30 May 2006 00:13:30
Laura Bush murdered her boy fr
Butch Harmon slams Michelle Wie and her parents

His book "The Pro" just came out. Some quotes re Michelle whom he
thinks has been brought along way too quickly.

"But she never dominated at any level, despite having more talent than
any woman in the game"

"I have also been concerned by how mechanical her game appears to have
become"

"I'm also alarmed by her ambivalent attitude toward not winning. ...
nobody who has a likeness hanging in the Hall of Fame ever felt good
about making a cut or fininshing in the top ten."

"Michellle has been trotted out like a pregame carnival act"

"She also is making a terrible mistake by continuing to play with the
men, where she
has no chance of winning"

"No one faults a family for making money. But i've always gotten the
sense that Michelle missed out on being a teenager"

"But i believe the adults in her life have done her a grave
disservice."



30 May 2006 08:49:08
Steve K. Lee
Re: Butch Harmon slams Michelle Wie and her parents

On 30 May 2006 00:13:30 -0700, "Laura Bush murdered her boy friend"
<xeton2001@yahoo.com > wrote:

>His book "The Pro" just came out. Some quotes re Michelle whom he
>thinks has been brought along way too quickly.
>
>"But she never dominated at any level, despite having more talent than
>any woman in the game"

Hard to argue there.

>"I have also been concerned by how mechanical her game appears to have
>become"

I don't know enough about the swing mechanics to comment on this, but
it's still sure is pretty to watch her swing. But perhaps Butch sees
something else and he's certiainly more qualified to do so than I.

But compared to TW or Adam Scott's swing, I certainly can see how her
swing seems much more robotic than theirs do.

>"I'm also alarmed by her ambivalent attitude toward not winning. ...
>nobody who has a likeness hanging in the Hall of Fame ever felt good
>about making a cut or fininshing in the top ten."

So true. It's amazing to see just how many seem to accept her
mediocre performance even when playing with women and what's even more
surprising is how everyone accepts her dismal record when playing as
some accomplishment.

>"Michellle has been trotted out like a pregame carnival act"

That's true too. But I would submit that that has more to do with the
tournament organizers than MW and her entourage. The tourney
coordinators know that her presence will bring out more people to the
course to watch her play, so they, for the lack of a better word,
exploit it.

>"She also is making a terrible mistake by continuing to play with the
>men, where she
>has no chance of winning"

That's hard to argue as well. And might I add, she has no chance of
making the cut on the European tour or the PGA, let alone win or come
close to winning.

>"No one faults a family for making money. But i've always gotten the
>sense that Michelle missed out on being a teenager"
>
>"But i believe the adults in her life have done her a grave
>disservice."

That's something only MW knows she can comment on. Anything else
coming out of anybody else's mouth is just pure speculation and not
even an opinion. If Butch ever had a chance to sit down with Michelle
and have a talk about this issue and is expressing his opinion about
it, then I'd say it has some merit. Otherwise, it's just pure
speculation and meddling in someone else's family affairs.

Let's face it. She's won nothing of note save for a women's pub link
tourney a few years back. I wouldn't exactly call that dominance
among her peers to have warranted her to turn pro, let alone
considering her good enough to compete against men.

Since then, she's won nothing, absolutely nothing. And so exactly,
how is she supposed to be a good enough player to be competing against
men? She still will be a very, very good LPGA player. But I'm
guessing it'll be much later rather than sooner, as in like never, for
her to make a cut on the PGA tour.

It'll never happen. She's never dominated at all on the women's
stage, so why do people believe that she's capable of playing against
men? But then, if you take enough shots at a basket from the center
of the court, one will eventually go in. If MW does make a cut,
that'll be that one center court shot that goes in.

Oh, right, she's so young. She has soooooo much potential. I don't
understand how or why people keep on making excuses for her again and
again, time after time. Gets tiring real quick.


30 May 2006 02:55:37
Eagle
Re: Butch Harmon slams Michelle Wie and her parents


Laura Bush murdered her boy friend wrote:
> His book "The Pro" just came out. Some quotes re Michelle whom he
> thinks has been brought along way too quickly.
>
> "But she never dominated at any level, despite having more talent than
> any woman in the game"
>
> "I have also been concerned by how mechanical her game appears to have
> become"
>
> "I'm also alarmed by her ambivalent attitude toward not winning. ...
> nobody who has a likeness hanging in the Hall of Fame ever felt good
> about making a cut or fininshing in the top ten."
>
> "Michellle has been trotted out like a pregame carnival act"
>
> "She also is making a terrible mistake by continuing to play with the
> men, where she
> has no chance of winning"
>
> "No one faults a family for making money. But i've always gotten the
> sense that Michelle missed out on being a teenager"
>
> "But i believe the adults in her life have done her a grave
> disservice."


I don't ever pay much heed as to what Butch has to say.
He was hired by Sky Sports, as a pundit, for broadcasts of PGA events
to the UK. While he spoke a lot, he hardly said anything of
significance. I've have never experienced his teaching sessions, so I
can't comment on his knowledge or ability, but his punditry on Sky
Sports suggests that he doesn't know a whole lot about the game, IMO.
So......I am going make a point or two against his argument.

1) Is it so important for a 16 year old to win?
2) Is it right to but a 16 year old in pressure situations where she is
expected to win all the time?
3) Is it not a good idea to put her in competition with men, most of
whom will always outscore her. Take that pressure of having to win off
her - and when she does finally make a cut in a PGA event, she will
write headlines and get a massive boost to her confidence.

I don't like the idea of a 16 year old generating so much media
attention, or earning so much money. She is 16 years old, and has
plenty of time to win events. I would like to think that she is
learning her trade, improving her game, and one day she will
concentrate fully on dominating LPGA tour events.

One point about her "mechanical game". I see this in many other LPGA
tour players as well! However, if her game is becoming even more
mechanical and less free-flowing, this is a problem.



30 May 2006 07:01:42
Mac3
Re: Butch Harmon slams Michelle Wie and her parents


> I don't know enough about the swing mechanics to comment on this, but
> it's still sure is pretty to watch her swing. But perhaps Butch sees
> something else and he's certiainly more qualified to do so than I.

Yeah, but what if that 'mechanical swing' is more repeatable?


> So true. It's amazing to see just how many seem to accept her
> mediocre performance even when playing with women and what's even more
> surprising is how everyone accepts her dismal record when playing as
> some accomplishment.

2006 - Two tournaments - two 3 place finishes. Mediocre? Dismal record?
Certainly you must be trolling.

>
> That's hard to argue as well. And might I add, she has no chance of
> making the cut on the European tour or the PGA, let alone win or come
> close to winning.

No chance? She missed the 2005 Sony by one stroke. Trolling or just
ignorant?

> Since then, she's won nothing, absolutely nothing. And so exactly,
> how is she supposed to be a good enough player to be competing against
> men?

I like the fact that she has the attitude that she ultimately wants to
compete against men. I like all the media hype. Makes it all more
interesting.





30 May 2006 21:39:00
Craig
Re: Butch Harmon slams Michelle Wie and her parents


>
>
>> So true. It's amazing to see just how many seem to accept her
>> mediocre performance even when playing with women and what's even more
>> surprising is how everyone accepts her dismal record when playing as
>> some accomplishment.
>
> 2006 - Two tournaments - two 3 place finishes. Mediocre? Dismal record?
> Certainly you must be trolling.
>

For someone who is as hyped as she, two 3rd place finishes is pretty
mediocre. Sorenstam, Webb or even young gun Ochoa wouldn't exactly be
over the moon with finishing 3rd.



30 May 2006 21:44:27
Craig
Re: Butch Harmon slams Michelle Wie and her parents

>
> 1) Is it so important for a 16 year old to win?

Yes, if they are a professional sports person. For the average kid on
the street, no.

> 2) Is it right to but a 16 year old in pressure situations where she is
> expected to win all the time?

See above response. If she doesn't want to be putting herself under too
much pressure she going about it the wrong way.

> 3) Is it not a good idea to put her in competition with men, most of
> whom will always outscore her. Take that pressure of having to win off
> her - and when she does finally make a cut in a PGA event, she will
> write headlines and get a massive boost to her confidence.

I am amazed that people think learning to win is so easy. As if as soon
as she decides to concentrate on the LPGA she will suddenly dominate.
Plenty of players have amazing talent, not many win. Learning to win is
important.



30 May 2006 11:53:49
jeffc
Re: Butch Harmon slams Michelle Wie and her parents


"Eagle" <eagle.someday@gmail.com > wrote in message
news:1148982937.498518.168670@j33g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
> One point about her "mechanical game". I see this in many other LPGA
> tour players as well! However, if her game is becoming even more
> mechanical and less free-flowing, this is a problem.

I don't think it is. Look at her follow through and you'll see how relaxed
and loose she must be to do that.




30 May 2006 05:36:43
annika1980
Re: Butch Harmon slams Michelle Wie and her parents


Craig wrote:
>
> For someone who is as hyped as she, two 3rd place finishes is pretty
> mediocre. Sorenstam, Webb or even young gun Ochoa wouldn't exactly be
> over the moon with finishing 3rd.

Well let's see, Michelle has played in exactly two LPGA tournaments
this year, finishing just one shot out of the lead in both of them.
In the first one she beat Webb by 11 strokes and Ochoa by 2 strokes
(Sorenstam didn't play).
In the second, Webb & Ochoa tied, one shot ahead of Michelle. Michelle
beat Annika by 6 shots in that one.

So perhaps you just don't understand the meaning of the word
"mediocre?"



30 May 2006 07:46:47
Lloyd Parsons
Re: Butch Harmon slams Michelle Wie and her parents

In article <447c2ed5@dnews.tpgi.com.au >, Craig <craigvn@gmail.com>
wrote:

> >
> >
> >> So true. It's amazing to see just how many seem to accept her
> >> mediocre performance even when playing with women and what's even more
> >> surprising is how everyone accepts her dismal record when playing as
> >> some accomplishment.
> >
> > 2006 - Two tournaments - two 3 place finishes. Mediocre? Dismal record?
> > Certainly you must be trolling.
> >
>
> For someone who is as hyped as she, two 3rd place finishes is pretty
> mediocre. Sorenstam, Webb or even young gun Ochoa wouldn't exactly be
> over the moon with finishing 3rd.

If those 3 were her age, they damn well would be.


30 May 2006 07:11:30
Howard Brazee
Re: Butch Harmon slams Michelle Wie and her parents

>"I have also been concerned by how mechanical her game appears to have
>become"

What does this mean? Does it mean she has a consistent swing? Does
it mean she's not wild?

If she were less mechanical, what would the effect be on her game?

Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com


30 May 2006 13:13:10
Howard Brazee
Re: Butch Harmon slams Michelle Wie and her parents

On 30 May 2006 02:55:37 -0700, "Eagle" <eagle.someday@gmail.com >
wrote:

>1) Is it so important for a 16 year old to win?
>2) Is it right to but a 16 year old in pressure situations where she is
>expected to win all the time?

Apparently, he thinks it is wrong that she doesn't win, and he thinks
it is wrong that she is under pressure to win.


30 May 2006 09:25:37
Zuke
Re: Butch Harmon slams Michelle Wie and her parents




On Tue, 30 May 2006, Laura Bush murdered her boy friend wrote:

> His book "The Pro" just came out. Some quotes re Michelle whom he
> thinks has been brought along way too quickly.
>
> "But she never dominated at any level, despite having more talent than
> any woman in the game"
>

What did Butch Harmon ever win?



30 May 2006 13:28:01
Raskull
Re: Butch Harmon slams Michelle Wie and her parents


"Zuke" <me@privacy.net > wrote in message
news:Pine.OSX.4.64.0605300925160.12442@ucfilespace.uc.edu...
>
>
>
> On Tue, 30 May 2006, Laura Bush murdered her boy friend wrote:
>
>> His book "The Pro" just came out. Some quotes re Michelle whom he
>> thinks has been brought along way too quickly.
>>
>> "But she never dominated at any level, despite having more talent than
>> any woman in the game"
>>
>
> What did Butch Harmon ever win?
>

BC Open




30 May 2006 13:45:22
Kenny Stultz
Re: Butch Harmon slams Michelle Wie and her parents

In article <Pine.OSX.4.64.0605300925160.12442@ucfilespace.uc.edu >,
me@privacy.net says...
>
>
>
>
>On Tue, 30 May 2006, Laura Bush murdered her boy friend wrote:
>
>> His book "The Pro" just came out. Some quotes re Michelle whom he
>> thinks has been brought along way too quickly.
>>
>> "But she never dominated at any level, despite having more talent than
>> any woman in the game"
>>
>
>What did Butch Harmon ever win?
>

What did golfers taught by Butch Harmon ever win would be a more appropriate
question.

