« Einstein Ben Roethlisberger shrugs off his motorcycle wounds to golfNew Jersey closes its Atlantic City casinos, golf goes on »

149 comments

Comment from: AhhSoo [Visitor]
Ohh Ohh...Lincicome is in danger of joining the cursed group of golfers who got tangled up with the Wies. Amacapane & Pressel could attest to the curse.

At least Morgan in her last press interview was more "diplomatic" in her comments about Michelle as noted by JC on another blog. Could be she finally figured out that continuing to "trash mouth" Michelle is getting her nowhere?

Brittany played really well in both of her Saturday matches and she was better than both of her opponents and that is why she won. She knows it and we who watched the match on TV know it. She should have just let that one go by without commenting. Just a smile at the question would have made her point much more effectively than answering it.

People never learn that reporters ARE NEVER EVER ON YOUR SIDE. They're just a bunch of snakes waiting to trap you into creating another controversy so that they can sell their rag sheets.
2006-07-08 @ 22:03
Comment from: AhhSoo [Visitor]
Chris, shouldn't you have waited for Sunday evening before stating "the unremarkable Brittany Lincicome"?

Just a thought as I don't want you munching on your foot AGAIN if Lincicome takes down your "will always be better" gal, Creamer in the final. heh heh
2006-07-08 @ 22:18
Comment from: Ford [Visitor]
Michelle makes the innapropriate comment and Brittany is the one who should hold her toungue...Please. It looks like Michelle is beginning to borrow excuses from her fans endless reserve.
2006-07-08 @ 23:02
Comment from: Alex [Visitor]
Chris, Did you hear the TV announcer plugging Bubbles for her upcoming attempt to try to make a cut at the John Deere? The irony was in the fact that this fawning was taking place just as MW was going into the tank once again. Bubbles' agents have got to be involved in some sort of payola to get these announcers to kiss up so blatantly. And even when she was getting her a** handed to her by Brittany, they could only gush about all the different shots she had exclusively, how good she was for a 16 year old girl, etc., ad nauseum. These Wie sycophants are determined to write and re-write history until it comes out as they want it to be. No wins, no problem. Bubbles is number two! She may even be number one according to the dunces down at Rolex since Annika was also eliminated today. It wouldn't surprise me a bit.
2006-07-08 @ 23:09
Comment from: Judge Smails [Visitor]
Hey, Bubbles is as Bubbles does . . ..
2006-07-08 @ 23:22
Comment from: putt4par [Visitor]
Woohoo, the fearless bottom feeders come out at night, hehe..

Ford, Alex, JS... Ok, wait, where is George? John D is missing too.

good grief, there are some bottom feeders missing.

It sure is interesting watching all of you congregate in Baldwins school of witless scum mucking, but what the heck, you all have to be somewhere I guess.
2006-07-08 @ 23:29
Comment from: Joe Cool [Visitor]
If I hear Michelle say the word "awesome" one more time, I am going to scream!!! It doesn't say much for the Hawaiian school district when a straight "A" student attending the best high school in the islands has only one adjective in her vocabulary!!! Pleeeze Michelle, stop making excuses...you were simply outplayed by Lincicome. Get over it and move on...if you start the prima donna routine and the silent treatment with the "girls" they will tear your heart out!!!
2006-07-08 @ 23:30
Comment from: Wie fan [Visitor]
So she had a bad day

Michelle at 16 is better than Tiger ever was at 16.

Nuff said !
2006-07-08 @ 23:38
Comment from: Ann [Visitor]
Wow... why am I not surprised?

But just to make a few corrections on your otherwise misleading quotes. Yes, Wie did say she had a couple of bad breaks. But what you conveniently left (or with your incredible lack of reporting knowledge to do further research) out was here also saying, "Brittany played really good today and that's how match play is. " That's just how match-play is. You just never know. Lorena's 2nd around when she was 4-down at one point, and rallied back to win. And how about Annika who was 3-up against Inkster at one point in today's round? And last year's winner was Baena?

As big of a fan as I am of Michelle's, I can say that she had a bad day. Even she knows what Match Play is like, "Your opponent plays well, you play well, she plays a little better, a couple shots here and there, and there's the match. I just felt like I played really solid today but not that extra, you know." She's a golfer. They all have bad days. Phil?

As for Brittany, I think she should learn to be a little more modest about her win. She did kick butt today, admittedly so. I'm not just saying this because of what she had to say about Michelle. But from a publicity point of view, it's just not good to pull another Morgan Pressel. At least Morgan is learning when to be modest and when to keep things unsaid. Like Ahhsoo pointed out, reporters want nothing more but to create controversy? Right, Baldwin?
2006-07-08 @ 23:53
Comment from: AhhSoo [Visitor]
Ford, the exact words from Brittany was "I don't remember there being any like bad kicks. I don't think,". The operative phrase here is "I don't think" which means that she was not certain that she had not seen the "bad breaks" that Michelle described.

My point was and is that if Brittany wasn't certain about Michelle's contention then she should have just let that question go unaswered. Now we have a controversy (this blog is evidence of that) that could blow up into a real media frenzy. I didn't want Brittany to be entangled in a Wie curse that seems to have hurt Morgan & Danielle.

Dunno bout most people, but I just whinced when I heard that.
2006-07-09 @ 00:00
Comment from: Jen [Visitor]
I don't visit here frequently and now am given more reasons to stay away.

Did Michelle rank herself as #2? No.

Did Michelle create the brackets for this tournament? No.

Yet you rain derision on her when she had nothing to do with how the tournament was setup. And of course you mention nothing about her beating a resurgent Se Ri Pak, who has about 100x the career of Paula Creamer. (Note that I LIKE Paula. But I also like Michelle.)

Brittany Lincicome beat Michelle Wie...good for her. What does this mean? I don't know, what does it mean that Michelle was able to beat Se Ri Pak in the morning? Is Brittany a better golfer than Michelle? Does that make Michelle better than Se Ri? I would say no to both questions.

Criticism is fine. The vitriol and hatred expressed here, lacking logic (again, did Michelle ASK to avoid Paula Creamer/Morgan Pressel?), borderline derogatory remarks goes to show that you guys are pretty sick. The rabid hatred is creepy, your disrespectful (and dehumanizing) nicknames are repulsive. What's even worse is that you guys seem to enjoy spewing this hatred without rhyme or reason.

I've read plenty of reasonable criticisms of Michelle Wie, but this is probably the only place where I can really feel the hatred. Are you proud of yourself?

I keep thinking that the LPGA is getting bogged down in petty questions and petty rivalries, and that's a shame given the strength of its veterans and the shine of its upcoming stars. It's all fueled by the media as well, which keeps harping on the questions of "Should you play as an amateur or go pro when you're young", "Shouldn't Michelle Wie become an LPGA member and play more". Why not stop asking these questions when the choice has already been made, and just focus on the golf? Enjoy the competition and attention that younger stars like Michelle bring.

Sad. But thanks to the media, we get stupid ongoing storylines like, "You MUST learn to win as an amateur otherwise you will never succeed." Funny, that hasn't helped Natalie Gulbis win. Or the aforementioned Brittany. Or Morgan Pressel. They, and Michelle, all need time. We should just enjoy the competition they all bring, instead of setting them (and their fan bases) against each other.
2006-07-09 @ 00:00
Comment from: Ann [Visitor]
Jen,

WOW. Thank you. You took every single thought I had in mine.
2006-07-09 @ 00:06
Comment from: One-Putt [Visitor]
Michelle has nothing to be ashamed of as she played very well in her first professional match play tournament.

Michelle had owned the par fives in previous matches, but lost her mojo on the par fives against Brittany. She still played at two under for fifteen holes.

2006-07-09 @ 00:08
Comment from: Chris Baldwin [Member] Email
One Putt, don't forget the match play is Michelle Wie's "specialty." That what was everyone's storyline before another lost tournament.

Oh well, Wie Warriors can always come up with something else.

Maybe, the she's only 16 and has "only" played in almost 40 pro tournaments.

2006-07-09 @ 00:24
Comment from: James COULTHARD [Visitor]
1--Brittany said very little, nothing to embarass herself. The interviewer was trying to stir up trouble.

Actually the idea that match play was Michelle wie's specialty WAS NOBODY'S STORYLINE before the tournament, at least that I am aware. It would be interesting if Chris could point out such storylines. What was said was that tournament set up well for long hitters like Michelle(and this would apply to Brittany as well.)

As far as the seedings are concerned, neither Creamer nor Pressel had to face a 2006 Major winner as early as the 3rd round.

ALEX. Do you even know what it means for an athlete to go into the tank? By accusing Michelle of going into the tank you were saying she purposely did not try to win. That would be a very insulting thing to say about Brittany that she could only beat Michelle when Michelle was purposely not trying to win.

2006-07-09 @ 00:54
Comment from: kaialii [Visitor]
If the LPGA really wanted to, I think they could have found a way to set the pairings for the Fields, Kraft Nabisco, and McDonalds tournaments where Michelle, Morgan and Paula are in the same group for the first 2 days.
2006-07-09 @ 01:03
Comment from: AhhSoo [Visitor]
Sorry kaialii, but in those 3 tournaments which is stroke format, the golfers play against the course not against each other. The dynamic would be different. Although, I must admit that the press pool would be ecstatic with the 3 grouped together. Another opportunity for the snakes to create controversy where they would be none.

Pairings and starting times are drawn by lot or as in the Opens determined by the placing & winners of the previous year's Opens. For instance, the US Open pairs last years winner with last year's Open (British) winner and the current year's USGA amateur champion. This not a rule but a tradition but it may as well be a rule as the tradition goes back over a 100 years.

Now, it may happen due to the luck of the draw that these 3 will get grouped at some point in the future. Ohh to be a fly on the bag and listen in to the conversations of these 3 gals making the "small" talk with the "dagger" eyes.
2006-07-09 @ 01:22
Comment from: Blazer [Visitor]
Loved the Tiger like, "I'm getting closer and closer" comment after the US Open.
2006-07-09 @ 01:27
Comment from: AhhSoo [Visitor]
Well, I don't think Tiger or any other competitive athlete would be saying: "I'm getting farther and farther." But you never know as a statement like that might do wonders for their confidence! /s
2006-07-09 @ 01:39
Comment from: putt4par [Visitor]
Jen, that was a thoughtful and pretty accurate description of this blog. As I said, the bottom feeders come out to play when Baldwin is in the Wie bashing mode.

Pretty sad when you think about it.
2006-07-09 @ 01:56
Comment from: AhhSoo [Visitor]
Well, I had to do an ahhsoo when I read Jen's comments. She was spot-on!

Hopefully, those that espouse the vitriol on this blog would take her thoughtful admonitions to heart.

Maybe Chris can start the ball rolling by eliminating the Wie bashing in his future articles and encourage his followers to do likewise.

The Wie Warriors should reciprocate by not calling Chris, Alex, Judge Smails, Ford, George, John D, etc. those awful names when they disagree. I pledge to do my part to help return the blog to a more civilized meeting place of ideas.

I could accept a statement like: "Wie is a sh---y putter but if she would just change to a putter with 2 degress more loft then she might get the ball rolling over better towards the hole." At least there is a constructive portion to that criticism.

BTW, does anyone know why they call Michelle, Bubbles?
2006-07-09 @ 02:22
Comment from: george [Visitor]


**
But thanks to the media, we get stupid ongoing storylines like, "You MUST learn to win as an amateur otherwise you will never succeed." Funny, that hasn't helped Natalie Gulbis win. Or the aforementioned Brittany. Or Morgan Pressel. They, and Michelle, all need time.
**
Jen, why do you think Paula Creamer won four professional tournaments as a rookie and played great in the Solheim Cup? Did her frequent amateur-level wins help her? And what would really help Michelle? Don't you think that the first win, if or when it comes, would be just the tonic for Michelle?

