Saturday slump ends Mickelson's Open hopes
SOUTHPORT, England—Coming into the first British Open since 1994 without You Know Who in the field, Phil Mickelson was the overwhelming fan favorite. British bookmakers are a more cynical bunch—they didn't give Mickelson much chance of taking home the Claret Jug, presumably because of his lousy Open history that has seen him record just one top-10 finish in 15 previous trips across the Ocean.
As usual, the bookies were proved right.
In Saturday's third round Mickelson shot a lackluster 76, falling to 13-over-par for the tournament. Midway through the day's play, Lefty stood 11 strokes off the lead.
"I was fighting hard, and in the middle of the round it kind of got me," Mickelson said. "I was 2-over at the turn and I felt like if I could keep it around there I'd be okay. But those three bogeys [on 10, 11, and 12] hurt."
The world number two admitted that the cold weather and high winds nullified the strength of his game—creativity. "I don't think creativity is going to help you. I just kind of think you need to keep it in play and try to make as many pars as you can," he said.
Through 54 holes Mickelson has made just five birdies.
(Photo: Peter Morrison/AP)
Posted by: Isaac Evans | Jul 21, 2008 12:38:10 PM
Phil is a professional golfer, better than half the field at any tournament he enters. He is no Tiger, but who is? He makes terrible decisions on the course to make us all wonder if he really wants to win or just pull off a shot that no one else can do, but who knows? Overrated, that's a bit of a stretch, but overhyped to be the next great one; now that's right on. Pressure busts pipes and Phil's seem to bust more often than others.
Posted by: Drake | Jul 20, 2008 2:31:03 AM
I find it odd that a thread that was supposed to be about a poor 3rd Round result by Phil has turned into a Tiger vs. Phil debate. I mean, what exactly is there to debate? With the possible of exception of Jack and maybe Bobby Jones, Tiger's the best ever. Phil, on the other hand, isn't Tiger, but he's a damn fine golfer with multiple majors and to call him overrated is clearly absurd. Now, if you want to call him an underachiever, THAT's another discussion altogether. But how is he overrated? Even the most ardent Phil fans realize he's #2 in the world at best, and the current world rankings have him safely in the #2 spot. He also ranks 2nd (behind Tiger again) in PGA victories among golfers born since 1950.
Does Phil make stupid decisions on the golf course? Yes. Has Phil snatched defeat from the jaws of victory on occasion? Yes. Is Phil still one of the greatest ever? Hate to break it to you, but again, the answer is yes.
Posted by: Myles | Jul 20, 2008 1:26:03 AM
Phil Mickelson has the golf skills to play with anybody, on any given shot. What he seems to lack is the mental and physical toughness, discipline and stamina, to compete time and again over 72 holes. All of this exacerbated by a bit of overconfidence. He can execute a phenomenal shot, or even post an extraordinary round or two, but at some point, especially in the majors, he's prone to give up a big score on a hole, or set of holes, and then he's toast. He'll lose focus or start getting too aggressive and three putt the next hole or two, or drive his ball into horrible trouble. He doesn't have the discipline to avoid blow-up holes or the toughness to take a deep breath and pull himself steadily, methodically and patiently out of the self-imposed hole he's dug. He wants it back all at once, the cheap and easy way out. Tiger Woods seems almost exactly opposite. When he first arrived on the PGA, he just turned his superior skills loose on the field, winning the 1997 Masters by twelve strokes, the 2000 US Open by fifteen strokes and in the same year, the British Open by eight. Despite his superior skills, he reshaped his swing to be less fluid but more consistent, and he traded in his prodigious distance and bold pin seeking approach shots for more consistency and fewer unrecoverable errors. He now rarely wins by double-digits, but he wins more often. He now plays "within himself", grinding out every shot, every hole, every round, all four days, minimizing mistakes, staying in contention. Then when he needs to (like Michael Jordan, Jim Brown, Joe Montana, Muhammad Ali, and all the greats), he kicks it up a notch to pull ahead and stay ahead. After his remarkable efforts at this year's US Open, he left no doubt (except perhaps in Retief Goosen's juvenile mind) regarding his mental and physical toughness. With Tiger, it's expected. With Phil it's unimaginable. That's the difference.