Kenny

--
Kenny Stultz - Troll and SPAM intolerant
"Golf is the only sport where a precise knowledge of the Rules can
earn one a reputation for bad sportsmanship"



30 May 2006 06:48:02
multi
Re: Butch Harmon slams Michelle Wie and her parents

On Tue, 30 May 2006 08:49:08 GMT, Steve K. Lee <yeah@right.com > wrote:

>On 30 May 2006 00:13:30 -0700, "Laura Bush murdered her boy friend"
><xeton2001@yahoo.com> wrote:

>>His book "The Pro" just came out. Some quotes re Michelle whom he
>>thinks has been brought along way too quickly.

I hope that's a joke, but it's funny. Butch Harmon writes a book
about how Michelle is being exploited? Apparently he didn't think his
comments on people he knows something about, like Tiger and Adam
Scott, would generate enough sales, so he chooses to exploit Michelle
as well. Priceless.

>>"But she never dominated at any level, despite having more talent than
>>any woman in the game"
>
>Hard to argue there.

Spare me. How many golfers *have* dominated, at any level? Tiger
dominated, both as an amateur and a pro, but he's one in a century.
Jones dominated 80 years ago. Other than that, who is there? Hogan
is the only other golfer who won three majors in a year. Nelson
dominated the 4-F fields of WWII, but not before or after. Jack is
often considered dominant, although a closer look shows just a few
great years mixed with a lot of good years. But most Hall of Fame
golfers, even the immortals (excepting maybe old-timers like Vardon),
had peers who beat them as often as not. Even Hogan had Snead and
Nelson. And over his long career, Jack was regularly beaten (at
different times) by Palmer, Player, Casper, Trevino, and (especially)
Watson.

But let's say all of the above dominated, and throw in Hagen and
Norman for good measure. That's only a dozen or so golfers in a
hundred years, and most of them didn't dominate as amateurs. If it
only happens that rarely, where do people get the idea that you're
supposed to dominate the Ams before you have the right to show your
face at a pro event? Even Ken Pitts once said he was happy to see a
16-year old Tiger at the LA Open. If you're less open-minded than
Pitts, you're in trouble.

>>"I have also been concerned by how mechanical her game appears to have
>>become"
>
>I don't know enough about the swing mechanics to comment on this, but
>it's still sure is pretty to watch her swing. But perhaps Butch sees
>something else and he's certiainly more qualified to do so than I.
>
>But compared to TW or Adam Scott's swing, I certainly can see how her
>swing seems much more robotic than theirs do.

I thought repeatability was the thing you want in a golf swing.

>>"I'm also alarmed by her ambivalent attitude toward not winning. ...
>>nobody who has a likeness hanging in the Hall of Fame ever felt good
>>about making a cut or fininshing in the top ten."
>
>So true. It's amazing to see just how many seem to accept her
>mediocre performance even when playing with women

You must be a real hot dog if you think her record in the LPGA is
mediocre. In the last seven majors she's played, at ages 14-16, she
has six top 20's, and four top fives (actually 4-2-T3-T3). How many
pros, men or women, have done better? Maybe Phil and Tiger, maybe
Annika? Anybody else? Is having the fifth or sixth best record in
the world over the last two years mediocre to you?

> and what's even more
>surprising is how everyone accepts her dismal record when playing as
>some accomplishment.

What utter horseshit. She's sixteen. Making the top five in a major
is an accomplishment for anyone; it's a huge accomplishment to do it
consistently; and it's unheard of for a high schooler to do it. It
has simply never happened before, and before she did it, most would
have said it was impossible. It would be like a 15-year old hitting
.300 and winning a Golden Glove playing for the Yankees.

As for men's events, she has just as much right to be happy about
making a cut in a PGA event as Jack or Arnie do, who by the way have
their likenesses hanging in the Hall of Fame. For the last five or
ten years, people in this group would nearly wet themselves when Arnie
or Jack even played, let alone when they almost made a cut. Jack
would have a half-hour interview every time he played, and he would
say he really hoped to be around for the weekend, and then go out and
shoot 82-85. But everybody, including me, was still glad to see him
there. Why? Because he was 65 years old with an artificial hip, and
he was playing in a PGA event. We don't have the same standards for
people much younger or older than their prime, as we do for when they
are in their prime. I'm amazed that anyone needs this explained.

If Michelle is still happy to make a cut when she's 25 or 30, then
you'll have a point. After she has reached her full potential, if the
best she can do is make an occasional cut on the PGA, then I won't
bother watching her, although I won't care enough to rant against it.
But if she has any chance at all at making a cut while she's in high
school, I'll watch every second of it. I feel incredibly lucky to
have seen Tiger's transition from geeky amateur to the best in the
game, and I wouldn't want to miss any career milestones of someone who
may become the best woman in the game.

For now, she is progressing nicely, and incidentally she's progressing
faster than anyone, male or female, since Young Tom Morris won the
Open against a field of 20 or so locals. I'll bet even money that
Michelle will make a PGA cut at a younger age than Tiger did (and
Tiger started trying when he was 16).

She is the first woman to make a cut on a men's international tour in
60 years. The wins will come. Look at Ochoa; she's played very, very
well all year. A couple of weeks she won; most of the time, she
didn't. She wasn't a worse golfer the weeks she finished second or
third. It just takes a couple of bad bounces, or lucky bounces from
an opponent, to make the difference in any given week.

>
>>"Michellle has been trotted out like a pregame carnival act"
>
>That's true too. But I would submit that that has more to do with the
>tournament organizers than MW and her entourage. The tourney
>coordinators know that her presence will bring out more people to the
>course to watch her play, so they, for the lack of a better word,
>exploit it.

Just like Harmon did?

>
>>"She also is making a terrible mistake by continuing to play with the
>>men, where she
>>has no chance of winning"
>
>That's hard to argue as well. And might I add, she has no chance of
>making the cut on the European tour or the PGA, let alone win or come
>close to winning.

She's missed the cut in a PGA event by one shot at age 14, and she
recently made the cut (easily) on the Asian tour. I'd take low odds
that she'll make the cut on either the Euro or PGA tour this year, and
I'd give odds that she'll make it before she's 21. Anyone who says
she has "no chance" is smoking something, and I'll be very happy to
take his money.

>>"No one faults a family for making money. But i've always gotten the
>>sense that Michelle missed out on being a teenager"
>>
>>"But i believe the adults in her life have done her a grave
>>disservice."
>
>That's something only MW knows she can comment on. Anything else
>coming out of anybody else's mouth is just pure speculation and not
>even an opinion. If Butch ever had a chance to sit down with Michelle
>and have a talk about this issue and is expressing his opinion about
>it, then I'd say it has some merit. Otherwise, it's just pure
>speculation and meddling in someone else's family affairs.

That's the first comment you've made that shows sense.

>Let's face it. She's won nothing of note save for a women's pub link
>tourney a few years back.

Ahem. It wasn't a pub link tourney, it was *the* pub links tourney,
the USGA national championship, for adults. Winning a USGA
championship is plenty of grounds for turning pro, even if you're 30.
Winning it at fucking TWELVE YEARS OLD means you're a phenom, and you
would be wasting your time playing more amateur events just for the
sake of staying amateur. Some people might want to "learn to win"
against other 12 year olds, but others might think they will learn
more by playing the best players in the toughest tournaments they can
enter. The latter is the harder course, but apparently Michelle is
mature enough to prefer long-term success over instant gratification.

> I wouldn't exactly call that dominance
>among her peers to have warranted her to turn pro, let alone
>considering her good enough to compete against men.

Name all the golfers who dominated the Ams like Tiger did before
turning pro. Guess what, there aren't any. Not even Bobby Jones won
three Ams in a row. If consistently finishing in the top five in pro
majors doesn't warrant turning pro, what does, winning every time you
play?

Besides, you're missing the point completely. As Michelle herself
demonstrated, talented amateurs can play nearly any pro event they
want, so turning pro isn't an ability decision, it's a financial
decision. At age 15, she had already given up most of a million
dollars by staying amateur. I wonder how lofty your standards would
be if it were your daughter who was turning down $100,000 checks every
time she played, and had ten million in endorsement money just waiting
for her signature.

It's a business decision. Look at Matt Leinart. In 2004, he led USC
to a perfect season, won the Heisman, was first-team all everything,
Victor Award, Walter Camp Award, Manning Award, etc., etc., and was
the Orange Bowl MVP in winning the NCAA national championship. If he
had turned pro, he would have been the first draft pick, with an
enormous guaranteed contract.

Instead, he made a stupid, stupid decision to play college ball
another year, in the hopes of getting another Heisman and another
championship for USC. He probably played just as well as in 2004, but
Vince Young played a little bit better, so Leinart didn't win the
Heisman, he didn't win another national championship, he didn't even
make first team All-American. He went tenth in the draft. He wasn't
even the first quarterback taken, since Young was smarter than he was,
and turned pro a year early instead of a year late. Leinart won't
starve, but he'll probably get a starting contract worth several
million less than he would have gotten as the all-world first pick
last year. And since the current salary is the basis for future
raises, he will probably average around five million dollars a year
less in salary for the rest of his career. His stupid little gesture
of loyalty cost him maybe $75 million, and he's not even the BMOC any
more; Reggie Bush is.

Michelle is smarter than all of you wankers who say she should beat up
on other high school players for two more years. She is set for life.
If it turns out she was just a flash in the pan, and she actually
never makes a PGA cut or wins an LPGA event, she's still set for life.
If she gets sick, or injured, or just gets tired of golf, she is still
set for life. It's a business decision.

>Since then, she's won nothing, absolutely nothing.

She's only played a couple or three events since turning pro. If you
think that only players who win at least one event in three should be
allowed to keep their card, you're gonna need a bigger Q-school.

> And so exactly,
>how is she supposed to be a good enough player to be competing against
>men?

It's what she wants to do. Nobody, including her, claims she's as
good at 16 as Tiger is at 30. But she's better at 16 than Tiger was
at 16, and nobody had a problem with Tiger competing in pro events,
even before he won his first US Am. If she keeps improving, she may
reach the point where competing on the men's tour is feasible. Right
now, she just wants to be the first woman to make a cut in a real PGA
field (Zaharias made her cuts in 1945, when the fields were full of
4-Fs, which also allowed Nelson to win his 11 in a row. It's no
coincidence they let her play that year. It was just like having the
women's pro baseball leagues then; most of the physically fit men were
gone, and they needed gimmicks to attract spectators).

> She still will be a very, very good LPGA player. But I'm
>guessing it'll be much later rather than sooner, as in like never, for
>her to make a cut on the PGA tour.

You're entitled to your stupid opinion. She's been knocking on the
door since she was 14, and missed it by one shot. She has already
proven that she can play well enough to do it. It's just a matter of
playing her best when she wants to, which not even Tiger can do,
although he's better than most.

>It'll never happen. She's never dominated at all on the women's
>stage, so why do people believe that she's capable of playing against
>men?

Um, because she just proved it in Korea? Yes, it's a lower level than
the PGA, but who knows, she might not be 16 all her life. She may get
better.

> But then, if you take enough shots at a basket from the center
>of the court, one will eventually go in. If MW does make a cut,
>that'll be that one center court shot that goes in.
>
>Oh, right, she's so young. She has soooooo much potential. I don't
>understand how or why people keep on making excuses for her again and
>again, time after time.

And *I* don't understand why you think that if you're sarcastic
enough, then she somehow won't be very young with a ton of potential.


