>>>>>
>>>>>Yes. good point. Lucky for him Tiger was having putting problems.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>I didnt' think he putted that badly from a scoring perspective.
>>>>
>>>>From what I saw, Tiger's putting problems all seemed to be mis-judging long approach putts. He didn't get anything really close and never sank a long birdie putt. But almost nobody did and certainly not with any consistency.
>>>>
>>>>Every time I looked around Tiger was making clutch 6-10 footers for par saves. If he were putting poorly, he would have wound up five strokes back, not one.
>>>
>>>
>>>Afterwards Tiger referred to the 30 foot putt that could have tied it on the last hole as "a triple break." With the greens that tough, no wonder the best golfers in the world were all above par.
>>>
>>>Par in itself was a distorted concept in this tournament. They tricked the course out to be as nasty as possible, then called it a par 70. Including two par 4's of 500 yards or more.
>>
>>Not to mention a 300 yard par three?
>>Having to use a driver on a par three is a bit too much.


So true.

And how about that rough? I thought I must have Rip Van Winkled for a few weeks and it was the British Open.

The U.S. Open is known for, and is supposed to be played on, insanely difficult courses. This one was just this side of sadistic. Or maybe the other side.

All the more amazing that Tiger won the Open at Pebble Beach a few years ago with a score of 12 under, 15 shots ahead of the second place finisher. That's one of those performances people will look back at decades from now and say "Whoa."