golf swing tips
Wednesday, April 21, 2004
Arnold Palmer
Many thanks to:
ASK THE GOLF EXPERT
By Jim McCabe
NBCSports.com contributor
Updated: 10:50 p.m. ET April 09, 2004
Q: For those of us who never saw him play competitively, why is Arnold Palmer so revered? Why did he do so well at the Masters?
A: Chris, how much time do you have? Truly, we could spend a long weekend discussing the reasons why Palmer is such an icon. But keep in mind that his appeal spreads from the generation that saw him play in his prime, to the generation that only watched him turn for the twilight of his career, to a generation that knows of his legend only from stories passed down from parents and grandparents. That ability to connect with people of all ages is what defines the Palmer legend and it is hard to put into words.
Surely, Palmer is beloved because he was such a fierce competitor on the golf course, one who refused to back down from a challenge, no matter the odds. That's how he won the 1960 U.S. Open, and oh, how we love that spirit in our athletes; but it's also that fire that lost him the 1966 U.S. Open and several other big tournaments, and, oh, how we admire the way he accepted defeat with class and humility.
It is essential to understand about Palmer that for all his success -- and he won more than 60 tournaments, seven of them majors, and he's the one who revived the British Open and invented the Grand Slam -- what made him so universally embraced is that he was one of the first big-name athletes who showed us that it was OK to fail, so long as you maintained dignity and gave it your greatest effort.
Palmer, who played his 50th and final Masters this year, has said on many occasions that his life has been shaped not as much by the wins, but by the defeats that tested his character. Like Jack Nicklaus, it can be said of Palmer that he not only was a terrific winner, but a great loser and who among us doesn't need to understand better how to handle the situations that don't go our way?
Beyond all that, Palmer touched people because he wanted to.
"The first time I played with him, he told me it was important 'To look 'em in the eye,' " said Brad Faxon, now in his 21st year on Tour. "I thought he meant the other players, but he meant the people in the gallery."
That is why Palmer caught on and has remained a rage for more than 40 years -- because he reached out to them and you'd be hard-pressed to find someone who doesn't have an autograph by the man simply known as "The King."
His style of play was effective at Augusta National; he hit the ball hard, often low, and frequently with a right-to-left shape that worked well at the par-5s. He was a bold, aggressive player, at a course that is one of the ultimate risk-and-reward venues, and in his prime no one made more long putts that mattered.
Q: In his new book Ken Venturi is accusing Arnold Palmer of a rules violation at the '58 Masters. What are your thoughts?
-- Alan Rae from Vancouver, British Columbia
A: Quite honestly, it's sad.
We are talking about something that happened 46 years ago and three of the gentlemen who have been dragged into it -- rules official Arthur Lacey and Masters architects Clifford Roberts and Bobby Jones -- have been dead for years.
What is Venturi's motivation? It's smacks of a bitter man who has carried around the heartache of three squandered chances (1956, 1958, 1960) to win a tournament he was passionate about. He claims that Palmer was credited with a 3 at the par-3 12th and not a 5 "because he didn't know the rules," yet Venturi knows the golden rule in golf -- that once the rules officials enter the discussion, other players are excused from participation. The rules official's decision is final. End of story.
Palmer was deemed to have been entitled to playing a second ball because his ball was embedded and a local rule was acceptable.
He played within the rules of golf; it is Venturi who has played outside the rules of good taste.
golf swing tips
ASK THE GOLF EXPERT
By Jim McCabe
NBCSports.com contributor
Updated: 10:50 p.m. ET April 09, 2004
Q: For those of us who never saw him play competitively, why is Arnold Palmer so revered? Why did he do so well at the Masters?
A: Chris, how much time do you have? Truly, we could spend a long weekend discussing the reasons why Palmer is such an icon. But keep in mind that his appeal spreads from the generation that saw him play in his prime, to the generation that only watched him turn for the twilight of his career, to a generation that knows of his legend only from stories passed down from parents and grandparents. That ability to connect with people of all ages is what defines the Palmer legend and it is hard to put into words.
Surely, Palmer is beloved because he was such a fierce competitor on the golf course, one who refused to back down from a challenge, no matter the odds. That's how he won the 1960 U.S. Open, and oh, how we love that spirit in our athletes; but it's also that fire that lost him the 1966 U.S. Open and several other big tournaments, and, oh, how we admire the way he accepted defeat with class and humility.
It is essential to understand about Palmer that for all his success -- and he won more than 60 tournaments, seven of them majors, and he's the one who revived the British Open and invented the Grand Slam -- what made him so universally embraced is that he was one of the first big-name athletes who showed us that it was OK to fail, so long as you maintained dignity and gave it your greatest effort.
Palmer, who played his 50th and final Masters this year, has said on many occasions that his life has been shaped not as much by the wins, but by the defeats that tested his character. Like Jack Nicklaus, it can be said of Palmer that he not only was a terrific winner, but a great loser and who among us doesn't need to understand better how to handle the situations that don't go our way?
Beyond all that, Palmer touched people because he wanted to.
"The first time I played with him, he told me it was important 'To look 'em in the eye,' " said Brad Faxon, now in his 21st year on Tour. "I thought he meant the other players, but he meant the people in the gallery."
That is why Palmer caught on and has remained a rage for more than 40 years -- because he reached out to them and you'd be hard-pressed to find someone who doesn't have an autograph by the man simply known as "The King."
His style of play was effective at Augusta National; he hit the ball hard, often low, and frequently with a right-to-left shape that worked well at the par-5s. He was a bold, aggressive player, at a course that is one of the ultimate risk-and-reward venues, and in his prime no one made more long putts that mattered.
Q: In his new book Ken Venturi is accusing Arnold Palmer of a rules violation at the '58 Masters. What are your thoughts?
-- Alan Rae from Vancouver, British Columbia
A: Quite honestly, it's sad.
We are talking about something that happened 46 years ago and three of the gentlemen who have been dragged into it -- rules official Arthur Lacey and Masters architects Clifford Roberts and Bobby Jones -- have been dead for years.
What is Venturi's motivation? It's smacks of a bitter man who has carried around the heartache of three squandered chances (1956, 1958, 1960) to win a tournament he was passionate about. He claims that Palmer was credited with a 3 at the par-3 12th and not a 5 "because he didn't know the rules," yet Venturi knows the golden rule in golf -- that once the rules officials enter the discussion, other players are excused from participation. The rules official's decision is final. End of story.
Palmer was deemed to have been entitled to playing a second ball because his ball was embedded and a local rule was acceptable.
He played within the rules of golf; it is Venturi who has played outside the rules of good taste.
golf swing tips