30 May 2006 06:53:18
sjh
Re: Butch Harmon slams Michelle Wie and her parents


annika1980 wrote:
> Craig wrote:
> >
> > For someone who is as hyped as she, two 3rd place finishes is pretty
> > mediocre. Sorenstam, Webb or even young gun Ochoa wouldn't exactly be
> > over the moon with finishing 3rd.
>
> Well let's see, Michelle has played in exactly two LPGA tournaments
> this year, finishing just one shot out of the lead in both of them.
> In the first one she beat Webb by 11 strokes and Ochoa by 2 strokes
> (Sorenstam didn't play).
> In the second, Webb & Ochoa tied, one shot ahead of Michelle. Michelle
> beat Annika by 6 shots in that one.
>
> So perhaps you just don't understand the meaning of the word
> "mediocre?"

My def. is making the cut then coming in last. That's mediocre!

Ah usenet, where's multi when you need him... With the high standards
set by some posters, they forget so many golfers start and only 1 wins.
The same folk who might be a fan of a pro team sports might say when
their guys lose: "But Boston played really well." or "xxxxxx still
pitched a great game."



30 May 2006 08:23:11
Howard Brazee
Re: Butch Harmon slams Michelle Wie and her parents

On 30 May 2006 06:53:18 -0700, "sjh" <strat68@eudoramail.com > wrote:

>> So perhaps you just don't understand the meaning of the word
>> "mediocre?"
>
>My def. is making the cut then coming in last. That's mediocre!
>
>Ah usenet, where's multi when you need him... With the high standards
>set by some posters, they forget so many golfers start and only 1 wins.
> The same folk who might be a fan of a pro team sports might say when
>their guys lose: "But Boston played really well." or "xxxxxx still
>pitched a great game."

But baseball games have one winner and one loser. Coming in second
in a major is not in the same league (pun accepted).

Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com


30 May 2006 08:29:53
Howard Brazee
Re: Butch Harmon slams Michelle Wie and her parents

On Tue, 30 May 2006 06:48:02 -0700, multi <multi@asm.org > wrote:

>Besides, you're missing the point completely. As Michelle herself
>demonstrated, talented amateurs can play nearly any pro event they
>want, so turning pro isn't an ability decision, it's a financial
>decision. At age 15, she had already given up most of a million
>dollars by staying amateur. I wonder how lofty your standards would
>be if it were your daughter who was turning down $100,000 checks every
>time she played, and had ten million in endorsement money just waiting
>for her signature.

With the added sub part to her business decision that playing as an
amateur around the world is *expensive*. Even taking lessons from
the best is expensive. Money makes it easier to do what she was
doing as an amateur.

Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com


30 May 2006 08:30:48
Howard Brazee
Re: Butch Harmon slams Michelle Wie and her parents

On 30 May 2006 13:45:22 GMT, stultz@wai.com (Kenny Stultz) wrote:

>What did golfers taught by Butch Harmon ever win would be a more appropriate
>question.

Only if he taught them how to make career decisions.

Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com


30 May 2006 10:37:56
sfb
Re: Butch Harmon slams Michelle Wie and her parents

Baseball isn't that good a comparison. In any season, you know going in a
team will win 50 and lose 50 games. The difference between first and last is
how you do in the other 60 games.

"sjh" <strat68@eudoramail.com > wrote in message
news:1148997198.063896.76040@g10g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>
>
> Ah usenet, where's multi when you need him... With the high standards
> set by some posters, they forget so many golfers start and only 1 wins.
> The same folk who might be a fan of a pro team sports might say when
> their guys lose: "But Boston played really well." or "xxxxxx still
> pitched a great game."
>




30 May 2006 07:38:22
Re: Butch Harmon slams Michelle Wie and her parents


multi wrote:
> She is the first woman to make a cut on a men's international tour in
> 60 years.

Wrong. Se Ri Pak did the same thing in 2003, also in a South Korean
event. And ended up in 10th place.

With much less hype, obviously, since so few golf fans know or remember
that.



30 May 2006 07:48:40
multi
Re: Butch Harmon slams Michelle Wie and her parents

On 30 May 2006 07:38:22 -0700, mman37x@cs.com wrote:
>multi wrote:
>> She is the first woman to make a cut on a men's international tour in
>> 60 years.
>
>Wrong. Se Ri Pak did the same thing in 2003, also in a South Korean
>event. And ended up in 10th place.

My statement was correct. Pak made the cut in a Korean tour event.
Michelle made the cut in an Asian tour event that happened to be
played in Korea. The Asian tour is a higher level than the Korean
tour.
http://sports.espn.go.com/golf/news/story?id=2434131


30 May 2006 08:00:45
Re: Butch Harmon slams Michelle Wie and her parents


multi wrote:
> On 30 May 2006 07:38:22 -0700, mman37x@cs.com wrote:
> >multi wrote:
> >> She is the first woman to make a cut on a men's international tour in
> >> 60 years.
> >
> >Wrong. Se Ri Pak did the same thing in 2003, also in a South Korean
> >event. And ended up in 10th place.
>
> My statement was correct. Pak made the cut in a Korean tour event.
> Michelle made the cut in an Asian tour event that happened to be
> played in Korea.
>The Asian tour is a higher level than the Korean
> tour.

A higher level? True. But the Korean Tour is not limited to Koreans
(Australians, for example often start their pro careers on it). Is
that not "international?"

And I don't think either are at the level of PGA Tour where Babe
Zaharias made three cuts (the "60 years ago" you're referring to).



30 May 2006 08:12:25
Laura Bush murdered her boy fr
Re: Butch Harmon slams Michelle Wie and her parents


Zuke wrote:
> On Tue, 30 May 2006, Laura Bush murdered her boy friend wrote:
>
> > His book "The Pro" just came out. Some quotes re Michelle whom he
> > thinks has been brought along way too quickly.
> >
> > "But she never dominated at any level, despite having more talent than
> > any woman in the game"
> >
>
> What did Butch Harmon ever win?

Not fair. No one ever said BH was the greatest player in the world.



30 May 2006 08:26:00
multi
Re: Butch Harmon slams Michelle Wie and her parents

On 30 May 2006 08:00:45 -0700, mman37x@cs.com wrote:

>
>multi wrote:
>> On 30 May 2006 07:38:22 -0700, mman37x@cs.com wrote:
>> >multi wrote:
>> >> She is the first woman to make a cut on a men's international tour in
>> >> 60 years.
>> >
>> >Wrong. Se Ri Pak did the same thing in 2003, also in a South Korean
>> >event. And ended up in 10th place.
>>
>> My statement was correct. Pak made the cut in a Korean tour event.
>> Michelle made the cut in an Asian tour event that happened to be
>> played in Korea.
>>The Asian tour is a higher level than the Korean
>> tour.
>
>A higher level? True. But the Korean Tour is not limited to Koreans
>(Australians, for example often start their pro careers on it). Is
>that not "international?"

Maybe for the field, but not the tour. I define an international tour
as one that regularly plays in several different countries, as the
Asian and Euro tours do. But if you agree that the Asian tour is a
higher level, that's all I was trying to say. Korea is a very small
country, so making a cut in a KPGA event is just not very impressive.
Not that I could do it.

>And I don't think either are at the level of PGA Tour where Babe
>Zaharias made three cuts (the "60 years ago" you're referring to).

I'm not exactly sure what you mean. I wholeheartedly agree that
today's PGA tour is far and away the most prestigious tour on the
planet, although I doubt that the weakest PGA fields, say some of the
events that are played concurrent with restricted field events, are
stronger than the strongest Euro tour fields. In fact, I think that
if Michelle makes the cut at the John Deere, people will still grumble
that she couldn't make the cut at Bay Hill.

However, the PGA Tour where Babe made her cuts was not the PGA tour of
today. In early 1945, almost all the able-bodied pros were in the
service, and the fields were very weak. That's why Babe was playing
in the first place, and that's why I have a mental asterisk by Byron
Nelson's records.


30 May 2006 09:49:12
Howard Brazee
Re: Butch Harmon slams Michelle Wie and her parents

On 30 May 2006 08:12:25 -0700, "Laura Bush murdered her boy friend"
<xeton2001@yahoo.com > wrote:

>> What did Butch Harmon ever win?
>
>Not fair. No one ever said BH was the greatest player in the world.

Compared to all of the pundits who have said that Michelle Wie is the
greatest player in the world?

Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com


30 May 2006 08:56:17
Re: Butch Harmon slams Michelle Wie and her parents


multi wrote:
> On 30 May 2006 08:00:45 -0700, mman37x@cs.com wrote:
>
> >
> >multi wrote:
> >> On 30 May 2006 07:38:22 -0700, mman37x@cs.com wrote:
> >> >multi wrote:
> >> >> She is the first woman to make a cut on a men's international tour in
> >> >> 60 years.
> >> >
> >> >Wrong. Se Ri Pak did the same thing in 2003, also in a South Korean
> >> >event. And ended up in 10th place.
> >>
> >> My statement was correct. Pak made the cut in a Korean tour event.
> >> Michelle made the cut in an Asian tour event that happened to be
> >> played in Korea.
> >>The Asian tour is a higher level than the Korean
> >> tour.
> >
> >A higher level? True. But the Korean Tour is not limited to Koreans
> >(Australians, for example often start their pro careers on it). Is
> >that not "international?"
>
> Maybe for the field, but not the tour. I define an international tour
> as one that regularly plays in several different countries, as the
> Asian and Euro tours do. But if you agree that the Asian tour is a
> higher level, that's all I was trying to say. Korea is a very small
> country, so making a cut in a KPGA event is just not very impressive.
> Not that I could do it.

OK, I guess we sort-of agree: yes, Michelle made the cut in a tougher
event than Se Ri.

But if the Korean and Asian tours are apples and oranges, so are the
Asian and PGA.

> >And I don't think either are at the level of PGA Tour where
> >Zaharias made three cuts (the "60 years ago" you're referring to).
>
> I'm not exactly sure what you mean. I wholeheartedly agree that
> today's PGA tour is far and away the most prestigious tour on the
> planet, although I doubt that the weakest PGA fields, say some of the
> events that are played concurrent with restricted field events, are
> stronger than the strongest Euro tour fields. In fact, I think that
> if Michelle makes the cut at the John Deere, people will still grumble
> that she couldn't make the cut at Bay Hill.
>
> However, the PGA Tour where made her cuts was not the PGA tour of
> today. In early 1945, almost all the able-bodied pros were in the
> service, and the fields were very weak.
> That's why was playing
> in the first place, and that's why I have a mental asterisk by Byron
> Nelson's records.

A little off the topic of Michelle Wie, but that's been at least
partially disputed:

http://golf.about.com/od/golfersmen/a/menstop10years_3.htm

"Jimmy Demaret and Craig Wood, for example, played full seasons.

And Hogan and Snead were most definitely around. Hogan played 19
tournaments in 1945, while Snead played 27 (Nelson played 30 or 31
events, depending on who's doing the record-keeping). So Snead played
essentially the full season, while Hogan played about two-thirds of it.
Hogan and Snead both won multiple times in 1945. In fact, Hogan set a
72-hole scoring record in one tournament, only to have Nelson break it
two weeks later."

Did Zaharias actually say that (that she played because the tour was
war-weakened)? I always figured she tried the PGA Tour because the
LPGA didn't exist (until 1950). She just had no regular place to play
unless she took on the men. So why not? She also tried (not making
the cut) to play in men's events as early as 1938, before WW2.




Back to Michelle. The point is that Michelle has gained quite a
reputation, not to mention huge endorsement money, without winning much
of anything beyond local stuff in Hawaii. It's almost always been good
showings "for her age" or "for a ." In each case, that's been true
as far as it goes. But it's hard to justify the hype based on that,
especially with Paula Creamer actually winning an LPGA event at a
scarcely greater age than Michelle's, or Morgan Pressel's impressive
age-group and amateur win totals, or even Zaharias's
three-cuts-in-a-row against the men, admittedly in a different era.

Not to mention the win totals of male golfers who were hyped before
turning pro (Nicklaus, Woods).



30 May 2006 10:01:56
Howard Brazee
Re: Butch Harmon slams Michelle Wie and her parents

On 30 May 2006 08:56:17 -0700, mman37x@cs.com wrote:

>Back to Michelle. The point is that Michelle has gained quite a
>reputation, not to mention huge endorsement money, without winning much
>of anything beyond local stuff in Hawaii. It's almost always been good
>showings "for her age" or "for a ." In each case, that's been true
>as far as it goes. But it's hard to justify the hype based on that,
>especially with Paula Creamer actually winning an LPGA event at a
>scarcely greater age than Michelle's, or Morgan Pressel's impressive
>age-group and amateur win totals, or even Zaharias's
>three-cuts-in-a-row against the men, admittedly in a different era.

