Phil gives it away

It was a double actually.  Same as Monty.

Two chokes from two of the biggest chokers in the game.  Phil finally remember that he's NOT supposed to win on Sunday.  Heh.

I love how they didn't show his second shot on 18. Never knew how the ball got to where it went.

But it's what Phil does best...lose majors.

Are you kidding?  Two green jackets and a PGA Championship and he's a loser in majors?  If I had 3 majors under my belt and was the current 2006 money leader with over 4 million in prize money (and it's only June), then call me a loser every day.

Yes, he's a loser in majors.  He's finally broken through in his last few, but that doesn't erase the countless Sundays prior to that where he was contending and did something stupid or simply choked.  People were wondering if he'd ever win ONE.

Count the chokes vs. the number of times he's actually won.  It's not even close.

Your lack of a real response isn't though.

What Derek Said. Until recently, Phil's claim to fame was always the best player to never wina  major. And he didn't just not win them, he consistently gave them away, in much the same way he did Sunday. Sure, Phil always won plenty of Pepsi-Hyundai Opens and whatnot, but he was the chokemeister at majors. Sunday he reminded us of that a little.

As a former golf professional, I can attest to how difficult it is to do well in tournaments, but cannot fathom it at that level.  But to state that a guy is a loser in majors when he's won 3 of the last 10, is ranked #2 in the world and leads the money earnings is, well, ignorant.  But we agree to disagree.

I don't think he's a loser, and I didn't call him that.

Of course he's ultra-aggressive.  He's also apparently not smart enough to put that aside when he doesn't need it.  He does it time and time again and usually on golf's biggest stages, the majors.  Sure, it'll work on occasion as it has for him over the last year or so, but you know the whole blind squirrel + nut deal...

He'll do it again.

Your former profession has no relevance to the discussion.  We all understand that it's hard to do well in tournaments.  All we can do is compare him to his peers.

You guys keep throwing around the "loser" comment like it's something I said.  I said that he chokes in majors.  He has done so many times and will do so again.  Winning a few doesn't erase all of that.

Leading the money list, blah blah...irrelevant to the topic at hand.

Ignorant?  LOL  Sure, whatever you say, bud.

You keep avoiding the point.  He has been in position to win many more and has done extraordinary things to keep him from winning them.  Most people call them "chokes".  How does winning a few erase all of those?

The analogy applies perfectly.  If you swing for the fences, you're bound to hit one out on occasion.

Double post

 Derek and I are enjoying a spirited debate, not pissy nor controversial.  If we wanted pissy and controversial, we'd discuss this month's Cosmo quiz

hehe....actually I am surprised that someone (Jim) didn't somehow make it Bush's fault! HA!

hehe....actually I am surprised that someone (Jim) didn't somehow make it Bush's fault! HA!

Well...I'll go out on a limb and guess that Phil's politics lean right...

Ya think?