoh, love to tweak your gullible and idiotic chain, just to hear you squeal. and you do squeal.
Now, back to your kennel and let your seeing eye dog speak for you, he makes much more sense.
2006-03-07 @ 21:51
Comment from: One-Putt [Visitor]
Comment from: george [Visitor]

Burp!
2006-03-08 @ 05:21
Comment from: HedgeHog [Visitor]
Biff Baldwin - if Gulbis if overhyped what does that make you? Crobar is in the mail to help you pull your head out...
2006-03-08 @ 09:52
Comment from: ToddCommish [Visitor]
Actually, Golf Digest put it best last year when they compared Michelle Wie to LeBron James (making a HUGE leap up in competition) and compared Paula Creamer to Tiger Woods (systematically stomping lower levels to learn how to win).

Some people are fans of LeBron and his athleticism and flashes of greatness. They wear his jersey, they buy his products, they cheer for him. And he's never made the playoffs.

I understand the hype and fanaticism to some degree. Great athletic ability in one so young is awesome to see, but sooner or later ACCOMPLISHMENTS must be considered over flash. [And I've said here before that Michelle Wie will win eventually, just as LeBron will make the playoffs, but can we hold off the brass bands and parades until they do?]
2006-03-08 @ 12:12
Comment from: george [Visitor]
** Comment from: Paul W [Visitor]
george, is there some point to these constant sarcastic posts from you? you just seem to keep saying the same thing over and over. turn the record over. **

Let's look at Side B.

Lookee here. The point remains: Michelle Wie has yet to win an LPGA tournament, despite the hype and fawning from all of you Wie Warriors.

Try as you will, the infantile parade of Wie Warriors is unable to change that uncomfortable yet concrete fact.

The acolytes can keep their spin machine in hypedrive 24/7, but that is still the bottom line.

Ultimately, all the discussions have to accommodate the reality that Michelle Wie is 0-for-LPGA.

-George
2006-03-08 @ 15:30
Comment from: jay z [Visitor]
Tiger won 6 USGA championship and Paula didn't even reach single USGA championship final. Somehow media is insisting Creamer dominated junior comptetition. To make comparison with wie who didn't take traditional route, Media made paula's amateur resume more than what she is.
2006-03-08 @ 20:33
Comment from: jay z [Visitor]
Also to compare creamer to Tiger is just ridiculous. If golf digest wanted to make comparison, Creamer is Carmelo Anthony rather than Tiger. There were experts who insisted Anthony should be #1 pick instead Lebron because he "proved" he is winner despite Lebron's apparent superioty in skill and athleticism.
Now is there anybody who still insists Anthony should have been #1 pick?
2006-03-08 @ 20:42
Comment from: putt4par [Visitor]
Comment from: george [Visitor]
** Comment from: Paul W [Visitor]
george, is there some point to these constant sarcastic posts from you? you just seem to keep saying the same thing over and over. turn the record over. **
---
Let's look at Side B.
---
Looks the same as side A to me georgie

---
Lookee here. The point remains: Michelle Wie has yet to win an LPGA tournament, despite the hype and fawning from all of you Wie Warriors.
----
And the simple fact still escapes you and all the bashers that no one....Not one single person has won an LPGA event at 16, or at 17 and Paula was 3 months shy of her 19th birthday when she became the youngest to win on the LPGA.
***
Try as you will, the infantile parade of Wie Warriors is unable to change that uncomfortable yet concrete fact.
***
[[[Has anyone else won an LPGA event at age 16]]] If you don't like the hype and the hype machine, bellyache about that, not about Michelle Wie. If you don't like the rankings, talk to LPGA officials. Fat lot of good it'll do you. Hey, they also recognise imbiciles like you, george. They can ignore you with ease, you are less than nothing to them.

Your expectations are so out to lunch as to be ridiculous. Talk about infantile, your moronic maunderings are so predictable, george.


