Connect with us

Opinion & Analysis

5 takeaways from the Woods-Mickelson match

Published

on

The match between Tiger Woods and Phil Mickelson has received mixed feedback since its finish on Friday night. Mickelson took the win and $9 million after birdieing the fourth playoff hole to triumph and claim bragging rights over his old rival. There are plenty of elements of the contest that have drawn a strong reaction from golf fans, and here are my five quick takeaways from the match.

1. Not selling tickets was a mistake.

The announcement that tickets would not be made available for the showdown at Shadow Creek drew criticism before the event, and anyone who watched the contest between the two men will agree that the decision was an error. Anytime Woods is in action, there is an electricity in the air, and while his relationship with Mickelson is friendly these days, there is still a significant and bitter division between Woods and Mickelson supporters. A division which could have created a genuinely spectacular atmosphere, and enhanced the event no end. It was a trick missed.

2. The side-bets enhanced things, but we needed more.

The gambling during the contest made certain moments far more interesting than they would have been without it, but the event needed more of it. Watching two men take their tee-shots on a par-3 midway through a round isn’t exactly a box-office moment, but when you stick a $300k closest to the hole challenge in the mix then it no doubt enhances the moment. There was no seven-figure side-bet like Mickelson had teased may happen, and the wagers came to a surprising halt the deeper we got into the round, but when they were occurring, they made things more interesting.

3. Embrace the razzmatazz

A HBO series, smack talk, drones flying overhead and gambling was all too much for some purists who felt the entire occasion was not fitting for the game of golf. Well, neither is the over the top celebrations and crowd chanting at the Ryder Cup, right? And that event has hardly hurt the game of golf. For golf to grow it needs to be creative, and this event indeed was that. Will an event like this be seen again? Who knows, but there seems to be no harm in having spectacles like this on the odd occasion.

4. Cut the microphones or allow the players to go unfiltered

It was perhaps unrealistic to expect a non-filtered Woods and Mickelson going at each other for 18 holes, but what we did get was too reserved. Both men were naturally clearly conscious of saying the wrong thing and getting themselves in trouble, and it made for too many awkward moments. One of those moments came while walking down the first fairway where both Woods and Mickelson incessantly spoke about how “cool” Samuel L. Jackson is, a conversation that felt so artificial that had it continued much longer may have induced me into having a stroke. Ironically, the best on-mic moment came on the same hole, after a very smug Woods took delight in Mickelson missing his birdie try, showing the potential of the experiment. Next time, allow the players to relax and be themselves.

5. No Tiger, No Party

With the biggest draw in the history of the sport failing to attract universal appeal to the event, it certainly makes you wonder how any other player could do so. Woods might not have been at his best on Friday, but he will always move the needle. The standard of golf may have been better if the contest had featured the current top two players in the game. But, how popular do you think an 18 hole event with microphones and ribbing between Brooks Koepka and Justin Rose would be?

Gianni is the Managing Editor at GolfWRX. He can be contacted at gianni@golfwrx.com.

13 Comments

13 Comments

  1. Luke Mullin

    Nov 28, 2018 at 4:07 am

    I didn’t watch it but to me it summed up all that is wrong with the higher echelons of professional golf. Too much money, too much hype and by all accounts the golf wasn’t of the highest standard. If this is the way that televised golf is going then I won’t be signing up for it.

  2. Cooper408

    Nov 27, 2018 at 2:19 pm

    The concept of this event was so on-point, but the execution was miserable. Something like this needs undercards for three primary reasons
    1. There need to be undercard matches — if for nothing else than to give us something to watch other Tiger and Phil make the 3-5 minute walk between every shot. Give us a few other pairings that golf fans might want to see, and maybe even throw a celebrity match in there with guys with low handicaps (Romo, Curry, Ray Allen, etc.), and then have an iso-can on the main match as an option for die-hards.

    2. If you’re going to mic-up the players, we don’t need them on ALL the time. I don’t need to hear Tiger gulping down his water, or Phil’s heavy breathing as he’s walking uphill, and most of it is pointless, forced banter that EJ and the crew just talked over anyway.

    3. Forget the exclusivity — PGA events are held on exclusive enough courses; there’s no need to make it even more so by holding such a big event on a course not suited for galleries of fans.

