| |
Main
Date: 13 Nov 2006 01:28:32
From: Brian Foster
Subject: Cristie Kerr
|
I watched a little of the LPGA tourney this weekend. I saw C. Kerr on the 17
hole during the 3rd round. It's a slick par 3 that she birdied during each
of the first 2 rounds.
So she hits the green on 17 in the 3rd round and everything goes to hell.
She cards an 8 and goes on to score a smooth 80 for the round. The very day
earlier she shot a 66 and was near the top of the leader board.
She handled the whole thing a lot better than I ever would/could of. You
could see steam coming out of her ears but she came back today and fired a 3
under.
http://www.lpgascoring.com/5381/scorecards/81106.html
She is one my favorites to watch. Lots of talent and spunk to go with it.
Good on her and I hope she has no more snowmen on her cards for a very long
time.
|
|
| |
Date: 13 Nov 2006 09:08:08
From:
Subject: Re: Cristie Kerr
|
Brian Foster wrote:
> I watched a little of the LPGA tourney this weekend. I saw C. Kerr on the 17
> hole during the 3rd round. It's a slick par 3 that she birdied during each
> of the first 2 rounds.
>
> So she hits the green on 17 in the 3rd round and everything goes to hell.
> She cards an 8 and goes on to score a smooth 80 for the round. The very day
> earlier she shot a 66 and was near the top of the leader board.
>
> She handled the whole thing a lot better than I ever would/could of. You
> could see steam coming out of her ears but she came back today and fired a 3
> under.
>
> http://www.lpgascoring.com/5381/scorecards/81106.html
>
> She is one my favorites to watch. Lots of talent and spunk to go with it.
>
> Good on her and I hope she has no more snowmen on her cards for a very long
> time.
It happens. Ochoa got an 8 for a Quad on the first hole of day two.
She just made some more birdies to stay a distance back, and then came
on strong and wiped the field of champs by 10 shots for PoY. Bye, bye
Annika. Bye, bye Christie. Bye, bye Karrie. Bye, bye Julie.
CJ
|
| |
Date: 13 Nov 2006 07:32:56
From: Laura M
Subject: Re: Cristie Kerr
|
Brian Foster wrote:
> I watched a little of the LPGA tourney this weekend. I saw C. Kerr on the 17
> hole during the 3rd round. It's a slick par 3 that she birdied during each
> of the first 2 rounds.
>
> So she hits the green on 17 in the 3rd round and everything goes to hell.
> She cards an 8 and goes on to score a smooth 80 for the round. The very day
> earlier she shot a 66 and was near the top of the leader board.
>
> She handled the whole thing a lot better than I ever would/could of. You
> could see steam coming out of her ears but she came back today and fired a 3
> under.
>
> http://www.lpgascoring.com/5381/scorecards/81106.html
>
> She is one my favorites to watch. Lots of talent and spunk to go with it.
>
> Good on her and I hope she has no more snowmen on her cards for a very long
> time.
My girlfriends and I call themm "snowbitches" instead of snowmen.
*snicker*
|
| |
Date: 13 Nov 2006 13:54:35
From: Carbon
Subject: Re: how did this group get ruined?
|
On Sun, 12 Nov 2006 20:50:20 -0800, Dene wrote:
> Carbon wrote:
>> On Sun, 12 Nov 2006 17:09:53 -0800, Dene wrote:
>>
>> > Hopefuly, he's doesn't deal with his adolescent children in the same,
>> > imperious fashion.
>>
>> Ok. I think we've latched onto something, your feeling that Mike is
>> imperious. He does have a somewhat formal writing style, but on the
>> other hand he has spent a lot of time in college learning to write that
>> way. I'm going to get flamed for this, but I'll say it anyway: he's
>> st. Some people are. He's not putting on airs. He thinks the way he
>> writes.
>
> Why would acknowledging his intelligence get you flamed? The issue is
> how Mike views himself in relation to other people, particularily those
> who dare to disagree. Imperious and pompous.
I've never met him, nor you, and I tune out all the boring c-list crap.
But personally I have never gotten the feeling that he was issuing edicts.
He will say things like, I am right because... and then will list a bunch
of reasons why he believes it. Maybe if he said I believe I'm right, or
put it in what-if form, or whatever, you guys wouldn't get so wound up.
Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't think he'd just reject another viewpoint just
because it differs from his own. Have you tried disagreeing with the
reasons instead of attacking the person?
Again, maybe I'm wrong. The only reason I posted in this thread is because
you attacked his signature, which in my opinion is total bullshit. A
signature like his has been the acceptable convention on Usenet since the
beginning of Usenet. The only people who ever flame him over it are those
with a pre-existing beef.
|
| |
Date: 12 Nov 2006 18:51:37
From: zumafan
Subject: Re: Cristie Kerr
|
Brian Foster wrote:
> Lots of ...spunk.....on her......I hope....for a very long time.
Uh huh huh....he said...."spunk"....huh huh huh....
|
| | |
Date: 13 Nov 2006 12:21:24
From: Manco
Subject: Re: Cristie Kerr
|
zumafan wrote:
> Brian Foster wrote:
>
>> Lots of ...spunk.....on her......I hope....for a very long time.
>
> Uh huh huh....he said...."spunk"....huh huh huh....
Get lost butthead.
|
|