Hype is a feature of show biz, and it doesn't need to make sense. But
if you can use it to your advantage, as the tournaments, the media,
and the Wies have, why not do so?

It's comical that Butch Hamon writes article about her getting too
much media attention. Is he complaining about himself?

Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com


30 May 2006 09:25:27
Re: Butch Harmon slams Michelle Wie and her parents


Howard Brazee wrote:
> On 30 May 2006 08:56:17 -0700, mman37x@cs.com wrote:
>
> >Back to Michelle. The point is that Michelle has gained quite a
> >reputation, not to mention huge endorsement money, without winning much
> >of anything beyond local stuff in Hawaii. It's almost always been good
> >showings "for her age" or "for a ." In each case, that's been true
> >as far as it goes. But it's hard to justify the hype based on that,
> >especially with Paula Creamer actually winning an LPGA event at a
> >scarcely greater age than Michelle's, or Morgan Pressel's impressive
> >age-group and amateur win totals, or even Zaharias's
> >three-cuts-in-a-row against the men, admittedly in a different era.
>
> Hype is a feature of show biz, and it doesn't need to make sense.

Makes sense if she's trying to be (or her parents/handlers are setting
her up to be) golf's Paris Hilton, rather than the female Tiger Woods.

> But
> if you can use it to your advantage, as the tournaments, the media,
> and the Wies have, why not do so?

Because she could be burned out by, say, the age of 19 trying to live
up to the hype.

Eventually even the sheeple are going to start asking "What has she
won?" and I don't think "The Women's Publinx" is going to satisfy them.
Or even an odd LPGA tour event or so, if she wins some of those.



30 May 2006 10:13:52
multi
Re: Butch Harmon slams Michelle Wie and her parents

On 30 May 2006 08:56:17 -0700, mman37x@cs.com wrote:
>> >A higher level? True. But the Korean Tour is not limited to Koreans
>> >(Australians, for example often start their pro careers on it). Is
>> >that not "international?"
>>
>> Maybe for the field, but not the tour. I define an international tour
>> as one that regularly plays in several different countries, as the
>> Asian and Euro tours do. But if you agree that the Asian tour is a
>> higher level, that's all I was trying to say. Korea is a very small
>> country, so making a cut in a KPGA event is just not very impressive.
>> Not that I could do it.
>
>OK, I guess we sort-of agree: yes, Michelle made the cut in a tougher
>event than Se Ri.
>
>But if the Korean and Asian tours are apples and oranges, so are the
>Asian and PGA.

No question about it.

>> >And I don't think either are at the level of PGA Tour where
>> >Zaharias made three cuts (the "60 years ago" you're referring to).
>>
>> I'm not exactly sure what you mean. I wholeheartedly agree that
>> today's PGA tour is far and away the most prestigious tour on the
>> planet, although I doubt that the weakest PGA fields, say some of the
>> events that are played concurrent with restricted field events, are
>> stronger than the strongest Euro tour fields. In fact, I think that
>> if Michelle makes the cut at the John Deere, people will still grumble
>> that she couldn't make the cut at Bay Hill.
>>
>> However, the PGA Tour where Babe made her cuts was not the PGA tour of
>> today. In early 1945, almost all the able-bodied pros were in the
>> service, and the fields were very weak.
>> That's why Babe was playing
>> in the first place, and that's why I have a mental asterisk by Byron
>> Nelson's records.
>
>A little off the topic of Michelle Wie, but that's been at least
>partially disputed:
>
>http://golf.about.com/od/golfersmen/a/menstop10years_3.htm
>
>"Jimmy Demaret and Craig Wood, for example, played full seasons.
>
>And Hogan and Snead were most definitely around. Hogan played 19
>tournaments in 1945, while Snead played 27 (Nelson played 30 or 31
>events, depending on who's doing the record-keeping). So Snead played
>essentially the full season, while Hogan played about two-thirds of it.
>Hogan and Snead both won multiple times in 1945. In fact, Hogan set a
>72-hole scoring record in one tournament, only to have Nelson break it
>two weeks later."

The article you cite IMO does not support its claim that the
weak-field argument is "utterly bogus." It even notes that the overall
fields were indeed weaker, but it considers that fact irrelevant
because the four good golfers named above were playing. All I can say
is there are a lot more than four or five winners each year.

I wish there were better records available for that time. Anyway,
here's a different take on it:
http://www.bobcullen.com/nelsonpiece.htm

He doesn't dispute the numbers above, but he gives a different
perspective on them. He notes that Snead was injured during Nelson's
streak of 11 straight, and had to miss three events (and I would
assume he was therefore less than 100% in other events), while Hogan
only played one of the 11. He also notes that even at the time, and
even among some PGA officials, there was doubt about the quality of
competition, and the hope that Nelson would validate his records by
winning some majors in subsequent years. Instead, Nelson retired.

By everyone's account, Byron Nelson is a true gentleman, and I know
for a fact he didn't invade Poland, so I can't blame him for the war,
and I can't blame him for not playing against the people who went into
the service. It may be that he would have won just as many events
against normal fields, and it may be that he would also have won all
the majors that were cancelled during the war, but we'll never know.
I don't deny his stats, I just question them.

>Did Zaharias actually say that (that she played because the tour was
>war-weakened)?

Not that I'm aware, but it makes sense. As I said, all the pro sports
were having trouble filling places, both on the field and in the
stands, with everybody gone to war. They had amputees playing major
league baseball.

> I always figured she tried the PGA Tour because the
>LPGA didn't exist (until 1950). She just had no regular place to play
>unless she took on the men. So why not? She also tried (not making
>the cut) to play in men's events as early as 1938, before WW2.

I don't know much about pre-Michelle women's golf, but apparently
there were precursors to the LPGA that offered regular competition.
This site http://www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cgi?page=gr&GRid=1139
says she won 17 straight tournaments in 1947 alone. Based on her
Olympic achievements, I'll gladly grant that she was a better athlete
than Michelle.

>Back to Michelle. The point is that Michelle has gained quite a
>reputation, not to mention huge endorsement money, without winning much
>of anything beyond local stuff in Hawaii. It's almost always been good
>showings "for her age" or "for a ."

Something weird is going on with some of your words. Anyway, she won
the US Women's Publinks at 12, and if that's all she ever did, she
would deserve quite a reputation. Playing against the men also got
her a lot of notice. Sure the reporters hype her; that's their job.
But she delivers the goods: good crowds, and good play, even if she
doesn't win.

It's true that her "phenom" status will be short-lived if she doesn't
start winning. But as long as she's still in high school, I cut her a
lot of slack.

> In each case, that's been true
>as far as it goes. But it's hard to justify the hype based on that,
>especially with Paula Creamer actually winning an LPGA event at a
>scarcely greater age than Michelle's, or Morgan Pressel's impressive
>age-group and amateur win totals, or even Zaharias's
>three-cuts-in-a-row against the men, admittedly in a different era.

Creamer was nearly 19 when she won. Michelle still has over two years
to win at a younger age, and almost two years to be the youngest ever.
But I'm not about to try to justify the hype. I try to ignore it. I
just go by the records, and I don't agree with the apparent majority
of the group who thinks that there are only two results in a
tournament, namely win and lose. I think that a top five finish is
better than a 40th place finish, and I think that if someone can
consistently finish second or third in majors, then she is good enough
to win. It just requires things coming together in a particular week.

>Not to mention the win totals of male golfers who were hyped before
>turning pro (Nicklaus, Woods).

Sure, but they turned pro in their 20's. I'd bet on Michelle against
either of them at 16.


30 May 2006 17:22:33
Chris Bellomy
Re: Butch Harmon slams Michelle Wie and her parents

multi <multi@asm.org > wrote:

[about Byron Nelson]

: The article you cite IMO does not support its claim that the
: weak-field argument is "utterly bogus." It even notes that the overall
: fields were indeed weaker, but it considers that fact irrelevant
: because the four good golfers named above were playing. All I can say
: is there are a lot more than four or five winners each year.
:
: I wish there were better records available for that time. Anyway,
: here's a different take on it:
: http://www.bobcullen.com/nelsonpiece.htm
:
: He doesn't dispute the numbers above, but he gives a different
: perspective on them. He notes that Snead was injured during Nelson's
: streak of 11 straight, and had to miss three events (and I would
: assume he was therefore less than 100% in other events), while Hogan
: only played one of the 11. He also notes that even at the time, and
: even among some PGA officials, there was doubt about the quality of
: competition, and the hope that Nelson would validate his records by
: winning some majors in subsequent years. Instead, Nelson retired.

Two words: stroke average.

--
Chris Bellomy
C-List Charter Member
http://clist.org/


30 May 2006 17:39:43
Carbon
Re: Butch Harmon slams Michelle Wie and her parents

On Tue, 30 May 2006 00:13:30 -0700, Laura Bush murdered her boy friend
wrote:

> His book "The Pro" just came out. Some quotes re Michelle whom he
> thinks has been brought along way too quickly.
>
> "But she never dominated at any level, despite having more talent than
> any woman in the game"
>
> "I have also been concerned by how mechanical her game appears to have
> become"

I guess he's including Leadbetter in "the adults in her life" that are
doing her a grave disservice. A bit of professional jealousy maybe?


30 May 2006 11:42:48
Howard Brazee
Re: Butch Harmon slams Michelle Wie and her parents

On Tue, 30 May 2006 10:13:52 -0700, multi <multi@asm.org > wrote:

>>And Hogan and Snead were most definitely around. Hogan played 19
>>tournaments in 1945, while Snead played 27 (Nelson played 30 or 31
>>events, depending on who's doing the record-keeping). So Snead played
>>essentially the full season, while Hogan played about two-thirds of it.
>>Hogan and Snead both won multiple times in 1945. In fact, Hogan set a
>>72-hole scoring record in one tournament, only to have Nelson break it
>>two weeks later."
>
>The article you cite IMO does not support its claim that the
>weak-field argument is "utterly bogus." It even notes that the overall
>fields were indeed weaker, but it considers that fact irrelevant
>because the four good golfers named above were playing. All I can say
>is there are a lot more than four or five winners each year.

The farther back in time we go, the less the competition is. The Tom
Morris's of the world did not need to be better than thousands of
full-time professionals with access to slow-motion TV analyses. The
person who barely makes the field today is worlds better than the
person who barely made the field generations ago.

Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com


30 May 2006 13:48:20
sfb
Re: Butch Harmon slams Michelle Wie and her parents

I would think "adults in her life" refers to career management (parents,
lawyers, accountants, USGA, Nike, Sony, tournament directors building gates)
not golf instructors.

Nice try, but only 2 on the troll meter.

"Carbon" <nobrac@nospam.verizon.net > wrote in message
news:pan.2006.05.30.17.39.37.694882@nospam.verizon.net...
>
> I guess he's including Leadbetter in "the adults in her life" that are
> doing her a grave disservice. A bit of professional jealousy maybe?




30 May 2006 11:49:37
Howard Brazee
Re: Butch Harmon slams Michelle Wie and her parents

On Tue, 30 May 2006 10:13:52 -0700, multi <multi@asm.org > wrote:

> I
>just go by the records, and I don't agree with the apparent majority
>of the group who thinks that there are only two results in a
>tournament, namely win and lose. I think that a top five finish is
>better than a 40th place finish, and I think that if someone can
>consistently finish second or third in majors, then she is good enough
>to win. It just requires things coming together in a particular week.

I think Tiger's toughest record was his consecutive cuts made record.
Playing well every single time seems more impossible to me than
playing great sometimes. Maybe that's just the way I play - but I
tend to doubt it.

Michelle has been in contention every single time she's played in the
LPGA, and big name men have always been behind her in PGA Tour events.

With some more maturity, she won't make the kind of mistakes that Phil
Mickelson was known for over a decade.

Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com


30 May 2006 11:02:58
Re: Butch Harmon slams Michelle Wie and her parents

multi wrote:
> >A little off the topic of Michelle Wie, but that's been at least
> >partially disputed:
> >
> >http://golf.about.com/od/golfersmen/a/menstop10years_3.htm
> >
> The article you cite IMO does not support its claim that the
> weak-field argument is "utterly bogus."

Which is why I said "partially." It's not totally bogus, the fields
were weaker, but not bereft of good, even top, players.

> > I always figured she tried the PGA Tour because the
> >LPGA didn't exist (until 1950). She just had no regular place to play
> >unless she took on the men. So why not? She also tried (not making
> >the cut) to play in men's events as early as 1938, before WW2.
>
> I don't know much about pre-Michelle women's golf, but apparently
> there were precursors to the LPGA that offered regular competition.
> This site http://www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cgi?page=gr&GRid=1139
> says she won 17 straight tournaments in 1947 alone.

With prize money? I'm thinking she was trying to make some money on
the men's tour. In those days, only the top 15-20 made any money
(prize money for everyone who made the cut wouldn't come until the
early 1960s, I think) so she didn't even when she made the cut. Worth
a try, though.

> Based on her
> Olympic achievements, I'll gladly grant that she was a better athlete
> than Michelle.

Well, Babe was a multi-sport athlete, which Michelle isn't trying to be
(apart from reportedly playing playground soccer with boys.)

> >Back to Michelle. The point is that Michelle has gained quite a
> >reputation, not to mention huge endorsement money, without winning much
> >of anything beyond local stuff in Hawaii. It's almost always been good
> >showings "for her age" or "for a ."
>
> Something weird is going on with some of your words.

The last phrase is supposed to be "for a girl."

> I
> just go by the records, and I don't agree with the apparent majority
> of the group who thinks that there are only two results in a
> tournament, namely win and lose.

But she's the third-highest paid female athlete in the world, and the
highest-paid female golfer. Mostly in endorsement money, of course,
not prize money.

At that level, second-place isn't hypable. You'd think.

It's not based on what she's won (millions for winning the W Publinx?).
Is it based on potential? On image? On looks? What? Is she, like
Paris Hilton, famous for being famous?



30 May 2006 11:35:28
Re: Butch Harmon slams Michelle Wie and her parents

Harmon shattered his credibility by hawking all those snake oil
gadgets. I could care less what he has to say about Wie.

If he was broke and needed the money I could maybe look the other way.



30 May 2006 12:48:56
Steve
Re: Butch Harmon slams Michelle Wie and her parents

I am going to venture a guess that Butch has more insight into situations
like this than any of us do.

> "But she never dominated at any level, despite having more talent than
> any woman in the game"
I have always found it more than odd that the person who many here think is
a better golfer than Tiger @ 16 was never able to win a Jr. Am or Womens Am
and is now something like 0-30 in LPGA events.

> "I'm also alarmed by her ambivalent attitude toward not winning. ...
> nobody who has a likeness hanging in the Hall of Fame ever felt good
> about making a cut or fininshing in the top ten."
Probably my biggest frustration with her, show some passion. Misses a PGA
cut by one or misses a playoff in an LPGA major by one and talks about how
happy she is with the way she played. As Tiger would say, there is nothing
worse than finishing 2nd, that is the first loser. As Annika would say, all
I care about are wins.

> "She also is making a terrible mistake by continuing to play with the
> men, where she
> has no chance of winning"
I always thought it was a mistake for her to skip events she could have or
should have won to enter events where she was probably not going to play
more than 2 rounds. In my opinion, if she had concentrated on events where
she would have been favored to win, she would have multiple LPGA wins and
maybe a major or two by now. She was never in contention to win on the back
9 on a Sunday afternoon last year, she has had those chances this year and
failed to convert the opportunities.




30 May 2006 15:10:48
the Moderator
Re: Butch Harmon slams Michelle Wie and her parents

All this talk about ability and performance....

Anyone ever hear of Anna Kournikova.




30 May 2006 13:33:18
sjh
Re: Butch Harmon slams Michelle Wie and her parents


Howard Brazee wrote:
> On 30 May 2006 06:53:18 -0700, "sjh" <strat68@eudoramail.com> wrote:
>
> >> So perhaps you just don't understand the meaning of the word
> >> "mediocre?"
> >
> >My def. is making the cut then coming in last. That's mediocre!
> >
> >Ah usenet, where's multi when you need him... With the high standards
> >set by some posters, they forget so many golfers start and only 1 wins.
> > The same folk who might be a fan of a pro team sports might say when
> >their guys lose: "But Boston played really well." or "xxxxxx still
> >pitched a great game."
>
> But baseball games have one winner and one loser.

Cap'n O: (shhhhhh, that was the point, don't tell sfb ok)



30 May 2006 14:36:41
Howard Brazee
Re: Butch Harmon slams Michelle Wie and her parents

On Tue, 30 May 2006 12:48:56 -0700, "Steve"
<stevenospamplease@comcast.com > wrote:

>I always thought it was a mistake for her to skip events she could have or
>should have won to enter events where she was probably not going to play
>more than 2 rounds. In my opinion, if she had concentrated on events where
>she would have been favored to win, she would have multiple LPGA wins and
>maybe a major or two by now. She was never in contention to win on the back
>9 on a Sunday afternoon last year, she has had those chances this year and
>failed to convert the opportunities.

In my opinion, if she concentrated on beating high school girls, she
would know how to play well enough to beat high school girls.


How many skills did you learn to excel in by competing against people
who weren't close to your ability?

How much of a killer instinct will I develop by playing against my
grandchildren? How much do I test my ability to handle stress by
playing in tournaments that nobody cares about?

Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com


30 May 2006 15:05:26
Mark A
Re: Butch Harmon slams Michelle Wie and her parents

"Howard Brazee" <howard@brazee.net > wrote in message
news:3tap72142hivbchufbm08vlj40afb2ih4i@4ax.com...
>
> In my opinion, if she concentrated on beating high school girls, she
> would know how to play well enough to beat high school girls.
>
>
> How many skills did you learn to excel in by competing against people
> who weren't close to your ability?
>
> How much of a killer instinct will I develop by playing against my
> grandchildren? How much do I test my ability to handle stress by
> playing in tournaments that nobody cares about?
>

Learning how to win does not mean learning a killer instinct. It means
learning how to not choke, mentally and physically.





30 May 2006 14:10:50
sjh
Re: Butch Harmon slams Michelle Wie and her parents


sfb wrote:
> Baseball isn't that good a comparison. In any season, you know going in a
> team will win 50 and lose 50 games. The difference between first and last is
> how you do in the other 60 games.

As opposed to golf where you can expect a rookie or journeyman to win
most of the tournaments he enters.



30 May 2006 14:31:52
Re: Butch Harmon slams Michelle Wie and her parents

"I have always found it more than odd that the person who many here
think is
a better golfer than Tiger @ 16 was never able to win a Jr. Am or
Womens Am
and is now something like 0-30 in LPGA events."

I've never thought Wie was better than Tiger, but Wie's performance in
LPGA events has been very good.

Two events this year and she has won $180,000. Not too shabby.

"In my opinion, if she had concentrated on events where she would have
been favored to win, she would have multiple LPGA wins and maybe a
major or two by now"

Your sentence above shows your ingorance. The LPGA severely limits
the number of events she can play in.



30 May 2006 21:35:56
Carbon
Re: Butch Harmon slams Michelle Wie and her parents

On Tue, 30 May 2006 13:48:20 -0400, sfb wrote:
> "Carbon" <nobrac@nospam.verizon.net> wrote in message
> news:pan.2006.05.30.17.39.37.694882@nospam.verizon.net...
>>
>> I guess he's including Leadbetter in "the adults in her life" that are
>> doing her a grave disservice. A bit of professional jealousy maybe?

> I would think "adults in her life" refers to career management (parents,
> lawyers, accountants, USGA, Nike, Sony, tournament directors building
> gates) not golf instructors.
>
> Nice try, but only 2 on the troll meter.

I fixed your top post.

Not a troll. There is competition among the top instructors for the prize
students, whether you realize it or not. You have no way of knowing that
Harmon meant everyone but Leadbetter when he said "the adults in her
life." How on earth could you know that?


30 May 2006 14:39:22
Re: Butch Harmon slams Michelle Wie and her parents

His point remains.

What does Wie gain by "learning how not to choke" against high school
girls? Wie is currently learning "how not to choke" against LPGA, PGA,
USGA, and overseas tour competition.

That's the path she chose and she is doing remarkably well. Many
claimed she would crash and burn out of the gate.

Wie is grinding it out. Just this year: Two 3rd place finishes in 2
LPGA events ($180,000), a local USGA qualifier win, and a made cut on
the Asian tour. All by a 16 year old girl.

Does anyone not think it is just a matter of time before Wie wins on
the LPGA tour?

She may never win or make a cut on the PGA tour, but like many men
before her who never won on that tour, she is damn well gonna try.



30 May 2006 14:56:53
Steve
Re: Butch Harmon slams Michelle Wie and her parents

> In my opinion, if she concentrated on beating high school girls, she
> would know how to play well enough to beat high school girls.
>
>
> How many skills did you learn to excel in by competing against people
> who weren't close to your ability?
>
> How much of a killer instinct will I develop by playing against my
> grandchildren? How much do I test my ability to handle stress by
> playing in tournaments that nobody cares about?

Nobody is saying she should be playing high school golf but after losing in
the 3rd round of the 2003 girls Jr. Am, she followed that up a couple of
weeks later losing in the first round of the 2003 Womans AM and then 2 weeks
later plays an open Canadian Tour event and a month after that plays a
Nationwide event. She was not exactly running away with the trophies in the
world of woman's Am golf, not sure what the reason for playing these open
events besides marketing / pr. There is a reason that pro baseball teams
that have a hot young pitching prospect do not send them straight to the big
leagues but let them get some minor league experiance first.

My bottom line isse is I think Team Wie made a decision a long time ago to
maximize profits at the expense of all else, including golf wins. Thats
fine if that is the priority all though you would think if she had a couple
of LPGA wins by now, the money would take care of itself. I, as a fan, feel
somewhat cheated that I see all of this talent yet none of the results that
all of us agree have been lacking. Its kind of like when a pro sport team
goes and buys a bunch of high priced free agents, you do not expect them to
finish 2nd in the division. The 2nd best female player in the world, per
the Rolex rankings, does not have a win in the last 3 years, which includes
playing in girls Jr. Am and Womens Am events. Do you not find something odd
about that?




30 May 2006 18:32:56
sfb
Re: Butch Harmon slams Michelle Wie and her parents

Are you referring to the one that was one of the top tennis doubles players
in the world winning multiple women's doubles Grand Slam events?

"the Moderator" <sparky@no_spam_engineer.com > wrote in message
news:g6CdnanVI4RUO-HZnZ2dneKdnZydnZ2d@centurytel.net...
> All this talk about ability and performance....
>
> Anyone ever hear of Anna Kournikova.
>
>




30 May 2006 18:34:52
sfb
Re: Butch Harmon slams Michelle Wie and her parents

I fixed your bottom post.

Not a troll. There is competition among the top instructors for the prize
students, whether you realize it or not. You have no way of knowing that
Harmon meant everyone but Leadbetter when he said "the adults in her
life." How on earth could you know that?

"Carbon" <nobrac@nospam.verizon.net > wrote in message
news:pan.2006.05.30.21.35.37.402196@nospam.verizon.net...
> On Tue, 30 May 2006 13:48:20 -0400, sfb wrote:
>> "Carbon" <nobrac@nospam.verizon.net> wrote in message
>> news:pan.2006.05.30.17.39.37.694882@nospam.verizon.net...
>>>
>>> I guess he's including Leadbetter in "the adults in her life" that are
>>> doing her a grave disservice. A bit of professional jealousy maybe?
>
>> I would think "adults in her life" refers to career management (parents,
>> lawyers, accountants, USGA, Nike, Sony, tournament directors building
>> gates) not golf instructors.
>>
>> Nice try, but only 2 on the troll meter.
>




30 May 2006 22:42:35
Carbon
Re: Butch Harmon slams Michelle Wie and her parents

On Tue, 30 May 2006 18:34:52 -0400, sfb wrote:

> I fixed your bottom post.

What's sfb stand for again?


