FEATURED POST: Dream playing partner: actress Taylor Cole

Kidnapping. Torture. Cop-killing. It's all in a night's work for beautiful bad-ass Vicky Roberts, the villainess played by model-turned-actress Taylor Cole on NBC's "The Event." (The fun, addictive show, equal parts political thriller and sci-fi chiller, airs Monday nights at 9pm.) In real life, Cole, 26, is much more easygoing than her alter-ego and prefers weekly rounds of golf with dad to, say, espionage and murder.

CONNELL BARRETT: How did you get into golf?

TAYLOR COLE: My dad got me into the game when I was 9, when he got me my first set of clubs. Maybe he wanted a boy. [Laughs] He signed me up for a two-week golf camp. I didn't love it at first, playing in Texas in the heat and humidity. But I'm glad he made me do it, because now I love it, and I love playing with him.

CB: When did you get hooked?

TC: As I got older, 17 or 18, I got to travel the world being a model. And one of the most beautiful parts of any city is a great golf course. And there's nothing like the feeling of pure contact.

CB: I've never acted -- except when I tell my buddy "par" after I make double -- but there must be parallels between golf and acting, right?

TC: When you're acting, you have to let everything go and not think outside of yourself. You have to be one with the character. It's similar to being one with the ball. You can't think too much in golf or in acting. Somtimes when I struggle with first-tee jitters, I act like I'm not nervous, and that calms me down.

CB: How far do you hit your drives?

TC: About 220. Is that good for a girl?

CB: If it's straight, that's good for anyone. That's plenty long.

TC: When I started, I didn't know if I was hitting it far or not. I would just swing, and I'd hear, "Wow, you hit it 200." I started out driving the cart and ended up driving the green.

CB: Last Monday, your character Vicky Roberts on "The Event" gunned down a cop who almost foiled a kidnapping. What would Vicky be like on the course?

TC: She'd be packing heat in her golf bag, that's for sure. She wouldn't take anything from anybody. She's sweet and charming at first, but if she wants to play through, you'd better let her.

CB: Vicky uses her looks to her advantage. Being a former model in a very male-heavy sport, you must hear plenty of pickup lines, yes?

TC: It usually happens when I'm teeing the ball up. My shorts are shorter than most, so guys will say, "Can you re-tee? Take another one." I had a date on the course, but he was a beginner, and I whupped him a little bit. [Laughs] I hit it farther than him.

CB: You dated Corey Pavin? Speaking of pros, what players do you find attractive?

TC: Well, Adam Scott is a hottie. And I like Rickie Fowler, who's got a lot of game. It'll be fun to see where his career goes.

CB: And if you and Rickie ever have a golf date, and it rains, you can take shelter under his hat. OK, last question. You're single, and Tiger's single. Does he have a shot with you?

TC: Umm, no. Well, unless he wants to caddie for me. I might let him carry my bag and read the greens. If he helps my game, then I might consider it.

Follow Taylor Cole on Twitter at Taylor_Q_cole.

(Photo:Jordan Strauss/Getty Images)

 

Chamblee on Ryder Cup, Player of the Year and more

Three questions for Brandel Chamblee, who makes his POY and Ryder Cup picks

Today, I called Golf Channel commentator and FOF (Friend of Flyers) Brandel Chamblee, who was pouring over his latte-stained Ryder Cup notes in an Orlando coffee shop, prepping for the biennial matches. We talked about the Player of the Year, the Tour Championship, and who'll take home the Ryder Cup. 

CONNELL BARRETT: Jim Furyk claimed the FedEx Cup Sunday with his Tour Championship win. Most of my colleagues in the PGA Tour Confidential give Furyk and his three 2010 Tour wins the nod for Player of the Year. Is he your POY pick? 

BRANDEL CHAMBLEE: There's no clear choice, but I give it to Dustin Johnson, because of his play in the major championships [top 10s at the U.S. Open and PGA Championship]. Jim was more consistent throughout the year [seven top 10s], but Johnson was better in the majors. And majors far exceed the gravity of the FedEx Cup. Not only was Johnson better in majors, but he deserves praise for way he got up off the mat not once but twice—after the U.S. Open and PGA Championship—and bounced back to win the BMW Championship. Johnson's Rules violation [at the PGA] was tragic, and almost parallel what happened to Jean Van de Velde at the British Open. Van de Velde was basically never heard from again, but Dustin has said, "I'm fine, I'm over this," and he proved it. Also, he put us in awe this year. His game made us do something very rare in the Tiger Woods era: forget about Tiger and Phil Mickelson. Oh, and his two wins—the AT&T and the BMW—are big events.