***
And you make the mistake of accusing us of fawning over Wie.
***
---
*** Nope, not true but I don't like seeing totally brain dead people like you and the moron whose blog this is, bash for no other reason than spite, jealousy,childish wimsy or or just plain too stupid to see the woods for the trees.***
---
The acolytes can keep their spin machine in hypedrive 24/7, but that is still the bottom line.
---
The bottom line here is that you are so short sighted that you cannot see any grey areas, only black and white. She hasn't won an LPGA event. And BALDWHINEs count of 0-32 or what ever is just plain ludicrous. The feeble minded fool is your clone george, he has counted all the professional events Wie has been in since she was 10 years old. How's that for moron nit picking? So by his idiotic count, she is way past where Annika and Dotty were in their careers. Jeez, when Pepper was 16, she had barely figured out how to walk, let alone make the cut in an LPGA event.
Both of them were over 18 when they won (actually, they were both old enough to drink and drive and vote), both had at least one full year as fully mature and fully developed adults on the LPGA tour before winning. And you witless dirtbags won't cut Wie that much slack?
man, you two need serious Phsyciatric help.
***
Ultimately, all the discussions have to accommodate the reality that Michelle Wie is 0-for-LPGA.
***
Go back to your kennel you little windbag. You wouldn't recognize reality if it hit you on the head ( you probably wouldn't feel it either, your so thick) I'll stay around and watch a bunch of young ladies ( Creamer, Pressel, Grenada, Wie and a few more) take on the LPGA and make Annikas accomplishments look pretty pallid by comparison.

Ok, georgie baby, time for you to let your Seeing eye dog take you for a walk again. As a reminder to your Dog, I hope he doesn't let you off your leash, keeps the poopy bags close at hand for when you open your mouth and to keep the pooper scooper in the paw not holding your leash.
Now go find that empty golf course, become familiar with it, apply to GolfPublishers.com and I am sure they'll let you train to spew forth drivel in Baldwhines wake.
2006-03-08 @ 22:11
Comment from: One-Putt [Visitor]
Comment from: putt4par [Visitor]

WOW!

Baldwin, George, Alex or any other poster at this forum can't deny the fact that Michelle has become the best player at her age of any golfer in the history of LPGA golf....period.

She would have qualified to hold an LPGA card at age thirteen and every year since. As a professional she would have earned enough in just eight events to end up 16th for 2005 on the ADT money list. Could one just imagine where she would have ended up playing in twenty five events like Paula Creamer? She would have finished second on the money list to be sure. Rolex figured this out and placed her in the position she deserves to be in based on her performance. It was not a conspiracy or accident pinheads.

To expect her to play amateurs when she has proved year after year she is good enough to play on the professional women's tour full time, is simply a ridiculous argument put forth by golf neophytes, mindless nerds and writers of questionable character.

Sorenstam, Kerr, Inkster and the current crop of youngsters will rue the day when Michelle decides to play the tour fulltime.



2006-03-09 @ 06:35
Comment from: putt4par [Visitor]
Best? Maybe, time will tell. She is exceptionally good.But never underestimate, Paula, Morgan, Julietta or any of the other fine young players coming up through the ranks. Golf has a nasty habit of leveling the playing field on any given day. Ask Annika how she feels on the odd occasion when she is beaten.

What I have a problem with is these idiots beating the heck out of the kid when shes not the problem.

You don't like the new rankings? Fine, then beat on the organizers who istituted them.

You don't like the Hype involved with Michelle Wie? Then bellyache at the people, the media and the Corporations that are exploiting her. Go to Nike and Sony and tell the off.
You don't like the route she has chosen to get to her objectives? then bellyache about that if you must. But just because it isn't the route you would chose, doesn't make it the wrong route.
But for crying out loud quit yapping about the kid. As she said, "All I've done is play golf" "I didn't put myself in 3rd or 2nd in the rankings".
She has no control over that.You are all beating up on the wrong victim here, folks.

What really gripes me is people like Baldwin who make a good living out of bashing Michelle and are really the fools feeding the machine.
But you'll never get them to admit their culpability.
You'll hear all about their right to publish what they want but you never hear much about the responsabilties that go along with that freedom of speech "right" that they "own". (Don't you just love quotation marks and brackets, Tim?)

So go bash the hell out of Michelles agents, her sponsors and her parents but until SHE does something illegal or immoral, or til she can compete in every tournament the same way as Paula, Natalie, Juli or Annika,leave her alone. Go after the folks causing the probems.
And quit bashing Morgan for crying. Cripes, any of you that have teenage daughters or teenage nieces, know how quick they can be to tear up. And don't bother with the pap about they are now professional...They are still human, still young, still have systems that are changing and also they are females going through routine hormonal changes every month, to add to the mix that you never find in the boys.