**And of course you mention nothing about [Wie] beating a resurgent Se Ri Pak, who has about 100x the career of Paula Creamer**

So does that mean Se Ri Pak has about 400x the career of Michelle Wie? Since Paula has at least won four professional tournaments.

And Jen, since you say you like Paula, what did you think of her victory over Pressel and then over Webb?

-George
2006-07-09 @ 03:30
Comment from: One-Putt [Visitor]
"Comment from: Chris Baldwin [Member]
One Putt, don't forget the match play is Michelle Wie's "specialty." That what was everyone's storyline before another lost tournament.

Oh well, Wie Warriors can always come up with something else.

Maybe, the she's only 16 and has "only" played in almost 40 pro tournaments."

Before the HSBC, Michelle was 28-8-0 in match play. So she must have lost eight times before Chris.

Over the years I have played in many match play events and beaten many golfers who were much better than I was. That is the beauty of match play versus stroke play Chris, you don't have to be the Alpha Dog in the field to win.

Ms. Baena was the example last year when she garnered her first and last win after nine years on the LPGA tour.

Brittany is a good golfer and put together a fine round. During that round she was better than Michelle. Brittany only had one top five finish this season at a minor event.

There is no question who is the better overall golfer based on past professional performance. Brittany would kill to have Michelle's results in this season alone.

In fact Chris, Paula and Morgan would do the same thing to equal what Michelle has accomplished. Paula has garnered two top five finishes this season in minor events and none in the majors. Morgan has logged the same results while playing a full schedule.

I think someone wrote you needed a reality check Chris? Well here is the reality: the top two golfers in the field exited the match early.

That is not ridiculous at all Chris, just a fact.

2006-07-09 @ 03:46
Comment from: One-Putt [Visitor]
I must say Chris, I picked Lorena early on to win this thing in the end. Her Golf Chi is very powerful right now. But then again this is Match Play and anything can happen.

2006-07-09 @ 04:26
Comment from: John D [Visitor]
The only way Wie-Wee will make the cut at John Deere is if the sorry Wie supporting members of the PGA throw their qualifing rounds to let Wie-Wee in.
2006-07-09 @ 05:40
Comment from: David [Visitor]
To the 'Wie fan' who claimed:

'Michelle at 16 is better than Tiger ever was at 16,'

I'll just say that there is absolutely no evidence to back this up, and I don't believe it to be true, anyway.

I don't think anyone in their right mind would believe that, because such a statement implies that Michelle will probably become a much better player than Tiger ever was at his peak (whenever his peak was or may be).

The reason I have a hard time believing Michelle can ever become as good as Tiger is because often, I wonder whether Michelle will just become the Anna Kournikova of women's golf. There is nothing to say that Michelle will ever become the leading player on the LPGA Tour in the future, or even nearly so, and she certainly won't challenge Tiger regularly, if at all.



2006-07-09 @ 06:07
Comment from: Jen [Visitor]
Thanks to AhhSoo, Ann for their kind comments. Don't know how you guys stay sane.

**George wrote: Jen, why do you think Paula Creamer won four professional tournaments as a rookie and played great in the Solheim Cup? Did her frequent amateur-level wins help her? And what would really help Michelle? Don't you think that the first win, if or when it comes, would be just the tonic for Michelle?

Certainly, Paula Creamer's amateur experience has made her into the player she is today. But you missed my point about the other players who have gone through the same "trial by fire" as an amateur and have come up empty handed as a pro. There is no sure-fire formula to guarantee you coming up as a winner.

What would help Michelle? I know that I wasn't predicting that this year she would end up in the top 5 in the first three majors of the year. Whatever she's doing, I'd say she's on the right track.

**George wrote: So does that mean Se Ri Pak has about 400x the career of Michelle Wie? Since Paula has at least won four professional tournaments.

Uh, Se Ri Pak has a career that both Michelle and Paula should envy. Michelle even said Se Ri is one of her idols. And I also said that I think at this point just because Michelle beat her in match play, Se Ri is still the better golfer. What is your point?

**And Jen, since you say you like Paula, what did you think of her victory over Pressel and then over Webb?

Paula's great and a lot of fun to watch. She's played superbly in this competition. Since you're also a fan, you must admit that it's been hard for her this year, for whatever reason, because she hasn't really been in contention in the majors and not much elsewhere either.

It's people like you that try to cause nasty divisions that make being a fan of the LPGA less fun. There's no reason that you can't be a fan of both Paula and Michelle. For the record, I don't own products endorsed by either.
2006-07-09 @ 07:04
Comment from: Alex [Visitor]
Folks, I've got a 9:00 AM tee time to play one of about 20 rounds this year, so you clowns will have to carry on without me. It is absolutely hilarious the way the Wie Warriors bristle and circle the wagons when Bubbles is called out for her catty remarks and less than good sportsmanship. What is missing so far is a really extraneous comment like "She can beat Alex, Ford, George and you Chris Baldwin, and she has more money than any of you and she's helping the poor and inspiring little girls." Those are always good for a few laughs. I'll be back in about six hours.
2006-07-09 @ 07:44
Comment from: James COULTHARD [Visitor]
David

Who kmows what will happen in the future--but there is something to say that Michelle Wie is already nearly the leading woman player in the world. That is her number to world ranking.

2006-07-09 @ 07:57
Comment from: Dave Marrandette [Visitor]
Chris, congrats for sticking your honeycoated fist into the hornets nest. Perhaps we (not wie) should focus on the young lady's attitude. If we examine her quote from yesterday, I think we can determine where she's coming from:

"I played very solid and just had a lot of bad breaks," admitted Wie. "There were a lot of wedge shots that could have been a lot closer and a lot of putts that could have gone in."

First, it's whine, whine. Then she shows a complete lack of understanding of the game. Michelle, have you ever heard "if's and but's were...(you fill in the rest)." David Deadheader needs to counsel her on more than the technical aspect of the swing.
2006-07-09 @ 09:01
Comment from: Evil Hater [Visitor]
Only a communist could be a Michelle Wie fan.
2006-07-09 @ 09:09
Comment from: Spencer Hux [Member] Email
Dave-
Perfect analysis of Wie's guru. Coincidentally, I was just finishing something about Leadbetter when I read your comment. It should be posted momentarily.
2006-07-09 @ 11:18
Comment from: Judge Smails [Visitor]
Anybody who would think, even for a second, that Bubbles is better now than Woods was at sixteen is so far out of touch with reality that he should be institutionalized immediately. At sixteen Woods was winning every BOYS' amateur event in sight, whereas the illustrious Bubbles lost the last time she played in a GIRLS' amateur event.

Moreover, Bubbles isn't even as good as the best sixteen-year-old boys today, never mind Woods. Of course, this fact should be obvious to people; the only reason it eludes them is that they've been inculcated with political correctness.

The gap between guys and gals is quite large even in golf.
2006-07-09 @ 13:10
Comment from: Judge Smails [Visitor]
Alex,

About commentators' fawning over of Bubbles: I really believe that they've been told to hype her by the PGA Tour back office bigwigs. Let's face it, this is a business, and the PGA is very savvy with respect to marketing.

In fact, I'm quite sure that these fellows may get talking points more often than one might think. They're probably asked to emphasize certain things, ones that serve the Tour's ends.
2006-07-09 @ 13:19
Comment from: One-Putt [Visitor]
I guess hitting gravel instead of sand at the bottom of your swing in a bunker is not a bad break.
2006-07-09 @ 14:54
Comment from: Jim COULTHARD [Visitor]
Talk about fawning over someone. The LPGA site is giving headline news--USA TODAY--After brief hiatus Sorenstam resumes stranglehold on women's game. Sorenstam isn't even the leading money winner on the LPGA Tour. I will grant her the number 1 position--but it is not even close to a stranglehold. Any reasonable observer would say there is a dogfight this year--and Anniks is now in the thick of it.

I think Michelle Wie should join the LET. This would provide the LET with an opportunity to expand into the American Market and challenge the LPGA as the number one tour in women's golf. Istead of just complaining about the stupidity of the LPGA's handling of the press, Michelle Wie could help create a new world wide tour that could work with the press as well as treat players with more respect than what we have seen in the treatment that Michelle Wie had gotten form the LPGA.
2006-07-09 @ 15:26
Comment from: AhhSoo [Visitor]
Well Chris... Like I stated in the 2nd post above, you certainly are good at "opening mouth and inserting foot." Hope you're enjoying the munch, munch, munch. ha ha

Yep, that was a real insightful statement you made yesterday: "the unremarkable Brittany Lincicome."
2006-07-09 @ 17:03
Comment from: Chris Baldwin [Member] Email
She is unremarkable. Lincicome came into the World Match Play as the 39th seed having made $392,258 in 33 previous LPGA Tour starts. But just like 60th-seeded Marisa Baena, who won the Match Play last year, she is much more remarkable in golf accomplishments now than Michelle Wie.

You Wie Warriors really cannot get over the fact that I've never been proven wrong on my predictions. Keep waiting, wishing and hoping.
2006-07-09 @ 17:19
Comment from: grayson [Visitor]
Michelle Wie being ranked the No. 2 women's golfer in the world is equivalent to a 0-11 Northwestern team coming in at No. 2 in the college football polls because they had a few nice plays that made SportsCenter. ------------ Analogies aren't really your strong point are they? This is as dumb as it gets, and it's the internet, so that's really dumb. Good luck with that brain of yours ...
2006-07-09 @ 18:14
Comment from: putt4par [Visitor]
Comment from: Chris Baldwin [Member] Said: You Wie Warriors really cannot get over the fact that I've never been proven wrong on my predictions. Keep waiting, wishing and hoping.

You've never been proven right either.

So we'll "Keep waiting, wishing and hoping."
2006-07-09 @ 18:23
Comment from: AhhSoo [Visitor]
Chris, you're trying to squirm out of your statement like a weasel. The context of your assertion was that Michelle lost to "the unremarkable Brittany Lincicome."

Brittany Lincicome, not just a week ago, shared the 54 hole lead in the US Women's Open. She finished 7th alone... that's a top 10 finish in the toughest golf tournament on the women's tour.

You call that "unremarkable"?

You predict that Michelle will lose every tournament that she enters but everyone (including you) knows that, someday, your "...never been proven wrong on my predictions" record will end. Then what? More back pedaling with your own "unremarkable" statement of: "She is still unremarkable but much more remarkable in golf accomplishments now."

...oivey
Look it up here: http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=oivey
2006-07-09 @ 18:36
Comment from: Alex [Visitor]
Hedlines in the Wie Warrior Gazette: BRITTANY WINS MATCH PLAY1 JULI SECOND, LORENA THIRD, PAULA FOURTH! BUBBLES SWEEPS INTO FIRST IN ROLEX RANKINGS! That would cause the ultimate orgasmic nocturnal emission for the Wie-wee's.
2006-07-09 @ 18:48
Comment from: Norman [Visitor]
Chris Baldwin said:
Wie falls to the unremarkable Brittany Lincicome.
****************************

That would be the same unremarkable Brittany Lincicome who won it outright, wouldn't it?
2006-07-09 @ 18:52
Comment from: Norman [Visitor]
Chris Baldwin said:
Only the rankings did mess up the Women's World Match Play Championship. It allowed Wie to duck Paula Creamer and Morgan Pressel.
*****************************

You obviously don't understand anything about how the seeding work, do you.

Here is the real story:
- Before the US Open, Morgan Pressel was ranked number 10 in the rankings. That would have made her Wie's Quarter Final opponent, had Morgan made it that far.