CB: Is that a dig on the Tour Championship? 

BC: I don't think an event with 30 players is really a golf tournament. It sneaks up on being an exhibition. I question who you beat in a tournament of 30 guys. If you figure 10 or more guys aren't playing well, the winner's only beating 10 or 15 guys. I understand that the Tour Championship carries weight, but it's more a reward for good play than a measurement of who the best player is. I've had enough of the limited-field events. We put too much importance on them. 

CB: The Ryder Cup kicks off on Friday. Tiger's slumping. Phil hasn't won since Augusta. The Euros haven't lost on their soil since the Belfry in 1993. Can Team USA win? 

BC: Yes, and I'm picking the U.S. The course [Celtic Manor] is enticing, seductive, and it rewards risk-takers. That favors our guys. We have risk-takers, bombers—Phil Mickelson, Dustin Johnson, Tiger Woods. And the European side is missing that Spanish spark that y'all descibred in your magazine [Golf Magazine, October issue, p. 38]. Also, Europe's main players, Lee Westwood and Padraig Harrington, are question marks as to how they'll play. Half the team is Ryder Cup rookies. It'll be close. It'll be exciting. We'll see lots of bogeys and eagles and balls in water. I like the USA. 

No. 1 Issue: Golf.com special coverage

Some six months ago, several bright, innovative minds at Golf Magazine and sister publication Sports Illustrated huddled in a room to brainstorm ideas for a new, annual fall issue celebrating the wide array of people who love golf. We considered many themes and hooks, some better than others. Alas, Justin Bieber was unavailable to be guest editor, and my "Jersey Shore" cover idea thudded faster than Snooki on Jell-0 Shot NIght. 

Fortunately, this led us to The No. 1 Issue, a celebration of golf excellence.

Why No. 1? Because golf, like much in life, is about striving to be, and to experience, the best. We note the No. 1 TV show, the No. 1 grossing movie, the No. 1 song. The Beatles were on to something. They refused to touch down at JFK Airport in 1964 until they had a No. 1 record on the U.S. charts (their first of 20 No. 1s):

Being No. 1 matters. Yeah, yeah, yeah.

I was charged with overseeing Golf Magazine's No. 1 issue, which is on newstands now. It's a hell of a strong effort. In fact, I think it's a 300-yard drive down the middle, thanks to the monumentally talented and hard-working editors and photographers here in the Sports Illustrated Golf Group. The print edition is chockablock with great reads, including No. 1 swing tips, an illuminating reader survey (packed with your No. 1s), a Top 100 Teacher breakdown of the No. 1 swing of all time, and a superb essay on Phil Mickelson (our No. 1 Golfer of the Year) by Sports Illustrated's renowned wordsmith Alan Shipnuck.

The issue's highlight is a special photo-driven section called the No. 1 People Portfolio, which delves deeply into the world of entertainment (plus sports, business and politics). Will Ferrell. Larry David. Dennis Quaid. Don Cheadle. Justin Timberlake. Jon "Don Draper" Hamm. The biggest names in Tinseltown who rarely do interviews couldn't wait to talk golf with us.

Even Bill Murray -- the Greta Garbo of Hollywood, who turns down the Tonight Show -- gave us exclusive access. Well, for a while, he did. When you read my Murray interview, notice how oddly our exchange ends, with a hint of tension from him. The Caddyshack star is famously volatile, and had clearly had enough of me. While this didn't make it into print, he halted our talk without warning, by saying, "You know what? I'm gonna go eat. Bye." And he wouldn't speak to me again. Ah, well. At least we wrangled a little time with Carl Spackler himself. So we got that going for is. Which is nice. (Check out this fantastic Entertainment Weekly article on the brilliant Murray and his I-don't-give-a-s--- ways.)

Online, we have exclusive videos, including several from Will Ferrell! The star of "The Other Guys" literally bent over backwards for us, as he recreated three of the most iconic moments in golf history, turning himself into Arnold Palmer, Phil Mickelson and Jack Nicklaus. (Video | Photos) He's hilarious, and he could not have been a bigger sport.

Enjoy the issue, both on Golf.com and in the magazine. I'm on Flyers vacation for a stretch, trying to get my putting tally down to under 40 (per 9 holes). Until soon.

Grade your ball-striking, part 2!

Warning! This post contains graphic scenes of horrific putting. Parental guidance is suggested.

