Golfers watching Jim Furyk

[kcchief19]

I was talking to a guy at work about the Open on Friday as Furyk was starting to make a move, and I made the comment that while I was going to be away from home one Sunday, I would probably tape the open and watch it later, unless Furyk was in or near the lead because the guy's swing drives me nuts. He agreed.

Am I the only one? I like Jim Furyk as a player and he seems like a nice guy. He's not annoying in a Jesper Parnevik or Vijay Singh kind of way, but I watch that swing and it starts to play head games with my own mental game.

What I find even more amazing is that he is successful with it, to a degree. This was his eighth career win on tour, so he wins about once a year. That makes sense to me, because I think his swing can only be sustained for a short period of time before it starts to fall apart.

There is a comparison to draw with Tiger. Tiger decided several years ago that his swing had taken him as far as it could and that he needed to rebuild it in order to dominate the way he wanted. So he goes off with Butch Harmon and turns into a monster. I'm surprised Furyk has not done the same thing. It may be an old dog-new trick thing, but I think with his mental approach and skills, he could be much more successful with a smoother, compact swing.

Thoughts?

[bbor]

It is ugly...but like you said...if it ain't broke...why fix it?

[Kevin]

He shouldn't change a thing. he is one of the few guys who is able to repeat the same swing every time. Also keep in mind that it's only the backswing and transition that is odd. The downswing and contact is as good as anyone's out there.

[KWhit]

Furyk annoys the hell out of me. I cannot stand his swing and his preshot and preputt routine. He sets up to strike a putt and then backs off, reads the green a second time and lines his putt up again. Drives me crazy. Just hit the ball!

[Easy Mac]

whats wrong with Vijay?

[Thomkal]

He won a US Open with that swing, a title that people with much nicer swings haven't won. Why change?

[Samdari]

Even before the Anika thing, Vijay was one of the most self-absorbed, arrogant pricks out there. He is Oceania's answer to Colin Montgomerie.

I KNOW this is the right place to ask the following question:

Anyone have links to pictures of the boobie incident? I was on a plane when it occurred and none of the respectable news sites have photos.

[robbgmaier]

no links, but NBC showed a "blurred" replay, and the chick looked pretty hot :)

[Anrhydeddu]

My wife and I actually watched the final round and really didn't notice Furyk's swing (but did notice his repeating setup routine). It was so refreshing to see someone not named Woods win a majors. They say that when Woods is leading, ratings go up 37%. In our household, it's just the opposite.

[TroyF]

Anrh,

How would the ratings in your house have been if Woods and Furyk were TIED going into the back 9 yesterday?

It's all perspective. When Tiger's in contention, there are as many people watching in the hopes he loses as much as the people who cheer him on.

Anytime he's not there, you lose a certain % of both groups of people, causing the drop off.

kc,

His swing doesn't bother me at all. If anything it HELPS my mental game. It shows me I don't have to have the perfect swing, that the key is to make my adjustments on the practice tees but to TRUST that swing on the course.

Furthermore, even though he hasn't won a ton on tour, his swing hardly falls apart. In the past three years, he's been fairly consistent. He misses about 5 to 6 cuts a year. He finishes in the top 10 about 1/3 of the time. (usually between 8-10 times a year)

He makes about 2.5-3 million a year on the course.

This year he's actually been better than in past years. He's made 13 of 15 cuts and has posted 11 top ten finishes. Heading into the Open, he'd finished in the top ten 9 times in his last 10 tournaments. (including a tie for 4th in the Players Championship)

I wish to God I had a swing that was as consistent as that. :)

TroyF

[Craptacular]

I help a friend make picks for a majors golf pool at his work (pick 4 guys not named Tiger, most money wins). This week, we went with Love, Furyk, Perry, and Els. Two others picked Furyk, but we won, basically because Perry made a nice comeback and Singh choked.

[bbor]

Originally posted by Anrhydeddu
My wife and I actually watched the final round and really didn't notice Furyk's swing (but did notice his repeating setup routine). It was so refreshing to see someone not named Woods win a majors. They say that when Woods is leading, ratings go up 37%. In our household, it's just the opposite.

