John and Henry Geiger join the inaugural Dropping the Mike podcast to preview Tiger’s return:
Monthly Archives: November 2017
A Study in Golf Course Architecture: Which Style is Best?
In golf, the on-course experience is biased by a wide variety of factors. This makes it difficult to distill a course’s true greatness after one round. Player performance, weather, and course pedigree affect how we evaluate the courses we play. Judging a course solely based on its architectural merit is a problem golfers face universally.
Two courses that perfectly illustrate that quandary are Hazeltine National and Somerby Golf Club, both in my home state of Minnesota. Both venues exemplify everything right with the sport. Both courses have excellent junior programs and also happen to be the next two State Amateur venues. But they’re also polar opposites in terms of their architectural approach.
Hazeltine National
Hazeltine was put on the world stage with its hosting of the 2016 Ryder Cup and it did not disappoint. The Robert Trent Jones Jr. design was perfect for the world’s best, providing a stout challenge that offered a plethora of risk-reward opportunities. Luckily, I live only forty minutes from the course and have had the opportunity to play it numerous times. It really is a cool feeling to hit the same wedge shot that George Washington Patrick Reed holed on 15 and try the same putt that Rory cashed from 60 feet on 8. However, due to this factor, it is quite difficult to acquit Hazeltine strictly relating to its architecture. But after developing a decent grasp of the course, I’ve begun to look past its reputation and see it through a more critical lens. For example, take a look at hole number 14, a 448-yard par four that displays Hazeltine’s MO architecturally.
The 14th at Hazeltine is a hole typical of the challenge the course poses. After a difficult tee shot, the approach to this hole is played to an uphill green heavily protected by several deep bunkers. The green is pinched at the front and only slightly wider in the back. While the world’s top players had little trouble with this second shot, it poses a substantial challenge to amateurs. If a golfer is even a fraction off with their iron into this green and finds a bunker, par is essentially out of the question. Even if a player does manage to squeeze his/her ball through the narrow mouth of the green, only a well-compressed iron will hold the course’s firm greens. Shots like this are common at Hazeltine, where Robert Trent Jones Jr. tells the golfer, “hit the shot I tell you to, or else.” The course is full of spots that demand the player’s full attention because disaster is always only one loose swing away.
Somerby Golf Club
Somerby opened in 2004 as a joint venture of Tom Lehman and John Fought, two architects who have since split to form independently successful design firms. The course hosted Web.com events in 2006 and 2007, with Brandt Snedeker and Chris Riley winning respectively. Somerby is about as different a course from Hazeltine as you will find in terms of style. It boasts extremely wide fairways and large undulating greens. The course plays firm and fast as often as the weather allows, and the maintenance crew does a fantastic job of creating a links feel in tree-filled Minnesota. A premium is placed on putting your ball on the side of the fairway off the tee that allows an iron shot to be played aggressively onto the correct tier of the green. To illustrate the course’s challenge, take a look at a hole typical of Somerby, the 417-yard par 4 3rd.
While aesthetically pleasing, the 3rd hole does not look like anything special strategically either in look or yardage. However, the par 4 offers many different options and challenges that are only discovered after multiple playings. If the better player seeks to cut off a huge chunk of yardage and get a wedge in his/her hand, an aggressive line can be taken right over the right red stake into a speed slot that kicks the ball forward, leaving a green-light special wedge shot. If average amateurs are just looking for a four or five, they can play their ball out away from the hazard to the right side of this massive fairway. However, those players now face a longer approach shot, with a large false front now coming into play. This kind of option gives players of all levels more opportunities to score and have fun, without sacrificing difficulty. Somerby is a shining example of what modern architects are capable of with good property, a flexible ownership, and a thoughtful routing.
Final Analysis
So then, which style of golf is better? Penal target-based shot values, or a wide and playable angle-based approach? Well, that depends. Hazeltine demands excellence and administers punishment from the very first hole. Not one shot can be taken lightly, or a severe price is paid. This kind of golf is thrilling but can also be taxing and repetitive. Somerby gives all players a chance to score and asks for more brain than brawn. However, the course does not offer the drama and heart-racing challenge that Hazeltine contains in spades. What disappoints me as a fan of golf and golf course architecture, is the premium that is placed by so many (cough cough, Golf Digest) on a course’s difficulty and reputation. A course like Hazeltine is a fantastic course, but due to its pedigree and history as a host of major championships and a Ryder Cup, average players are tricked into thinking it’s the right course for them. In reality, the 15 handicapper will struggle greatly at a course like Hazeltine. Now, it is an unreal experience to get to play a course full of history and great moments, and I don’t seek to diminish that aspect one iota. But, once the shine wears off, players not playing to a single digit handicap will most likely be miserable if they’re trying to post any kind of decent score.