In my last post, I was about to try an on-course experiment, and I invited you to do the same. It's a great way to measure your ball-striking against other golfers, and to spotlight which part of your game needs more work: Your long game or short game. (Click here to for the formula that lets you grade your ball-striking.)

You probably think you're throwing away more strokes around the greens than off the tee or from the fairway, but that's probably not the case, according to Mark Broadie, a Columbia Business School professor who will be featured in the October issue of Golf Magazine. He's done massive research—70,000 shots studied!—revealing that everyday golfers lose more strokes in the long game than the short game. And last week, I shared Broadie's formula for finding out how your ball-striking measures up.

Using his method, you record how many yards from the pin you leave approach shots of 100-150 yards, then crunch those numbers to see how you measure up to golfers of all levels. I'm a 10-handicap, but last weekend, I had one of those rare, wonderful, preacher-from-Caddyshack rounds. I simply couldn't mis-hit the ball. I was inside 35 feet (in regulation) for most of my approaches, and I scared the pin several times. When I did the math, to my delight, my ball-striking numbers were PGA Tour level. Sadly, my putting was more PBA Tour than PGA Tour: I shot 80, with 40 putts. On one hole, I three-putted from 11 feet. And—full disclosure—I may have, ahem, given myself a 3-footer or two. You know, just to keep play moving.

Yes, I know. A pathetic short-game display. My putter should be surrounded by police tape. And when you're putting like a caffeinated chihuahua, it doesn't take a statistics expert to tell you that you need to spend more practice time on the green.  But still, Broadie's formula gave some much-needed context for how good my ball-striking can be and how awful my putting is. That clarity propelled me to a post-round (and much needed) lap-putting practice session.

While my round seems to fly in the face of Broadie's findings—that we lose more shots in the long game—I think it supports his point. I putted like a complete chop and still threatened the 70s, thanks to consistent, all-the-stars-were-in-alignment ballstriking. Flip that script—say, I'm making putts but topping tee shots and dumping approach shots into hazards—and I probably don't break 90.

A reader named Justin from Indiana wrote me with a different story. He also tracked his approach shots last weekend and learned that his full swing needs work. Justin, 29, shoots in the mid-80s and, indeed, shot 87 last Saturday. Broadie's ball-striking formula revealed that Justin's 87 came even though he hit the ball like a 95-shooter. "That surprised because I always thought I had to work on my short game," Justin wrote me. "But I need to work on avoiding trouble off the tee," which is where he tends to throw away strokes.

OK, end of lesson. Get out there this weekend and see how your ball-striking measures up. And look for me on the practice putting green.

How to grade your ball-striking this weekend

Should you practice your full swing or short game? Here's how to find out

If you're like most golfers, you probably think that you lose more strokes in your short game (shots inside 100 yards) than your long game (shots outside 100 yards.) Scoring is all about the short game, right? Well, as you'll find out in a fascinating, counter-intuitive feature coming soon in the October issue of Golf Magazine, that's not the case. On average, everyday players like you and me actually throw away nine strokes per round in the long game, compared to about six strokes in the short game.

You read correctly. For most (but not all) of us, the quickest way to save strokes is by shoring up the full swing, not getting better at chipping and putting. 

I know, I know. Sounds hard to believe. But this isn't mere theory. It's a fact, based on a Mount Everest-sized heap of research done not by a top teacher but by a number-crunching Columbia Business School professor named Mark Broadie, one of the most innovative minds in golf. As you'll read in detail in the October issue, Broadie analyzed more than 70,000 shots hit by golfers of levels—from Tour pros to 100-shooters. He found that everyday players of all levels throw away more strokes outside of 100 yards than they do around the greens, in part because, with the long game, there's simply more real estate in which to shank, chunk, and splash shots. Sure, three-putting will cost you, but at least you won't hit your 20-foot putt O.B. (Though I've come close.) "The short game and putting are important," Broadie told me. "They're just not as important as we always thought. A good long game puts you in a position to make a good score with the short game. They work together."

Much more later on Broadie, who is working with the PGA Tour on how they track statistics. For the purposes of today's blog, I want to share Broadie's method for grading your ball-striking on the course this very weekend. It just takes one round. This is a valuable exercise because it reveals where you're leaking the most WD-40—the long game or the short game—thereby illuminating where you should focus your practice time. 

All you need is a pencil and a calculator. Here's how to find out how good your ball-striking is. 

