There was a moment yesterday, during the presentation of the Claret Jug to Collin Morikawa, when I thought his overwhelmingly positive reception by the patrons at Royal St. George might turn to enmity.  As reported by Yahoo Sports, there was an “audible gasp” and “stir on social media” when the new champion said, “To see some of the best crowds I’ve ever seen, I look forward to my trip every year to the British (my emphasis) Open to see you guys.”  The United States does not have a monopoly on political correctness.

Some think referring to the final major each year as THE OPEN is a relatively new phenomenon.  Actually, the opposite is true.  Just ask Malcolm Booth, the communications director for the Royal and Ancient Golf Club of St. Andrews, golf’s most recognizable venue and the present day keeper of the flame.

The name of the championship hasn’t changed in 155 years.  The reason we think 155 years on there (sic) is legitimacy in calling it ‘The Open Championship’ is it really was the birthplace of open competition.  (Associated Press interview in 2016)

Hard to argue with that, except times have changed.  A century and a half ago, the event at St. Andrews was the only “open” golf competition which allowed both professionals and amateurs (as opposed to the “open era” in tennis which began in 1968).  Today, every country which now belongs to the community of golfing nations has a similar if not quite as venerable event.  The same might be said if one compares the world of George Washington with the present.  When the United States emerged as the first modern republic in 1789, if you referred to Washington as THE president, everyone knew about whom you were talking.  But imagine if, today, the secretary general of the United Nations introduced Joe Biden as THE president.  He would be greeted with more catcalls than Roger Goodell at a Patriots football game.

However, this was just one of many stories coming out of Sandwich, Kent, England.  The return of the open and its patrons. Phil Michelson’s first round 80.  Jordan Spieth’s roller coaster ride to a second place finish.  Another Oosthuizen near miss.  However, the main event was the contrast between two American players which mirrored what may be the major but least documented factor causing the current division in the American psyche.  Not partisanship or ideology or even culture.  STYLE!

At one extreme of the spectrum was Bryson DeChambeau.  In 2019, DeChambeau promised to transform himself and the game of golf by gaining 30 pounds and focusing on swing speed.  His goal?  To overpower a golf course starting from the tee box with drives that left him with short irons to almost every green.  Since re-emerging as the “bully of the fairways” in 2020, he has won three tournaments including the 2020 U.S. Open.  [NOTE:  Prior to the transformation he won five PGA tournaments from June 2017 through November 2018.]

He has two other traits which might also remind you of another American.  He believes he always has the right answer, and when he does not succeed, he looks for a scapegoat.  This latter characteristic was on full display last week when he blamed Cobra, the manufacturer of his driver, for all the errant tee shots that left him three over par, 15 strokes off the lead, at the finish of Saturday’s third round.

At the other extreme was the eventual winner Morikawa.  Above all, he paid attention to history.  He took a lesson from Tiger Wood’s 2006 Open victory at Hoylake, when he pulled out his driver only once over four days.  Prioritizing ball placement over distance, Woods avoided the overgrown rough and pot bunkers that spelled disaster for other competitors.  A similar approach served Morikawa well as he finished the tournament without a bogey on any of the final 31 holes.

This diversity in styles, a modern day fable of a hare (DeChambeau) and a tortoise (Morikawa), is why, despite the location, this Open was much more American than British.  It was a metaphor for the state of our nation’s body politic which is too often driven (pun intended) by decibel level rather than substance.  Where a belief there is nothing to learn from history competes with knowledge and experience.

There is an old saying among golfers.  “You drive for show and putt for dough.”  DeChambeau, like that other American, does put on a good show.  But the proof is in the putting.  Can you effectively finish what you started?  If golfers were assessed like Olympic divers and skaters, it’s safe to say the panel of judges (and history) would still be out.  Otherwise, you have to look at the scorecard where the record currently sits at the 24 year-old, 160 pound tortoise-two majors, the 27 year-old, 240 pound hare-one.  For now at least, Aesop is still right!