In other words, think about what you are doing, what you are saying and how you'd react if someone was constantly bashing you daily. I am amazed at the grace these young ladies show under pressure. I'd be willing to bet that Baldwin wouldn't be nearly so calm under the same circumstances.
2006-03-09 @ 12:16
Comment from: ToddCommish [Visitor]
One-Putt makes several valid points, but they tend to get masked by his "slippery slope" logic.

"Michelle has become the best player at her age of any golfer in the history of LPGA golf....period." - True, and I don't think anyone disputes this. Well, maybe Baldwin, but he's the only one.

"She would have qualified to hold an LPGA card at age thirteen and every year since." - Probably, but the fact is, she didn't. That's the equivalent of saying Michael Jordan could've played in the NBA at the age of 16. Well, fine, but he didn't, so let's not speculate on what-might-have-been.

"As a professional she would have earned enough in just eight events to end up 16th for 2005 on the ADT money list." - True, an awesome achievement.

"Could one just imagine where she would have ended up playing in twenty five events like Paula Creamer? She would have finished second on the money list to be sure." - Here's where the facts and logic start to come apart. Playing 25 events adds stress, travel, and multiple other complexities onto a player. Would she have played as well? Maybe. He's projecting an entire year based upon her limited schedule, which is like projecting a great pinch-hitter's stats over a full season. She might well have gotten tired out, and not even played as well in the eight tournaments she actually played. Honestly, I think her and Creamer would've likely battled for the #2 slot all year, as they probably will for the next ten years or so.

"To expect her to play amateurs when she has proved year after year she is good enough to play on the professional women's tour full time, is simply a ridiculous argument put forth by golf neophytes, mindless nerds and writers of questionable character." - Classic straw-man argument. No one is saying she SHOULD have played amateurs, the skeptics are saying she SHOULD have learned to win at some level. Remember, nobody is arguing that she shouldn't be in the LPGA... at least I haven't heard them.

"Sorenstam, Kerr, Inkster and the current crop of youngsters will rue the day when Michelle decides to play the tour fulltime." - This is patently ridiculous. All of them recognize that Wie brings attention; attention brings fans and sponsors; fans and sponsors bring money; money brings, well, more money.


2006-03-09 @ 12:23
Comment from: putt4par [Visitor]
Damn it Toddcommish, you continue to astound and amaze me. I agree with you. Look at my post of a few minutes ago.

Michelle is no goddess, no diety nor is she infallible. She is as capable of mistakes as is anyone else. Lord only knows she has made some serious blunders in her games, but then so has Tiger, so has Annika and any other golfer out there.

But beat on her for her mistakes,not the mistakes of her handlers or the mistakes of those bashers who believe their expectations should be Michelles expectation.
Also cut her the same slack that you accord the other golfers in the LPGA or the amateurs.

That's where I get cranked at Baldie and some other posters here and in other media outlets. There is seldom any value to their attacks and often what seems to be spite, hate and total disregard for fair comment.
2006-03-09 @ 12:53
Comment from: Nas [Visitor]
Not one sane person, let alone draft expert thought that Carmelo should go before Lebron. So your comparison doesn't hold water. You can all take your shots at Paula, but the fact remains that Paula has what Michelle can only dream about right now and those are victories at the LPGA and JLPGA. Michelle can have the bogus #2 spot in the rankings and you people can have your delusional take on the career of Michelle Wie.
2006-03-09 @ 14:05
Comment from: One-Putt [Visitor]
Comment from: ToddCommish [Visitor]

...."Probably, but the fact is, she didn't. That's the equivalent of saying Michael Jordan could've played in the NBA at the age of 16. Well, fine, but he didn't, so let's not speculate on what-might-have-been."....

ADT money list performance based on finishes if they allowed thirteen, fourteen, fifteen or sixteen year olds to hold LPGA cards:

2003 Age 13: 103rd on the money list playing in six LPGA events. This would qulify her for a "non-exempt" LPGA card in 2004. Average potential earnings per event: $9,617. Times 25 events equals $240,425 in annual earnings.