In your next round, record your approaches from 100-150 yards, noting how far each shot stops from the hole—be it 5 yards or 50 yards. Then, take each "leave" figure and divide it by the shot's initial distance. For example, if a 130-yard approach stops seven yards from the hole, your "leave" is 7/130, or 5.3%. Using a minimum of five approach shots, list your leaves from smallest to largest, take the middle figure, and compare that number to the median leaves shown on the chart below, which is based on Broadie's 70,000-shot database and the PGA Tour's ShotLink database: 

Tour pro: 5.5% median leave

80-shooter: 9% median leave

90-shooter: 12% median leave

100-shooter: 15% median leave

For instance, let's say you're a 90-shooter, and you record leaves of 9.5%, 11.7%, 14.8%, 16.3% and 17.0%. With your median leave being 14.8%, the chart reveals that your ball-striking is closer to a 100-shooter than the 90-shooter you are; that means you need to improve your full swing. Now, if you're a 90-shooter and your median leave is close to that of an 80-shooter, then your ball-striking is excellent and should instead focus on short game and putting.

Got it? I'm gonna crunch my numbers this weekend and see what the chart reveals. You should too. Then, we'll talk next week about how to take what you learn about your ball-striking and apply it to the practice tee. 

Look for Tiger to make a Saturday move

Tiger's done. Toast. Stick a spork in him.

That's what I've been saying about Woods' "lost" 2010 season. That Tiger will play for pride at the PGA, in the wake of his embarrassing Firestone performance last week, and he'll make the cut. But he won't be a major factor -- and he certainly won't win his 15th major.

But now I'm not so sure. Tiger enters the third round today tied for 21st, five strokes off the lead. And I think he might win this thing.

I feel like Ben Crenshaw, wagging his finger on the eve of Sunday singles in the 1999 Ryder Cup: "I have a good feeling... That's all I'm gonna say."

I have a feeling Tiger's gonna go low and put his name at or near the top of the leaderboard by Saturday night. Why? There's a spring in his step and his swing. We haven't seen it since Saturday at the U.S. Open, when he reached the 18th hole in two. After all, he was put on this earth to win major tournaments. It's what he does. And in two rounds this week, we've seen flourishes of that ol' Tiger magic, like this morning when he grabbed a 5-wood from the fairway bunker on 18, prompting Ian Baker-Finch to chide, "I don't understand this. I really don't." Well, Tiger went and walloped a sky-scraping wood that found the green, and he dang-near holed the 80-something footer for birdie.

"I'm in good shape," Woods said after completing his second round at 3-under for the tournament. "I'm right there in the ball game. I just have to continue to play well."

Ahh, see? The old, boring Tiger is back! No more blaming Stevie (like at Pebble) or venting to Peter Kostis (at Augusta) in post-round Q&As. Just boring cliches. One shot at a time. Yadda yadda. 

That's Tiger's poker face, and we only see it when he's holding a fistful of aces.   

I think Woods has found something. I think he's looking at the leaderboard and licking his chops. There are 20 names between his and the lead. Tiger has 14 majors. The 20 men in his way have six combined.

Sorry, but Matt Kuchar does not scare Tiger Woods. 

Of course, there's this pesky matter of his abysmal driving. If Tiger can't straighten out his tee shots -- his driving accuracy is 46.4 percent this week, tied for 126th -- forget about it. But if Woods can buy a few more fairways to go with his improved putting (1.667 putting average, T-19th) and always-superb short game, I think Tiger's got something special up his sleeve for the weekend. If his tee shots start finding sunlight, rather than fescue, he'll race up the leaderboard.

I have a good feeling. That's all I'm gonna say.

Jerry Rice talks!

Football's greatest receiver ever goes deep on his obsession with golf
San Francisco 49ers legend Jerry Rice took a break from rehearsing his NFL Hall of Fame induction speech (he'll be enshrined Saturday) to call Flyers World Headquarters and talk golf, gridiron, and how Sir Charles dang near made him toss the sticks for good.

(Shameless plugs: To read about Rice's valiant efforts on the Nationwide Tour, check out this excellent piece from the NFL package in the new issue of Golf Magazine. Also, this year, Rice, 47, is teaming with NFL sponsor Procter & Gamble. To see a video message from Rice, or to wish him well on his Hall of Fame enshrinement, go to Facebook.com/TakeItToTheHouse.) 

CONNELL BARRETT: Jerry, as a lifelong Cowboys fan, I threw many beer bottles at my TV after you'd shred our secondary. But still, congratulations on Saturday's Hall of Fame induction.

