BOGEYBREAKERS ^TM

Watch Phil in the Majors: 2004 Could be the Year

Colonel Bogey and many others have written many words on Phil Mickelson’s failure to win a major and his prospects for winning any in the future. Frankly, Colonel Bogey has had his doubts that Phil would ever win a major. The Colonel has changed his mind. This could be the year and this week’s Masters could very likely be Phil’s first Major. What has changed?

Phil has changed. He is now playing the kind of golf that wins major tournaments. It is not surprising that Phil is near the top (2nd as of this writing) in number of birdies per round. But it is surprising that if there were a fewest bogeys per round statistic Phil would be near the top of it too. Many commentators and writers have mentioned Phil’s “conservative play” so far in 2004. The Colonel thinks Phil’s 2004 play is conservative only if compared with Phil’s play in previous years. The phrase the Colonel would use is “smart play.”

And Phil’s smart play has paid off so far. He is number two on the money list and has not been out of the top 10 in the seven events he has played this year. So keep your eye on Phil this week because he could be donning a green jacket before it is over.

Tags: Blogs by admin
No Comments »

Phil Mickelson continues to play the kind of smart golf that makes him one of the favorites for this week’s U.S. Open. Bet you never thought you would see Phil in 32nd place in driving distance as he was at last week’s Buick Classic but it shows how far he is willing to go to have the kind of control he needs to win more Majors. Keep your eye on Rory Sabbatini at Shinnecock. Rory was seventh in number of birdies at the Buick but he tied for first because his Gross Positive Score (GPS) was only +6 (4 bogeys and 1 double bogey). As the Colonel has pointed out before, the GPS is the most important (and least known) statistic week after week in determining who wins on the PGA Tour. Even for Tiger. At the Buick Invitational earlier this year Tiger tied for first in the Gross Negative Score (GNS) category with a -21 but he finished tenth in the tournament because of his +13 GPS. As Golfweek pointed out in its current issue, “Tiger Woods and Mickelson seemingly have switched styles…”

Tags: Blogs by admin
No Comments »

At the end of the third round of the World Golf Championship (August 25, 2002)
Craig Parry was tied for the lead with Robert Allenby at 10 under par. An announcer
asked Parry what his strategy had been thus far. Parry answered that he had
been going for the middle of the greens. The announcer asked what his strategy
would be for the final round and Parry answered “Well, it’s worked so far
so why change it?”

Parry won by four shots over Allenby and his win was typical of what happens
week in and week out on the pro tour. Parry’s Gross Negative Score (GNS) was
-20. Allenby’s GNS was -23. Eight golfers in the top 12 finishers had a GNS
equal to or better than Parry’s (see chart below). So how did Parry win by 4
strokes? By making fewer mistakes, that’s how. Parry had only four bogeys in
72 holes. Allenby had 7 bogeys and two double bogeys to go with his -23 GNS,
for a final -12.

Phil Mickelson who finished at -7 to tie for ninth had a -20 GNS to tie Parry
in that category, but he had nine bogeys and two double bogeys for a Gross Positive Score (GPS) of +13 and a net minus seven. Note that Phil did finish first in one category. He had the most eagles,
three. So what? As, discussed elsewhere, this is typical Mickelson and is the
reason why he may never win a major championship.

Note that the most significant column in the above table in terms of final standing is the Gross Positive Score column.

Tags: Blogs by admin
No Comments »

If the winner of a golf tournament was determined by the Gross Negative Score
(GNS), Tiger Woods would win a lot fewer golf tournaments. For example, Tiger’s
-20 GNS would have placed him no better than 5th in last weeks Buick Invitational
behind Mark Calcavecchia (-25), Jonathan Kaye (-22), Carl Pettersson (-21) and
Brian Baird (-21). Marco Dawson’s -16 GNS tied him with Geoff Ogilvy but Dawson
took home $130,950 while Ogilvy took home $9,270. In fact, in spite of his -16
GNS, Ogilvy finished a full 60 places behind Dawson. What accounts for these
results?

If you are a regular follower of Colonel Bogey’s statistics, you already know
the answer. In the Buick the Gross Positive Score (GPS) was, as usual, the most
important statistic column. Dawson had a GPS of only +7, while Ogilvy’s GPS
was +19. Thus, the $120,000+ difference on payday.

Guess who had the lowest GPS for the tournament? Tiger, of course, with just
+4. Tiger had one bogey in each round so his GNS of -20 and GPS of +4 was good
enough to beat the rest of the field by 4 strokes in net score.

If driving distance (DD) interests you, here are some figures to consider.
Tiger finished 4th in driving distance and took home $810,000 for winning the
tournament, while Brent Geiberger finished first in driving distance and took
home $43,000+ for his tie for 21st finish. Carl Petterrson finished 42nd in
driving distance but took home $486,000 for second place in the tournament.

There were some good signs for Mickelson fans. Despite all of the media hype
over Phil’s GOLF magazine interview plus his playing with Tiger in the last
round, Phil’s GPS was only +7. Phil had, for him, an unusual first round in
which he had no bogeys or double bogeys. The mystery is why Phil had a double
bogey in each of his middle rounds on an admittedly very difficult golf course
but a course on which there were not many double bogeys by those who made the
cut.

Keep your eye on Arron Oberholser who had the worst GNS (-15) in the top ten
but who tied for 4th because his GPS was only +5, second only to Tiger.

Tags: Blogs by admin
No Comments »