| |
Main
Date: 06 Nov 2006 06:28:12
From: Manco
Subject: Adam Scott
|
Now that he's #4 in the WGR, I can say it's safe to say that in the next 2
years, he's the only one with a good shot at knocking Tiger off his #1
perch. The one huge advantage he has is he's younger, and really hungry to
win majors.
|
|
| |
Date: 06 Nov 2006 05:10:19
From: oconnell@slr.orl.lmco.com
Subject: Re: Adam Scott
|
Colin Wilson wrote:
> Manco wrote:
>
> > Now that he's #4 in the WGR, I can say it's safe to say that in the next 2
> > years, he's the only one with a good shot at knocking Tiger off his #1
> > perch.
Only for various values of "good". Tiger has 3 times the points Adam
has. Tiger looks good every year to win at least one major, if not
two. Adam has yet to win one.
> > The one huge advantage he has is he's younger, and really hungry to
> > win majors.
>
> Scott was #4 before the Tour Championship. His win will get him very
> close to overtaking #3 (Mickelson).
Mostly because Phil isn't playing at all. Adam looked very good.
But he's looked good before, like when he won the TPC. It's never
been a indicator of long term consistency. If there is someone who
has any shot at all of scaring Tiger it's not Scott, it's either Phil
or
Furyk.
> Scott is playing the Australian Open next week. Winning that could see
> him overtake Mickelson ... the AO has a reasonable WGR points status,
> particularly with Scott and Ogilvy, who are both in the WGR top 10, in
> the field.
1 Tiger Woods, USA 21.59
2 Jim Furyk, USA 9.15
3 Phil Mickelson, USA 8.36
4 Adam Scott, Aus 7.73
5 Vijay Singh, Fij 6.43
6 Retief Goosen, SAf 6.40
7 Luke Donald, Eng 5.99
8 Ernie Els, SAf 5.90
|
| | |
Date: 07 Nov 2006 09:21:17
From: Colin Wilson
Subject: Re: Adam Scott
|
oconnell@slr.orl.lmco.com wrote:
> Mostly because Phil isn't playing at all.
That's *exactly* why Scott can knock Mickelson off for #3!
Mickelson's = 8.36.
Scott = 7.73 (402/52).
He has only 1 ranking point (and 3 events) to drop off to the end of
2006, and needs 8.37 (436/52) to pass Mickelson. That's *35* more points.
Over the next month, the Australian Open is worth 16 (x 2 = 32), the
Australian PGA 13 (x 2 = 26), and the Australian Masters 15 (x 2 = 30).
Winning one of the Australian events and a reasonable placing in another
will do it easily.
> If there is someone who
> has any shot at all of scaring Tiger it's not Scott, it's either Phil
> or Furyk.
I don't know why you think this. Firstly everyone is a mile off Tiger
anyway, but Scott has been every bit as consistent this year as the
other two.
--
Cheers
Colin Wilson
------------------------------------------------------------------
Trentham Golf Club: http://www.trenthamgolf.com
Barnbougle Dunes: http://publishing.kyneton.net.au/barnbougle
------------------------------------------------------------------
|
| |
Date: 06 Nov 2006 07:43:58
From: Colin Wilson
Subject: Re: Adam Scott
|
Manco wrote:
> Now that he's #4 in the WGR, I can say it's safe to say that in the next 2
> years, he's the only one with a good shot at knocking Tiger off his #1
> perch. The one huge advantage he has is he's younger, and really hungry to
> win majors.
Scott was #4 before the Tour Championship. His win will get him very
close to overtaking #3 (Mickelson).
Scott is playing the Australian Open next week. Winning that could see
him overtake Mickelson ... the AO has a reasonable WGR points status,
particularly with Scott and Ogilvy, who are both in the WGR top 10, in
the field.
However, Scott has *never* won a pro event in Australia.
--
Cheers
Colin Wilson
------------------------------------------------------------------
Trentham Golf Club: http://www.trenthamgolf.com
Barnbougle Dunes: http://publishing.kyneton.net.au/barnbougle
------------------------------------------------------------------
|
| |
Date: 07 Nov 2006 07:20:12
From: oconnell@slr.orl.lmco.com
Subject: Re: Adam Scott
|
Colin Wilson wrote:
> oconnell@slr.orl.lmco.com wrote:
>
> > Mostly because Phil isn't playing at all.
>
> That's *exactly* why Scott can knock Mickelson off for #3!
Yes, temporarily. But what kind of accomplishment
is that? It won't be indicative of anything in Scott's game.
Come January, Phil could quickly return by winning early
(as he usually does).
[snip]
> > If there is someone who
> > has any shot at all of scaring Tiger it's not Scott, it's either Phil
> > or Furyk.
>
> I don't know why you think this. Firstly everyone is a mile off Tiger
> anyway, but Scott has been every bit as consistent this year as the
> other two.