    • Cooper408

      Nov 27, 2018 at 2:20 pm

      I just realized I got off track and forgot the change my into haha. Oops.

  3. Euan Hardman

    Nov 27, 2018 at 11:54 am

    From Iain Carter BBC Golf Correspondent:

    Cards on the table, I did not watch it. I had plans last Friday night and they were not going to be changed by The Match even though it carried a scary significance that stretched beyond a contest between America’s two best known golfers.

    Judging by the reaction to Phil Mickelson’s 22nd hole victory over Tiger Woods I did not miss much.

    The golf was mediocre by their standards, their much-vaunted “smack talk” was pretty dull and the destiny of the $9m (£7m) was settled by a 93-yard pitch and putt.

    But this contrived contest offered a glimpse of where professional golf is headed. The destination looks terribly tawdry and potentially downright dangerous.

    This was nothing more than a desperate attempt to make a quick buck. Never mind the $19.99 television charge, the most significant ground broken by this pay-per-view pantomime was the wager culture it promoted.

    Changing odds were constantly updated as MGM’s gambling app offered an assortment of “in-play” punts. The telecast featured betting experts effectively promoting the idea that the only way to enjoy the golf was to have some money on it.

    Timing is everything and American sport is on the threshold of a betting revolution. Golf does not want to miss out after the US Supreme Court’s decision to end a federal ban on sports punting.

    The Match was a cynical play to get the ball rolling. It is well known that Mickelson loves a bet and plays high stakes money matches with fellow pros on the Tuesdays of tournament weeks.

    Woods said “we’ll play for whatever makes him feel uncomfortable” when the idea of a winner-takes-all match was initiated at last May’s Players Championship. It would be all about the money.

    So it was perfectly in keeping when the publicity shoot last week had both players posing with millions of greenbacks piled around them. It was so tacky, so out of touch, so unfeeling for the world outside their super-rich existence.

    “When they put that photograph out of both of them caressing nine million we were left going ‘hang on a minute, this is not our sport’,” Sir Nick Faldo told BBC Radio 5 live’s Breakfast show.

    Yet those tasteless, gaudy pictures did their job; they stoked interest, had people talking and got The Match trending.

    This was never going to be a worthy, legitimate sporting occasion which makes the fact that it appeared as a sanctioned event on the PGA Tour calendar hard to stomach.

    How could they let it overshadow the World Cup in Australia? Well, The Match was a cash cow, a vehicle to open golf to fledgling US gambling markets and so commanded official endorsement.

    The PGA Tour wants sports betting on its platforms. It recently announced an agreement with distributors to circulate scoring data for media usage and gambling purposes.

    There is no doubt golf lends itself to in-play betting, a type of wagering that nets huge sums for bookies. It reportedly accounted for 77% of Bet365’s revenue when the online bookmaker last week revealed an operating profit of $790 million.

    That is money largely extracted from losing punters’ pockets, many lured by uninvited tv ads instructing us to take note of changing odds and to have a wager.

    Sir Nick Faldo has been particularly critical of The Match
    For some it is a welcome bit of fun to enhance our viewing, for others it is a dangerous assault on impressionable minds that can lead to a lifetime of misery.

    Either way, this is the world that has caught the eye of professional golf and it wants its share.

    There is already gambling on golf but it is now headed to another level. So far the sport has been spared a betting scandal but it needs to be wary of the way integrity easily disappears when betting becomes a central part of proceedings.

    It would be naive to think otherwise, especially if we are headed down the “exhibition” route of The Match.

    Many have wondered whether Mickelson and Woods privately decided to split the $9m so both were guaranteed a big pay day regardless of the result. There is no evidence to suggest this, but cynics still ask the question.

  4. AJ

    Nov 27, 2018 at 1:40 am

    Well it might have made up a little bit for all the runner ups at US Opens for Phil. A tiny bit.

  5. jgpl001

    Nov 26, 2018 at 4:01 pm

    The 5 things to take from this were:

    1. This was a non-event
    2. Thia was a non-event
    3. This was a non-event
    4. This was a non-event
    5. This was a non-event

    Time to move on guys -YAWN

  6. Tom

    Nov 26, 2018 at 3:29 pm

    Playing an 18 hole match for $9 million is an insult to the Fed Ex season bonus of $10 million based on actual season performance…this was just a circus minus the elephants and trapeze artists, although it did feature two clowns.