JERRY RICE: [laughs] Hey, we [the 49ers and Cowboys] had some great battles. It was either us or the Cowboys winning the championships, year after year. You look back on those battles and we were like the Lakers and Celtics of the NFL. And thank you -- I'm just so excited and honored about Canton on Saturday.

CB: How did you get hooked on golf?

JR: It happened during the 1980s, through my [49ers] trainer. We were at practice one day, and he brought a couple of balls and clubs. In between running routes, I tried to hit the ball. Several times. But I couldn't! I got really upset. It became a challenge for me. When I face a challenge, I'm gonna do whatever I can to meet it.

CB: In football, your commitment to practice and training is legendary. Did you apply the same discipline to golf?

JR: Oh, absolutely. I would go hit balls at 4:30 in the morning, then do team meetings and practice all day, and then come back and hit more balls. I still can't get enough. The perfect scenery, that feeling of a perfect shot -- there's something about golf that just touches your heart. You can hit so many bad shots and want to quit, but then that next pure swing makes you fall back in love with the game all over again.

CB: Of all the celebrities you've played golf with over the years, who stands out?

JR: I've played with Arnold Palmer, John Daly, Jack Nicklaus, Lee Trevino. But the most memorable might be Charles Barkley.

CB: Did he have his famous swing hitch going?

JR: Oh, man. After the round I said to myself, "Never again!" I just couldn't watch him. His swing looks like someone having a heart attack.

CB: What's the best tip any of those big names gave you?

JR: "Enjoy it. Relax. It's a game." People take golf so seriously.

CB: So do you. You played some Nationwide Tour events this year with mixed results. What's more intimidating: Seeing Lawrence Taylor on the other side of the line, or having to make a slick 5-footer to save par?

JR: No contest! That putt is terrifying. In football, I was in my element. Golf is out of my comfort zone. But I learned a lot playing on the Nationwide Tour. I learned patience. I learned to break everything down one shot at a time, to control your heart-rate. There's just no challenge in the world like golf.  

(Photo: Chris Condon/PGA Tour/Getty Images)
 

Ask Phil Mickelson a question!

Here's your chance to interview the reigning Masters champion

You like him! You really like him!

Phil Mickelson, that is. OK, that's hardly front-page news. Lefty's been a huge fan favorite since he won on Tour in 1991 as an amateur. But now we have hard data to look at. The Sports Illustrated Golf Group recently polled over 600 everyday players of all ages and handicaps. Why? To learn more about your opinions and beliefs relating to all things golf. 

In a section in the survey about Tour pros, a whopping 44 percent of you cited Phil's Masters win from this year as your favorite major moment in recent history (Tiger's 2008 U.S. Open win at Torrey Pines was second, at 31 percent.) Another question asked which pro you would most like to play with in a friendly round. Arnold Palmer won that contest over the likes of Jack Nicklaus and John Daly, but Mickelson was a close second behind the King. And President Obama wishes he had Lefty's approval rating—74 percent of you call yourself Phil fans, citing his autograph-signing, risk-taking, major-winning ways. (Cue The Shot from this year's Masters.)  

With all this in mind, we'd like you, his fans, to interview the 4-time major winner. So give us your burning questions for Phil Mickelson, and we'll take the best of the batch and ask the man himself. Post your questions below in the reader-comments section, or email them to "editor@golf.com." Please keep them concise and include your first name, age, and your home town and state. 

Come on. Talk to Phil! 

What to watch for Sunday at the 2010 British Open at St. Andrews

Other than Masters Sunday and Bachelorette Monday, reality TV doesn't get more fun than the final round of the British Open—especially at the Old Course. Here, dear readers, what to watch for on Sunday. 

Watch for Louis Oosthuizen to cough up his four-stroke lead. I hope I'm wrong because he's so dang likable. He's humble, funny, with a good nickname (Shrek)—and the Alfred E. Neuman gap in his teeth makes me feel better about my looks. Also, he's averaging 319.3 yards off the tee and driving it straight. "Louis is a good ball-striker, and it wouldn't surprise me one bit if he has a good [Sunday] and wins," Phil Mickelson said Saturday. But that was Saturday. Leads in majors vanish awfully fast on Sundays. (See: Johnson, Dustin.) Closing out a major is 10 percent shot-making, 90 percent fear-management. Sunday pressure does bad, bad stuff. And Oosthuizen's major record—seven appearances, six missed cuts—suggests a bloody Sunday for the leader. 

Watch Oosthuizen's approach shots on the first three holes, all par-4's. Why? They're a window into his mental state and how he's handling the pressure. When pros get extremely spooked, Paul Goydos told me, distance control is the first thing to go. They jack irons over greens or leave approaches woefully short. If Oosthuizen parks his first few approach shots pin high, it could be a long day for his pursuers. If he does falter...