Phil's got those majors under his belt, Adam doesn't. Furyk had
a boat load more of experience and since coming off his hand
surgery has been making consistent improvement. If I was
betting between the two, I'd guess that Jim has a better chance
of having the better record next year.
|
| | |
Date: 07 Nov 2006 21:31:26
From: Colin Wilson
Subject: Re: Adam Scott
|
oconnell@slr.orl.lmco.com wrote:
> Yes, temporarily. But what kind of accomplishment
> is that? It won't be indicative of anything in Scott's game.
> Come January, Phil could quickly return by winning early
> (as he usually does).
Sorry ... what's *not* in Scott's game, apart from a slightly cool
putter sometimes? Last weekend he struck the ball from tee to green as
well as anyone could.
BTW, you don't get WGR points just from winning. Scott has won $700,000
more on the USPGA Tour this year than Mickelson, from the same number of
events (19). Scott has also won three events overseas (two in Asia, one
in Europe) since the start of 2005, something Mickelson avoids even trying.
> Phil's got those majors under his belt, Adam doesn't.
Which is exactly why there's plenty of upside to Scott. He won the Tour
Championship at 26, Phil was 30 when he won his. Scott has 8 more years
to win a major before he reaches the age Mickelson won his first.
> Furyk had
> a boat load more of experience and since coming off his hand
> surgery has been making consistent improvement. If I was
> betting between the two, I'd guess that Jim has a better chance
> of having the better record next year.
No one would be stupid enough to deny the likelihood of Mickelson and
Furyk continuing their excellent records. I'm just surprised you seem to
think Scott has got where he is at the end of 2006 by some sort of
mediocrity.
--
Cheers
Colin Wilson
------------------------------------------------------------------
Trentham Golf Club: http://www.trenthamgolf.com
Barnbougle Dunes: http://publishing.kyneton.net.au/barnbougle
------------------------------------------------------------------
|
| |
Date: 07 Nov 2006 16:59:50
From: oconnell@slr.orl.lmco.com
Subject: Re: Adam Scott
|
Colin Wilson wrote:
[snip]
> Scott finished T1 in putts per round this week (27.75). Before the Tour
> Championship he was T138 (29.38). He still missed quite a few 5-10ft
> birdie putts this week. Once he gets control of his putter, he will
> challenge anyone.
You mean "if". I can't count the number of talent, especially
young,
that "only needs to improve their putting". You win and lose on the
Tour by your putter. He had a good week, a trend it does not make.
|
| |
Date: 07 Nov 2006 13:31:38
From: oconnell@slr.orl.lmco.com
Subject: Re: Adam Scott
|
Colin Wilson wrote:
> oconnell@slr.orl.lmco.com wrote:
[snip]
> > Furyk had
> > a boat load more of experience and since coming off his hand
> > surgery has been making consistent improvement. If I was
> > betting between the two, I'd guess that Jim has a better chance
> > of having the better record next year.
>
> No one would be stupid enough to deny the likelihood of Mickelson and
> Furyk continuing their excellent records. I'm just surprised you seem to
> think Scott has got where he is at the end of 2006 by some sort of
> mediocrity.
No, all I said was that he was less of a threat to Tiger than either
Phil or Furyk. The implication being, next year. He may pass
Phil this fall because Phil won't be playing, and hasn't been.
That won't be an indication of much for when Phil does start
playing again. Basically Adam has only been "gaining ground"
on Phil because Phil hasn't been playing.
|
| | |
Date: 08 Nov 2006 00:55:27
From: Colin Wilson
Subject: Re: Adam Scott
|
oconnell@slr.orl.lmco.com wrote:
> No, all I said was that he was less of a threat to Tiger than either
> Phil or Furyk. The implication being, next year.
It's only your conjecture that Mickelson will start winning again early
next year and Scott won't. And once he's gained the ground, Scott just
has to keep on playing at the same level, which he's quite capable of doing.
> He may pass
> Phil this fall because Phil won't be playing, and hasn't been.
> That won't be an indication of much for when Phil does start
> playing again. Basically Adam has only been "gaining ground"
> on Phil because Phil hasn't been playing.
That's not quite true. The WGR is a points average, not an aggregate. It
also depends on what you drop off from two years ago. Scott doesn't have
much, Mickelson has majors.
Scott has 10 top-10 finishes and seven top-3 finishes in his 19 USPGA
Tour starts in 2006. That's a pretty formidable record. His 2006 scoring
average is 68.95 (Mickelson 69.50). Overall, he has won four times when
leading entering the final round (lost just once). His final round
scoring average is 70.13 (Mickelson 71.47).
Scott finished T1 in putts per round this week (27.75). Before the Tour
Championship he was T138 (29.38). He still missed quite a few 5-10ft
birdie putts this week. Once he gets control of his putter, he will
challenge anyone.
--
Cheers
Colin Wilson
------------------------------------------------------------------
Trentham Golf Club: http://www.trenthamgolf.com
Barnbougle Dunes: http://publishing.kyneton.net.au/barnbougle
------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
