Deucewood

71 to tie Harrigton would have been tough for Norman even if he played
really well. It was the difference between a 53 year old partimer on
his honeymoon who doesn't play and practice much and a full time
player possibly at the peak of his career.

Speeders & Drunk Drivers are M

On Jul 21, 11:01 am, bjwil...@ilstu.edu (Deucewood) wrote:
> 71 to tie Harrigton would have been tough for Norman even if he played
> really well. It was the difference between a 53 year old partimer on
> his honeymoon who doesn't play and practice much and a full time
> player possibly at the peak of his career.

BS - norman just doesn't have any gutts. If i had his ability, i'd
have won the open by 20 strokes.

EdSmithers

On Jul 21, 11:01 am, bjwil...@ilstu.edu (Deucewood) wrote:
> 71 to tie Harrigton would have been tough for Norman even if he played
> really well. It was the difference between a 53 year old partimer on
> his honeymoon who doesn't play and practice much and a full time
> player possibly at the peak of his career.

You're exactly right, I think. I hadn't thought of it in those terms.
But if you look at the back 9 Harrington shot, it was quite
spectacular...in his own quiet way.

For the longest time yesterday I thought Poulter had won it with that
par putt on 18.

Ed

William Clark

In article <>,
(Deucewood) wrote:

> 71 to tie Harrigton would have been tough for Norman even if he played
> really well. It was the difference between a 53 year old partimer on
> his honeymoon who doesn't play and practice much and a full time
> player possibly at the peak of his career.

Well, it might have been more realistic if he had played a little
smarter. Thrashing away with the driver on so many holes was really
dumb, I'm sorry. Harrington, on the other hand, played some of the most
intelligent golf you will ever see.

William Clark

Deucewood

On Mon, 21 Jul 2008 20:28:03 -0400, William Clark
<> wrote:

>In article <>,
> (Deucewood) wrote:
>
>> 71 to tie Harrigton would have been tough for Norman even if he played
>> really well. It was the difference between a 53 year old partimer on
>> his honeymoon who doesn't play and practice much and a full time
>> player possibly at the peak of his career.
>
>Well, it might have been more realistic if he had played a little
>smarter. Thrashing away with the driver on so many holes was really
>dumb, I'm sorry. Harrington, on the other hand, played some of the most
>intelligent golf you will ever see.
>
>William Clark

I tend to agree, but had he got there with that reckless style in the
first 3 rounds - didn't see much of the tournament. He was probably
living on borrowed time.