30 May 2006 22:54:10
Carbon
Re: Butch Harmon slams Michelle Wie and her parents

On Tue, 30 May 2006 18:32:56 -0400, sfb wrote:
> "the Moderator" <sparky@no_spam_engineer.com> wrote in message
> news:g6CdnanVI4RUO-HZnZ2dneKdnZydnZ2d@centurytel.net...

>> All this talk about ability and performance....
>>
>> Anyone ever hear of Anna Kournikova.

> Are you referring to the one that was one of the top tennis doubles
> players in the world winning multiple women's doubles Grand Slam events?

And how many singles tournaments did she win as a professional?


30 May 2006 23:14:46
jeffc
Re: Butch Harmon slams Michelle Wie and her parents


"Laura Bush murdered her boy friend" <xeton2001@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1149001945.755393.239450@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>
> Zuke wrote:
>> On Tue, 30 May 2006, Laura Bush murdered her boy friend wrote:
>>
>> > His book "The Pro" just came out. Some quotes re Michelle whom he
>> > thinks has been brought along way too quickly.
>> >
>> > "But she never dominated at any level, despite having more talent than
>> > any woman in the game"
>> >
>>
>> What did Butch Harmon ever win?
>
> Not fair. No one ever said BH was the greatest player in the world.

To repeat what Kenny and Howard have said, he only needs to be a great
teacher, not player. Then again, he doesn't seem to be teaching golf, but
career management, or parenthood, or somesuch, and there doesn't seem to be
any evidence of him being good at that.




30 May 2006 16:16:43
Re: Butch Harmon slams Michelle Wie and her parents


the Moderator wrote:
> All this talk about ability and performance....
>
> Anyone ever hear of Anna Kournikova.

Unfortunately, yes.
That's the problem.



30 May 2006 16:36:29
Laura Bush murdered her boy fr
Re: Butch Harmon slams Michelle Wie and her parents


danc55344@yahoo.com wrote:
> Harmon shattered his credibility by hawking all those snake oil
> gadgets. I could care less what he has to say about Wie.

He's not the first person to endorse products. It doesn't destroy his
credibility.



30 May 2006 16:41:11
Laura Bush murdered her boy fr
Re: Butch Harmon slams Michelle Wie and her parents


Steve wrote:
>
> > "She also is making a terrible mistake by continuing to play with the
> > men, where she
> > has no chance of winning"


> I always thought it was a mistake for her to skip events she could have or
> should have won to enter events where she was probably not going to play
> more than 2 rounds. In my opinion, if she had concentrated on events where
> she would have been favored to win, she would have multiple LPGA wins and
> maybe a major or two by now. She was never in contention to win on the back
> 9 on a Sunday afternoon last year, she has had those chances this year and
> failed to convert the opportunities.

Part of the problem is the LPGA only lets her play 8 events a year so
she's d kinda forced to play some on the mens tour.



30 May 2006 17:08:58
Re: Butch Harmon slams Michelle Wie and her parents


Laura Bush murdered her boy friend wrote:

> Part of the problem is the LPGA only lets her play 8 events a year so
> she's d kinda forced to play some on the mens tour.

So loser, have a good weekend? Spent it "stroking off" to Tiger Woods
photos?



30 May 2006 17:38:53
multi
Re: Butch Harmon slams Michelle Wie and her parents

On 30 May 2006 16:36:29 -0700, "Laura Bush murdered her boy friend"
<xeton2001@yahoo.com > wrote:

>
>danc55344@yahoo.com wrote:
>> Harmon shattered his credibility by hawking all those snake oil
>> gadgets. I could care less what he has to say about Wie.
>
>He's not the first person to endorse products.

True.

> It doesn't destroy his credibility.

False.



30 May 2006 17:45:10
Steve
Re: Butch Harmon slams Michelle Wie and her parents


<danc55344@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1149024712.752666.10590@i39g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> "I have always found it more than odd that the person who many here
> think is
> a better golfer than Tiger @ 16 was never able to win a Jr. Am or
> Womens Am
> and is now something like 0-30 in LPGA events."
>
> I've never thought Wie was better than Tiger, but Wie's performance in
> LPGA events has been very good.
>
> Two events this year and she has won $180,000. Not too shabby.
>
> "In my opinion, if she had concentrated on events where she would have
> been favored to win, she would have multiple LPGA wins and maybe a
> major or two by now"
>
> Your sentence above shows your ingorance. The LPGA severely limits
> the number of events she can play in.
>

She has played close to 30 LPGA events and by my count has played in 9
majors.




30 May 2006 17:55:16
multi
Re: Butch Harmon slams Michelle Wie and her parents

On 30 May 2006 14:39:22 -0700, danc55344@yahoo.com wrote:
>His point remains.
>
>What does Wie gain by "learning how not to choke" against high school
>girls? Wie is currently learning "how not to choke" against LPGA, PGA,
>USGA, and overseas tour competition.

Absolutely correct. My favorite example is Nathan Green, who learned
to win on lesser tours, but folded like a card table when he faced
Tiger in a playoff at the Buick Invitational this year.

Thanks to her aggressive schedule, Michelle already knows that she can
shoot 68's in PGA events; she already knows that she can beat Annika
by six shots in a major; and she already knows that she can play well
in the final stretch while in contention for a major title. That's
something she could never learn on the amateur circuit. If she never
wins a pro event, it won't be because she didn't play on her high
school team.


30 May 2006 17:59:40
multi
Re: Butch Harmon slams Michelle Wie and her parents

On Tue, 30 May 2006 14:56:53 -0700, "Steve"
<stevenospamplease@comcast.com > wrote:
>The 2nd best female player in the world, per
>the Rolex rankings, does not have a win in the last 3 years, which includes
>playing in girls Jr. Am and Womens Am events. Do you not find something odd
>about that?

What's odd is that the winners get way more ranking points than second
or third place finishers, so for Michelle to be ranked second without
winning means she must have posted a boatload of top fives.


30 May 2006 18:14:17
multi
Re: Butch Harmon slams Michelle Wie and her parents

On Tue, 30 May 2006 12:48:56 -0700, "Steve"
<stevenospamplease@comcast.com > wrote:
>I have always found it more than odd that the person who many here think is
>a better golfer than Tiger @ 16 was never able to win a Jr. Am or Womens Am
>and is now something like 0-30 in LPGA events.

Why do you find it odd? In single-elimination match play, anything
can happen. Tiger lost in the first round (hence, to the
lowest-ranked player) of the WGC match play during one of his
strongest years. He was trounced by Steve Scott in the first round of
the 1996 US Am final, five down after 18. Being Tiger, he made an
amazing comeback to win in the afternoon round, but if he had met
Scott in an earlier round, with only 18 holes, he would have lost.

And by the way, when Tiger turned 16, he had one US Junior on his
resume. He won his US Ams at ages 18, 19, and 20. He hadn't even
attempted to make a pro cut before 16, let alone come within a shot of
doing it at 14. He made his first pro cut at 19.

Based on her PGA results, I think Michelle is clearly better than
Tiger up to now. There is no guarantee she will keep improving, and
it is a good bet that nobody, male or female, amateur or pro, will
ever match Tiger's records. But for right now, at this age, she's the
best we've ever seen. Isn't that enough for you?


30 May 2006 18:17:33
multi
Re: Butch Harmon slams Michelle Wie and her parents

On Tue, 30 May 2006 17:45:10 -0700, "Steve"
<stevenospamplease@comcast.com > wrote:
><danc55344@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:1149024712.752666.10590@i39g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>> "I have always found it more than odd that the person who many here
>> think is
>> a better golfer than Tiger @ 16 was never able to win a Jr. Am or
>> Womens Am
>> and is now something like 0-30 in LPGA events."
>>
>> I've never thought Wie was better than Tiger, but Wie's performance in
>> LPGA events has been very good.
>>
>> Two events this year and she has won $180,000. Not too shabby.
>>
>> "In my opinion, if she had concentrated on events where she would have
>> been favored to win, she would have multiple LPGA wins and maybe a
>> major or two by now"
>>
>> Your sentence above shows your ingorance. The LPGA severely limits
>> the number of events she can play in.
>>
>
>She has played close to 30 LPGA events and by my count has played in 9
>majors.

And exactly which LPGA events should she have played where she would
have been favored to win?



30 May 2006 18:45:09
multi
Re: Butch Harmon slams Michelle Wie and her parents

On 30 May 2006 06:53:18 -0700, "sjh" <strat68@eudoramail.com > wrote:
>Ah usenet, where's multi when you need him...

I'm only one man.


30 May 2006 20:06:08
Laura Bush murdered her boy fr
Re: Butch Harmon slams Michelle Wie and her parents


multi wrote:
>
> Based on her PGA results, I think Michelle is clearly better than
> Tiger up to now. There is no guarantee she will keep improving, and
> it is a good bet that nobody, male or female, amateur or pro, will
> ever match Tiger's records. But for right now, at this age, she's the
> best we've ever seen. Isn't that enough for you?

She does everything but win.



30 May 2006 20:19:56
Re: Butch Harmon slams Michelle Wie and her parents


Laura Bush murdered her boy friend wrote:
> multi wrote:
> >
> > Based on her PGA results, I think Michelle is clearly better than
> > Tiger up to now. There is no guarantee she will keep improving, and
> > it is a good bet that nobody, male or female, amateur or pro, will
> > ever match Tiger's records. But for right now, at this age, she's the
> > best we've ever seen. Isn't that enough for you?
>
> She does everything but win.

That differs from the following statement regarding your life how?

"Laura Bush murdered her boyfriend" does nothing but lose.



31 May 2006 03:44:11
JJK
Re: Butch Harmon slams Michelle Wie and her parents

"Eagle" wrote:
> I don't ever pay much heed as to what Butch has to say.
> He was hired by Sky Sports, as a pundit, for broadcasts of PGA events
> to the UK. While he spoke a lot, he hardly said anything of
> significance. <snip>


Didn't Butch pimp a magnetic bracelet on the Golf Channel for awhile?




30 May 2006 21:40:45
Re: Butch Harmon slams Michelle Wie and her parents


multi wrote:
> On 30 May 2006 06:53:18 -0700, "sjh" <strat68@eudoramail.com> wrote:
> >Ah usenet, where's multi when you need him...
>
> I'm only one man.


multi wrote:
> On 30 May 2006 06:53:18 -0700, "sjh" <strat68@eudoramail.com> wrote:
> >Ah usenet, where's multi when you need him...
>
> I'm only one man.

Either I was a bit early or a bit late (newsfeeds) but you came through
anyway.

Thanks, this was up your alley. Of course, the numbnuts took me
literally on the team sport thing. And I purposefully left out a sport
name and took an arbitrary city, "Boston." It could have been the
Bruins or Celtics it doesn't matter, but they assumed it was baseball.

Yep, an outright second or T3 in golf especially for a kid is simply
horrific, what was Mr Wie thinking!



31 May 2006 03:25:07
Re: Butch Harmon slams Michelle Wie and her parents


Laura Bush murdered her boy friend wrote:
> Part of the problem is the LPGA only lets her play 8 events a year so
> she's d kinda forced to play some on the mens tour.

There are women's tours in other countries. She could play those.

(She's already played *men's* events in Japan and Korea, after all, and
talked about the British Open as well.)



31 May 2006 11:09:47
Carbon
Re: Butch Harmon slams Michelle Wie and her parents

On Wed, 31 May 2006 03:44:11 +0000, JJK wrote:

> Didn't Butch pimp a magnetic bracelet on the Golf Channel for awhile?

Oh really? Well that is different. Grips and shafts I have no problem
with, but obvious snake oil is a different story.


31 May 2006 08:07:53
Howard Brazee
Re: Butch Harmon slams Michelle Wie and her parents

On Tue, 30 May 2006 15:05:26 -0600, "Mark A" <nobody@nowhere.com >
wrote:

>> In my opinion, if she concentrated on beating high school girls, she
>> would know how to play well enough to beat high school girls.
>>
>>
>> How many skills did you learn to excel in by competing against people
>> who weren't close to your ability?
>>
>> How much of a killer instinct will I develop by playing against my
>> grandchildren? How much do I test my ability to handle stress by
>> playing in tournaments that nobody cares about?
>>
>
>Learning how to win does not mean learning a killer instinct. It means
>learning how to not choke, mentally and physically.