2004 Age 14: 42nd on the money list playing in seven LPGA events. This would qualify her for an "exempt" LPGA card in 2005. Average potential earnings per event: $36,229. Times 25 events equals $905,725 in annual earnings.

2005 Age 15: 16th on the money list playing in eight LPGA events. This would qualify her for an "exempt" LPGA card in 2006. Average potential earnings per event: $85,022. Times 25 events equals $2,125,563 in annual earnings.

..."Here's where the facts and logic start to come apart. Playing 25 events adds stress, travel, and multiple other complexities onto a player. Would she have played as well? Maybe. He's projecting an entire year based upon her limited schedule, which is like projecting a great pinch-hitter's stats over a full season. She might well have gotten tired out, and not even played as well in the eight tournaments she actually played. Honestly, I think her and Creamer would've likely battled for the #2 slot all year, as they probably will for the next ten years or so.".....

When Michelle plays in limited events and has long breaks in between them would you agree she steps onto the first tee with a distinct disadvantage? She hadn't played a competitive round of golf in over three months and she still came in third at the Fields.

The more you play the better you get......period. Everyone has bad events on the tour, but the percentages rise in your favor when you play more events.

Personally I play over a hundred rounds of golf a year between my two home courses and when traveling to Europe, the Mainland, Australia or to Asia. This keeps me scoring around "Scratch". If I layoff for some reason, my score rises six to eight strokes until I get some rounds under my belt and get back in form.

Now I can't say for sure how many rounds a year you play to hold a 22 handicap, but I estimate it at twenty or less full rounds a year range.

..."To expect her to play amateurs when she has proved year after year she is good enough to play on the professional women's tour full time, is simply a ridiculous argument put forth by golf neophytes, mindless nerds and writers of questionable character." - Classic straw-man argument. No one is saying she SHOULD have played amateurs, the skeptics are saying she SHOULD have learned to win at some level. Remember, nobody is arguing that she shouldn't be in the LPGA... at least I haven't heard them."....

When a golfer enters a competition they are playing against the field that entered the event. So if we follow your logic, she should have been beating other children and not beating the best female golfers in the world who played in the field. What would she learn from that? How to win?

Here are the facts: If you play someone of lesser skill you learn nothing. When you play against someone better, you than you will learn something. My best lessons came when someone beat me, not when I win the match that day. I feel good, but I didn't learn much. That is why Michelle plays against the men, to learn something.

..."Sorenstam, Kerr, Inkster and the current crop of youngsters will rue the day when Michelle decides to play the tour fulltime." - This is patently ridiculous. All of them recognize that Wie brings attention; attention brings fans and sponsors; fans and sponsors bring money; money brings, well, more money....

As long as they are satisfied with second place and below money.






2006-03-09 @ 14:20
Comment from: Nas [Visitor]
It was Tiger Woods who first brought the "learning to win" model to the fore front. He was critical of Michelle's career path years ago and it is imporatnt to note that while nobody is saying that she can not compete or belong on the LPGA tour, people are questioning her ability to win. Winning or dominating at the highest level of junior or amateur golf gives the player a comfort level, a feeling that they have been there before. Tiger often talks about the ability to recall wins and draw strength and confidence from them. A more recent example would be J.B. Holmes who when asked how he could be so cool trying to win his first pro tournament recalled winning at the major college level and had that experience to fall back on. Michelle Wie does not have that source of strength, she has very limited memories of actual wins. I think we all beleive the girl is incredibly talented, so much so that it looks as if she should have won by now. She has put herself into winning situations and thus far has come up short. When looking for reasons why, we don't think it is a talent issue, or an age issue, so we must look at it as a psychological issue. For the record I think Michelle will win eventually and probably often. I just don't think the girl has "it".
2006-03-09 @ 14:24
Comment from: putt4par [Visitor]
There, damn it, there we have some reaonable and good debate.
You both have a different opinion, but no one called anyoe stupid, nor called Michelle we a loser because we disagree or because she hasn't won yet.I really believ, just looking at her steady improvement over the last 3 years, that she will win an LPGA event this year, maybe even a major.
But that is just kind of a gut feeling.

I do know that all it will take is one win for MW to get the winning feeling. She is very strong mentally and will use that win to focus on more wins.