Then what happened?
Morgan played poorly in the US Open, her ranking dropped to 12, and thus she avoided playing Michelle Wie.

Therefore, if anyone was avoiding anyone, it was Morgan avoiding Michelle.

Of course, she wasn't actually avoiding Michelle, she just wasn't good enough to put in a good US Womens Open performance on that occasion.

Oh, and by the way, Se Ri Pak is a much better player than Morgan Pressel or Paula Creamer. Michelle was unlucky to meet Se Ri so early in the competition.
2006-07-09 @ 18:58
Comment from: Alex [Visitor]
Guys, these Wie Warriors are getting more daffy by the minute. Norman has started to chime in so watch out for some really convoluted suppositions. I've noticed that the Wie-wee's have a tendency to go absolutely bananas immediately after Bubbles pulls one of her prdictable pratfalls.
2006-07-09 @ 19:13
Comment from: Norman [Visitor]
******************************
Judge Smails said:
At sixteen Woods was winning every BOYS' amateur event in sight, whereas the illustrious Bubbles lost the last time she played in a GIRLS' amateur event.
*******************************

INCORRECT. It wasn't a girls event, it was a Womens event. Notice, Wie was playing in Adult events, and Tiger in Childrens events.

Actually, by Wie's stage, Tiger had only won 1 US Amateur boys title.
Wie hasn't played in an Amateur Womens since she was 14 by the way.
She played in an Amateur MENS at 15 and got to the quarter final. Notice that's MENS. Tiger only won BOYS events before he was 18. Before he was 18, Tiger's best performance in a MENS usga event was to get to the last 32. Michelle made the last 8 at just 15 years of age.
Hope that explain it okay.

Maybe it will give you an appreciation of just how good she is.


*****************************
Judge Smails said:
Moreover, Bubbles isn't even as good as the best sixteen-year-old boys today, never mind Woods. Of course, this fact should be obvious to people; the only reason it eludes them is that they've been inculcated with political correctness.
******************************

Actually Judge, she is the best 16 year old golfer male or female. That is a fact.
Yes there are 16 year olds who could shoot better rounds than her, here and there, but there is no 16 year old who has performed at such a consitantly high level as she has.

That is why people are amazed by her. Because she doesn't just shoot the odd good round here and there. She is a consistant performer and has consistantly got better.
2006-07-09 @ 19:14
Comment from: Alex [Visitor]
Way to go, Norman baby! Keep it up and you'll be far ahead of Jim COULTHARD in the Wie brown noser competition. I just knew you wouldn't disappoint.
2006-07-09 @ 19:21
Comment from: Norman [Visitor]
Alex,
Do you ever actually contribute anything to debates?
2006-07-09 @ 19:43
Comment from: Alex [Visitor]
Norman, Do you call your drivel a debate? To me it's either a comedy routine or the rantings of a lunatic. But it is supremely entertaining. So as I say, have at it, you Wie-men!
2006-07-09 @ 19:57
Comment from: AhhSoo [Visitor]
Norman, we present facts and reasoned arguments for our positions. CB and his gang of syncophants AKA Wie Bashers (Alex being the prime example) retort with "Wie-wees", "Wie brown noser", "Bubbles lovers", "communist", and the list goes on "ad infinitum."

I get called an "A**Hole" by John D. on Jennifer Mario's blog here: http://www.travelgolf.com/blogs/jennifer.mario/2006/07/08/ladies_battle_at_the_hsbc_women_s_world

Brings back memories of my dad giving me some helpful advice in my youth. He said: "You can ALWAYS tell when you've won the argument, the other person starts calling you names."

Norman, if I remember correctly, this is about the 3rd or 4th time that you needed to present the facts comparing Michelle's record and Tiger's record at 14, 15 & now 16 ON THIS BLOG. This time for Judge Smails.

Sure hope that CB & the Syncophants (sounds like a British rock group) retire someday soon.
2006-07-09 @ 20:11
Comment from: Evil Hater [Visitor]
Norman is obviously a communist.
2006-07-09 @ 20:12
Comment from: Norman [Visitor]
AhhSoo,
I'm glad you have noticed the whole Tiger and Michelle comparison thing.
It is amazing how the Wie-bashers tend to come up with their wrong stats in this regard. And each time it is the same. They basically misunderstand Junior and Adult events. It might be easy for us to understand, but to them, it is a pretty difficult concept.

Also, when the facts are presented to them in this case, the next response is usually "so you think she'll be better than Tiger when she is 25".

Of course, neither of us has claimed any such thing. We have simply pointed out the facts that it really is rather silly to belittle someone who has achieved more than Tiger did at their particular age.

I also enjoyed your point on the winning of an argument. It is indeed a sure sign that someone concedes defeat, when they stop trying to put forward opinions and instead resort to namecalling and insults.

We shouldn't be too hard on the Wie-bashers though. As Michelle gets better, their job is becoming more and more difficult. Some more name calling to come perhaps!
2006-07-09 @ 20:40
Comment from: Boola Boss [Visitor]
CB writes: "Wie falls to the unremarkable Brittany Lincicome.."

UNREMARKABLE is she?......do you want to say that again Chris".....only this time.....take your foot out of your mouth first......in her last match event......the men's APL....Michelle lost in the 3rd round to Ogden.......who ALSO won the event.....and he got a trip to the Masters for his trouble.....all Brittany got was a measley half-million dollars.....
2006-07-09 @ 20:46
Comment from: Jim COULTHARD [Visitor]
NORMAN

Do you think the LET would be interested in having Michelle Wie as a member? And do you think the LET would have any interest in replacing the LPGA as the number one Womaen's Tour? After all the Wie baiting by the LPGA in the Interviews it seems to me that Michelle Wie might want to find a place that is not as hostile to her as the LPGA. Once she puts up a few big wins she should be able to tell the LPGA what it can do with itself.
2006-07-09 @ 21:00
Comment from: Alex [Visitor]
Ahhsoo, Pay attention, you might learn something. It's spelled "sycophants", one "n". You have the meaning wrong, also. George, Judge, Ford, and I are not sycophants. We merely think alike. You, Jim C and Norman are sycophants of Bubbles, that is, brown nosers, bootlickers, butt kissers, etc. End of lesson. Your father should have taught you this.
2006-07-09 @ 21:09
Comment from: Woman Golfer [Visitor]
This whole thing with Michelle Wie makes me sick. The whole essence of her success emanates from the fact that despite all the accomplishments of the LPGA, men are still controlling women's golf.

They know Michelle is not as good as they say, they just want to keep fawning over a 16-year old girl who wears skirts so short they shows her rear every time she picks up her ball. It's so interesting how she makes such a big deal of playing with the men but she's the only female golfer who dresses like a whore. During the Women's Open I literally saw her underwear. It was really disturbing. She's no different than Jan Stephenson.

And when other female golfers tell the truth about the shortcomings in her game, they get called "catty" and bad sports. The actual term for their behavior is passion, something the robotic and uncharismatic Wie decidedly lacks. Besides you never hear male athletes getting reprimanded for speaking their minds. Where would the NBA be without trash talking?

Anyway, all that matters at the end of the day is who wins the tournament. And we ALWAYS know that it's never going to be Michelle.

When I first started playing golf, I was a Michelle Wie fan. I liked the way she was unafraid to take on the men. Now I realize, she's just a silly girl who likes all of the attention. I don't care if she's 16. I was WAY smarter than that when I was her age and I had a lot more respect for myself.

Thanks for letting me share my feelings. I don't mean to offend anybody. I'm just telling the truth as I see it.

And maybe instead of attacking each other for liking/disliking Wie, we could all use the time to work on our game so that we never suffer the same embarassment that she has.
2006-07-09 @ 21:49
Comment from: Ford [Visitor]
Jen--I appreciate your opinion and admire the passion in which you have defended Michelle. All in all a bit mellow dramatic, "Bubbles" is hardly dehumanizing, but I catch your drift just the same. It is easy to paint anyone who does not buy into the Michelle Wie hype as a bad guy, after all what kind of a monster routes against a 16 year old kid. I have never spewed hatred towards Michelle Wie, I have only questioned her career path, her killer instinct and her ability to win. I have also never refered to her as anything, but Michelle, sure I may have called her gawky to get a rise out of her fans, but there is no anger, hatred, jealousy or any other malicious intent behind my comments. I just happen to disagree with the people that believe she is on her way to becoming to the greatest female golfer of all time. For the record I also disagree with the people that believe that she will succesfully compete with the men on the PGA tour. MY basic argument is as follows: Michelle Wie by some gift from the gods has been endowed with perhaps the greatest natural ability the game of golf has ever seen, as unimaginable as it seems she has had the game/ability to win on the LPGA tour since she was 14, but she has not, despite being in contention numerous times. I believe that this should tell us something about her game and more importantly her mental state and lack of a killer instinct. I further believe that the longer she goes without a win the harder it will be for her to break the seal. I also believe that the majority of her fans can be likened to a flock of sheep who are simply placing their faith and their loyalty in the hands of slick marketers and a politically correct media that tells them that Michelle Wie is the real deal. When her win total starts to match her potential and her accomplishments outweigh her hype I will gladly blog about her place in golf history, for now I will consider her as little more than a long hitting media creation who has won precious little at any level.
2006-07-09 @ 22:11
Comment from: AhhSoo [Visitor]
Ahh Alex, I used and spelled it the exact way I intended. SYNCO-PHANTS are people that SYNChrOnize with Chris Baldwin on Wie-bashing and sport elePHANT snouts that get in the way of their mouths. Of course, I mean no disrespect to the pachyderm species by using one of their appendages to describe the Wie-bashers penchant for "something bigger than foot in mouth disease."

Two of the latest "snout in mouth" examples are CB's: "...the unremarkable Brittany Lincicome." AND JS's: "Anybody who would think, even for a second, that Bubbles is better now than Woods was at sixteen is so far out of touch with reality..."
2006-07-09 @ 22:19
Comment from: Jim COULTHARD [Visitor]
Somebody is out of date. LPGA swimsuit calendar girl does not conjure up images of Jan Stephenson to very many people.
Oh and a supporter of women's golf really has a right to act holier than thou about a teenager in a short skirt when there is a Ladies Hooters Tour that you can read about when you check the Headlines Archive at the Official LPGA site.
2006-07-09 @ 22:27
Comment from: Ford [Visitor]
The skirts are kinda short...Whore, probably not, creepy marketing strategy to capatalize on the sexuality of a sixteen year old girl, absolutely!
2006-07-09 @ 22:28
Comment from: AhhSoo [Visitor]
Woman Golfer: I thought I saw that too when she retrieved her golf ball on one of the greens. I believe that they were white but after giving it some thought, I don't believe for one moment that her parents (especially her mom) would have let her go play on national tv using regular underwear. Could be its a bathing suit (bikini type and similiar to what we see at the beach or on cheerleaders) bottom type underclothing that goes together with her new Nike designed short golfing skirts. Nike did say that they were designing an entirely new collection of sport (golf) attire which appeal to the younger gals.

Your statement in part: "...she's the only female golfer who dresses like a whore." was way too strong and, maybe, premature. Millions saw what we saw and I hope Nike issues a press release explaining what we saw was not what we thought.

Ford: Way to go. I disagree with a few of your comments but not all and I do appreciate the way that you put it forth here without resorting to the name calling.

Your later comment: "Whore, probably not, ..." was a little disconcerting. Hope that your insertion of the qualifier "probably" was not a hint that you suspect that she might be one but not sure. Don't believe with all the demands on her time for school, homework, practice, traveling, tournaments, appearances, etc. would leave any time to walk the streets at night as a whore? Anyway, I'm confident that you meant to write it as: "Whore, I think not, ..." Agree 100% with the "creepy marketing strategy" part of your sentence.