And I don't learn how to overcome anything by playing against easy
competition.


31 May 2006 08:10:20
Howard Brazee
Re: Butch Harmon slams Michelle Wie and her parents

On Tue, 30 May 2006 14:56:53 -0700, "Steve"
<stevenospamplease@comcast.com > wrote:

>My bottom line isse is I think Team Wie made a decision a long time ago to
>maximize profits at the expense of all else, including golf wins. Thats
>fine if that is the priority all though you would think if she had a couple
>of LPGA wins by now, the money would take care of itself.

She is maximizing profit compared to high-school wins. But do you
seriously think she would have more LPGA wins if she hadn't gone pro?


31 May 2006 08:38:57
Laura Bush murdered her boy fr
Re: Butch Harmon slams Michelle Wie and her parents


mman37x@cs.com wrote:
> Laura Bush murdered her boy friend wrote:
> > Part of the problem is the LPGA only lets her play 8 events a year so
> > she's d kinda forced to play some on the mens tour.
>
> There are women's tours in other countries. She could play those.
>

They don't pay shit and i doubt if MW gets much appearance money
overseas since she's not well know outside of america. After all she's
never won anything as a pro and very little as an amateur.



31 May 2006 13:01:07
multi
Re: Butch Harmon slams Michelle Wie and her parents

On 31 May 2006 08:38:57 -0700, "Laura Bush murdered her boy friend"
<xeton2001@yahoo.com > wrote:

>
>mman37x@cs.com wrote:
>> Laura Bush murdered her boy friend wrote:
>> > Part of the problem is the LPGA only lets her play 8 events a year so
>> > she's d kinda forced to play some on the mens tour.
>>
>> There are women's tours in other countries. She could play those.
>>
>
>They don't pay shit and i doubt if MW gets much appearance money
>overseas since she's not well know outside of america. After all she's
>never won anything as a pro and very little as an amateur.

She reportedly received a $700K appearance fee for her recent foray
into Korea, where she is very well-known, and very popular, especially
with children. She won about $4K in the tournament itself. KJ Choi,
a three-time PGA winner from Korea, was paid around $400K (plus $32K
in winnings), and was not pleased when he found out how much Michelle
got. There were also reports that she signed endorsement deals with
Korean firms that will be worth another $5 million to her. She
donated $600K to some Korean children's hospitals.
http://english.chosun.com/w21data/html/news/200604/200604200008.html


31 May 2006 13:18:20
multi
Re: Butch Harmon slams Michelle Wie and her parents

On 30 May 2006 20:06:08 -0700, "Laura Bush murdered her boy friend"
<xeton2001@yahoo.com > wrote:
>multi wrote:
>>
>> Based on her PGA results, I think Michelle is clearly better than
>> Tiger up to now. There is no guarantee she will keep improving, and
>> it is a good bet that nobody, male or female, amateur or pro, will
>> ever match Tiger's records. But for right now, at this age, she's the
>> best we've ever seen. Isn't that enough for you?
>
>She does everything but win.

I guess you're right. That's why I've never watched a Martin Scorsese
movie, and I never will, until he wins an Oscar.



31 May 2006 15:15:49
Steve
Re: Butch Harmon slams Michelle Wie and her parents


"multi" <multi@asm.org > wrote in message
news:6jrp72hvgsmhpl15tddc28qdmr4vrf12vb@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 30 May 2006 17:45:10 -0700, "Steve"
> <stevenospamplease@comcast.com> wrote:
>><danc55344@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>news:1149024712.752666.10590@i39g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>>> "I have always found it more than odd that the person who many here
>>> think is
>>> a better golfer than Tiger @ 16 was never able to win a Jr. Am or
>>> Womens Am
>>> and is now something like 0-30 in LPGA events."
>>>
>>> I've never thought Wie was better than Tiger, but Wie's performance in
>>> LPGA events has been very good.
>>>
>>> Two events this year and she has won $180,000. Not too shabby.
>>>
>>> "In my opinion, if she had concentrated on events where she would have
>>> been favored to win, she would have multiple LPGA wins and maybe a
>>> major or two by now"
>>>
>>> Your sentence above shows your ingorance. The LPGA severely limits
>>> the number of events she can play in.
>>>
>>
>>She has played close to 30 LPGA events and by my count has played in 9
>>majors.
>
> And exactly which LPGA events should she have played where she would
> have been favored to win?
>
Did not mean LPGA events. Maybe I was not clear. She could have been
playing events where she would have been favored to win, 2004 Junior Girls
Am, 2005 US Womens Am, 2005 US Womens Pub Links for starters, all events she
skipped. And do not even start in about she is way too good for the Junior
Am or Womens Am because her record is less than stellar in both those
events.

I am sure there are a ton of other events she could have played, such as
Future tour events or regional Open Ams where she would have been expected
to win or seriously compete but instead choose to spend her limited time and
money playing PGA and Open tour events with zero chance of winning and
almost certainly not getting in more than two competative rounds. You guys
always state that she did not play Am events because of the cost and the
travel and time but somehow think it makes more sense to play in events
where she is almost certainly not going to make a cut versus playing in an
event she has a serious shot at winning.




31 May 2006 16:28:34
multi
Re: Butch Harmon slams Michelle Wie and her parents

On Wed, 31 May 2006 15:15:49 -0700, "Steve"
<stevenospamplease@comcast.com > wrote:

>
>"multi" <multi@asm.org> wrote in message
>news:6jrp72hvgsmhpl15tddc28qdmr4vrf12vb@4ax.com...
>> On Tue, 30 May 2006 17:45:10 -0700, "Steve"
>> <stevenospamplease@comcast.com> wrote:
>>><danc55344@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>>news:1149024712.752666.10590@i39g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>>>> "I have always found it more than odd that the person who many here
>>>> think is
>>>> a better golfer than Tiger @ 16 was never able to win a Jr. Am or
>>>> Womens Am
>>>> and is now something like 0-30 in LPGA events."
>>>>
>>>> I've never thought Wie was better than Tiger, but Wie's performance in
>>>> LPGA events has been very good.
>>>>
>>>> Two events this year and she has won $180,000. Not too shabby.
>>>>
>>>> "In my opinion, if she had concentrated on events where she would have
>>>> been favored to win, she would have multiple LPGA wins and maybe a
>>>> major or two by now"
>>>>
>>>> Your sentence above shows your ingorance. The LPGA severely limits
>>>> the number of events she can play in.
>>>>
>>>
>>>She has played close to 30 LPGA events and by my count has played in 9
>>>majors.
>>
>> And exactly which LPGA events should she have played where she would
>> have been favored to win?
>>
>Did not mean LPGA events. Maybe I was not clear. She could have been
>playing events where she would have been favored to win, 2004 Junior Girls
>Am, 2005 US Womens Am, 2005 US Womens Pub Links for starters, all events she
>skipped. And do not even start in about she is way too good for the Junior
>Am or Womens Am because her record is less than stellar in both those
>events.

Well, that clarifies which events you think she should have played in,
but it doesn't clarify how playing in the Junior Girls Am would have
helped her win a major or two by now.

>I am sure there are a ton of other events she could have played, such as
>Future tour events or regional Open Ams where she would have been expected
>to win or seriously compete but instead choose to spend her limited time and
>money playing PGA and Open tour events with zero chance of winning and
>almost certainly not getting in more than two competative rounds.

Exactly. She could have breezed through local amateur events, or she
could have been hammered at PGA events. It took guts to choose the
latter, but I admire her for it. We'll have to agree to disagree on
whether she learned more, and prepared for the future better, by doing
it her way.

> You guys
>always state that she did not play Am events because of the cost and the
>travel and time but somehow think it makes more sense to play in events
>where she is almost certainly not going to make a cut versus playing in an
>event she has a serious shot at winning.

I haven't read every post about Michelle, but I've read a lot of them,
and the only one I remember that mentioned the cost of playing Am
events was clearly in the context of a business decision, not how many
rounds she would get in. And yes, learning experience aside, it does
make more sense to turn pro and get six figure appearance fees for
showing up, instead of paying for everything yourself.


01 Jun 2006 05:19:43
Doc Dice
Re: Butch Harmon slams Michelle Wie and her parents

I am glad to see a kid such as Michelle be that talented and compete at
the level she is competeing at. I, like a lot of others here, would
enjoy seeing her win on the LPGA first. As far as her missing out on
her teenage years, I really do not care.
Good Luck


multi wrote:
> On 30 May 2006 20:06:08 -0700, "Laura Bush murdered her boy friend"
> <xeton2001@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >multi wrote:
> >>
> >> Based on her PGA results, I think Michelle is clearly better than
> >> Tiger up to now. There is no guarantee she will keep improving, and
> >> it is a good bet that nobody, male or female, amateur or pro, will
> >> ever match Tiger's records. But for right now, at this age, she's the
> >> best we've ever seen. Isn't that enough for you?
> >
> >She does everything but win.
>
> I guess you're right. That's why I've never watched a Martin Scorsese
> movie, and I never will, until he wins an Oscar.



01 Jun 2006 09:45:23
Re: Butch Harmon slams Michelle Wie and her parents

In article <tn8r72t60n8g5at19ugr4o59nec6bnj39h@4ax.com >,
Howard Brazee <howard@brazee.net > wrote:

> On Tue, 30 May 2006 15:05:26 -0600, "Mark A" <nobody@nowhere.com>
> wrote:
>
> >> In my opinion, if she concentrated on beating high school girls, she
> >> would know how to play well enough to beat high school girls.
> >>
> >>
> >> How many skills did you learn to excel in by competing against people
> >> who weren't close to your ability?
> >>
> >> How much of a killer instinct will I develop by playing against my
> >> grandchildren? How much do I test my ability to handle stress by
> >> playing in tournaments that nobody cares about?
> >>
> >
> >Learning how to win does not mean learning a killer instinct. It means
> >learning how to not choke, mentally and physically.
>
> And I don't learn how to overcome anything by playing against easy
> competition.

I agree wholeheartedly with this last statement. Playing down can make
players more lazy, especially with teenagers.

B. Martin


01 Jun 2006 09:54:22
R.V. Kint
Re: Butch Harmon slams Michelle Wie and her parents

marti285@umn.edu writes:

> In article <tn8r72t60n8g5at19ugr4o59nec6bnj39h@4ax.com>,
> Howard Brazee <howard@brazee.net> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 30 May 2006 15:05:26 -0600, "Mark A" <nobody@nowhere.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > >> In my opinion, if she concentrated on beating high school girls, she
> > >> would know how to play well enough to beat high school girls.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> How many skills did you learn to excel in by competing against people
> > >> who weren't close to your ability?
> > >>
> > >> How much of a killer instinct will I develop by playing against my
> > >> grandchildren? How much do I test my ability to handle stress by
> > >> playing in tournaments that nobody cares about?
> > >>
> > >
> > >Learning how to win does not mean learning a killer instinct. It means
> > >learning how to not choke, mentally and physically.
> >
> > And I don't learn how to overcome anything by playing against easy
> > competition.
>
> I agree wholeheartedly with this last statement. Playing down can make
> players more lazy, especially with teenagers.
>

That's all well and good but how does this relate (or, how do you think
this relates) to the issue at hand i.e. whether Wie should have continued
to play National Women's Amateur events?

I would not consider those events 'playing down' for her since she
was not dominant in those events when she stopped playing them.

--

-------------------------------------------
Roger Kint
-------------------------------------------


01 Jun 2006 12:14:25
Zuke
Re: Butch Harmon slams Michelle Wie and her parents

>>>
>>> She does everything but win.
>>

Didn't she just win a local US Open qualifier?




01 Jun 2006 15:58:33
multi
Re: Butch Harmon slams Michelle Wie and her parents

On 01 Jun 2006 09:54:22 -0500, rvkint@gmail.com (R.V. Kint) wrote:
>marti285@umn.edu writes:
>> I agree wholeheartedly with this last statement. Playing down can make
>> players more lazy, especially with teenagers.
>>
>
>That's all well and good but how does this relate (or, how do you think
>this relates) to the issue at hand i.e. whether Wie should have continued
>to play National Women's Amateur events?
>
>I would not consider those events 'playing down' for her since she
>was not dominant in those events when she stopped playing them.