One of the four noble truths of Buddhism is that life is suffering. It’s clear to me now that Buddha was an avid golfer. By its very nature, golf will beat you down relentlessly with only brief intermissions of blissful relief. While chasing top 100 lists and collecting bag tags is an exciting and alluring venture (or so I’ve heard), it is usually one that trades playability and fun for notoriety and prestige. Winged Foot and Baltusrol are bucket list venues that deserve all the accolades they get, but getting your ass kicked can be overrated. Don’t forget that golf is hard enough, so make sure you keep an eye out for the Somerbys of the world. Take some time out of your golf schedule to have some fun. Anyone dumb enough to play this game deserves at least that much.
Franken’s Folly: a Sign of the Times
After the Al Franken story broke, like many conservatives I basked in a few glorious hours of schadenfreude. For a POS like Franken to get nailed red-handed with rock-solid allegations was a Christmas present that arrived 6 weeks early. On top of it, the fact that there was photographic evidence with the senator perversely grinning at the camera was almost too good to be true.
Unfortunately, the chances that Franken will survive the scandal with his job intact grow with every passing day. Despite a, shall we say, lackluster first apology, the senator rebounded by shrewdly calling for a Senate ethics investigation on himself. Inevitably, after the furor over these allegations has subsided, it will conclude that his behavior was completely unacceptable. However, when all is said and done, Franken will likely be allowed to retain his title. He’ll go on some bogus tour of the state meeting with “women of all walks of life” to generate some good PR, and a year from now none of this will matter.
The greatest tragedy of the entire sequence of events? Republicans are politically handcuffed by the fact that they are running a guy for senator accused of doing things much worse than what Al Franken did. As allegations mount against Roy Moore, there remain important figures such as Senator Rand Paul who at the time of print have still refused to withdraw their endorsement of the Alabama Senate candidate.
If Moore wins, the two parties will be engaged in a prisoner’s dilemma. Both sides will face strong public pressure to dispose of their respective candidate, but the threat of the other side gaining power will likely keep both in office. This stance is perfectly laid out on the liberal side by Kate Harding of the Washington Post, who argues against a Franken resignation, writing, “…if we set this precedent in the interest of demonstrating our party’s solidarity with harassed and abused women, we’re only going to drain the swamp of people who, however flawed, still regularly vote to protect women’s rights and freedoms.” Essentially, our party is full of so many disgusting people that if we start to care about abused women, we’ll lose power.
Regardless of what happens next, it has never been more clear that we are living in a post-moral society. Obviously, reprehensible behavior from Hollywood and Washington DC are not a 2017 invention, but the edifice is starting to crumble. It is getting more and more difficult to cover up the repulsive behavior of the powers that be who control the culture. On the political side, it didn’t start with Donald Trump, but the “at least he’s not as bad as her” campaign logic was never on solid footing morally, and the defense of Roy Moore is only a continuation of that logic. “Why abandon Roy Moore? He’s a creep, but he’s better than electing a Democrat!”
Moving forward, the only option we have as conservatives is to cling tightly to principle. If we tie ourselves to individuals, then we are forced to defend them, whether they’re right or wrong. It is essential that we build a foundation that is sturdier than the morality of singular human beings, something increasingly being proven highly fallible. We need to call balls and strikes with a clearly defined strike zone, even if it means every once in while “our guy” is gonna strike out.
Unfortunately, Al Franken’s transgressions will not likely result in the political victory it was initially hoped to be. It appears that the only fallout will be both parties digging deeper into their respective positions, as they now are on equally uneven footing morally in the political arena. Hopefully, those who stand for something greater than power will make their voices heard, and the principles that the country was founded on will be restored as the foundation of our government. Don’t hold your breath.
A Cautious Optimism: The 2017 Vikings
Even as a fan more than 6 months shy of his 20th birthday, an innate cynicism about the Minnesota Vikings has already been hardwired into me. I am obviously not alone in this respect, as you can almost feel the collective tension of the entire fanbase building after each Vikings win. We can’t help but get excited. The team is 7-2, on top of the NFC North, and the looming return of Teddy Bridgewater has many downright giddy. However, that joy is quickly tempered by the memories of seasons past.
Despite a highly respectable 476-415-10 historic team record, the Vikings remain one of the most tortured franchises in sports. 28 playoff appearances and 4 Super Bowl berths are numbers that several teams are far shy of reaching, but the lack of a championship is the defining characteristic of the franchise. It isn’t that we’ve never had a team worthy of it, either. There have been multiple instances in which the team seemed destined to win The Big Game and fate cruelly dashed our hopes. Three specific instances stand out above the rest.
In 1975, the Vikings rolled into the playoffs with an NFC-best 12-2 record (the league was still a few years away from expanding the season to 16 games), and QB Fran Tarkenton had just won the league’s MVP award. With only 24 seconds left and the Vikings holding a 14-10 lead, Cowboys QB Roger Staubach desperately threw up a 50-yard touchdown pass that ended up inspiring the term “Hail Mary.” Unfortunately, the Vikings players and fans’ prayers once again went unanswered.