Posted by: Chris | Jul 19, 2008 10:32:58 PM
Man, a lot of you are morons. The last time Phil and Tiger were paired head-to-head, Phil won. How many golfers can say that?
No, he's not nearly as good as Tiger. Who is? He's still better than anyone else out there.
Posted by: Brian Sullivan | Jul 19, 2008 10:02:47 PM
Phil isn't Tiger. Nor does he claim to be. But what he is, even if he never wins again, he would be considered one of the 20 best golfers in history, above all the current actives - with the exception of Tiger. He has gotten so much grief for the no driver strategy - what do you think Rocco did - he avged 275 yrd drives, but hit many fairways. That is exactly what Phil's plan was. Ok, he didn't execute - but so didn't 120 (minus Tiger and Rocco) others. He is great to fans, respecteful to the other players and properly humble to Tiger. Maybe his game wasn't made for the Open Championship - but many other greats had weak spots in their majors - Faldo never won the US Open or the PGA - Norman has only won the Open, and so on. Btw, last time it was Tiger versus Phil, 4th round in a Tournament - guess who came out on top - Phil in the Duetch Bank. - Less than 1 year ago. So to say he has no game is plain ignorance or more likely spitefullness.
Posted by: Joe Zubrick | Jul 19, 2008 8:17:56 PM
To start, I’m not a Mickelson fan-never have been, never will be. I think he has enormous talent-sure, he’d beat the bloggers on this post day in and day out-he’s supposed to-he’s a professional athlete. And I think the goal of professional athlete’s is to win, not to amuse and entertain the fans. How would we have felt about Jordan if had just contented himself with making impossible shots and not have led his teams to victory? What if Federer just served aces and forgot to return groundstrokes?
OK. If Phil’s playing the Skins Game or the Bob Hope, what’s wrong with having a bit of fun. He can knock himself out there. But the bonehead plays in majors-not carrying a driver at Torrey, endlessly flipping chips shots short to a sucker pin, trying to skip shots across the water, bouncing a driver of a tent (and subsequent shots off trees or into bunkers) on the 18th when a 4-wood and a layup would have sewn up a victory make me question his real desire to win. And, to some extent, the fans have enabled this behavior- goading Phil to attempt shots to wow them instead of concentrating on winning the tournament. Sure, he pulls them off occasionally and that just revives interest in seeing what he’ll do next.
A friend of mine marshalls at the FBR and he says Phil is a real gentleman. I don’t doubt it. And I love the fact that he spends time with the fans and signs autographs until his arms droop. And occasionally he shows some grit and determination but it’s usually short-lived. It’s easy to see him as Palmer to Tiger’s Nicklaus but Phil will never have that drive or intensity. In a way, it’s been to easy for him. He’s the best of the also-rans,
30+ wins, three majors, lots of memories- he way ahead of Hal Sutton or any of those who were thought to be the “next” Nicklaus. But he’s just a class clown, a more successful Woody Austin.
Posted by: Thomas | Jul 19, 2008 6:36:35 PM
WOW! It is amazaing to sit back and read some of these comments. My favorite is that Phil hasn;t got "game." He has arguably one of the best short games in golf history, and his imagination around the greens is not even second to Tiger's. Phil's a player with game, and I think thats an important distinction. What has been made up is that Phil's only goal, like Tiger's is to win, and therefore his is unsuccessful. Phil plays the game to enjoy it, try new things, and have fun. And he has won a lot doing that. I guess you all don't appreciate the entertainment and flair he brings to the game, and his incredible skill, only bcause he isn't the winningest player on tour. He will beat anyone on this blog hands down everyday for the next 50 years.