For what it’s worth.
Dr. ESP

Last week, I mentioned how current events have triggered reminders of past life experiences.  This morning was one more of those occasions.  The prompt was a CNN report under the heading, “Tiger Woods won’t face charges after sheriff says car crash was an accident.”

The year was 1993.  I was lead staff for a National Governors Association project to establish uniform state policies for the regulation of the hazardous materials (HM) trucking industry.  The first step involved formation of a working group consisting of state and local officials, environmental interests and the industry.  In preparation for the first meeting I met with staff from the National Highway Transportation Safety Agency (NHTSA) to confirm what I believed to be the primary goal of the project: reconcile the myriad difference in HM regulations among the contiguous 48 states while still ensuring safe movement of some pretty nasty stuff within the legal definition of HM ranging from large quantities of nail polish to radioactive waste.

The project was a compromise with the industry which pushed for federal preemption of state authority.  During congressional hearings for what became the Hazardous Materials Transportation Uniform Safety Act of 1990 (HMTUSA), states made the case they already had the infrastructure in place to regulate the industry.  To shift responsibility to Washington, D.C. would require a significant increase in federal resources and staffing, something the George H. W. Bush Transportation Department was not ready to support.

At the NHTSA briefing, I asserted the states’ primary objective was prevention of accidents which resulted in HM spills which threatened both human safety and the environment.  I was immediately stopped and told (paraphrasing}, “There are no such things as accidents.  DOT uses the term ‘incident.’  There is either equipment failure or operator error.”  For example, metal fatigue results in a broken axle.  A driver falls asleep after violating mandatory rest stops.  The shipper inadequately secures the cargo.  Even incidents related to so-called “acts of God” are avoidable if the proper preventive measures are employed.

Too bad Los Angeles County Sheriff Alex Villanueva had not been in attendance at that briefing.  On a Facebook Live chat about Tiger Woods, Villanueva said:

We don’t contemplate any charges whatsoever in this crash.  This remains an accident. An accident is not a crime. They do happen, unfortunately.

Accidents do not just happen.  Villanueva reminds me an of old Joan Rivers joke about the business executive calling a tryst with his secretary an accidental affair.  His wife responds, “Did you slip on a banana peel and fall into her vagina?”

None of us knows exactly what happened, but if you look at the following range of possibilities, it is hard to call what occurred at 7:12 am this past Tuesday an accident.

• The steering rod breaks or other equipment on the Genesis GV80 Woods was driving fails.  Not a great advertisement for a car with a $48,900 base price and title sponsor of last week’s PGA tournament for which Woods was the host professional.  Though the price seems worth it based on the survivability factor in such a horrific crash and rollover.
• Woods was late for a photo session at Riviera County Club and may have been exceeding the speed limit to make up time.
• Two days earlier Woods had talked with CBS’ Jim Nance about his discomfort from December back surgery.  One would think he might consider a driver as the normal one hour drive from his  hotel to the Club would test his tolerance level to be strapped in, relatively immobile for that length of time.
• There could have been an object in the road (e.g. animal or pothole) in which case the driver would be expected to slow down to avoid it.
• Though the police at the scene claims he did not seem to be impaired, his condition and the need to get him to the Harbor-UCLA trauma center ASAP meant that normal on-site breath or dexterity tests were not employed (now known as the Bruce Springsteen defense).
• Perhaps conditions demanded vehicles proceed at less than the posted speed limit.
• Or Woods simply did not appreciate how fast the car was going due to the exceptionally smooth ride, quiet interior and the 375 horsepower engine under the hood.

Surely, no one believes Woods intended for this to happen.  But it is just one more example of the difference between intent and accountability.  I will leave it to the judicial system to decide if any laws were violated.  Though there is a touch of irony.  A major objection to the use of excessive force by police in several noted cases is when the arresting officer exceeds his/her authority becoming the judge and jury.  In this case, Villanueva did much the same thing, except, playing prosecutor, judge and jury, he singlehandedly acquitted the suspect.