2006-07-09 @ 23:00
Comment from: Judge Smails [Visitor]
Woman Golfer,

It must be hard hitting a high, soft shot with such a big chip on your shoulder.

Male athletes never get reprimanded for speaking their minds? Are you on drugs or is too much estrogen clouding your mind? Have you ever heard of Vijay Singh, Fuzzy Zoeller or John Rocker?

You and I certainly agree that Bubbles is all style and hype and little substance, hence the moniker I applied to her. However, the media buttress her career not because of sex appeal, for if that were the motivation they'd be in Creamer's corner. No, it's done because of political correctness, which, by the way, is the same force that brought condemnation down upon the gentlemen I mentioned in the last paragraph.
2006-07-09 @ 23:11
Comment from: Jim COULTHARD [Visitor]
Oh by the way, Jan Stephenson, who was not even an American, came out in favior of restrictions on the number of non-American golfers on the LPGA Tour--apparently aimed at limitng the number of Koreans on the Tour. Michelle Wie would never say anything like that--so she very definitely is different from Jan Stephenson.
2006-07-09 @ 23:23
Comment from: Ford [Visitor]
AhhSoo--I'm sorry I meant no disrespect to Ms. Wie, I have precious little practice discussing the sexuality of young girls(at least since I was that age or thereabouts) and did not mean to insinuate that she might be anything but a wholesome young woman. I also disagree with Woman Golfer and her labeling Michelle a whore for her attire, though I think the message sent by the length and fit of her outfits is the wrong one for young impressionable girls who idolize her and for the no doubt legion of dirty old men in her fan club. Thank you for at least accepting my point of view, if not embracing it.
2006-07-10 @ 00:01
Comment from: Jay [Visitor]
I am surprised to hear the whore comment by "Women golfer". Is she a "ultraconservative christian women golfer" ? I don't know which century she is living in ? A lot of 16 yrs old girl wears such attire these days.

Regarding Baldwins' comment of ranking system. I think the ranking system settled in and people are accepting the system more or less with the exception of the couple Japan/Korean Tour players. They were mindful enough to reject the invitation of the HSBC and let LPGA money ranked players attend.
2006-07-10 @ 01:02
Comment from: AhhSoo [Visitor]
Ford, you're a stand-up person and I was pretty certain that you didn't mean it the way I took it. It bothered me for a bit and I just had to ask.

The thank you is not necessary for accepting your point of view because as the saying goes "when you're right, you're right!" AND you're right on this one. Sure wish the Wies and Nike would throttle back on the "skimpy" skirts. IMHO, it would be more appropriate after she turns 18.

She does wear pants on the few men's events that she is given exemptions to but I think that this is required by the dress code on the PGA.

Have a good week and meet you here again with our "sometimes opposing" comments after the John Deere finishes up or sooner if she doesn't make the cut.
2006-07-10 @ 01:28
Comment from: One-Putt [Visitor]
Michelle wears spandex shorts under her attire on the course. Nike plans the outfits she will wear for each round of an event months in advance and then ensures it is on the shelves in retail outlets while Michelle is playing.

Depending on event media coverage the products might be stocked locally or nationally.

Nike nor Michelle is in the habit of flashing panties for the viewing audience. Anyone who thinks such a thing is quite demented and could use some professional help. Michelle is simply a Nike model who spends six hours on the runway.

Nike, Sony, Omega the PGA and LPGA are getting their investments back tenfold with Michelle in the field. Revenue is up for television and attendance at events Michelle appears in. When Michelle is in a broadcasted event Nike slashes and the Sony logo are broadcast for hours. How much would a couple of broadcast hours of advertisement cost Nike or Sony in this day and age? I would say tens of millions per event. Talk about a bargain.



2006-07-10 @ 03:09
Comment from: Jim COULTHARD [Visitor]
The PGA does require long pants to be worn--which is, of course, an outrageous requirement since the proper attire for playing golf involves wearing a kilt.
2006-07-10 @ 03:33
Comment from: John D [Visitor]
"Comment from: AhhSoo [Visitor]
Norman, we present facts and reasoned arguments for our positions. CB and his gang of syncophants AKA Wie Bashers (Alex being the prime example) retort with "Wie-wees", "Wie brown noser", "Bubbles lovers", "communist", and the list goes on "ad infinitum."

I get called an "A**Hole" by John D. on Jennifer Mario's blog here: http://www.travelgolf.com/blogs/jennifer.mario/2006/07/08/ladies_battle_at_the_hsbc_women_s_world

Brings back memories of my dad giving me some helpful advice in my youth. He said: "You can ALWAYS tell when you've won the argument, the other person starts calling you names.""

You have not WON anything, You are just like WIE-WEE - A LOSER ! !
2006-07-10 @ 05:23
Comment from: Alex [Visitor]
Ahhsoo, SURE you did. I must admit it was fast thinking in your part.
2006-07-10 @ 06:36
Comment from: Greg [Visitor]
How many top 5 finishes do Creamer and Pressel have between them in 2006? Creamer has 3 in 15 tournaments (0 top 3s), while Pressel has 2 in 11 tournaments (0 top 3s). Wie has 4 in 5 tournaments (3 top 3s). She's well in the top 20 in 2006 earnings, despite having played less than half as many tournaments as any other player.
2006-07-10 @ 07:11
Comment from: Norman [Visitor]
Greg,
Good comments, but she should note that Michelle in fact has 5 top 5 finishes in the 5 tournaments she has played. The four losing quarter finalists in a matchplay tournaments get the placing, tied 5th.
2006-07-10 @ 08:16
Comment from: Norman [Visitor]
Alex said:
Ahhsoo, Pay attention, you might learn something. It's spelled "sycophants", one "n". You have the meaning wrong, also. George, Judge, Ford, and I are not sycophants. We merely think alike. You, Jim C and Norman are sycophants of Bubbles, that is, brown nosers, bootlickers, butt kissers, etc. End of lesson. Your father should have taught you this.
****************************************

Funny how Alex backed up Ahhsoo's point by resorting to the name calling again. From the Wie Warriers, a big thank you to Alex. While some people come out with some reasonable arguments, you completely destroy any credibility they have by being on their side.
2006-07-10 @ 08:19
Comment from: Norman [Visitor]
Jim Coulthard said:
NORMAN

Do you think the LET would be interested in having Michelle Wie as a member? And do you think the LET would have any interest in replacing the LPGA as the number one Womaen's Tour?
*****************************

The LET would be interested in having Michelle as a member, but it isn't realistic. Michelle likes to face the best competition possible and she wouldn't find it on the let tour.
As regards replacing the lpga as the number 1 tour, of course they'd like to, but they would have a long way to catch up in the first place.

Michelle also wants to be a freelance golfer and not obliged to any particular tour. You should expect this to continue. I predict she won't join any tour before at least 23 years of age, unless the lpga make big changes to their rules.

A possible exception would be if she were to qualify for the pga tour before then, but I'd say she will be mainly trying to qualify for the pga tour, between ages 22 and 27. She'll probably enter q school at 20, but that mostly for experience.
2006-07-10 @ 08:27
Comment from: Arnold H. Szporn [Visitor]
"Wie falls to the unremarkable Brittany Lincicome"
I must strongly disagree with the second half of Mr. Baldwin's statement.
I had the privilege of being a walking marshal for the Lincicome vs. Bae 3rd round match Saturday morning. I knew nothing about Brittany at the start of her match, except for some TV coverage she had at the US Open the previous week. She was simply outstanding. Ms. Lincicome consistently out drove her opponent in that match by 20 to 40 yards. On those holes where I was a fairway marshal for the rest of the tournament, she consistently out drove her opponent by the same yardage range (sounds remarkable to me). Out of fairness, though, I did not get a chance to see any of the Lincicome vs. Wie match, because of my other duties that day. Due to the elevation changes at Hamilton Farms (something you may not be able to appreciate on TV), length off the tee was a critical factor. Based on her performance, I expect that Brittany Lincicome will not be a one shot wonder and will have an extremely succesful career. If you were at the tournament, you may have realized that some thing special is brewing here.
2006-07-10 @ 09:04
Comment from: Mike s [Visitor]
I must admit it was refreshing to see Ford's comments. It shows that someone can post an opposing view without resorting to trash talk and outright stupidity (alex, cb, Judge S, .........) I am an admirer of Ms. Wie and me and my daughter enjoyed watching the match play coverage on Saturday, we missed Sunday due to playing golf!~ My daughter is inspired by Michelle and also loves watching Paula Creamer (to the point of wearing pink to golf) play. So thank you Jen for articulating a valid point of view and thank you Ford for your opposing point of view. I read these blogs a lot, but do not comment as much as I tend to dislike being called names for an honest point of view.
2006-07-10 @ 09:19
Comment from: Jim COULTHARD [Visitor]
NORMAN

Annika is a member of the LET and plays maybe two or three LET events per year including the Evian and Weetabix. That doesn't sound like a big commitment to make. I am not sure exactly how this works--but if Michelle can retain her card just playing at the Evian and the Weetabix she would have official status as a member of a TOUR while still retaining her freedom.
2006-07-10 @ 09:47
Comment from: Norman [Visitor]
Jim,
Annika has a lifetime exemption on the ladies european tour. It's not difficult to work out why.

As regards Wie, I'd bet the LET would invite her to any events she would want, so that could be okay. There probably wouldn't be any need for her to join though.

I guess she could join as long as there was absolutely no other restrictions based on membership.
2006-07-10 @ 11:47
Comment from: George [Visitor]
**Comment from: AhhSoo [Visitor]
I get called an "A**Hole" by John D. on Jennifer Mario's blog here:
**

Stop whining! Coulthard called me a racist last year because I didn't fawn sufficiently over Michelle. I guess he had lost the argument as well back then. (using your "logic")

-George
2006-07-10 @ 12:47
Comment from: Chappy [Visitor]
Perhaps ranking Wie #2 in the world is unrealistic, but perhaps not. Sure, she hasn't won yet, but she hasn't played in all that many tournaments as a pro, either.

On the plus side, she's had how many top-5 finishes in the majors, five in a row? That says a lot for her abilities as a player. How many other players can claim five top-5 finishes in the last five majors? She was only 5 strokes from winning the last three majors in a row. Think about that.

If she wins her next LPGA tournament, does that cement her #2 ranking better than, say, four more top-five finishes? Don't forget that top-10/top-20 finishes count in the rankings too, not just victories, and top-5 finishes in majors count a lot more than top-20 finishes in lesser tournaments.

The way Lorena Ochoa is playing, she probably deserves to be ahead of Wie in the rankings, but I can't think of anyone else (besides Sorenstam) who does, based on their recent performances. (Maybe Pat Hurst, but that's really based only on the last few weeks.)

Regarding claims that Wie is "ducking" top players, what do you call playing in the majors--where the best players in the world all compete? I hardly think that so many top-5 finishes would give Wie any reason to be worried about the competition. Not to mention that the willingness to compete against men in PGA tour events shows supreme confidence in her game. That's hardly the mark of someone who's afraid to compete against the women.

For a while, Phil Mickelson was the "best player never to win a major". Yet he turned that moniker on its ear in a hurry, with three majors in quicdk succession. It wouldn't take much more for Wie to do the same to her naysayers.