23 years later, the Vikings were once again a force to be reckoned with. Led by an explosive offense, Minnesota had only lost one game the entire season going into the NFC Championship game. Kicker Gary Anderson hadn’t missed in two years and was 35-35 in the 1998 season. Well, we all know what happened next. The game goes to overtime. The Vikings drive into Falcons territory, putting the game on a platter for Anderson to send the team to the Super Bowl. Wide left. Atlanta got the ball back and Kicker Morten Andersen’s field goal put the game away soon after. Brutal.
The 2009 Vikings were the first truly great team that I can remember watching. The roster was loaded. 10 Pro Bowlers and a revitalized Brett Favre had the Minnesota fanbase riding high. A 12-4 regular season record gave the team a first-round bye, and after a dominant 34-3 victory over the Dallas Cowboys, the team only needed one more win over the New Orleans Saints for a spot in the Super Bowl. Late in the game, Minnesota recovered possession and drove into field goal range with 30 seconds left. Then, the unthinkable. A flag for too many men on the field and an ill-advised (to say the least) throw by Brett Favre that was picked off by New Orleans sent the game into overtime. The Saints won the toss, the ensuing field goal ended Minnesota’s season.
Despite the substantial scar tissue that’s been accumulated over the years, we as Vikings fans have once again built up our hopes and dare to dream that the 2017 Vikings will be the team to break the franchise’s championship curse. This season will likely end in heartbreak and misery (once again), but deep down in every Vikings fan’s heart there remains the small flickering flame of hope that on that cold night in February at US Bank Stadium, they will finally be able to exorcise the demons of Vikings past and celebrate a Super Bowl victory 66 years in the making.
Red Alert: Brazile Sounds the Alarm
On the morning of November 2nd, the Democratic Party made it official: the Witch is dead. Donna Brazile’s excerpt from her upcoming book left scorch marks on the campaign that was run by Hillary Clinton and clearly established Bernie Sanders as the future of the party. The piece, while laughably self-aggrandizing, provided some interesting information on what the inside of the Democratic looked like during the last several years.
One of the main parts of Brazile’s piece that jumped out right away was the extent to which Obama screwed the Democrats. By the time the 2012 campaign had wrapped, Obama had saddled the DNC with roughly $24 million of debt. The Clinton campaign and DNC were forced to pay back much of that number, and it left the party in dire financial straits. After the Democratic National Convention, the party was over $2 million in debt and was forced to take out a large loan just stay afloat.
Brazile firmly placed former chairman Debbie Wasserman-Schultz under the bus, claiming, “If I didn’t know about this, I assumed that none of the other officers knew about it, either. That was just Debbie’s way. In my experience, she didn’t come to the officers of the DNC for advice and counsel.” Brazile continued to shift the blame away from the party and took calculated shots at the Clinton campaign. She wrote, “(Gary Gensler, CFO of the Clinton campaign) described the party as fully under the control of the Clinton campaign, which seemed to confirm the suspicions of the Bernie camp.”
The dismantling of Hillary Clinton’s campaign didn’t stop there, as Brazile went on to fully expose the arrogance of the One Who Persisted. According to Brazile, Hillary’s campaign took control of the party’s Victory Fund, which is intended for state races and the party’s nominee, nearly a year before she secured the nomination. The move clearly put Sanders’ campaign at a huge disadvantage and played a huge part in keeping the Clinton Machine running.
The irony of this mea culpa was Brazile’s failure to mention her own role in undermining the Sanders campaign. Of course, during the primaries, Brazile twice sent future town hall questions to the Clinton campaign. She later called it, “a mistake that I will forever regret.” Brazile’s memory must have experienced a lapse as this apparently heartbreaking mistake wasn’t mentioned in her chronicle of Democratic foibles.
The entire piece leads up to Brazile’s climactic phone call admitting all of this to Bernie Sanders himself. Brazile apparently addressed the senator with this doozy of a line, “Hello Senator. I’ve completed my review of the DNC and I did find the cancer, but I will not kill the patient.” Brazile was then asked by Sanders to give him her assessment of Clinton’s chances. It is here in which the article goes from informative to comedically self-serving. Brazile allegedly writes, “I had to be frank with him. I did not trust the polls, I said… I found a lack of enthusiasm for her everywhere. I was concerned about the Obama coalition and about millennials.”
Apparently, on the Democratic side, Donna Brazile and Donna Brazile alone forecasted Hillary Clinton’s struggles in the upcoming election. Ignoring the obvious ass-covering by Donna Brazile however, it is clear now that the Democratic Party is moving forward with Bernie Sanders as the face of the party. This change in strategy is disturbingly rational, as it shows the party might have learned from the massive failures of the Obama-Clinton coalition. As incriminating as Brazile’s piece was, it may end up steering the party back towards political relevance, something especially worrying with the 2018 elections less than a year away. Donald Trump and the Republicans must resist the urge to sit on their laurels and press their advantage before it’s too late. If they do not, the current Republican majority in a few years will look like ancient history.
Dropping the Mike 