Setting at Shadow Creek made up for any perceived shortcomings in original match, which makes venue selection for rematch key to attract viewers’ attention
Scattershooting while contemplating the comments regarding the Tiger Woods-Phil Mickelson rematch (“Tiger Woods-Phil Mickelson Round 2: Is it worth it?” May 1):
1. I thought Match 1 was entertaining. It was a novel idea, and it had potential for greatness. It had an ideal time slot, on the day after Thanksgiving 2018.
2. Agreed, that the quality of golf wasn’t that great, considering the legends who were playing. No one was lighting it up.
3. The pay-per-view was appropriately priced. A $20 spot was just the number for me. More than that, and I probably would have declined. But for 20 bucks? Sure.
4. I wish I had a dollar for everyone who claimed to be offended by the spectacle or didn’t watch. I would wager that three-quarters of those people were watching.
5. The banter between Mickelson and Woods was a little lame, especially considering that Mickelson is well-known for the needle.
6. However, the banter between the other golf “commentators” made up for it. No, Charles Barkley, Samuel L. Jackson, and Pat Perez are not golf commentators, but this wasn’t a serious event. It was for entertainment, and those guys’ banter was almost worth the price of admission. Several times, I laughed out loud at some crazy thing that Barkley or Jackson said. They made the show. So, no, I wasn’t offended. If I want golf purity, give me the Masters. For an exhibition such as this match in Las Vegas, these guys were perfect.
7. Which brings me to the final point. What really made this event was the venue, Shadow Creek. It was fantastic on high-definition TV. Very few people have seen this place. (Granted, anyone staying at a certain property and willing to pay the steep green fee can play it.) To really do Match 2 right, yeah, bringing in quarterbacks Peyton Manning (with Woods) and Tom Brady (with Mickelson) as partners will mix things up a bit. But to really, really do it right, stage it at another iconic venue on which the general public never will set foot.
Tiger vs. Phil at Cypress Point, anyone? Or how about Pine Valley? I would pay good money to watch that one. At TPC Sawgrass? Nah. I’ve already seen that dozens of times. It’s all about the venue.
Little Rock, Ark.
Golfers should ignore Alex Miceli and get back on course
I've never read an article filled with more errors of analysis than what Alex Miceli dumped on readers Monday (“Tread carefully into golf's 'new normal'," May 4).
Statistical analysis is showing – and history will forever remember – that government overreaction to coronavirus was a catastrophic mistake to global health and wealth.
For Miceli to continue to spread flaws of reason only extends the damage already done to the world's economy, and in turn to the game of golf.
We don't need golf to "be cautious," as Miceli posits. Instead, we need golf facilities to reopen fully, and as quickly as possible. And we need to get back to living normal lives, not Miceli's unsubstantiated version of a “new normal.”
A good early-week gesture
With golfers tired of watching reruns of old tournaments, what would be the harm of televising the Tuesday and Wednesday practices when golf returns? Pros and caddies actually could show what they are looking at and how they think about their approach.
Of course, it would be on Golf Channel or ESPN, and I’d bet you would see a spike in viewership. It would help all of us amateurs learn and get tips, plus it would be a good gesture.
River Grove, Ill.
Morning Read invites reader comment. Write to editor Steve Harmon at email@example.com. Please provide your name and city of residence. If your comment is selected for publication, Morning Read will contact you to verify the authenticity of the email and confirm your identity. We will not publish your email address. We reserve the right to edit for clarity and brevity.
Sign up to receive the Morning Read newsletter, along with Where To Golf Next and The Equipment Insider.