Maybe the Stephen Sondheim musical “Into the Woods” is actually a metaphor for encounters with law enforcement.  If you are a famous athlete involved in a serious car crash which could endanger life and property or rock star arrested for DUI, the relevant song is “No One is Alone” from Act II.  The police and courts have your back.  But if you are an average Joe or Jane with a burned out taillight or you are jaywalking, you have a different take on the encounter. “Agony!”

For what it’s worth.
Dr. ESP

There are two organizations in which the members are largely responsible for monitoring their own behavior.  The first is professional golf.  While there are rules officials on the course during every tournament, they rarely have to charge a player with a violation of the sport’s behavioral canons or assess penalties.  A professional golfer who deviates from the standard of self-policing can quickly be marked by fellow contenders as a persona non grata.

To understand this principle, one need look back no farther than the 10th hole at Torrey Pines during the third round of the Farmers Insurance Open this past weekend.  Patrick Reed’s second shot found the left rough, bounced and dove into the deep blend of kikuyu, rye and poa annua grass.  Reed, upon reaching his ball, believed it was embedded in the softer than usual ground, understandable considering the course had been pummeled by rain and sleet the previous day.  Instead of immediately calling for an official or asking another member of the threesome to confirm his judgment, Reed picked up the ball and examined the lie.  Immediately, the online golf community speculated Reed should be assessed a two-stroke penalty for moving the ball.

The same day, Rory McIlroy faced a similar situation on the 18th hole and took comparable relief.  However, McIlroy did not face similar protests on the internet.  Was it merely the fact McIlroy first conferred with playing partners Robby Shelton and Will Gordon before touching the ball?  Were the situations so different to suggest Reed actually violated the rules while McIlroy had not?  Not according to the tournament officials who, after reviewing video of Reed’s actions, did not assess any penalty.

Technically, both players adhered to the procedures laid out in Sections 16.3 and 16.4 in the “Rules of Golf.”  Then, what was the difference which created an uproar in one case and not the other?  Two things.  First, in golf, there is a difference between the letter of the law and the spirit of the game.  While acknowledging Reed did not technically violate a rule, all four CBS commentators–Nick Faldo, Ian Baker Finch, Frank Nibolo and Dottie Pepper–said they would never have done what Reed did.  They confirmed McIlroy followed the more common and accepted practice of involving others BEFORE moving his ball.

The second is what one announcer referred to as Reed’s “pre-existing condition.”  This diagnosis was based on Reed’s history of questionable actions going back to his college days at the University of Georgia where he was dismissed from the golf team after just one year.  Subsequent behavior including arguments with course officials, additional charges of cheating and homophobic hot mic comments have made Reed one of the most unpopular players among his peers.   Therefore, if like McIlroy, the issue on Saturday had been a one-off, he too may have received the benefit of the doubt.  But one’s credibility and reputation depends not only on what you do today, but past patterns of behavior.

Which brings me to the second organization in which members are expected to self-monitor, the United States Senate.  And in this particular case, Republican senators.  They too have a Reed-like “pre-existing condition.”  When out of power, GOP members of the upper chamber of Congress beg the Democratic leadership to give a little in order to win bi-partisan support for pending legislation.  But it is never enough.  Of course, the best example is the Affordable Care Act.  At Republicans’ request, Democrats agreed to remove a public option to increase support for the bill, much of which was modeled after Massachusetts law championed by then governor Mitt Romney.  However, following adoption of several GOP-sponsored amendments, not one Republican voted for passage of the bill.

So yesterday, when the 10 Republicans who brought their counter proposal for COVID relief to the Oval Office claimed they were acting in the spirit of bi-partisan unity, should we give them the benefit of the doubt?  That depends less on what they say and do today than their history in similar situations.  If politics were golf, you might call that past behavior “fore! play.”

Postscript:  Origins of a Conspiracy Theory

Some alt-right conspiracies are understandable.  For example, Trump supporter Sal Amanda posted the following on Twitter.