Does this mean you enjoyed the Masters too with Canada's own Mike Wier Winning ? :D

[Anrhydeddu]

Yes, we enjoyed Wier's victory at the Masters very much as well.

[Craptacular]

Or Weir even.

[kcchief19]

Troy, I have to completely disagree on the Tiger thoughts. There is a vocal minority that likes to bash Tiger, for some bizzarre reason. I don't understand rooting against someone simply because they are so good. Then again, I'm sure there were people who rooted against Michael Jordan for the same reason.

To borrow a phrase from Phil Mickelson, I can't imagine what kind of success Furyk would have with a more fundamentally sound swing. I think he would be right up there with Mickelson and Els in the battle for world's second best player.

If you don't have a fundamentally sound swing (or pitching motion or jump shot or what have you), you can have extraordinary periods of success, but I have not seen anyone sustain it for a long period. I think Furyk has the ability and instincts to be a great player instead of being a nice player. With his game, he should win a couple of times a year rather than once a year.

He could prove me wrong and have a great year. It will be tough, because a lot of guys have trouble living up to the title of U.S. Open champ. I was impressed that Weir has played as well as he has since The Masters.

[TroyF]

kc,

1) I'm not sure why you are disagreeing with me on the Tiger thoughts. I didn't say **I** cheered against Tiger. (though I usually hope new guys win one) I just said that if Tiger were in contention, the ratings would be higher. Some of the reason is the people cheering FOR him, some would be because of the people cheering AGAINST him. I know there are people who have a hatred for Tiger he doesn't deserve. My point is those very people will watch if it's ac close tournament to see if Tiger gets beat.

2) According to the World Rankings, Furyk is the 6th ranked player in the world. (Woods, Els, Weir, DL3, Singh) Before this week, he was still in the top 10. He's ALREADY had a good year.

He is currently 11th on the tour in Greens in Regulation and FIRST in Par 4 performence. (fifth in par 5 performence, 26th on the par threes) He's number 1 in scoring, and 8th in final round scoring this year. He's also first in top 10 finishes. Should he not win another penny this year, he'll rank in the top 10 on the money list, possibly as high as the top 5. He's also finished in the top 5 of the Players Championship, The Masters and The US Open. He could go 100% in the tank and he's had a successful year.

You said he wasn't consistent. He's been VERY consistent over the course of his PGA career. He's finished among the top 20 money leaders for 6 consecutive years now.

Let's put this into perspective. Vijay Singh has been playing on the tour slightly longer than Furyk has. He has 13 career tour victories. His first major came at the age of 35. (It was the PGA and at the time Vijay had 5 previous tournament wins) Overall, he's earned 4 million less than Vijay over the same time frame despite being 7 years his junior.

Jim is doing just fine with his current swing. I expect he'll have many more big years and a few more major titles by the time it's all said and done.

TroyF

[kcchief19]

Troy, I didn't phrase my objection to your original Tiger thought well. I think there is certainly a vocal minority of Tiger bashers, but I disagree that "there are as many people watching in the hopes he loses as much as the people who cheer him on." I would hazzard to guess that most of the Tiger naysayers follow golf pretty closely and watch regularly but root against him because they simply want someone else to win. When Tiger is in contention and ratings are up 37 percent, I think that 37 percent is generally solidly behind Tiger.

And I don't disagree that the numbers support the fact that Furyk has a fine record. I think you could very easily argue that he is among the top 10 players in the world. You could make an argument he is in the top five. However, if you objectively look at the stats, number of wins and consistent performance, the fact is that statistically Tiger is ahead of the rest of the field by leaps and bounds. Els right now is clearly the second-best player in the world. I would argue that Mickelson is third, a little behind Els.

The gap between third (Mickelson) and fourth (your choice -- I would say Singh, then probably Furyk) is substantial. Not as big the gap between Tiger and Els, but substantial enough that I wouldn't mention the fourth-best golfer in the world in the same sentence with the third-best golfer.

