Question:
I see what you’re saying about him not having that much emotion on the course. I don’t think that makes the 99 Masters any less exciting. To me it wasn’t so much that Olazabal won, but who he held off to win the Masters. He held off Norman, not a one time major winner, who was trying to win that green jacket that he wants so badly, and Davis Love III who wants to win another major. Although Davis has won his major and shed that title of best player not to have won a major, but nowadays, it doesn’t take one major to define a player. A player has to win more than one to disprove any notion that it was a fluke or a lucky win at a lucky time. Olazabal was one of those players in my mind and he has shown me that he has the game when he needs it. It’s one thing to find your game in any tournament, but to find it at the Masters is another. Maybe now he’ll get the recognition that he deserves.
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Here, here. It’s not that I dont like Olazabal, I think he’s a great player he just doesn’t have any panache or charisma. Duval has his calm and calculating look but in the end the fireworks go off. Tiger is a never-ending story of emotion and the band keeps playing on. Norman is just what they say a shark that is always there and his eyes tell exactly what he’s thinking…..Olazabal is just there making excellent shots no emotion even when he wins its a "hey, that was cool oh well" In fairness, I really don’t think it’s the fact that Ollie is a European that taints my view. It’s just that I’m abivalent towards HIM. I don’t dislike him, it’s just that he’s not one of my favorite players. If it had been Seve rising from the ashes, a la Jack in ‘86, that would’ve really been one for the ages. Or if Langer had continued his good play that got him into contention and gone on to win a third green jacket, I’d have thought that was really something. Truth is, y’all who’ve responded to my original post are dead on correct. This Masters had all the ingredients you look for in a major championship. The one thing I found lacking was the emotional drama, and if you think about it, emotion is in the eye (or, heart) of the beholder. But like I said before, its’ probably just me. Which is why I felt compelled to write it. I had to get it off my chest. I feel better now. :-) Randy But maybe my perception is tainted by my being an American. There’s no maybe about it. From my perception it was great to see ANOTHER European victory at Augusta. If I were the scriptwriter, Norman would have holed out from the fairway to steal it at the end. Then, finally, there would have been a measure of justice. The good guy wins in the end. That’s not justice because then Olazabal would have felt the tournament was stolen from him. If it had happened, then everyone who is now saying Greg choked would be saying Greg didn’t win the Masters, he fluked it. And they would be right for a change. To be honest I think Greg would hate to win that way. He knows what it’s like to be on the receiving end. It was not, however, a Masters Tournament that will go down as one of the most memorable. Not even in the top 20. At least not for me. But I’m surprised you felt it wasn’t a memorable Masters. I thought that the golf played round Amen Corner on Sunday was as good as it gets. Norman’s shot from the ‘rough’ into 11 was excellent. More than one player bottled that approach shot. He then holed for birdie. If you were supporting Norman didn’t you feel the tension as he stood on the 12th and then took his stance only to step back and start again? All the while you’re thinking about what happened on Saturday, what happened in 1996 and the fact that this is the most demanding par 3 in the world. Then when the ball was flying through the air…and then when it stopped on the bank and thankfully didn’t roll back. Then of course we have the 13th. Enough said about that hole already. For me, the moment Norman bogeyed the 15th then, yes, the tournament lost it’s edge. It had slipped from his grasp. Jose had out-played him. I agree with your sentiments on Norman not winning (I wanted him to win) but I get the impression you didn’t appreciate a European winning. Had an American won in the same circumstances it would have been ‘one for the ages’. Jim
Response:
Here, here. It’s not that I dont like Olazabal, I think he’s a great player he just doesn’t have any panache or charisma. Duval has his calm and calculating look but in the end the fireworks go off. Tiger is a never-ending story of emotion and the band keeps playing on. Norman is just what they say a shark that is always there and his eyes tell exactly what he’s thinking…..Olazabal is just there making excellent shots no emotion even when he wins its a "hey, that was cool oh well"
No charisma? Maybe you need to look closer than CBS lets you. I recall Ollie doing the flamenco on the 18th green at Muirfield Village after the 1987 Ryder Cup with a Spanish flag draped over his shoulders and the crowd going bananas. Or his comeback win (in Dubai?) wiping tears from his eyes on the 18th green as he tried to hole out. Or any Ryder Cup foursome or fourball with Seve. This guy is a tiger, and I think that if he ever elects to spend more time over here on the PGA Tour, then the public will get to know him better and appreciate him more. So maybe "no emotion", should read "no VISIBLE emotion". After all, Sunday ws a a day for self control above everything under those conditions. William Clark — *LEGAL NOTICE TO ALL BULK E-MAILERS* Pursuant to US Code,Title 7,Chapter 5,Subchapter II,227,all nonsolicited commercial Email sent to this address is subject to a download & archival fee in the amount of $500US. E-mailing to this address for commercial purposes denotes acceptance of these terms. Violators will be prosecuted to the maximum extent of the law.