Fine, she hasn't won yet. But she will, probably fairly soon (this season or next), and often.
2006-07-10 @ 13:33
Comment from: observer [Visitor]
I really hope that the summer is over soon and Michelle can go back to school so that she doesn't have to subject herself to such abuse. This is so sick.
2006-07-10 @ 13:50
Comment from: casual observer [Visitor]
Nobody generates as much passion and discussion as Wie. Baldwin knows this and that's why he says negative outrageous things about Michelle so his blogs get read.
2006-07-10 @ 16:25
Comment from: Alex [Visitor]
Norman, "Completely destroyed" is a redundancy. "Destroyed" suffices. In case that you are not familiar with the definition of redundancy, about 90% of any of your posts are redundant.
2006-07-10 @ 18:06
Comment from: Dr. Wee Wee [Visitor]
Alex, your existence itsle if redudant perhaps ? ^___^ cheers~~~
2006-07-10 @ 19:11
Comment from: George [Visitor]
** Comment from: Chappy [Visitor]
Fine, [Michelle Wie] hasn't won yet. But she will, probably fairly soon (this season or next), and often.
**

Why do you think that, Chappy? Is it really more likely that Michelle will find a victory sometime this year or next year than it was at the beginning of 2006?

The dynamics of how often Michelle plays won't really change until, say October 2007, right? That's the month when Michelle turns 18. At that point, the LPGA would surely allow her to play in every tournament, or she would get her card, or do something to allow her to be a full-time player. So her full-time play might not become until January 2008.

Do you think that perhaps Michelle simply needs to play on a regular basis to get that first win?

Just to reiterate, because some Wie Warriors will try to twist words around and so forth, I'm not saying what Wie will not win prior to being a full-time player. I'm just saying it would in fact be easier for her to win due to being able to see lots of courses, regular practice, lots of competitive reps, and so forth. If nothing else, her odds would increase because she would be in more tournaments. She might be more relaxed because she would know she has more chances.

Or maybe this will not happen until she's 22, since Michelle apparently wants to go to Stanford U full time.

The likely outcome: Michelle may never become a full time player. She will be a dabbler in this tour and that tour, all for the purpose of getting those big endorsement contracts.

Wie actually is under less pressure to win than regular tour players. Sorenstam, Creamer, Ochoa, Pressel, Gulbis, Lincicome, Christina Kim, and so forth, are under pressure -- big-time -- to win, since they derive a major source of income from winning, or doing well in, tournaments.

Wie, in contrast, primarily is being paid to hawk products and be compelling, and unusual, rather than actually winning.

So far, mission accomplished.

-George
2006-07-10 @ 20:01
Comment from: Judge Smails [Visitor]
Norman,

You're wrong. The last time she played in a girls' amateur event, she lost. You can check it out.
2006-07-10 @ 21:00
Comment from: Jim COULTHARD [Visitor]
Gulbis has never won an LPGA Tournament but has more than 2 and a quarter million in winnings. There may be financial pressure on players to do well--BUT THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS FINANCIAL PRESSURE TO WIN when you can become a multimillionaire without ever winnning. Wie does well enough with consistent high finishes to rank number 2 in the world--but she is under a lot of pressure to deliver a win. If the LPGA were really serious about the view that winning is everything, then the entire purse would go to the tournament winner. Until the LPGA shifts to winner take all tournaments don't denigrate the Top 5 finishes that Wie produces on a regular basis.
2006-07-10 @ 22:18
Comment from: Jim COULTHARD [Visitor]
Judge Smails. Are you taking about Morgan Pressel who lost the USGA Girls Amateur in the tird round as a 17 year old in 2005? Funny how Michelle Wie got more flack for losing in the 4th round of the adult male WAPL as a 15 year old than the supposedly better player Morgan Pressel got for losing in a children's female event as a 17 year old, the oldest age at which anyone could participate in the girls only event. Admittedly many people believed Wie was better than Pressel, but there were many who believed that Pressel was better than Wie.

2006-07-10 @ 22:29
Comment from: Gary Fitzpatrick [Visitor]
Chris,

It is disgusting that the ranking system the LPGA uses puts Wie at number 2. It’s absurd that, as you point out, Pressel and Creamer, the cream of the youth movement, rank lower than her. And what about Natalie Gulbis and Brittany Lang. They are also the ones the future will be built on. One of the problems with the LPGA system is it looks at a player’s performance only in those tournaments in which they play. If the men used this type of system, Tiger Woods would have a high ranking this year instead of the very low ranking he deserves for having skipped out of so many tournaments just because his father died.

I’ve devised a much better system, in which the winner of a tournament gets 50 points, 2nd gets 30, 3rd gets 25, fourth gets 20, fifth gets 15, sixth gets 10, and finishers from 7 to 15 get from 9 down to 1, and it simply adds up all points for the year regardless of how many tournaments a player has entered. This rewards the people who actually win, which will put Wie in her place. Also, it rewards those who play every tournament and punishes Wie for using the excuse of having to finish her junior year in high school to stay away from so many tournaments. I imagine next year she’ll again duck tons of tournaments because she has to finish her senior year. Right! Hasn’t she heard of a GED?!

After assigning points from this year’s LPGA touranments, Wie comes out tied for 12th with Brittany Lincicome. A far cry from number 2. And one of your favorites, Paula Creamer, came in three spots higher at 9. By playing ten more tournaments than Wie, Creamer was able to score a total of 108.9 points to Wie’s miserable 88.5.

Natalie Gulbis also did very well in this system, scoring 69 points, and she has no reason to be ashamed of needing 11 more tournaments to come within 19.5 points of Wie.

Pressel did not fare all that well in comparison, getting just 36.8 points to Wie’s 88.5. But that is largely a factor that Pressel has played in only 13 tournaments, which obviously is not nearly enough to overcome Wie’s results in 5 tournaments.

Lang’s performance was somewhat in line with Pressel’s. Her 16.4 points, 18.5%, of Wie’s, was not bad when you consider she has only played in 14 tournaments.

I think my system needs some tweaking however. One problem with it is that if you look just at points scored in the three major tournaments to date, Wie comes in second with 53 points behind Sorenstam’s 64.5. You would think that looking just at how well players do in the really big tournaments, where everyone is under the eye of the critical press and fans, would show who the best players are and Wie, who is constantly being chastised for choking big time, would come out looking terrible. But my ranking system does not do justice to the real cream of the youth movement when it comes to the majors. Something is wrong with a rating system that shows that Gulbis scored a modest 22.5 points in majors, Lincicome got 9, Lang scored 7, Pressel 2.5, and Creamer an incredible 0 (zero).

There is another problem with this system that needs to be worked out. If you look at how all players did just in the tournaments in which Wie played, Karrie Webb is the only player with a better record, having scored 90.5 points to Wie’s 88.5. Ochoa, Sorenstam, and Inkster are in the low and mid 70s. For some reason, Pressel has only 7.8 points, the equivalent of a single 8th place finish in the five tournaments in which Wie has been entered. I’m sure that the really good young players really want to tee off on Michelle when she is there to be picked on, that they would really shine when they can show her how the game is meant to be played, but for some reason my ranking system does not reflect that.

I’ll keep working until I come up with a better ranking system that puts Wie in her place. Most likely, it will have to be very subjective, because as of now I’m having a hard time seeing how an objective ranking system can put her as far down the list of women golfers as you and I believe she belongs.

I guess part of the problem with Wie is the big money she gets from endorsements. That really irks me, especially the dough that Nike, of all companies, dishes out. I’d like to think that Nike knows what they are doing. But then again, look at their history of picking people to promote. They lavished tons more money on Tiger Woods than they have even on Michelle in spite of the fact that he never made a cut in a professional tournament that he got into as an amateur through sponsor’s exemptions until he was something like 19 years old. Then there is the case of Michael Jordan. All he had going for him was a single NCAA tournament championship and only the 3rd picked in the NBA draft. Hell, there are hundreds of men who have won a single NCAA tournament, and UCLA produced dozens of players who each won three NCAA tournaments. So I guess when you look at it closely, Nike just not understand the importance of winning often in the major events before signing someone up to promote their products.
2006-07-11 @ 01:20
Comment from: Jim COULTHARD [Visitor]
Gary--Why are you talking about what Michael Jordan did in the NBA and college hoops? You should focus on his baseball career. Look at how much money Nike spent on a player who never made it out of the minors.
2006-07-11 @ 02:30
Comment from: AhhSoo [Visitor]
George, who's whining... I'm laughing!

Laughing at your logic... JC calls you a racist. John D. calls me an A**Hole. Of course, in your eyes (head), this makes it OK because it follows the proven adage that "two wrongs MAKE a right". /s

Yep, we should not stop at murdering one person but try for two as that would make us innocent. Why not? OJ did and got away with it. Speaking of which, still wondering how he's coming along with his intensive sleuthing for the real killer(s) of Nicole & Ron?
2006-07-11 @ 04:08
Comment from: One-Putt [Visitor]
Comment from: Gary Fitzpatrick [Visitor]

The LPGA was involved every step of the way developing the Rolex Rankings with Rolex Gary so it is their system.

You do well in Major events and you earn big points. Since Michelle is restricted to 6 exemptions from the LPGA each year she plays in mostly the Big events with the most points available under this system. She, Rolex or the LPGA didn't plan it this way, it just happened. Eventually when Loreana's weaker finishes from last season start dropping off Michelle will drop down in the rankings. In fact when she falls below 15 events she won't appear at all.

You can expect Annika losing some points as some of her wins from last season fall off the Rolex radar screen.

Ms. Bivens stated something about, The Rolex rankings were developed to determine who the best women golfers are in the World are amateur or professional without regard to affiliation. That seems fair to me.

If Michelle had not turned Pro she might very well be listed as the number 2 ranked woman golfer in the World as an amateur.

2006-07-11 @ 06:09
Comment from: Norman [Visitor]
Gary Fitzpatrick,
Yours is probably the best post in these blogs in quite some time. Well done.

Also, it is a pity that some of the other posters didn't understand the sarcasm throughout your piece.

Your comments showed exactly how stupid the arguments of Chris Baldwin and others are.
2006-07-11 @ 09:55
Comment from: observer [Visitor]
Gary Fitzpatrick:

Your post is hilarious!!!. Love it. Seriously funny. Folks, pay attention and read again.
2006-07-11 @ 11:40
Comment from: Gary Fitzpagtrick [Visitor]
Norman,

Thanks for the compliment. All the young ladies on the tour are wonderful to watch and they are all such incredible athletes. I just don't understand why people want to look for faults in any of them. We all have faults, so let's not go picking on people for foolish little things that are of so little consequence.

One aside about previous posts. As for the comments about Michelle's short skirts, remember that she is from Hawaii. I spend a lot of time there and occasionally teach at the University in Honolulu and thus have a chance to observe girls around her age. Michelle's golf outfits are quite modest by what you see on girls in Honolulu. Young ladies there think nothing of going to the mall in very short shorts and a tiny bikini top. Folks there are comfortable showing off their bodies.


2006-07-11 @ 11:53
Comment from: Fred [Visitor]
Well, once again we have Chrissy Baldwin cherry picking his stats. Let me explain it to you once again since your walnut size brain can't seem to grasp things.

The fact that Michelle Wie is only 16 is relevant. You keep harping about this, but name me ONE golfer who has ever won pro tournament at 16. You CAN'T. Why don't you ever address this.

You harp on the number of tournaments she has entered--yet conveniently ignore the fact that she started when she was 13. Do you really expect anyone to win a pro tournament at 13?

You are an idiot Chrissy. No one can take you seriously. You have no talent as a sports writer. That's why you blog. That is the truth. You should own up to your gigantic failure as a man. So take your Midol and shut up about a 16 year old girl already. Go get some therapy.
2006-07-11 @ 11:58
Comment from: observer [Visitor]
The outfit is a non-issue. Other girls also wore very short skirts in the US Open. She just wore it better and had more TV time. The day will come, even for Michelle, that a short skirt will not be appropriate. But before that, she doesn't need to be ashamed of her god-given good look.