I think the fact that Furyk has achieved so much with a trainwreck of a swing is a testament that he has the mental and physical abilities to be one of the three-best players in the world. I think he could win more often and more regularly if he had a fundamentally sound swing. If Tiger had not rebuilt his swing, I don't believe he would be much better than Els is right now. That's good, but not as good as he has shown he can be.

As a personal bias, I must admit that I'm reworking my swing right now because I realized that I could only improve so far as a golfer with my swing as it was. I previously favored the less-than-fundamental ten-finger grip and used a big backswing. I have changed grips and am working on a more compact swing to improve my consistency. By no means am I comparing myself to Jim Furyk -- we play two completely different games on different planets. But I think he is holding himself back and limiting his potential by using a herky-jerky swing.

[Pumpy Tudors]

Originally posted by Samdari
Anyone have links to pictures of the boobie incident? I was on a plane when it occurred and none of the respectable news sites have photos.

http://www.rock103.com/crew/showprep/media/furykgolftits.jpg

If you want more, I might be able to find you three more.

[TroyF]

First off, on Tiger, don't underestimate the amount of people who watch to see him lose. They are plentiful. I'm one of em. Not that I cheer AGAINST him, but I'm much more likely to watch a tourney if he's around at the end. Why? I want to see someone stand up to him. Whether I'm right or wrong on that, the number show that when Tiger is there, the rating are much higher than when he isn't.

Second off, I can only assume you are basing your opinion of the top players in the world off of just that: Opinion. Rather than concrete facts.

Look at the numbers of these three guys and tell me which is which:

Player A: 39 tournies, 17 top10's, 2 victories.
Player B: 40 tournies, 20 top10's, 2 victories.
Player C: 46 tournies, 21 top10's, 4 victories.

Player C had played 46 events in the past three seasons. Player A and Player B are both for the last two seasons.

Player A would be Phil Mickelson. Player C would be Ernie Els. Player B is the one and only Jim Furyk.

Now I happen to be a huge Phil Mickelson fan. Despite watching the constant train wrecks he pulls off on Sunday's, I enjoy his style and his flair. He has a ton of charisma. The stats, however, don't lie. Furyk has been every bit the equal of Phil the past two years. What's more, Furyk is playing SUPERIOR golf to Phil right now. Not even a contest.

As for Ernie, you'll note one more top 10 in 6 more events. Two more wins are huge, but it doesn't exactly show Ernie to be a SUPERIOR player to Furyk right now either.

Besides, Furyk's problem has never been with his swing. He hits as many greens as anybody. He's in the top 20 every year in that category. His problem is his distance with the driver, where he consistently ranks in the 135-170 range among PGA regulars. When your distance is that short, there are simply some courses you will have a tough time competing on.

I'm not trying to force you to change your mind here. I'm just trying to find in my mind where Furyk is losing tournies because of that swing. I don't see a shred of evidence, either in statistics, or in my memory of watching his rounds to support that theory. Quite the opposite, everything I can see shows his swing to be accurate and consistent. . . and it hold up under pressure just fine.

Good luck with your swing change. I've been working on some things this year as well. I'm working on moving the ball and shaping it to the course a bit more. As of now, I'm failing miserably.

TroyF

[Thomkal]

Furyk has had the swing his entire adult life. I can not imagine it would be easy to just one day wake up and move to an entirely different swing. It would likely take him one or two years to master it if he could master it all. He says a "normal" swing does not feel comfortable or right to him. He said that if he had a normal swing he might not be US Open champion right now.

He was third in driving accuracy in 2002, and second in greens-in-regulation hit. It was only his once highly thought of putting skills that brought him down, he was something like 140th in putting last season I believe. He doesn't use that funky swing on the greens. He's seventh on the all-time PGA Money list with over 17 million dollars. He has 11 Top 10's this year so far.

I think that swing has made him one of the best in the world, and changing it at this point in his career isn't likely to make him any better in my opinion. It isn't a swing you would teach to anyone else, he himself said that. But it clearly works and works very well for him. He just won a US Open with it. The last thing I'd want to make him do is second guess his swing. He's a rare player who can make an unorthodox swing work. He believes in it and for me that's the number one goal in finding the swing that works for you.