Response:
Well I can’t really argue with your reply. We all have own favourites and we all have our own perception of events. We may agree on many events in golf that are truely memorable but there will always be some that we take different views on. It is true that our emotional ties towards one golfer can affect our view of a tournament. We make our own emotional drama. I could show the video of the 1986 Masters to a friend who doesn’t like golf and he’ll look at me and say "Huh, so what?". I was just a bit surprised at your complete indifference to him – as if he adds nothing to the game and might as well have never existed. To call him the "spoiler of all spoilers" seemed a bit like sour grapes. But that’s only my perception of things…I appreciate I could be wrong. Jim – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – In fairness, I really don’t think it’s the fact that Ollie is a European that taints my view. It’s just that I’m abivalent towards HIM. I don’t dislike him, it’s just that he’s not one of my favorite players. If it had been Seve rising from the ashes, a la Jack in ‘86, that would’ve really been one for the ages. Or if Langer had continued his good play that got him into contention and gone on to win a third green jacket, I’d have thought that was really something. Truth is, y’all who’ve responded to my original post are dead on correct. This Masters had all the ingredients you look for in a major championship. The one thing I found lacking was the emotional drama, and if you think about it, emotion is in the eye (or, heart) of the beholder. But like I said before, its’ probably just me. Which is why I felt compelled to write it. I had to get it off my chest. I feel better now. :-) Randy
Response:
I agree that the perception or experience of emotion is all in the eye of the beholder…. i have to question the beholder though, who cannot find emotion in watching a player, who thought he may never walk again, let alone play and win the Masters,….go ahead and do that, just a short few years later. I would have been very interested to see what you had written had another 1-major-wonder-American won it….. Otherwise very well written…. and some interesting insights. play well Stan
Response:
Here, here. It’s not that I dont like Olazabal, I think he’s a great player he just doesn’t have any panache or charisma. Duval has his calm and calculating look but in the end the fireworks go off. Tiger is a never-ending story of emotion and the band keeps playing on. Norman is just what they say a shark that is always there and his eyes tell exactly what he’s thinking…..Olazabal is just there making excellent shots no emotion even when he wins its a "hey, that was cool oh well" – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – In fairness, I really don’t think it’s the fact that Ollie is a European that taints my view. It’s just that I’m abivalent towards HIM. I don’t dislike him, it’s just that he’s not one of my favorite players. If it had been Seve rising from the ashes, a la Jack in ‘86, that would’ve really been one for the ages. Or if Langer had continued his good play that got him into contention and gone on to win a third green jacket, I’d have thought that was really something. Truth is, y’all who’ve responded to my original post are dead on correct. This Masters had all the ingredients you look for in a major championship. The one thing I found lacking was the emotional drama, and if you think about it, emotion is in the eye (or, heart) of the beholder. But like I said before, its’ probably just me. Which is why I felt compelled to write it. I had to get it off my chest. I feel better now. :-) Randy But maybe my perception is tainted by my being an American. There’s no maybe about it. From my perception it was great to see ANOTHER European victory at Augusta. If I were the scriptwriter, Norman would have holed out from the fairway to steal it at the end. Then, finally, there would have been a measure of justice. The good guy wins in the end. That’s not justice because then Olazabal would have felt the tournament was stolen from him. If it had happened, then everyone who is now saying Greg choked would be saying Greg didn’t win the Masters, he fluked it. And they would be right for a change. To be honest I think Greg would hate to win that way. He knows what it’s like to be on the receiving end. It was not, however, a Masters Tournament that will go down as one of the most memorable. Not even in the top 20. At least not for me. But I’m surprised you felt it wasn’t a memorable Masters. I thought that the golf played round Amen Corner on Sunday was as good as it gets. Norman’s shot from the ‘rough’ into 11 was excellent. More than one player bottled that approach shot. He then holed for birdie. If you were supporting Norman didn’t you feel the tension as he stood on the 12th and then took his stance only to step back and start again? All the while you’re thinking about what happened on Saturday, what happened in 1996 and the fact that this is the most demanding par 3 in the world. Then when the ball was flying through the air…and then when it stopped on the bank and thankfully didn’t roll back. Then of course we have the 13th. Enough said about that hole already. For me, the moment Norman bogeyed the 15th then, yes, the tournament lost it’s edge. It had slipped from his grasp. Jose had out-played him. I agree with your sentiments on Norman not winning (I wanted him to win) but I get the impression you didn’t appreciate a European winning. Had an American won in the same circumstances it would have been ‘one for the ages’. Jim
Response:
In fairness, I really don’t think it’s the fact that Ollie is a European that taints my view. It’s just that I’m abivalent towards HIM. I don’t dislike him, it’s just that he’s not one of my favorite players. If it had been Seve rising from the ashes, a la Jack in ‘86, that would’ve really been one for the ages. Or if Langer had continued his good play that got him into contention and gone on to win a third green jacket, I’d have thought that was really something. Truth is, y’all who’ve responded to my original post are dead on correct. This Masters had all the ingredients you look for in a major championship. The one thing I found lacking was the emotional drama, and if you think about it, emotion is in the eye (or, heart) of the beholder. But like I said before, its’ probably just me. Which is why I felt compelled to write it. I had to get it off my chest. I feel better now. :-) Randy – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – But maybe my perception is tainted by my being an American. There’s no maybe about it. From my perception it was great to see ANOTHER European victory at Augusta. If I were the scriptwriter, Norman would have holed out from the fairway to steal it at the end. Then, finally, there would have been a measure of justice. The good guy wins in the end. That’s not justice because then Olazabal would have felt the tournament was stolen from him. If it had happened, then everyone who is now saying Greg choked would be saying Greg didn’t win the Masters, he fluked it. And they would be right for a change. To be honest I think Greg would hate to win that way. He knows what it’s like to be on the receiving end. It was not, however, a Masters Tournament that will go down as one of the most memorable. Not even in the top 20. At least not for me. But I’m surprised you felt it wasn’t a memorable Masters. I thought that the golf played round Amen Corner on Sunday was as good as it gets. Norman’s shot from the ‘rough’ into 11 was excellent. More than one player bottled that approach shot. He then holed for birdie. If you were supporting Norman didn’t you feel the tension as he stood on the 12th and then took his stance only to step back and start again? All the while you’re thinking about what happened on Saturday, what happened in 1996 and the fact that this is the most demanding par 3 in the world. Then when the ball was flying through the air…and then when it stopped on the bank and thankfully didn’t roll back. Then of course we have the 13th. Enough said about that hole already. For me, the moment Norman bogeyed the 15th then, yes, the tournament lost it’s edge. It had slipped from his grasp. Jose had out-played him. I agree with your sentiments on Norman not winning (I wanted him to win) but I get the impression you didn’t appreciate a European winning. Had an American won in the same circumstances it would have been ‘one for the ages’. Jim
Response:
But maybe my perception is tainted by my being an American.
There’s no maybe about it. From my perception it was great to see ANOTHER European victory at Augusta. If I were the scriptwriter, Norman would have holed out from the fairway to steal it at the end. Then, finally, there would have been a measure of justice. The good guy wins in the end.
That’s not justice because then Olazabal would have felt the tournament was stolen from him. If it had happened, then everyone who is now saying Greg choked would be saying Greg didn’t win the Masters, he fluked it. And they would be right for a change. To be honest I think Greg would hate to win that way. He knows what it’s like to be on the receiving end. It was not, however, a Masters Tournament that will go down as one of the most memorable. Not even in the top 20. At least not for me.
But I’m surprised you felt it wasn’t a memorable Masters. I thought that the golf played round Amen Corner on Sunday was as good as it gets. Norman’s shot from the ‘rough’ into 11 was excellent. More than one player bottled that approach shot. He then holed for birdie. If you were supporting Norman didn’t you feel the tension as he stood on the 12th and then took his stance only to step back and start again? All the while you’re thinking about what happened on Saturday, what happened in 1996 and the fact that this is the most demanding par 3 in the world. Then when the ball was flying through the air…and then when it stopped on the bank and thankfully didn’t roll back. Then of course we have the 13th. Enough said about that hole already. For me, the moment Norman bogeyed the 15th then, yes, the tournament lost it’s edge. It had slipped from his grasp. Jose had out-played him. I agree with your sentiments on Norman not winning (I wanted him to win) but I get the impression you didn’t appreciate a European winning. Had an American won in the same circumstances it would have been ‘one for the ages’. Jim
Response:
Randy, Sure we all would have liked a Hollywood ending at the Masters. If we couldn’t have Crocodile Dundee beating out the sinister Hispanic dude, at least let one of our own — and a Georgia native to boot — receive the holy verdant vestment while Jim Nantz delivers oleaginous encomia to the great victorious champion of this most hallowed of sacred golfing sacraments, etc., etc. Too bad it didn’t happen. Yet another foreigner took the Green Jacket, and one who doesn’t even have some variant of English as his first language. It might not have been Hollywood, but then Europe seems to be producing better stories than La-La Land this year. I hate to say it, but your dismissal of Ollie’s victory as anti-climactic smacks of parochialism. In 5 years overseas, I saw a lot more European Tour golf than most of readers of RSG, certainly of the Americans, and a lot more of Chema. Not only is he a short-game magician and a fierce competitor, but he is also the heir to Seve’s mantle. (What is it about these Spaniards and their short games?) Their Ryder Cup partnerships were at least on a par with Love-Couples in terms of both performance and flair. Believe me, when he was out with his foot/back problems, he was sorely missed. I thought Ollie won at Augusta in great style — how can you fault answering Norman’s eagle on 13 with a birdie of his own? Like Seve before him, he has the chance to carve out his own little hacienda down in Georgia. And I look forward to the time when Sergio Garcia takes over as Robin in Spanish golf’s new Dynamic Duo.