Watch for a big name to win. Obviously, Paul Casey, in second and four shots behind, is in the best position. If it's not Casey, take Westwood. History says that a great (or future great) golfer will hoist the claret jug Sunday. The Paul Lawries and Todd Hamiltons of the world don't win at the Old Course. The last nine men to win at the Home of Golf: Tiger Woods, John Daly, Nick Faldo, Seve Ballesteros, Jack Nicklaus, Tony Lema, Kel Nagle, Bobby Locke, Peter Thomson and Sam Snead. Add to that list ... Louis Oosthuizen?

Watch (OK, listen) for the many ways the 54-hole leader's name will be mangled. Saturday on ESPN, we heard Woost-hazen (Paul Azinger), Woost-high-zen (Mike Tirico, though he finally got it by round's end), and Yoost-hweezen (Tom Weiskopf). 

Watch for the Road Hole to crush many souls. Why do players ignore the Nicklaus Way of playing 17? As Tom Watson noted today, "There are two places you don't want to be—the bunker and road. That's why Jack Nicklaus always played to the very front of the green, no matter what. He did not want the ball to ever travel far enough where it could get in the bunker." The leaders should heed Watson's words. 

Watch for Tiger's final round to be brought to you by the letter F, as was his F-bomb-laced Saturday. F also stands for frustration on the greens. Tiger is putting like Old Tom Morris, logging a whopping 99 putts through three rounds. With 20 players and 12 strokes separating Tiger and the leader, Woods will almost certainly fail in his attempt to win a third Open at St. Andrews. He'll be oh-for-three in 2010 majors, and at three sites that last year looked like gimme wins. 

Watch for Calc to post a good number Sunday, if only for his pride. His 50-year-old nerves simply weren't ready for the last-group-on-Saturday pressure. He deserves props for gathering his ample self with a back-nine 34, following a front-side 43 that began like a fake movie phone number: 555-4944. 

Watch for more of ESPN's pitch-perfect Open voiceovers. On Saturday Ian McShane's apocalyptic growl gave chilling voice to the Road Hole's infamous bunker: "I am the eternal soul, shaped in dirt, carved in doom..." Oddly enough, my ex-mother-in-law used to say the same thing. 

Watch the way-cool TV innovation that is the Protracer, which reveals live (!) the trajectory of drives on No. 17, offering views both from the tee and the fairway. It makes Curtis Strange's Virgina drawl ("This hole suits Tahger's ahhhh-laaahn") almost bearable. 

Watch out for Rory Mac. Sure, he's 11 strokes back, but if Oosthuizen and Casey return to the pack, the talented 21-year-old could shoot up the leaderboard. Look for the kid to go for the claret jugular and gun for the pins, after roller-coaster rounds of 63, 80, 69—which, by the way, are also Calc's measurements. 

Chamblee mid-season Q&A, part 2

He talks Phil's no. 1 hopes, and rips Tiger for disrespecting many in the game

Here's part two of my mid-season Tour Q&A with Golf Channel's Brandel Chamblee. (Click here to read part 1). Today, we talk Phil's rocky British Open record, Tiger's continuing woes, and who will be No. 1 at year's end. 

CONNELL BARRETT: The British Open is next week. Full disclosure. I'm a Phil fan. I like his playing style, and at St. Andrews in 2005 I watched him sign dozens of autographs only minutes after finishing a disappointing final round. What are your thoughts on why Phil's only had one British top 10 [at Troon, in 2004]?  

BRANDEL CHAMBLEE: It's one of the ultimate ironies that one of the best, most creative, most talented players of our generation has had a terrible Open record. I think early on [in his career] Phil didn't have the ability to hit all those knock-downs. He loves the greenside flop, and hits those so well, but in links golf you need those little 3-iron bump-and-runs over the mounds. Seve, Watson, Tiger—they've all had those specialty shots with 5-irons, 6-irons, 3-woods.

CB: As you said, you'd think someone as creative as Phil would thrive on a links setting. Do you have to master those links shots to win at St. Andrews?

BC: Jack never had to because he was a great driver of the ball and had a penetrating ball flight. Phil has never been a great driver of the ball. That gets him in trouble at British Opens. You can't come out of that 3-foot hay unless you have incredible creativity like Seve had. Phil's creativity has never come out in terms of bump-and-runs around greens. That, together with his driving, is why he has struggled. 

