ATTENTION, READERS in the 28 EUROPEAN VAT COUNTRIES: Because of the new VAT law, you probably can't order books direct from my site now. But that's okay -- just go to my Smashwords author page.
You can order PDFs (as well as all the other ebook formats) from there.

Tuesday, September 4, 2012

The Limerick Summary: 2012 Deutsche Bank Championship

Winner: Rory McIlroy

Around the wider world of golf: Things weren't too busy this weekend. Richie Ramsay won the Omega European Masters on the ET; Robert Streb won the Mylan Classic on the Tour; and Sun-Ju Ahn won the Golf5 Ladies on the JLPGA. (The Constructivist has the details.)

Rory lifts his 3rd trophy of the year

A quick look at the final leaderboard tells you all you need to know about the Deutsche Bank Championship:
  1. Rory McIlroy, -20
  2. Louis Oosthuizen, -19
  3. Tiger Woods, -18
  4. Phil Mickelson, -14
    Dustin Johnson, -14
The leaderboard was laden with big names playing well. That's the key thing. While Rory and Louis were the two most likely winners, stumbles by both in the last 4 or 5 holes, combined with a solid round by Tiger, actually gave him a chance to come from 6 back and post an upset win. In the end, Rory posted -4, Louis even, and Tiger -5 for the final round.

And then the other names finally found their games with Phil leading the way, posting -5 himself. This bodes well for both the rest of the playoffs and for the Ryder Cup. Speaking of the Ryder Cup:

This was the tournament within the tournament as Davis Love III will name his captain's picks early this morning, but I'm going to take a shot at guessing who he'll pick:
  • Steve Stricker
  • Brandt Snedeker
  • Dustin Johnson
  • Hunter Mahan
Here's my logic: Stricks teams well with Tiger and putts well. Sneds is clearly in the best form of any of the choices... and he also putts well. DJ is the "hot player" who played his way onto the team; he has length, a vastly improved short game, and pairs well with both Phil and Tiger. I think these three are as close to locks as you're going to find.

As for the fourth... I think Mahan makes it simply because he won the Accenture Match Play (it's hard to leave off the reigning match play champion) and, even after his poor play of the last few months, he's still #9 on the points list. In fact, GC/NBC showed an "updated" points list of what it would look like if points had continued to be awarded since the cutoff date... and these four players were #9 thru #12. I just don't see DL3 choosing outside of these four. (I personally like Bo Van Pelt over Mahan, however. I think "home games" are the best time to acclimate rookies to the team. I think Van Pelt may make the next Ryder Cup on points, and I'd like him to have some experience under his belt.)

At any rate, GC will carry the announcement press conference at 10am ET this morning.

Does it seem as if I'm glossing over this tournament? I don't mean to. It's just that there was too much going on to really write an adequate summary. I really do feel that the leaderboard tells it all: Tiger and Phil finally getting it in gear over "the weekend," such as it was, being that we had a Monday finish; Rory continuing to find a way to post scores despite still not playing quite as well as he did earlier in the year; and the other big names we expect to be in contention finally starting to rise to the challenge. That's the legacy of Deutsche Bank this year... and it's a good one.

So the Limerick Summary simply salutes Rory on getting his 2nd win in 3 starts and his 3rd win overall this year:
A couple of months ago, Rors
Was struggling to post a good score.
But a major and Deutsche Bank
Makes two out of three, thank
You! Clearly he struggles no more.
The photo came from the tournament home page at


  1. Mike,

    John Huggan, in his book Cure a Slice Forever, advocates using a slightly open stance with the feet to hit a draw.
    I've always been taught to use a slightly closed stance.
    I tried his way, but I kept hitting pulls to the left (I'm a lefty).

    I realize that there is no right or wrong way to play this game, and, with time, I could probably hit draws with an open stance.

    What do you think?


  2. You're both right, Patrick. A slightly closed stance is the standard way to hit a draw... and, in my opinion, the easiest way.

    However, if you use Hogan's methods (as taught in Five Lessons) you can hit a draw from a slightly open stance. Here's how it works:

    1) Hogan kept his trailing (right) elbow extremely close to his side. That encourages an in-to-out swing path, even from a square stance.

    2) Hogan also stressed pushing the hips slightly toward the target to start the swing; that's how he further "dropped" his swing plane to aim it even more in-to-out. In my copy of Five Lessons, the pictures showing this begin on page 88. (I should point out that Hogan didn't advocate a huge hip slide, but the emphasis placed on "starting the downswing with the lower body" by most instruction methods causes players to push their hips farther forward and lean backward more. That exaggerates the in-to-out move.)

    3) When you combine these two movements, the club path is traveling very much in-to-out. Open your stance slightly, and the club path is still slightly in-to-out.

    4) And since most teachers tell you to twist your forearms through impact to "release" the clubhead, you can see how they get a draw from an open stance.

    Essentially, if you have an in-to-out swing path, you can play a draw from an open stance. If you have a "straight down the line" swing path, you'll need to close your stance in order to draw the ball.

    And bear in mind that you said Huggan specifies a slightly open stance "with the feet." You and I are assuming your feet and your shoulders are aimed along the same line. If they aren't, all bets are off.

    Many slicers close their feet but open their shoulders. (In fact, Michael Breed talked about that very problem Monday night on The Golf Fix.) Huggan may be reversing that and setting the shoulders slightly closed to enhance an in-to-out move. You'll have to recheck the book to find out if that's the case.

    Does that clear up the apparent contradiction?