  7. Tiger Noods

    Nov 26, 2018 at 3:21 pm

    The best commentary and smack talk came from Chuck and Sam. Chuck apologizing to America, saying they were witnessing crappy golf, was the highlight of the show.

    If you want a forum like this, take 8 guys, play 6 holes, best 4 strokes play match on the second 6, and then you play 2 for the last 6 for all the marbles. Let the others continue on and have whatever side-bets they want. Just a 5 mill pool. Winner gets 2 mill, second gets 0.5, and so does 3rd. 4th gets 250. Then along the way, you have closest to the pin for all contestants on all four par 3’s for 250k, longest drive, longest fairway drive, and all birdies pay 50k.

    8 guys, 8 mics, and the commentary box should be just Ernie, Chuck, and Sam. We don’t need any golf experts for the broadcast; just have someone with rules information on standby. Add Feherty for on-course if needed. That’s it. That’s your winner.

    “All Star Golf (series-number)” – just like UFC. And good gravy I would already be hyped for the first women’s version to hear the catty chit.

  8. Liberty Apples

    Nov 26, 2018 at 12:10 pm

    Let’s face it. It was a bust. And a predictable one.

  9. Gunter Eisenberg

    Nov 26, 2018 at 12:02 pm

    I’d pay money to see Spieth and Patrick Reed go at it on PPV. Judging from the Ryder Cup, they clearly don’t like each other and are in the prime of the careers now.

    • Roy

      Nov 26, 2018 at 2:29 pm

      May be in the prime of their careers, but had fewer W’s then Phil/Tiger last year on the PGA tour….

  10. JD

    Nov 26, 2018 at 11:47 am

    The PGA ruined this event. Limiting side bets, not allowing ticket sales, filtering both golfers. They are so focused on preserving the good ole’ days of golf, that they aren’t adapting quick enough and are going to lose out on a significant amount of fans moving forward.

    There should be an all-star weekend for golf. There should be more match play seeded tournaments, like a march madness for golf. There should be more stadium holes, if not a whole stadium course. Basketball, football, baseball, hockey, all adapting to modern attention requirements for their sport… i really don’t see golf doing any of that. There mere fact that these dudes still have to wear pants in 90 degree heat because of a rule made in 1900 just shows you how off pace the PGA is.

    But hey, at-least we get to drop a ball from our knee height now. That’s the evolution we’ve been waiting for!

  11. leezer99

    Nov 26, 2018 at 10:55 am

    You know what was even more boring than the actual event? The incessant coverage after the fact of how it could have been better.

Leave a Reply

Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Opinion & Analysis

The 2 primary challenges golf equipment companies face

Published

on

As the editor-in-chief of this website and an observer of the GolfWRX forums and other online golf equipment discourse for over a decade, I’m pretty well attuned to the grunts and grumbles of a significant portion of the golf equipment purchasing spectrum. And before you accuse me of lording above all in some digital ivory tower, I’d like to offer that I worked at golf courses (public and private) for years prior to picking up my pen, so I’m well-versed in the non-degenerate golf equipment consumers out there. I touched (green)grass (retail)!

Complaints about the ills of and related to the OEMs usually follow some version of: Product cycles are too short for real innovation, tour equipment isn’t the same as retail (which is largely not true, by the way), too much is invested in marketing and not enough in R&D, top staffer X hasn’t even put the new driver in play, so it’s obviously not superior to the previous generation, prices are too high, and on and on.

Without digging into the merits of any of these claims, which I believe are mostly red herrings, I’d like to bring into view of our rangefinder what I believe to be the two primary difficulties golf equipment companies face.

One: As Terry Koehler, back when he was the CEO of Ben Hogan, told me at the time of the Ft Worth irons launch, if you can’t regularly hit the golf ball in a coin-sized area in the middle of the face, there’s not a ton that iron technology can do for you. Now, this is less true now with respect to irons than when he said it, and is less and less true by degrees as the clubs get larger (utilities, fairways, hybrids, drivers), but there remains a great deal of golf equipment truth in that statement. Think about it — which is to say, in TL;DR fashion, get lessons from a qualified instructor who will teach you about the fundamentals of repeatable impact and how the golf swing works, not just offer band-aid fixes. If you can’t repeatably deliver the golf club to the golf ball in something resembling the manner it was designed for, how can you expect to be getting the most out of the club — put another way, the maximum value from your investment?