CB: With St. Andrews being more wide open off the tee than other British Open courses, could this be Phil's year? 

BC: I hope so, because golf tournaments are a lot more interesting when he's playing well. Players who do well in [British] Opens embrace links golf. They come over early and play in Ireland, Scotland. He's playing Loch Lomond [in Scotland] this week, which is a marvelous venue, but not a particularly good place to prepare for a British open. Phil needs to hit bump-and-runs, work shots into cross winds. As wild as Watson was [in his prime], he could always work shots into cross winds. Phil's driving has hurt him in cross winds. I would be surprised if Phil contended in St. Andrews. 

CB: Still, with an A.P.B. out on Tiger's golf game, Phil has to be at least the co-favorite. Do you think Phil will finally get to no. 1 at some point this year, if not at the British? 

BC: I think he will. I think Phil will supplant [Tiger]. I also think Ernie Els might continue to be a big story. He's already won twice this year. I wouldn't be at all surprised if Ernie won the British Open. 

CB: If reports are true, Tiger and Elin are divorcing, with Elin getting $100 million—which, by my math, comes to $875,000 per mistress. Golf is such a psychological, internal game. I can see Tiger playing better almost as soon as the ink dries on the divorce because he can start to move on.

BC: Well, that would be a first step. The second step [in Tiger playing better] will take longer. I'm talking about the ambiguous response of the fans. It's not gonna improve this year. I think Tiger Woods draws from the energy around him, and right now all that energy is ambiguous—and ambiguous pretty much describes his golf game. 

CB: Fascinating. I'm a psychology nerd. There's a concept called "state transfer." Some people are wired to feel the emotions that others feel. To them, emotions are literally contagious. Maybe Tiger needs those emotions from the fans, and he's not getting them—apart from the 54th hole at U.S. Open, when Tiger hit the green in two and the place went nuts. 

BC: People are still searching for an appropriate way to respond to Tiger. Certainly lavish applause and ballyhoos are not appropriate. But boos are not appropriate either. We're in a wait-and-see mode. And not only because of his off-course problems. I'm talking about the fact that Tiger hasn't treated people in golf the way he should have, and that has been whispered for years and years. Now, these off-course problems make it acceptable to talk about that. 

CB: Do you mean he hasn't treated his fellow players well? 

BC: No, I'm talking about sponsors of tournaments. Skipping tournaments that showed him respect early on [in his career] by extending invitations. But I also mean him not moving his play around to struggling events. Also, the media—showing them respect. Writers have the tedious job of covering a player who's reluctant to give them anything but the most obvious details. 

CB: I think many of his peers are enjoying Tiger's lost season. Golf Magazine just did a poll of 70 PGA Tour pros. We asked them which player they would most like to see miss a short putt to win a major. Tiger finished first. "Pretty much everybody would like to see that," one Tour player said.

BC: There's jealousy there because very little bad has ever happened to Tiger Woods on the golf course. People want to see that he's human. To me the most human thing I've seen him do on the course is the [eagle] putt he hit on the 54th hole at [this year's] U.S. Open. After a phenomenal shot into the 18th green and needing an eagle to further his chances, he left it woefully short. That's a putt I've never seen him hit in a big moment. That looked very human. 

Brandel Chamblee's mid-season Tour report, part 1

Golf Channel's star analyst on "psychologically bankrupt" Tiger Woods, and Phil's big moment

We're at halftime of the 2010 Tour season—two majors down, two to go (plus the Ryder Cup). What better time to check in with Brandel Chamblee, a Friend of Flyers and, for my greens fees, the sharpest golf analyst on the tube. 

Chamblee's not afraid to speak his mind, and he's usually right—like when he said Phil would rule a Tour without Tiger, and predicted that the tabloid circus would leave town after Woods' Masters return. Chamblee was in typical, candid form during last week's AT&T National, calling the slumping Tiger Woods "emotionally and psychologically bankrupt." (Not everyone's a Brandel booster. An active Tour pro recently grumbled to me, "Why does he use those 5-dollar words? Can't he just use normal words?" Chamblee uttering platitudinous palaver? Extirpate the thought!)

Here's Chamblee's take on 2010. 

CONNELL BARRETT: Brandel, let's start with Tiger's season so far: a missed cut, an almost missed cut, a WD, and two T-4's in majors. I've been saying that he reminds me of a cell phone only getting one or two bars of service. He's not at full strength. What's your assessment? 