Tiger also said she has what it takes to win, and win often. Other than that, he has refused to make any other coomments or predictions about MWs game.
What worked for Tiger may or may not have worked for MW. Since she didn't take that same route, we'll never know for sure, therefore leaving lots of room for debate.

But just because we have certain expectations of her, that doesn't mean she has to do things as we think she should.

It'll be interesting to see where she goes this year.
2006-03-09 @ 14:48
Comment from: ToddCommish [Visitor]
I think we're all in agreement that MW is a great talent (and a reasonably good kid). I think the disconnect is whether great talent alone merits the adulation. Don't assume that the rest of the "skeptics" share Chris Baldwin's disdain for everything she does. The "product placement" of the watch, while a little tacky, certainly didn't merit two mentions, especially given the whorish nature of the walking billboards of the pro golf tours.

And I stand by my assertion that competing and traveling constantly (20+ tournaments) puts wear and tear on a professional. You can't be expected to sustain a high level of play simply because "you play more". Typically, even when not in tournaments, they're still practicing, but they're not competing or traveling to do so. Just ask Tiger, who scaled his tournament schedule back to a select few, just so he could focus on WINNING the majors [not just make the cut].

Props to One-putt for being a scratch golfer. I'm not quite sure of the relevance to the MW discussion, but it's nice for him.

I think I'm more of a "skeptic" than a basher. Once she wins as much as her talent seems to portend, I think most of us will meet on the Wie-scale. Until then, some will tout her talent and others will doubt her ability to win. Strangely enough, both can be equally true.
2006-03-09 @ 17:09
Comment from: jay z [Visitor]
Todd. Paula had 5 strokes lead with 7 holes to go but ended up losing by 4 strokes in rochester international. But because she is not michelle wie, Media gave free ride to paula. Even Greg Norman didn't blew that large lead in such a short span. Also paula shot 79 at women's open but also because she is not a wie, she was again forgiven by media.
Are you talking about JB holems? I heard that Camilo Villegas held 3 round lead 8 times in nationwide tour last year but didn't win single time. It looks like winning at college didn't help villegas at all.

2006-03-09 @ 20:34
Comment from: putt4par [Visitor]
Didn't help Gulbis. :)
2006-03-09 @ 22:56
Comment from: Jim COULTHARD [Visitor]
Lorena Ochoa is the one who made up 9 strokes in 7 holes to win at Rochester. Yet it is Lorena who seems to have gotten the CHOKE label--because of what happened with a whole lot of people watching at one hole in the Open. Then look at Morgan Pressel. She got a pass for her loss last year in the 3rd round of the Juniors--but this year at the Fields the focus was on her and Michelle even before the round started--so whatever she did good or bad would be noticed.
2006-03-09 @ 23:21
Comment from: ToddCommish [Visitor]
Gulbis is famous for two reasons. And neither of them are golf-related.
2006-03-10 @ 00:07
Comment from: One-Putt [Visitor]
..."Comment from: ToddCommish [Visitor]

Props to One-putt for being a scratch golfer. I'm not quite sure of the relevance to the MW discussion, but it's nice for him."...

To improve at golf takes many hours on the practice range, the ability to learn from your mistakes and numerous rounds of golf. It also pays to play against players that are better than you are to elevate your game to a higher level. Michelle is following this path and that is why she plays against the men, to raise her game to a higher level.

What do you think Michelle did after carding a 79 at the Sony? Go home and cry in her pillow all night? No Todd she headed to the driving range and hit enough balls to relieve the frustration and figure out what the hell happened to her game.

Before her round the next day she hit the driving range again to make sure her corrections were locked in. The result was carding a 68. You watched the same thing at the Fields. Her mid-round was off so she adjusted.

The difference between Annika and Michelle is Annika can adjust mid-round when something goes South in her game. That is what years of experience will do for your game.

If I pick up a serious fade or draw when driving, I don't fight it, I play it, because that is what I brought to the course that day. Michelle pulled three balls into a ten foot pattern in the rough on the same hole in three rounds. That can only come from setting up exactly the same way every time she hit on that hole. Annika would have moved the ball back a half inch in her stance and adjusted after the first mis-hit. That is what experience brings to the game.

Michelle is gaining that experience every round she plays.