Similarly, game improvement equipment can only improve your game if you game it. In other words, get fit for the clubs you ought to be playing rather than filling the bag with the ones you wish you could hit or used to be able to hit. Of course, don’t do this if you don’t care about performance and just want to hit a forged blade while playing off an 18 handicap. That’s absolutely fine. There were plenty of members in clubs back in the day playing Hogan Apex or Mizuno MP-32 irons who had no business doing so from a ballstriking standpoint, but they enjoyed their look, feel, and complementary qualities to their Gatsby hats and cashmere sweaters. Do what brings you a measure of joy in this maddening game.

Now, the second issue. This is not a plea for non-conforming equipment; rather, it is a statement of fact. USGA/R&A limits on every facet of golf equipment are detrimental to golf equipment manufacturers. Sure, you know this, but do you think about it as it applies to almost every element of equipment? A 500cc driver would be inherently more forgiving than a 460cc, as one with a COR measurement in excess of 0.83. 50-inch shafts. Box grooves. And on and on.

Would fewer regulations be objectively bad for the game? Would this erode its soul? Fortunately, that’s beside the point of this exercise, which is merely to point out the facts. The fact, in this case, is that equipment restrictions and regulations are the slaughterbench of an abundance of innovation in the golf equipment space. Is this for the best? Well, now I’ve asked the question twice and might as well give a partial response, I guess my answer to that would be, “It depends on what type of golf you’re playing and who you’re playing it with.”

For my part, I don’t mind embarrassing myself with vintage blades and persimmons chasing after the quasi-spiritual elevation of a well-struck shot, but that’s just me. Plenty of folks don’t give a damn if their grooves are conforming. Plenty of folks think the folks in Liberty Corner ought to add a prison to the museum for such offences. And those are just a few of the considerations for the amateur game — which doesn’t get inside the gallery ropes of the pro game…

Different strokes in the game of golf, in my humble opinion.

Anyway, I believe equipment company engineers are genuinely trying to build better equipment year over year. The marketing departments are trying to find ways to make this equipment appeal to the broadest segment of the golf market possible. All of this against (1) the backdrop of — at least for now — firm product cycles. And golfers who, with their ~15 average handicap (men), for the most part, are not striping the golf ball like Tiger in his prime and seem to have less and less time year over year to practice and improve. (2) Regulations that massively restrict what they’re able to do…

That’s the landscape as I see it and the real headwinds for golf equipment companies. No doubt, there’s more I haven’t considered, but I think the previous is a better — and better faith — point of departure when formulating any serious commentary on the golf equipment world than some of the more cynical and conspiratorial takes I hear.

Agree? Disagree? Think I’m worthy of an Adam Hadwin-esque security guard tackle? Let me know in the comments.

@golfoncbs The infamous Adam Hadwin tackle ? #golf #fyp #canada #pgatour #adamhadwin ? Ghibli-style nostalgic waltz – MaSssuguMusic

Continue Reading

Podcasts

Fore Love of Golf: Introducing a new club concept

Published

on

Episode #16 brings us Cliff McKinney. Cliff is the founder of Old Charlie Golf Club, a new club, and concept, to be built in the Florida panhandle. The model is quite interesting and aims to make great, private golf more affordable. We hope you enjoy the show!

Continue Reading

Opinion & Analysis

On Scottie Scheffler wondering ‘What’s the point of winning?’

Published

on

Last week, I came across a reel from BBC Sport on Instagram featuring Scottie Scheffler speaking to the media ahead of The Open at Royal Portrush. In it, he shared that he often wonders what the point is of wanting to win tournaments so badly — especially when he knows, deep down, that it doesn’t lead to a truly fulfilling life.

 

View this post on Instagram

 

A post shared by BBC SPORT (@bbcsport)

“Is it great to be able to win tournaments and to accomplish the things I have in the game of golf? Yeah, it brings tears to my eyes just to think about it because I’ve literally worked my entire life to be good at this sport,” Scheffler said. “To have that kind of sense of accomplishment, I think, is a pretty cool feeling. To get to live out your dreams is very special, but at the end of the day, I’m not out here to inspire the next generation of golfers. I’m not out here to inspire someone to be the best player in the world, because what’s the point?”