[snip of Randy's well-expressed thoughts on the Masters]
Response:
Wonderful post Randy. I thought I was the only one who felt the same way as you’ve described regarding Olazabal. Not dislike, but indifference. I have every Masters broadcast since ‘90 on tape and on rainy days in the winter will watch them and reminisce. The ‘94 tape where he won the first time never gets watched. I suspect this years will be the same.
Well, pull out the 1987 and 1989 Ryder Cup tapes of him and Seve, and let’s see how indifferent you feel after those. Watch the 10th at the Belfrey in (I think) 1989 – two better tee shots you won’t see. William Clark — *LEGAL NOTICE TO ALL BULK E-MAILERS* Pursuant to US Code,Title 7,Chapter 5,Subchapter II,227,all nonsolicited commercial Email sent to this address is subject to a download & archival fee in the amount of $500US. E-mailing to this address for commercial purposes denotes acceptance of these terms. Violators will be prosecuted to the maximum extent of the law.
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I gotta admit I’m a romantic. Something about closing out the millennium with a win for the ages appealed to by sensibilities. (I know, I know, the year 2000 is technically the end of the millennium. So the last tournament played in a year starting in "1.") The story could have played out in a number of ways… Davis Love’s unbelievable hole-out for birdie on 16 leading to an unforgettable win for a Georgia boy just 35 years (a nice round number) removed from his dad leading Round 1 at Augusta with a 69 (same thing Davis did this year). That would have been a great story. David Duval, everybody’s everything, capping a three-straight streak to finally break through for his first major. It would have been the crowning achievement on a spectacular two year ride, and would have made a nice bookend to his 59 earlier this year. It was an obvious choice, and no one would have questioned whether the "best" player won. Tiger Woods, the man Jack once said would exceed the total wins at Augusta registered by both him and Arnie combined. Tiger-proof Augusta? You gotta be kidding. A win would have been a statement of, "Take that, you Tiger-proofers!" Would’ve been a good story, but it didn’t happen. Not even close. Greg Norman, golf’s all-time career leader in disappointments. A win at Augusta would have been a storybook ending to a climb back to golf’s mountaintop, just a year removed from a career-threatening injury. Norman, who has often been criticized as a choker by ignorant sports fans who would find their April weekends better spent watching celebrity wrist-wrestling on TV, is unquestionably one of golf’s all-time heroes, and one of its great champions. Yet he will best be remembered by his failures, and by being a tragic figure. In this, his return to Augusta after a year’s layoff, there was no pressure, and strangely, he seemed to have metamorphosed into an "elder statesman" of the game. A Norman win would have been the perfect punctuation mark on the ’90s, and in almost poetic fashion, would have brought down the curtain on the saddest chapter of one of the game’s most beloved personalities. Somehow, it seemed as though in this, the first Masters Tournament played in four decades without a player named Nicklaus in the field, that golf’s script-writers would have give, us a gem for the ages. Instead, quite frankly, it was, at least for me, anti-climactic. The spoiler of all spoilers, the man who, just five years earlier, denied another of American golf’s favorite sons, Tom Lehman, the same green jacket, did it again, this time to one of World golf’s all-time favorite sons, Greg Norman. In a Masters Tournament where five players were tied for the lead as the final group was playing number 11, the tournament was over as the final group was teeing off on 17. As storybook endings go, this one ended too early, and did so on a strangely sour note. Jose Maria-Olazabal is a fine player. A world-class player. A man with two majors on his resume, and probably two or three more in his bag. He’s good. He’s real good. He’s better than most of us Americans give him credit for, since he plays most of his golf (quite well, by the way) in a far away land. The ‘99 Masters was a victory for us short-knockers, and in an age where conventional wisdom suggests that it’s the Tiger Woodses and John Dalys who should eat up Augusta National, that a man who averaged just over 250 yards off the tee won his second green jacket in five years should not be taken lightly. Any questions about the value of a short game? It’s true: Drive for show. Chip and putt for green jackets. Congratulations to Jose Maria. Like Faldo three years ago, he earned it. Though