2006-03-10 @ 06:35
Comment from: John [Visitor]
"She may have 0 wins but that No2 looks pretty good."

Not as good as 4 wins and 3-1-1 at the Solheim.
2006-03-10 @ 12:50
Comment from: John [Visitor]
Wie Warriors, that's too nice a nickname for some of the pathetic posters here. Wienies or Wie-Nuts are both more appropriate for some of the pathetic people who seem to think trashing Paula Creamer, or Morgan Pressel, or any of the other young stars will somehow elevate Michelle Wie to the top.

If you losers were so confident, you'd be content to let Michelle play her way to the top. But instead, you just amplify your personal insecurities by trashing her so-called rivals. Here's a fact - they've all won something of note. Another young player getting attention in the press, by the fans, doesn't mean your precious princess is losing anything. All of you need to just grow up
2006-03-10 @ 12:59
Comment from: One-Putt [Visitor]
..."Comment from: John [Visitor]
"She may have 0 wins but that No2 looks pretty good."

Not as good as 4 wins and 3-1-1 at the Solheim."...

No doubt Paula had a Rookie Year young golfers dream about. Two LPGA wins, two JLPGA wins, number two on the ADT money list and the S Cup performance were outstanding and showed some solid play. She dominated the Evian Masters and played one of the finest tournaments of her life.

Paula will have to pick up her consistency or she will be overtaken by Lorena, Christie, or the Japanese or Korean gals who are hovering around the top.

The Rolex standings reward consistency of play, not wins or money earned. It is based on a different standard that has become the most important statistic for LPGA members this year. Based on their Rolex position they will or will not qualify for many of the year end events.

Michelle is not a LPGA member and in-turn not eligible for these events, no matter what her position on the list is.



2006-03-10 @ 13:53
Comment from: ToddCommish [Visitor]
Wow, One-putt, that was well-stated! I agree that Paula's consistency (or lack thereof) will be her biggest hurdle this year. Michelle's biggest hurdle will be her first LPGA victory. Pressel's will be a combination of the two, making her task more difficult.

Paula will actually find it difficult to fall out of the top five or ten, based upon last year. Remember, the "rankings" (yes, i think they're bogus, but the LPGA muckety-mucks put weight on them) are for a two-year period and though her brilliant 2005 season will get less weight, Paula would have to play abysmally to lose much ground. After all, she looked terrible for the first round or two of the Fields and came in T-11th.
2006-03-10 @ 17:13
Comment from: Jim COULTHARD [Visitor]
Paula was very consistent last year, particularly at the end of the season. She had 8 top 3 finishes in 25 events. Her biggest hurdle this year will be the same as it was last year--Annika. Since old events get less weight as far as getting points are concerned, but not as far as the divisor is concerned--Paula could lose some ground, but certainly not enough to be a problem for her. As far as the rankings are concerned, I doubt the LPGA plans to make much use of them.
2006-03-10 @ 20:25
Comment from: One-Putt [Visitor]
..."Comment from: Jim COULTHARD [Visitor]

As far as the rankings are concerned, I doubt the LPGA plans to make much use of them."..

Jim, the LPGA helped create the Rolex criterior and intends to use it for year end event qualifying. This is their baby as much as Rolex.
2006-03-11 @ 03:15
Comment from: alan m [Visitor]
putt4par
I totally agree with every comment you have made. Thanks for taking the time to present our views. one-putt is almost there.
Alan M
2006-03-11 @ 10:09
Comment from: Kal [Visitor]
Comment from: John [Visitor]
"She may have 0 wins but that No2 looks pretty good."

Not as good as 4 wins and 3-1-1 at the Solheim.

But definitely better than the 79 and 74 this past weekend.
2006-04-05 @ 02:00
Comment from: Michael T [Visitor]
Leave Paula alone Paul W! She's a great woman and a great golfer! I'm sure she'd kick your @ss any day of the week out on the links. So back off!
2008-07-03 @ 14:52

Comments are closed for this post.

Simply select where you want to play, find a tee time deal, and golf now!

Dates: July 31, 2014 - August 31, 2014
Stay & Play for as Low as $84/day. Our all-inclusive Kentucky golf packages always include unlimited carts, golf and three meals a day.
Price range: $84