Forget the misspellings and typos.  Anyone could confuse labor and civil rights activist Cesar Chavez for the late Hugo Chavez.  Right?

But how do you explain Marjorie Taylor Green’s conspiracy theory the California wild fires were started by Jewish anarchists using space lasers?  Last night, while searching for songs on Amazon Music Unlimited, I think I found the answer.  There it was, the all-Aryan cast album of the 2020 production of Fiddler on the Roof on which the eighth song “Tevye’s Dream” identifies the leader of this Hebraic cadre of international renegades as “the butcher ‘Laser’ Wolf.”

You cannot make this stuff up.  Or maybe you can.

For what it’s worth.
Dr. ESP

In spectator sports, we are often mesmerized by the play that defies the odds.  For example, during a 2018 NFL wild-card match-up between Kansas City and Tennessee, Titans quarterback Marcus Mariota caught his own deflected pass and ran for a touchdown which contributed to his team’s 22-21 upset of the Chiefs.  Catching one’s own pass is a rarity in and of itself.  But scoring a touchdown following the self-reception has only happened twice in NFL history.  The more likely outcome is a loss of yardage as the initial deflection is a sign one or more linemen were already converging on the quarterback.

I raise this issue because  the designated “goat” in Saturday’s Alabama-Auburn game, Crimson Tide place kicker Joseph Bulovas, was actually the victim of a teammate’s split second reaction in hopes of adding his name to the annuls of Alabama football lore.  With 2:05 remaining in the fourth quarter, Alabama faced a third down and goal at the Auburn 10 yard line.  While Alabama trailed Auburn 48-45, the Tide was poised to win or at least tie the score at the end of a drive that began at their own 37 yard line.

On what proved to be Alabama quarterback Mac Jones’ last offensive play of the game, Jones’ attempted pass was batted back to him by an Auburn lineman.  Jones caught the deflection six yards behind the line of scrimmage and ran towards the end zone.  However, he was tackled after gaining only four yards, a two yard loss from where the play originated.  Coach Nick Saban elected to bring on the field goal unit with hopes of forcing overtime to decide the state’s premiere football power.

For you non-football aficionados, during a field goal attempt the holder is positioned eight yards behind the line of scrimmage.  Therefore, with the ball at the Auburn 12 yard line, Bulovas faced a 30 yard attempt as the goal post stands at the back of the 10 yard deep end zone.  (12+8+10=30.  QED)  Bulovas hooked the kick, which struck the left upright, securing Auburn’s three-point lead and eventual victory.

Bulovas hung his head as his teammates tried to console him.  In a post-game interview, he apologized for costing the Tide an outside chance to play for another national championship.  Kudos to this stand-up young man.  But the truth is his kick would have likely succeeded if not for the previous play.  The ball was still drifting left when it struck the goal post.  But for the two yard differential on Jones’ self-reception, the ball would have cleared the upright and the game would have been tied at 48 points apiece.

Now, I am not going to blame Jones for his decision to catch the deflected pass attempt.  As stated above, it was a split second choice.  And was due to reaction more than a rational thought process.  Any quarterback not named Mac Jones would have done the same thing.  You see a football in the air, you catch it and run.  And yes, a straighter kick would have nullified any impact of the two-yard loss.  But that is true only in hindsight.  So let’s give Joseph Bulovas a break.  This was a team loss.

In fact, if Alabama had not given up 48 points, I would be writing about something else this morning.  If you are still looking for a goat, maybe Alabama defensive coordinator Pete Golding is the more logical target.  Or head coach Nick Saban who hired him last February.  But leave it to Nick “It Is Never My Fault” Saban to blame the loss on confusion caused when Auburn head coach Gus Malzahn distracted the Tide with a fourth and seven fake offensive call which resulted in an Alabama penalty for too many players on the field.  Hopefully, next time Coach Saban will look to his players like Joseph Bulovas for a role model.

For what it’s worth.
Dr. ESP