2006-07-11 @ 12:05
Comment from: george [Visitor]
*****
Comment from: AhhSoo [Visitor]
George, who's whining... I'm laughing!

Laughing at your logic
*****

Sorry, AS, but the only laughable logic is yours. You whined about being called an a** before I posted about Coulthard using the hackneyed race card because of skepticism over Michelle.


*****
... JC calls you a racist. John D. calls me an A**Hole. Of course, in your eyes (head), this makes it OK because it follows the proven adage that "two wrongs MAKE a right". /s
*****

As you already noted, it has nothing to do with two wrongs. It has to do with you need to stop being so whiney.

Rise above the rest of the Wie Warriors and bring something to the table.

You CAN be better than Norm or Couthlard or 1putt. (Lord knows it takes little effort.) It is up to you, and you alone, to prove the Wie Warriors are more than lunatics. You must succeed where Jennifer Mario has completely failed.

-George
2006-07-11 @ 12:48
Comment from: BV [Visitor]
Well, it took AhhSoo's response to Gary's post to finally make me realize that he REALLY does deserve being called an a**hole. Hey AhhSoo - ever heard of "irony" or "satire" (this was not "sarcasm" as some other blogger stated...look in a thesaurus for heavens sake)??? To borrow someone else's phrase: "Maybe your dad should have taught you that"! ;)

Other than that - the whole mush/mess is just some typical Baldwin pot-stirring. I'm convinced he gets bonuses for the number of comments generated! ;)
2006-07-11 @ 16:05
Comment from: AhhSoo [Visitor]
"irony", "satire" or "sarcasm", I think not but, hey, I'm willing to retract my critical comments of his post if Gary Fitzpagtrick will admit that it was. Admit that it was an attempt by him to refute CB's articles on Wie's ROLEX ranking and on the endorsement $ received from Nike & Sony.

I didn't see any of the 3 in his post but only more Wie-bashing. At this point, I've read his post 3 times (all 931 words... each time). Did notice a few sentences that may be construed as pointing out the absurdity of Chris's arguments BUT didn't believe, that the post taken as a whole, could be anything but what it seemed following my 1st reading.

Well, Gary... what is it? Am I an A**Hole (BV's characterization) for mis-reading your comments for what I thought it was?
2006-07-11 @ 16:40
Comment from: AhhSoo [Visitor]
george, thank you for your comments regarding my post: "I'm laughing".

Good to know that you group me with Norman, Jim COULTHARD, One-Putt and Jennifer Mario. No need to rise above them but proud to stand along side them when they proffer their reasoned arguments WITHOUT resorting to the name calling. "Wie Warriors are more than lunatics" as you put it.

BTW, didn't agree with JC calling you a "racist" but the fact that you noted it in your post "might" indicate that you were whining (your characterization) about that too.

My post commending Jen for her comments was to confirm that the name calling continues and I offered it as a recent example (among others). I'm not bothered about the AH moniker as I'm secure in knowing who I am and what I'm about.

I'm a pretty old person by anyone's standard and having been around that long, don't see the advantage one gains when ending an argument with the statement: "You're an A**Hole." If it is, then they should teach it in law school where a defense attorney could gain an advantage in their final arguments before the jury. It could go something like this: "Ladies & gentlemen of the jury, you have heard the Prosecutors case, his final arguments, our case for the defense and, now, our final arguments for my client's innocence of this crime AND IF YOU DON'T AGREE THAT HE IS INNOCENT THAN YOU'RE ALL A**HOLES."
2006-07-11 @ 17:21
Comment from: Gary Fitzpatrick [Visitor]
AhhSoo,

Pardon the excessive words, but I am used to writing books.

No, you are not an a**hole. Others were correct, my posting was a combination of satire, irony, and sarcasm. You were right that I put in several sentences which revealed my intention, but there is no reason for anyone to be upset that you doubted my intentions. In hind sight, I did a pretty good job of emulating the tone of the Wie bashers. And, blogs are generally not a place one looks for satire.

I could not believe that GolfTravel.com allowed Chris’ original blog to go public. Is there no editorial control? As someone who writes serious stuff that gets subjected to critical review, I am floored that Chris does not have the humility to put a damper on his opinions. Before publishing anything, a writer has to ask whether putting the words into the public will benefit society or not. If, as some have suggested, he gets pleasure or profit from antagonizing others, then that is a different issue that I won’t address here. I will simply assume he is incapable of seeing the flaws in his logic. I do not normally contribute to blogs because too many people shoot from the hip. I like environments in which postings are carefully thought out, don’t get published until the author is sure that the opinions being expressed are valid, and where an element of civility is maintained. Chris’ ranting irked me so much that I could not resist needling him in a way that maybe stepped over the line of my own rules.

I agree with many of the things you said about Michelle, especially that she is donating more than pocket change to charities and that she has a focus to that charitable inclination. In all, I think we are very fortunate to be able to witness this young girl’s maturation.

An important point to be made is that there is not a single model for parenting or for childhood. One of the difficult things to deal with as a parent is helping a child who has a passionate interest in something. When the child is also blessed with phenomenal skills or abilities related to that passion, then the parenting issue becomes exceptionally challenging. In those cases, children can be abused by parents, relatives, advisors, and professionals looking to profit from them. I am inclined to think that Michelle’s parents are taking a good approach. I find many similarities between how they are all developing her golf talent to how the family of the great young violinist Hilary Hahn (now 26) handled her development. (www.hilaryhahn.com contains a journal that goes back to Hilary’s teenage years.) Hilary seems to have avoided the burnout common to musical prodigies, and it seems to be because her parents and teachers allowed her to take on challenging music and performances, but did so slowly. She was not held back by being forced to stay at the level of her peers, but she was introduced to the higher pressure situations a little bit at a time. Just as Michelle seems to be improving by playing with the best competition available, Hilary credits the insights gained during performances with world class symphonies as a twelve or thirteen year old as being critical to developing her understanding of music – insights she would not have gained had she merely been in a high school or even college orchestra. If young people grow in their passion and still develop well as individuals, then what more can be asked of parents.

Last thing! As I mentioned earlier, I spend considerable time in Hawaii and occasionally teach at the University where B. J. is a professor. While Honolulu is a big city, it is also a small town. It is interesting that I have never heard any negative gossip in Hawaii about the Wie family. And believe me, if there is a reason for negative gossip, you will hear it there.

But can anyone figure out why on earth Michelle wants to go to Stanford?
2006-07-11 @ 17:51
Comment from: AhhSoo [Visitor]
Gary, I offer my sincerest apology for the mis-read and the critical comments. If you will allow, I retract everything I wrote about your entry. Apologies go out to Norman and BV, also, as they were correct in their assessment of your blog entry. I offer no excuses for messing up!

I have re-read (for the 4th time) your entry armed with the knowledge that it is a piece laced with the 3 qualities mentioned and had a good laugh at the expense of Mr. Baldwin.

In the past, I have posted sporatically (except for the past week) and did not see any of your earlier entries. If I had done my homework in a diligent manner, I would have known that you are an opponent of CB and all the Michelle Wie bashing comments that spew forth in his articles.

I appreciated your 3rd to last paragraph in your most recent post because I learned something I did not know before. That being the story about Hilary Hahn and how it relates to Michelle's development. Great stuff there.

Your question about Stanford seems to imply that you don't agree with her choice? Would be very interested to know your pick for her post-secondary education fulfillment.
2006-07-11 @ 18:45
Comment from: George [Visitor]
Comment from: Gary Fitzpatrick [Visitor]

**Pardon the excessive words, but I am used to writing books.**

[...]

**But can anyone figure out why on earth Michelle wants to go to Stanford?**

She wants to put some distance between herself and boring, long-winded book writers who are based in Hawaii? (sarcasm, which you claim to know)

Didn't Tiger Woods and Tom Watson go there? (could be sarcasm, could be irony)

I'll add two things you apparently are unfamiliar with: brevity and a straightfoward answer.

Stanford seems to have a very good golf program. It also boasts world class educators and a great business program. Michelle's got at least $20 million to manage, so getting an education geared towards and MBA (were that her choice) wouldn't be such a bad thing. Plus she would be closer to Hollywood for the inevitable "Michelle Wie Story" movie. Maybe you could write the screenplay.

-George
2006-07-11 @ 18:56
Comment from: observer [Visitor]
I am very glad that Michelle has supporters like Gary Fitzpartick. I completely agree with your point that parenting a gifted child is extremely challenging and Michelle's parents are doing the best they can: guiding but not limiting.

I think it's a good idea for Michelle to go to college generally, and Stanford is certainly one of the best. She can meet a more diversed set of people, make new friends and grow more well-rounded as a person.
2006-07-11 @ 20:18
Comment from: Alex [Visitor]
George, If Gary Fitzpatrick ever gets around to writing his tour de force "The Michelle Wie Story" he should sub-title it "NO wins, No problem."
2006-07-11 @ 20:43
Comment from: Gary Fitzpatrick [Visitor]
To all who took the bait...

Of course Stanford is a good school, as the graduate of another Pac 10 school I feel that a little pricking of Stanford's bubble is always in order. And I like to call Berkeley the Northern Campus.

Alex,

I'll get around to my book on Michelle as soon as I finish the picture research on my Anna Kournikova tome.

George,

Tiger did go to Stanford, just like Jimmy Connors went to UCLA. "Nice college to visit but I wouldn't want to stay there." I think Watson did get a degree, however.

2006-07-11 @ 22:04
Comment from: putt4par [Visitor]
Comment from: Jim COULTHARD [Visitor]
NORMAN

Do you think the LET would be interested in having Michelle Wie as a member? And do you think the LET would have any interest in replacing the LPGA as the number one Womaen's Tour? After all the Wie baiting by the LPGA in the Interviews it seems to me that Michelle Wie might want to find a place that is not as hostile to her as the LPGA. Once she puts up a few big wins she should be able to tell the LPGA what it can do with itself.
2006-07-09 @ 21:00

I have the feeling that she has already pretty much told them to take a hike. She has stated quite publicly in the last month that she is not interested in being tied to one tour. You think maybe she was referring to the LPGA?

Along with that, I've noticed that MWs name is no longer highlighted and used very sparingly to enhance the Publicity for LPGA Tournaments lately.

Couple that with the general feeling that the LPGA members have been told that they can bait MW now openly in their interviews, along With Paul Rovnak and Dana Gross being quick of the mark with some very leading questions, I think there is a decided coolness there, if not outright hostilities.

No, I don't think the LPGA is making any headway with MW. And she is stubborn enough to go her own way, succeed and rub their noses in it. They may come to a day in which they will regret those tactics but what the heck, they have to try. No one said Ms.Bivens was that sharp.
2006-07-11 @ 22:59
Comment from: putt4par [Visitor]
Comment from: Alex [Visitor] · http://Alex
Ahhsoo, Pay attention, you might learn something. It's spelled "sycophants", one "n". You have the meaning wrong, also. George, Judge, Ford, and I are not sycophants. We merely think alike. You, Jim C and Norman are sycophants of Bubbles, that is, brown nosers, bootlickers, butt kissers, etc. End of lesson. Your father should have taught you this.
-------------------------------------------------------------
Ahhsoo,
Who needs lessons when you have Alex and JS, the village clowns at your beck and call

Birds of a feather and fools always flock together, to sort of paraphrase two old standards. And as they need surgery to remove their lips from CBs nether orfice, I'd say there is little wiggle room for the pair of them.


Oh darn, I have almost slipped to their level. Shoot, gosh, darn anway.
2006-07-11 @ 23:07
Comment from: putt4par [Visitor]
Comment from: Woman Golfer [Visitor]
This whole thing with Michelle Wie makes me sick. The whole essence of her success emanates from the fact that despite all the accomplishments of the LPGA, men are still controlling women's golf.