Correct. But there are only two national women's amateur
championships per year, the USGA women's Am, and the USGA women's
Publinks. She already won the Publinks (when she was 12!!!). So you
are advising her to give up millions of dollars per year in
endorsements and appearance fees, for the sake of adding one event to
her resume, which happens to be single elimination match play.

The best pros in the world, including Tiger and Ernie, often skip
match play events when they involve long trips, because they know
anything can happen in match play. They won't risk a plane ride, and
you want Michelle to give up millions. In fact, anything can happen,
not just in a single match play event, but over the long term ---
Tiger has a mediocre Ryder Cup record, Phil didn't win a single match
at the President's Cup in South Africa, and the much stronger (on
paper) US team has lost four of the last five Ryder Cups.

Besides, once she starts winning on the LPGA tour, nobody will care
whether she won the Am. Hal Sutton and Mark O'Meara both won the US
Am. I've never heard it mentioned on TV, and I watch a lot of golf.



01 Jun 2006 16:07:58
multi
Re: Butch Harmon slams Michelle Wie and her parents

On Thu, 1 Jun 2006 12:14:25 -0400, Zuke <me@privacy.net > wrote:
>>>>
>>>> She does everything but win.
>>>
>
>Didn't she just win a local US Open qualifier?

Yes, she was medalist. She was also co-medalist in the qualifier for
the USGA Men's Publinks last year, made it to the quarterfinals, and
lost to the eventual winner. Some woman wins the women's amateur
events every time they are played; no other woman has ever gotten
through the qualifiers she got through, let alone won them. But you
don't have to live very long to see that people will ignore facts that
contradict their cherished opinions.


02 Jun 2006 14:50:28
Steve
Re: Butch Harmon slams Michelle Wie and her parents

> Correct. But there are only two national women's amateur
> championships per year, the USGA women's Am, and the USGA women's
> Publinks. She already won the Publinks (when she was 12!!!). So you
> are advising her to give up millions of dollars per year in
> endorsements and appearance fees, for the sake of adding one event to
> her resume, which happens to be single elimination match play.

But she stopped playing those a couple of years ago. Did not play either
one in 2005. In fact she could have also played the Jr. Am but stopped
playing that after 2003, never came close to winning that one. It is hard
to blame her for not playing those events, there was no upside to playing.
If she wins, which was in no way guarenteed, so what, she is expected to
win, if she continue to lose, like she did in the 2003 Jr. Am, the 2004
Womens Pub Links and the 2004 Womans Am, the bloom starts coming off of the
rose. On the other hand there was and continues to be no downside to
playing Open events. No sane person expects her to win or even seriously
compete so as long as she does not finish DFL the claim can be made that she
beat 1 or more pro men and if she makes a cut, even better. Its a brilliant
game plan from a marketing viewpoint, just in my opinion, not the best for
her golf game and as a fan, I feel cheated. I do not care one bit how much
money she makes, I just want to see her play on Sunday afternoon and except
for the last two LPGA events, that has not been the case.

In my opinion, the reason she turned pro when she did was Pressel and
Creamer were starting to steal some spotlight by putting up wins and then Ai
Miyazato runs away with Q school and Gulbis does the whole calendar thing
and Team Wie was concerned that if she did not put up some Ws and quick, the
endorsement money available could start to lessen if potential sponsers
started looking around. As it turns out, none of the other rookies and
younger players have done much so it may have actually paid for her to have
waited. I personally would have done the same thing, turn pro when she did,
I just would not have skipped the AM events listed above.




02 Jun 2006 18:02:50
Dave Holo
Re: Butch Harmon slams Michelle Wie and her parents

"Steve" <stevenospamplease@comcast.com > wrote in message
news:YdadnctVg6gVLx3ZnZ2dnUVZ_oednZ2d@speakeasy.net...
> Its a brilliant game plan from a marketing viewpoint, just in my opinion,
> not the best for her golf game and as a fan, I feel cheated.

Cheated of what? She owes you something?





02 Jun 2006 19:40:15
Howard Brazee
Re: Butch Harmon slams Michelle Wie and her parents

On Fri, 2 Jun 2006 14:50:28 -0700, "Steve"
<stevenospamplease@comcast.com > wrote:

> No sane person expects her to win or even seriously
>compete so as long as she does not finish DFL the claim can be made that she
>beat 1 or more pro men and if she makes a cut, even better. Its a brilliant
>game plan from a marketing viewpoint, just in my opinion, not the best for
>her golf game and as a fan, I feel cheated.

So you were planning on watching her play in the amateur events? Or
do you believe that beating weak competition would have made her so
much more interesting whenever she reached the level she's at now?


03 Jun 2006 02:07:35
Zuke
Re: Butch Harmon slams Michelle Wie and her parents




On Fri, 2 Jun 2006, Steve wrote:

>> Correct. But there are only two national women's amateur
>> championships per year, the USGA women's Am, and the USGA women's
>> Publinks. She already won the Publinks (when she was 12!!!). So you
>> are advising her to give up millions of dollars per year in
>> endorsements and appearance fees, for the sake of adding one event to
>> her resume, which happens to be single elimination match play.
>
> But she stopped playing those a couple of years ago. Did not play either
> one in 2005. In fact she could have also played the Jr. Am but stopped
> playing that after 2003, never came close to winning that one. It is hard
> to blame her for not playing those events, there was no upside to playing.
> If she wins, which was in no way guarenteed, so what, she is expected to
> win, if she continue to lose, like she did in the 2003 Jr. Am, the 2004
> Womens Pub Links and the 2004 Womans Am, the bloom starts coming off of the
> rose. On the other hand there was and continues to be no downside to
> playing Open events. No sane person expects her to win or even seriously
> compete so as long as she does not finish DFL the claim can be made that she
> beat 1 or more pro men and if she makes a cut, even better. Its a brilliant
> game plan from a marketing viewpoint, just in my opinion, not the best for
> her golf game and as a fan, I feel cheated. I do not care one bit how much
> money she makes, I just want to see her play on Sunday afternoon and except
> for the last two LPGA events, that has not been the case.
>
> In my opinion, the reason she turned pro when she did was Pressel and
> Creamer were starting to steal some spotlight by putting up wins and then Ai
> Miyazato runs away with Q school and Gulbis does the whole calendar thing

There's only one reason she turned pro when she did: money. She's a lot
more marketable at 16 then she would be at 18. She'll have two years
of major money whether she ever wins a tourney or not.

I don't knock her or her parents. I think they've made good decisions
under unique circumstances all down the line.

Of course, if she does become an impact player, best scenario, competitive
on the PGA tour, her high end is stratospheric. If if turns out she
is just one of the better LPGA pros, her earning power will level off
to be equal with the other good LPGA pros by the time she is twenty
or so.



05 Jun 2006 13:40:35
Steve
Re: Butch Harmon slams Michelle Wie and her parents


"Dave Holo" <dave_holo@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:e5qmu0$7po$1@nntp.aioe.org...
> "Steve" <stevenospamplease@comcast.com> wrote in message
> news:YdadnctVg6gVLx3ZnZ2dnUVZ_oednZ2d@speakeasy.net...
>> Its a brilliant game plan from a marketing viewpoint, just in my opinion,
>> not the best for her golf game and as a fan, I feel cheated.
>
> Cheated of what? She owes you something?
>
The chance to watch her compete for a win on the back nine on a Sunday. Did
not happen once last year. Set the tivo to record time and time again and
saw very little of her at all and never once hitting a meaningful shot. You
would think with all of the hype, she would have contended more often than
she did but time and time again in 2005 she fell short and disappointed the
golf viewing public, US Womens Open, John Deere, Asian Open event.

Sorry if I expect a win once in a while from the player I am told is the #2
female in the world and is better @ 16 than Tiger was.




05 Jun 2006 13:43:21
Steve
Re: Butch Harmon slams Michelle Wie and her parents

> So you were planning on watching her play in the amateur events? Or
> do you believe that beating weak competition would have made her so
> much more interesting whenever she reached the level she's at now?

Probably would have watched her play in an Am event, assuming she did not
flame out like she did in the last 3 or 4 she did play. I do think if she
had played and had been in contention and maybe had won a couple over the
last 3 years, she would have a win or two on the LPGA tour by now instead of
being something like 0-30.




05 Jun 2006 13:49:19
Steve
Re: Butch Harmon slams Michelle Wie and her parents

> There's only one reason she turned pro when she did: money. She's a lot
> more marketable at 16 then she would be at 18. She'll have two years
> of major money whether she ever wins a tourney or not.
>
> I don't knock her or her parents. I think they've made good decisions
> under unique circumstances all down the line.
>
> Of course, if she does become an impact player, best scenario, competitive
> on the PGA tour, her high end is stratospheric. If if turns out she
> is just one of the better LPGA pros, her earning power will level off
> to be equal with the other good LPGA pros by the time she is twenty
> or so.
>

I think it was a spectacular decision if it was based on the bank account
first and golf results somewhere down the line. I would disagree though
that if she turns out to be a better LPGA pro her earning power will level
off to the same as others. I think there are a number of factors that will
always keep her earnings much higher regardless of the results. The whole
Asian fan base, long ball hitter, 6 footer etc., etc. If you look at who
gets sponsor dollars, its not always those with the best results. Otherwise
explain why Daly and "Badds" and Hank Kuene have commercials but Goosen,
Toms and Dimarco do not. I am sure Ochoa would like to be making Gulbis
sponsor money.




06 Jun 2006 01:42:48
Carbon
Re: Butch Harmon slams Michelle Wie and her parents

On Mon, 05 Jun 2006 13:49:19 -0700, Steve wrote:

> I think it was a spectacular decision if it was based on the bank
> account first and golf results somewhere down the line. I would
> disagree though that if she turns out to be a better LPGA pro her
> earning power will level off to the same as others. I think there are a
> number of factors that will always keep her earnings much higher
> regardless of the results. The whole Asian fan base, long ball hitter,
> 6 footer etc., etc. If you look at who gets sponsor dollars, its not
> always those with the best results. Otherwise explain why Daly and
> "Badds" and Hank Kuene have commercials but Goosen, Toms and Dimarco do
> not. I am sure Ochoa would like to be making Gulbis sponsor money.

It's always about looks.


05 Jun 2006 18:51:44
Jack Thompson
Re: Butch Harmon slams Michelle Wie and her parents


Carbon wrote:
> On Mon, 05 Jun 2006 13:49:19 -0700, Steve wrote:
>
> > I think it was a spectacular decision if it was based on the bank
> > account first and golf results somewhere down the line. I would
> > disagree though that if she turns out to be a better LPGA pro her
> > earning power will level off to the same as others. I think there are a
> > number of factors that will always keep her earnings much higher
> > regardless of the results. The whole Asian fan base, long ball hitter,
> > 6 footer etc., etc. If you look at who gets sponsor dollars, its not
> > always those with the best results. Otherwise explain why Daly and
> > "Badds" and Hank Kuene have commercials but Goosen, Toms and Dimarco do
> > not. I am sure Ochoa would like to be making Gulbis sponsor money.
>
> It's always about looks.

True, Daly is a looker.



06 Jun 2006 04:40:53
Carbon
Re: Butch Harmon slams Michelle Wie and her parents

On Mon, 05 Jun 2006 18:51:44 -0700, Jack Thompson wrote:
> Carbon wrote:
>> On Mon, 05 Jun 2006 13:49:19 -0700, Steve wrote:
>>
>> > I think it was a spectacular decision if it was based on the bank
>> > account first and golf results somewhere down the line. I would
>> > disagree though that if she turns out to be a better LPGA pro her
>> > earning power will level off to the same as others. I think there
>> > are a number of factors that will always keep her earnings much
>> > higher regardless of the results. The whole Asian fan base, long
>> > ball hitter, 6 footer etc., etc. If you look at who gets sponsor
>> > dollars, its not always those with the best results. Otherwise
>> > explain why Daly and "Badds" and Hank Kuene have commercials but
>> > Goosen, Toms and Dimarco do not. I am sure Ochoa would like to be
>> > making Gulbis sponsor money.
>>
>> It's always about looks.
>
> True, Daly is a looker.

He represents America.