BRANDEL CHAMBLEE: That's pretty accurate. Injuries and issues have robbed him of his brilliance. If you took his record this year—two top-5's in the first two majors—you'd give a thumbs up for any other player. Lee Westwood or Vijay Singh would take it. But we judge Tiger to a standard only he can live up to. He's played 21 rounds this year, and with the exception of the first round of the Masters and the third round of the U.S. Open, he's been flat. Those two rounds remind us that he's still capable of brilliance like no one else, but I don't see him playing the kind of golf we saw last year [seven Tour wins, the FedEx Cup title] until 2011. He's going through mental strife, and he will continue to for some time. 

CB: You're a former Tour player. Can personal issues have a direct, negative impact on your game? 

BC: Absolutely. There are players—Ernie Els, Phil Mickelson—who may be more innately talented than Tiger Woods. But what has set Tiger apart, what makes us shake our head at his greatness, is his ability to come up in the big moments. That's not talent. That's focus and comfort, which is born of a clear mind. But this year is unlike any other. He's surrounded by [fans] who don't know how much to applaud, a media that doesn't know how to handle him, his personal issues—it all adds up to what must be going through his mind. For Tiger to play the kind of golf we're accustomed to, he needs a clear, quiet mind. 

CB: The British Open at St. Andrews is less than two weeks away. Tiger has called St. Andrews his favorite course, even over Augusta. But I wouldn't put money on him. I sense this will be a lost year for Tiger in the majors. To think, the scandal could cost Tiger Woods two, three majors, if you assume he would have otherwise cleaned up this year. 

BC: I agree about the lost year. It's a year of lost opportunities. If he comes into 2010 the way he went into last year, you've got Augusta, Pebble, St. Andrews—they were lined up for him to pick up at least one, maybe two or three. A lot of people like him to win at St. Andrews. I don't know if "shocked" is the right word, but I'd be pretty darned surprised if Tiger wins there. Every single tournament this year some part of his game has been in complete disarray. This past week [at the AT&T National] his irons and short game were both atrocious—by his standards and Tour standards. The bright side is, he drove the ball well. It seems every week Tiger's on a fact-finding mission, not a mission to win a tournament. 

CB: I think Tiger and Hank Haney parting ways will be a good thing for Woods, who can dig his swing out of the dirt. Gurus are way overrated—OK, I've had 12 of them, but I'm a hacker. The greatest player of his era should can hone his own swing, right? 

BC: Well, Tiger's very analytical—he likes to bounce things off of people. I'm not positive, but I think maybe he's been doing that with Notah Begay [Chamblee's Golf Channel colleague, ex Tour pro, and friend of Tiger]. Tiger drove the ball better at the AT&T, but his swing is still nowhere near where it needs to be.

CB: You've been very outspoken of Tiger's swing. Break it down for us. 

BC: In my mind, Tiger's getting [his left wrist] way too bowed in the backswing, which lays off the club [at the top]. He also gets the club too far away from his body in the takeaway. This all leads to a series of compensating moves on the way down. He is not all systems go. Not by a long shot. I think he needs to find a solid coach. I think Hank leaving caught him off-guard. Look, Tiger's had five different golf swings in his career. He can win with any series of swings. But he needs clarity in what he's working on—a point of reference. A swing coach can provide that. 

CB: Besides "As the Woods Turns," what's the story of the year on Tour so far? Phil's Masters win? 

BC: Everything's Tiger related. Even Phil Mickelson's fine play is more relevant and entertaining because he has a chance to supplant Tiger as No. 1, something Phil has never done. So "Story 1-A" is Tiger Woods. "Story 1-B" is Phil maybe taking over the No. 1 spot. Again, Tiger is paying a price for all the strife in his life. I doubt that becoming No. 2 would bother Tiger Woods all that much, except that it's Phil Mickelson who would be taking over the spot. Tiger is not particularly fond of Phil—that's no secret. Why? Who knows. Probably because Phil Mickelson is everything Tiger Woods is not. You couldn't get more opposite. 

CB: Phil seems to have sensed, and seized, the moment this year. He's downplayed questions of possibly becoming the World No. 1, but he's so competitive that it must motivate him.

BC: Phil Mickelson has risen to the occasion this year. At the Masters, he played some of the most spectacular golf ever on a Saturday and Sunday at a major—including that spectacular shot on no. 15. And he finished [tied for] fourth at the U.S. Open. Phil is certainly a phenomenal story for 2010. 

NEXT FLYERS: Part 2 with Brandel Chamblee, who reveals why Phil Mickelson has never made hay at the British Open—and why St. Andrews could be different.