They know Michelle is not as good as they say, they just want to keep fawning over a 16-year old girl who wears skirts so short they shows her ass every time she picks up her ball.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Really? Tsk, tsk, you were looking? How rude. Also sounds like you like it a bit on the wild side?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It's so interesting how she makes such a big deal of playing with the men but she's the only female golfer who dresses like a whore.
-------------------------------------------------------------
You are aquainted with whores? Wow, now that is kinky.
Hmmm, either you are near sighted or have selective vision. Ms. Gulbis has been rather daring on occasion.
I see Ms Creamer showing a lot of... Well, let's say it is what you are b*tching about.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
During the Women's Open I literally saw her underwear. It was really disturbing. She's no different than Jan Stephenson.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Oh dear, the shame of it all, but I’ll be willing to wager you got all hot and bothered, didn’t you? Now, come on admit it.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And when other female golfers tell the truth about the shortcomings in her game, they get called "catty" and bad sports.
-------------------------------------------------------------
The actual term for it is being a b*tch. Pure and simple.


The actual term for their behavior is passion, something the robotic and uncharismatic Wie decidedly lacks. Besides you never hear male athletes getting reprimanded for speaking their minds. Where would the NBA be without trash talking?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Really? And what the heck do you suppose that beeper is for? Time signals?
But maybe they should keep a bar of soap handy when interviewing NBA players instead of that nasty little bleeper. It kind of wrecks the ambience of a good potty-mouthed interview, know what I mean?

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Anyway, all that matters at the end of the day is who wins the tournament. And we ALWAYS know that it's never going to be Michelle.
-------------------------------------------------------------
So, what will your beef be when she wins, and we know that she will win. You want to trash her some more for some other imagined ill?



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
When I first started playing golf, I was a Michelle Wie fan. I liked the way she was unafraid to take on the men. Now I realize, she's just a silly girl who likes all of the attention. I don't care if she's 16. { Seriously?)I was WAY smarter than that when I was her age and I had a lot more respect for myself. {Nah, you can't be serious!}
-------------------------------------------------------------
So, by your own admission, you have been playing golf for what? Maybe tops 3 years? And now you are an expert on all things legitimate in the Golfing world, vis’a vis’ ms Wie.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for letting me share my feelings. I don't mean to offend anybody. I'm just telling the truth as I see it.
And maybe instead of attacking each other for liking/disliking Wie, we could all use the time to work on our game so that we never suffer the same embarassment that she has.


Michelle Wie is not embarrassed, that you can believe. She is focused on her career. She shuts out naysayers and gloom merchants like you.

You might want to read this article before embarrassing your self further, Golf Woman. See the link here.

http://www.postcrescent.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060710/APC02/60710082/1892/APCsports.


2006-07-09 @ 21:49

2006-07-11 @ 23:33
Comment from: putt4par [Visitor]
Ahhsoo said:
Your statement in part: "...she's the only female golfer who dresses like a whore." was way too strong and, maybe, premature. Millions saw what we saw and I hope Nike issues a press release explaining what we saw was not what we thought.
------------------------------------------------------------ Whore is way off the mark, unbecoming of any woman commenting on the TV coverage as we all saw it.

Michelle explained that she has shorts on under the skirts, so that she doesn't have to tuck the shirts and blouses in.

No need to get excited guys, she is a very circumspect young lady, in spite of Woman Golfers insinuations.
Her mum would have a lot to say to the young lady if those were only panties, or god forbid, a thong which is supposed to be the latest greatest thing.
And you can bet that Nike/sony/William Morris has a clause in there about morals and appearance.
2006-07-11 @ 23:47
Comment from: Se Ri Pak [Visitor]
What am I chopped liver?
That little bitch kicked my ass....
Oh, I must be having another off year.
Chris you are an idiot.
2006-07-11 @ 23:57
Comment from: Chuck Collet [Visitor]
My goodness, what time is it.. My Lord it's quarter past nine and I'm not in bed yet.. 60 lousy years old and I'm being put to sleep by a pile of losers who have nothing better to do..
Well Guys, (and one sick puppy broad), sleep will be far more exciting than reading the crap you all have to spew out over a child of 16....... Nitey Nite!!!
2006-07-12 @ 00:20
Comment from: Judge Smails [Visitor]
Jim C., you poor simpleton, why would you think that I would care about Morgan Pressel? Here's a quick lesson in logic: the fact that I dislike Bubbles does not indicate that I like any other specific female golfer, nor does it mean that I must like any other female golfer. I have hever sung the praises of Pressel, and I wouldn't pay her any mind whatsoever unless she decided to follow Bubbles' stupid career path and venture where she doesn't belong.
2006-07-12 @ 00:36
Comment from: Visionary [Visitor]
Judge Smells, you don't like womens golf, you don't like MW playing with the boys, you seem to exhibit no optimism with any of your commentaries, only a dark cloud of negativity. Seems like you and Woman Golfer may be a potential couple. Better take off your head dress so she can get a better look at you.
2006-07-12 @ 05:40
Comment from: AhhSoo [Visitor]
putt4par, I did respond to Alex regarding his criticism of my spelling abilities in a post somewhere up above. He did not accept my explanation of my intentional use of SYNCO-PHANTS but did commend me for my fast thinking.

Thanks for the supportive comments though.

Appreciative of the way you took down Woman Golfer for her outrageous statements on Michelle. As with Jen you were spot-on!
2006-07-12 @ 06:45
Comment from: AhhSoo [Visitor]
Did anyone notice that, this evening, someone at travelgolf.com went through the entire blog roll above and replaced the "ss" in A**hole with 2 asterisks?

Where was this editor when John D was posting the word in all of its glorious entirety a few days ago?

Ahh george, don't get excited because I'm not whining about it but curious to see that certain words are verboten here.

Maybe the editors can add Wie-wee, Bubbles, Wie brown noser,communist, etc. to their list of banned words on this blog. Therefore we might see Wie-wee edited with asterisks to look like W**-w**. That should put a "stutter in the putter" of the Wie-bashers. heh heh
2006-07-12 @ 07:07
Comment from: Alex [Visitor]
AhhSoo, Congratulations on your latest, and most brilliant essay. Just as I always told Judge Smails, "That AhhSoo is as sharp as a bowling ball!"
2006-07-12 @ 09:06
Comment from: Judge Smails [Visitor]
Alex,

Yes, and I think that would be a well polished bowling ball!

Visionary,

Since you're struck by my allegedly gratuitous negativity, I'll strike a more optimistic note just for you. I think it's wonderful how when Bubbles chokes, a young lady who has been striving and laboring much of her life to hone her craft gets to hoist a trophy. Life is grand, ain't it?
2006-07-12 @ 11:45
Comment from: hapahaole [Visitor]
"So I guess when you look at it closely, Nike does not understand the importance of winning often in the major events before signing someone up to promote their products." Gary Fitzpatrick

You are right. Nike just doesn't get it. How ccould they sign up Michael Jordan and Tiger Woods before they won something of substance? And now here is a 16 year old girl who hasn't won ANYTHING for years. Her only claim to fame is just that. FAME. WORLDWIDE FAME. Her huge popularity in the Orient and Europe is predicted to put millions into NIKE coffers through her "young women's fashion look" in the published media and tv coverage in golf tournaments. And her new contract will reflect this, all because "Nike just doesn't get it".
2006-07-12 @ 12:20
Comment from: hapahaole [Visitor]
"I spend a lot of time there and occasionally teach at the University in Honolulu and thus have a chance to observe girls around her age." Gary Fitzpatrick

Gary, where is the University of Honolulu?
2006-07-12 @ 12:30
Comment from: John D [Visitor]
Excuse me, from now on I use A$$ instaed of ASS.
2006-07-12 @ 13:29
Comment from: Gary Fitzpatrick [Visitor]
Hapahaole,

It's just a few blocks on the other side of H-1 from Leonard's Bakery, the home of the original malasada. That puts it very near the University of Hawaii at Manoa. When one is awake and alert, they are probably one and the same.

Aloha
2006-07-12 @ 13:45
Comment from: ToddCommish [Visitor]
Getting opinions on Michelle Wie from someone who calls themselves "hapahaole" is like getting opinions on the Kennedys from someone in Massachusetts.
2006-07-12 @ 14:08
Comment from: Evil Hater [Visitor]
Only a degenerate communist could be a Michelle Wie fan.
2006-07-12 @ 14:30
Comment from: One-Putt [Visitor]
"Comment from: Evil Hater [Visitor]
Only a degenerate communist could be a Michelle Wie fan."

Obviusly you are someone whom your mother deliberately dropped on the head as an infant (from 15 feet).

You have my sympathy.
2006-07-12 @ 14:54
Comment from: Gary Fitzpatrick [Visitor]
Evil Hater,

The general principle of name calling is to choose something that a) actually hurts your intended target and b) makes other people will understand the degeneracy of that person.

Why would a communist be a fan of a girl who has allied herself with two capitalist giants, not to mention the elistist Omega watch company?

May I suggest an alternative -- running dog capitalist swine. That was a quite popular epithet in the 60s.

If you accept the alternative, then I will be duly hurt and contritely reconsider my postion vis a vis Michelle.
2006-07-12 @ 15:08
Comment from: vistor [Visitor]
Whoever thinks that Bubbles is better at 16 than Tiger was when he was 16...."Cocaine's a helluva drug".
2006-07-12 @ 17:52
Comment from: AhhSoo [Visitor]
Alex, This "bowling ball" has 3 w**-w** holes in it for you, John D & Judge Smails to crawl into and hide. You, all, will need these 3 little "pukas" (like that word Gary & hapahaole?) when the reasoned arguments and the unrefuted facts of Norman's posts causes your retreat to these places-of-shame.

Judge Smails, The polishing is necessary so that while you, Alex & John D are in the w**-w** "pukas", you may gaze upon your own reflections... faces-of-shame for the unrelenting name-calling that spews out via your posts on these blogs.

vistor (or is it visitor?) stated: "Whoever thinks that Bubbles is better at 16 than Tiger was when he was 16...."Cocaine's a helluva drug"."

Please read Norman's excellent post above that details the historical facts regarding Michelle's record vs. Tiger's record at age 16. This is about the 4th time that Norman has done so. His previous posts on this exact topic was laced with even more facts (not stated here) that lay to rest any notions to the contrary. You do have one thing correct though... "Cocaine's a helluva drug." it's role in keeping a few "banana republics" solvent is unchallenged!
2006-07-12 @ 20:06
Comment from: Alex [Visitor]
This is getting really good. Norman has now been duly appointed the Lord High Priest of the Wie Warriors by no less an authority than AhhSoo hinself. AhhSoo, I am sure that Norman is grateful, since before you started posting here, he was considered the Number One dunce on this site. Some of your nonsense has gotten you serious consideration for the upcoming Alan Cup awards. Don't be surprised if you are notified by the committee members.
2006-07-12 @ 21:05
Comment from: Jenney M [Visitor]
Chris Baldwin, why are you so hot for Paula Creamer? You always going on about Creamer and Pressel. With the exception of HSBC match play tournament, Pressel and Creamer haven't finished higher than Michelle Wie in any of the LPGA tournaments Michelle has been in this year. Pressel has hardly set the LPGA on fire in her rookie year and Creamer has been pretty flat. Maybe you'd have more credibility if you talked about female golfers who've done things THIS year.

Does it hurts that a 16 yo girl can do what you can't? It's sad that the most noticeable thing you do is write about a 16 year old you seem to hate.
2006-07-12 @ 21:11
Comment from: AhhSoo [Visitor]
Alex, what's the $ amount that goes with winning the Alan Cup?