Posted by: carl | Jul 19, 2008 6:33:01 PM
Carol:
Your not qualified to carry Phil's clubs. Get a life. To see him play is awesome. Tiger too. Their the best of the best!!!!
Posted by: Fred | Jul 19, 2008 5:51:18 PM
I think Phil needs to get rid of Mr. Pelz. Sure he had not won a major until he and Pelz was together,
I think that was just a coincidence. Consistency is what make a good player great and a great player a world beater player. I think Phil needs to go back in time when
he use to think for himself and not have Dave Pelz tell him or anyone that would listen how good he is. Phil go back to being Phil.
Posted by: Carol | Jul 19, 2008 5:47:33 PM
Phil is overrated! I am so tired of the call "lefty", Lefty does nothing, but measure every hole, bunker, he should be a greens keeper.
Posted by: Dal | Jul 19, 2008 5:26:48 PM
Phil is such a mystery. Ok not really.
Obv, the guy has some serious skill. But his head? Yikes... Plain and simple he wilts under the pressure.
No one is saying these top tournaments are easy on the nerves but it is the same playing field that everyone else is playing.
The real shame is the work he has to put in on the fake smile and excuses. Be nice to see him get pissed off finally and run off several tournaments in a row.
But we all know he won't. And that's too bad. For him and for us.
Posted by: Robert Burrows | Jul 19, 2008 3:50:09 PM
Do I think Greg can win tomorrow¿
Yes I do. And if he can then why cant Michelson win The Open¿ Go Greg.
Posted by: RJC | Jul 19, 2008 3:36:19 PM
Mickelson is the creation of sportswriters looking for a great white hope. Phil is more like a great white float. Being a fat, non-athlete didn't used to be disqualifying in golf but Tiger has changed all that. Now Phil is just another head case. He and David Duval ought to start their own tournament. At least one of them would have to win.
Posted by: Ed | Jul 19, 2008 3:25:33 PM
It never ceases to amaze me that people get so down on Phil. Sure, he's no Tiger, but who is? He's won dozens of times on the PGA tour, has 3 Major victories, and is a lock for the World Golf Hall of Fame. And with all due respect to Ernie and Vijay, he's arguably the second-best player in the world over the past 15 years. Doesn't sound overrated to me.
Posted by: Carl | Jul 19, 2008 2:35:26 PM
Phil will always get endorsement deals and will always be a fan favorite. He takes chances and that's exciting to watch. He's also got game. Any of you clowns ever see him in person? To call a guy with over 30 PGA tour wins overated you have to be die hard Tiger Wood's or nothing fans.
Posted by: Yesrick | Jul 19, 2008 2:12:26 PM
I would expect to start seeing less endorsement deals for Phil after this year. If he implodes at the PGA Championship then the ride down will be feel like a drop from peak of a roller coaster, fast, scary and over fast.
Posted by: James | Jul 19, 2008 2:08:13 PM
Couldn't agree more with you uug. Phil will never win the Open Championship because he lacks the golf shots needed to win it. He's limited in the way he can play golf and wind definitely reducing his ability to win. I don't doubt for a minute that if Tiger was playing this week, he would at the very least be in contention.
Posted by: MTaylor | Jul 19, 2008 2:01:55 PM
Who will Phil blame for his "choke" this time??? Tiger was not there to steal his chance at victory this time. The truth is he hsa no game. That number 2 ranking is a joke!
Posted by: uug | Jul 19, 2008 1:44:08 PM
With Tiger, no Tiger, good weather, bad weather, good course set up, bad course set up..Phil Mickelson will never be in contention nor win the Open Champonship. I'm not surprise that he is in the bottom of the leaderboard. Lucky he made the cut. I consider Mickelson the most overrated number 2 in Golf ranking. Granted he won 30 plus tournament, but half of them, the One legged who is not around!