Ironically — or perhaps perfectly — he went on to win the claret jug.

That question — what’s the point of winning? — cuts straight to the heart of the human journey.

As someone who’s spent over two decades in the trenches of professional golf, and in deep study of the mental, emotional, and spiritual dimensions of the game, I see Scottie’s inner conflict as a sign of soul evolution in motion.

I came to golf late. I wasn’t a junior standout or college All-American. At 27, I left a steady corporate job to see if I could be on the PGA Tour starting as a 14-handicap, average-length hitter. Over the years, my journey has been defined less by trophies and more by the relentless effort to navigate the deeply inequitable and gated system of professional golf — an effort that ultimately turned inward and helped me evolve as both a golfer and a person.

One perspective that helped me make sense of this inner dissonance around competition and our culture’s tendency to overvalue winning is the idea of soul evolution.

The University of Virginia’s Division of Perceptual Studies has done extensive research on reincarnation, and Netflix’s Surviving Death (Episode 6) explores the topic, too. Whether you take it literally or metaphorically, the idea that we’re on a long arc of growth — from beginner to sage elder — offers a profound perspective.

If you accept the premise literally, then terms like “young soul” and “old soul” start to hold meaning. However, even if we set the word “soul” aside, it’s easy to see that different levels of life experience produce different worldviews.

Newer souls — or people in earlier stages of their development — may be curious and kind but still lack discernment or depth. There is a naivety, and they don’t yet question as deeply, tending to see things in black and white, partly because certainty feels safer than confronting the unknown.

As we gain more experience, we begin to experiment. We test limits. We chase extreme external goals — sometimes at the expense of health, relationships, or inner peace — still operating from hunger, ambition, and the fragility of the ego.

It’s a necessary stage, but often a turbulent and unfulfilling one.

David Duval fell off the map after reaching World No. 1. Bubba Watson had his own “Is this it?” moment with his caddie, Ted Scott, after winning the Masters.

In Aaron Rodgers: Enigma, reflecting on his 2011 Super Bowl win, Rodgers said:

“Now I’ve accomplished the only thing that I really, really wanted to do in my life. Now what? I was like, ‘Did I aim at the wrong thing? Did I spend too much time thinking about stuff that ultimately doesn’t give you true happiness?’”

Jim Carrey once said, “I think everybody should get rich and famous and do everything they ever dreamed of so they can see that it’s not the answer.”

Eventually, though, something shifts.

We begin to see in shades of gray. Winning, dominating, accumulating—these pursuits lose their shine. The rewards feel more fleeting. Living in a constant state of fight-or-flight makes us feel alive, yes, but not happy and joyful.

Compassion begins to replace ambition. Love, presence, and gratitude become more fulfilling than status, profits, or trophies. We crave balance over burnout. Collaboration over competition. Meaning over metrics.

Interestingly, if we zoom out, we can apply this same model to nations and cultures. Countries, like people, have a collective “soul stage” made up of the individuals within them.

Take the United States, for example. I’d place it as a mid-level soul: highly competitive and deeply driven, but still learning emotional maturity. Still uncomfortable with nuance. Still believing that more is always better. Despite its global wins, the U.S. currently ranks just 23rd in happiness (as of 2025). You might liken it to a gifted teenager—bold, eager, and ambitious, but angsty and still figuring out how to live well and in balance. As much as a parent wants to protect their child, sometimes the child has to make their own mistakes to truly grow.

So when Scottie Scheffler wonders what the point of winning is, I don’t see someone losing strength.

I see someone evolving.

He’s beginning to look beyond the leaderboard. Beyond metrics of success that carry a lower vibration. And yet, in a poetic twist, Scheffler did go on to win The Open. But that only reinforces the point: even at the pinnacle, the question remains. And if more of us in the golf and sports world — and in U.S. culture at large — started asking similar questions, we might discover that the more meaningful trophy isn’t about accumulating or beating others at all costs.

It’s about awakening and evolving to something more than winning could ever promise.

Continue Reading

WITB

Facebook

Trending