The revelation, that you and the rest of the committee members have given "serious consideration" to my standing in this competitive event, will cause my confidence level to soar to new heights.

While awaiting the arrival of the "prize patrol" on my door steps, I will endeavour to increase my score in the "nonsense" department so that I might separate myself from the field and ensure my victory.

My only concern upon winning is whether the "prize patrol" will also bring me a bouquet of roses to go with the silver cup and the champions purse?
2006-07-12 @ 21:26
Comment from: caninne lover [Visitor]
Good one, AhhSoo. My inquiring mind demands to know the $ amount of the Alan Cup. I can be just as good as anyone of these Alan Cup contenders. Alex, don't try to weasle out of this one. "All air but no substance" will not do. Tell me the prize and I assure you I can out-Alan any of the Alan cup contenders, including Ahhsoo. No offense intended Ahh Soo, Ah So or whatever.
2006-07-12 @ 23:27
Comment from: Judge Smails [Visitor]
AhhSoo said:

"Please read Norman's excellent post above that details the historical facts regarding Michelle's record vs. Tiger's record at age 16."

Ah, I didn't realize that Woods was allowed to compete in girls' events as a lad. Did he lose to a young girl the last time he played a junior match play tournament too?
2006-07-12 @ 23:32
Comment from: AhhSoo [Visitor]
Helloooo Judge, poking your head out of the "bowling ball" pukas are you? Got fatigued peering at your own reflection from that "polished bowling ball" surface? Sorry... those were not nice questions... just having some fun at your expense.

Appreciative that there were no invectives in your reply but some plain good old sarcasm. Gotta admit that's a pleasant change from your usual style.

Regarding your comment: It's right there before your eyes... Please read again... "Michelle's RECORD vs. Tiger's RECORD. Norman is comparing their RECORDS within the competitive paths they chose while teenagers AND not on any head-to-head meeting results as you intimate.

One of Norman's many examples was the 2003 Kraft Nabisco where Michelle, a 13 year old amateur, playing in the final threesome on Sunday (no doubt due to her top three 54 hole score) ended up tied 9th in her first LPGA Major. And how did Tiger do in his first PGA Major appearance at the age of 13? Well... nothing, because he didn't compete in one. But if he did, you wouldn't find anyone in this world that would predict a Tiger tied for 9th or better outcome in any of the 4 PGA Majors occurring that year... including, even, his recently departed and beloved dad.
2006-07-13 @ 03:45
Comment from: AhhSoo [Visitor]
cannine lover, I consider you a formidable opponent for the Alan Cup tournament championship. Never know... we might be paired on Sunday as the top 2 scorers going into that final round.

So, now, with daylight fading, I must return to the "nonsense" practice green to improve my "nonsense" putting for my upcoming eagle and birdie runs at the "nonsense" cups. My maniacal practice regimen ensures that I will not develop the dreaded "stutter-in-putter" syndrome which afflicts many but not all of the Wie-bashers.
2006-07-13 @ 04:12
Comment from: Judge Smails [Visitor]
Ahhsoo,

You're just piling up those Alan Cup points, aren't you?

The consensus assertion made by the Wiemen is that Bubbles is actually better that Woods was at the same age. Mind you, not merely more dominant within the arena of girls' and womens' golf, but a superior golfer. Thus, comparisons between their records in their respective realms cannot support this bold claim. You see, if they are being measured by different yardsticks and Bubbles' is far less demanding, such an analysis becomes an exercise in inanity.

I think, Ahhsoo, that a better comparison would be Bubbles vs. Tadd Fujikawa, the Wie lass vs. the wee lad. Methinks, however, that a case could be made for the diminutive boy being just a "Tadd" better.

2006-07-13 @ 05:53
Comment from: Ford [Visitor]
Stats can be twisted to fit any argument. Truly intelligent thinkers analyze the statistical data and apply it reasonably to a situation or as a means of comparison. People are correct when they say that Michelle Wie's results are better then Tiger Woods at a similar point in their career's and lives, but they are dead wrong when they use this evidence to make the claim that she is therefore a better golfer. You must look deeper then the numbers. Look at Biological factors, women develop earlier then men, the 16 year-old Tiger is a wisp of a boy, Michelle at 16 is a fully developed woman, of full height and musculature. Look at the competition they are playing, the PGA tour is a far superior playing field, with much deeper talent, the LPGA has improved to be sure, but the mere fact that Michelle is able to contend week in and week out shows a lack of depth and quality of play.

Does anyone actually think that the current Michelle Wie would have beaten a 16 year-old Tiger? Tiger even at that age had something that Michelle will never have, a killer instinct, an ability to win whatever the cost. The Junior Amateur Champion Tiger would beat Michelle then and he would beat her at every stage of their development, despite what the numbers say. Come on people lets start using our heads and not simply regurgitate stats to make our arguments.
2006-07-13 @ 09:52
Comment from: Judge Smails [Visitor]
"People are correct when they say that Michelle Wie's results are better then Tiger Woods at a similar point in their career's and lives."

Ford,

As you know, you and I are mostly on the same page. However, I have to disagree with the above statement. Her results are NOT better because they aren't results achieved in the same realm, that of soley boys' and mens' golf. This would be like saying that a woman who runs a 4:13 mile and dominates her peers has better results than a man who runs 4:02 and is only second on his college team. Those asserting this would be overlooking the fact that if the man could compete against her competition, he'd have even better "results."
2006-07-13 @ 12:29
Comment from: Evil Hater [Visitor]
Gary Fitzpatrick,

Capitalism and communism are two sides of the same coin; both are dedicated to concentrating wealth into the heads of their administrators and with the annihilation of the middle class.
The hype behind Michelle Wie is capitalist on the surface, designed to get idiots to part with their money, however the mission of this Michelle Wie nonsense are two hallmarks of communism - equality and feminism. She herself has said that she is trying to break down barriers. I never heard her ever say it's all about the golf. Rooting for her is rooting for communism to continue to prevail here in the United Soviet States of America. She is a social engineering experiment, not a golfer.

Ooga Booga,

Evil Hater




2006-07-13 @ 13:14
Comment from: AhhSoo [Visitor]
JS, thanks for the update on my Alan Cup points status.

Your statement "Thus, comparisons between their records in their respective realms cannot support this bold claim." is correct but Norman was not making the claim that Michelle is a better golfer than Tiger, NOW. Or making the claim that Michelle was better than Tiger even at the age of 13. No question that Michelle accomplished more at 13 WITHIN the path she chose vs. what Tiger accomplished at 13 WITHIN the path he chose. Does this make Michelle a better golfer than Tiger when they were both 13? ABSOLUTELY NOT!

Norman (as least my interpretation of his posts) was positing the side-by-side teenagers' records, simply, to show that at that time, Michelle had a greater upside potential than Tiger at that same age. Currently, we know what Tiger has accomplished and there is no question that he is the better golfer by a country mile! Hey, most PGA touring pros and a few LPGA members (Annika being the prime example) are better golfers than Michelle by a country mile! All of these comparisons were drawn to show what Michelle MAY accomplish at age 20/21 (or before)... an age when Tiger hit the pro circuit and won his 1st Major, the Masters.

Not attempting to place words in Norman's mouth... maybe he can weigh-in with his intensions as to what significance the record comparisons (their teenage years) hold for Michelle?
2006-07-13 @ 16:12
Comment from: AhhSoo [Visitor]
JS, your suggestion "...that a better comparison would be Bubbles vs. Tadd Fujikawa..." is, already, a SETTLED topic... Michelle beat Tadd Fujikawa in the US Open (men's that is) Qualifier on May 15, 2006. Note that this "comparison" (but we call it getting beat) was accomplished within the same parameters that you and others set forth: "within the arena", "their respective realms", "results achieved in the same realm", et al.
2006-07-13 @ 16:37
Comment from: jonny johnston [Visitor]
Wow the rantings of an obvious retard shure inspires alot of debate. Whoops
2006-07-15 @ 23:31
Comment from: AhhSoo [Visitor]
jj, Chris Baldwin is a "professional" reporter. His "rantings of an obvious retard" does not diminish his stature one iota. At least in his mind, that is! /s

"inspires alot of debate" is correct and CB is well on his way to winning the travelgolf.com office competition for columns mentioning Michelle Wie that inspire the most blog entries. Tim McD is a close 2nd.

IMHO, the winner of this competition will secure an accomplishment "of dubious distinction." Bashing a 16 year old girl (previously at age 13, 14 & 15 too) seems to be their forte in life.
2006-07-16 @ 00:23
Comment from: UnderPar [Visitor]
Judge correct me if I'm wrong, but didnt Fujikawa qualify this year for the US Open? I thought he won the Open Qualifier this year?
2006-07-16 @ 01:44
Comment from: AhhSoo [Visitor]
UnderPar, Tadd Fujikawa came in 3rd at the US Open Qualifier behind the Medalist (that's winner), Michelle Wie, played at the Palmer Course (Turtle Bay CC) on the Hawaiian island of Oahu.

Michelle entered the US Open Sectionals in NJ against 152 other male golfers for 8 to 12 positions at Winged Foot. Her choice of this site was dictated by her required appearance later on Thursday that same week at the LPGA's 2nd Major, McDonalds Championship.

Tadd Fujikawa, because of his 3rd place finish in the Oahu Qualifier was able to participate in the US Open Sectional held at Poipu Bay on the Hawaiian island of Kauai... against 10 other golfers for ONE spot at Winged Foot. An 11 competitor field that did not include one PGA touring pro or 4 previous PGA Major winners as in Michelle's case at the Canoe Brook CC in Summit, NJ.

And as we know now, Tadd finished as the Medalist in Kauai and participated in the US Open at Winged Foot but did not make the cut. A valiant try for a soon to be high school freshman at Moanalua High School on Oahu.

So... UnderPar, to be precise, Tadd Fujikawa did not win the Open Qualifier but loss to Michelle Wie... did win the Sectional against a field NOT including Wie and made it to Winged Foot. An outstanding accomplishment in its own right. But winning head-to-head against Michelle... Ahh, sorry but not Soo!
2006-07-16 @ 02:23
Comment from: AhhSoo [Visitor]
UnderPar, I might add that Michelle Wie, with her Medalist finish (again, that's the winner) at the US Open (Men's) Qualifier on Oahu, accomplished what no other girl, woman (female of any age) in the history of US Open golf had done before. This new record was set by Michelle as reported by the USGA according to a careful review of their official historical archives.
2006-07-16 @ 02:35
Comment from: AhhSoo [Visitor]
UnderPar, another tidbit of history not mentioned above and my apology for going on with this. But allow me just one more...

Tadd Fujikawa, although a loser to Michelle in the Oahu Qualifier but eventual participant at Winged Foot, set another USGA record by becoming the youngest participant in US Open history at the age of 15 years, 6 months, 7 days old.

As I posted earlier about Tadd, "An outstanding accomplishment..." and something his family & friends are, justifiably, proud of.
2006-07-16 @ 03:21
Comment from: AhhSoo [Visitor]
UnderPar, yes I lied about "allow me just one more..."

Casey Watabu, 22 year old golfer from Kapaa, Hawaii (a town on the same island of Kauai where Tadd won the US Open Sectional), just won the USGA APL Championship. This puts him in next year's Masters.

A wondrous thing these Hawaii golfers: Michelle Wie, only female to win a US Open Qualifier, Tadd Fujikawa, the youngest participant in a US Open and, now, Casey Watabu, playing in the 2007 Masters!
2006-07-16 @ 13:20

Comments are closed for this post.

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

Dates: May 21, 2014 - December 31, 2014
Briggs Woods Golf Course offers several different Stay & Play packages to fit your needs. Stay & Play packages are available from opening day in the spring through October 31st, packages starting at $136 per person.
Price range: $136