everyone remembers Greg’s faultering in ‘96, Faldo’s performance on Sunday that year was one of the great ones. And though Norman gave it away, he didn’t give it *to Faldo*. Faldo had to go get it. And last week in Augusta, Georgia, Jose Maria Olazabal went out and got it. Again. He was simply better than the others. Everything Norman and the others threw at him, he simply one-upped them. Every time. But for those of us looking for a Mize-like miracle, or a not-a-dry-eye-in-the-house Crenshaw-like finish, or a final-hole O’Meara-esque lightning bolt, or a stop-the-presses Tiger-like stampede, or a Nicklaus-in-86-like whodathunkit, this was all too clinical, too restrained, too much like any old garden-variety Fruit-of-the-Loom Boxer Shorts Open, with another very good pro winning in ho-hum fashion. Not the heroics or emotion we’ve come to expect from this majestic tournament that signals the beggining of "the *real* golf season." But maybe my perception is tainted by my being an American. I’m sure the folks in Spain see it quite differently. As well they should. I guess I just don’t have any emotions attached to watching Olazabal win a golf tournament. He’s certainly deserving. He’s a great champion. But I just don’t care about him one way or the other. I’m glad his foot is better, but to be candid, I didn’t miss him when he was gone. It’s not that I don’t like him, I’m just ambivalent towards him. If I were the scriptwriter, Norman would have holed out from the fairway to steal it at the end. Then, finally, there would have been a measure of justice. The good guy wins in the end. But as we all know, in golf, there is no justice. Funny thing is, though, Greg darn near *did* hole out from the fairway — not once, not twice, but THREE TIMES. His spinning the ball back out of the 2nd cut on 7 where it nearly went in for a 2 (then he missed the putt); his spinning the ball back with his pitch on the par five 8th (nearly went in for eagle), which he tapped in for birdie; and his 2nd shot on the par five 13th, that darn near hit the flagstick (was I the only one thinking of Sarazen’s "shot heard ’round the word" at that moment?). How do you suppose *that* would have changed the way this Masters Tournament will be remembered? Not only did Norman not choke, he played GREAT. He missed a couple of shots coming down the stretch, but in case you forgot, so did the winner. So does everyone. Make no mistake — a Norman win was what I was hoping for. It’s what the moment called for. It’s what golf needed. What it got, instead, was a workman-like win by an exceptional, if somewhat less-than-charismatic, player. It was not, however, a Masters Tournament that will go down as one of the most memorable. Not even in the top 20. At least not for me. Though I’m gonna go out on a limb and guess that for the Olazabal family, it’ll go down in the Top 2. Randy
Yes, I agree with your assessment. I do think, however, that once the wind started to blow and the greens got even harder and faster, that we were always going to see a final round more akin to walking on eggshells than to a firework show. I think that there was very little real option to go for the pins, and those who did (Duval and Westwood, for example) quickly came to grief. The Players had to be concerned first and foremost with getting on, and staying on, the putting surface, prefereably in a spot from which they had a decent two-putt with a chance of a one-putt. I don’t know whether the Masters thinks it has any debt to the watching public, but those greens did seem to be absurdly fast and difficult. Noetheless, it was a fascinating chess game of a final round. No great dramatics, sure, except for the putts on 13, but absolutely rivetting. I liken it to a 1-0 Greg Maddux game vs. a 14-11 Mark McGwire slugfest. Both magical in their way, but the real sense of absorption in watching a master craftsman at work in holding the 1-0 lead. And then the recovery shot on 17, when he could really have been in trouble was the shot of a champion. Overall, it seemed to me that once the conditions turned out to be dry and windy, it brought the Europeans much more into the picture. Clearly some of the US pros were caught a little short of invention at times, and the creative short games of the Europeans were a big advantage. Interesting the some who have had only so-so seasons in Europe, like Lyle and Woosnam, featured in the Masters at some point. Olazabal may be "less than charismatic" in the way he applied himself to the job on Sunday, but if I were a US PGA pro I would be getting a little more nervous for the Ryder Cup right now. JMO will be a ferocious opponent in September. William Clark — *LEGAL NOTICE TO ALL BULK E-MAILERS* Pursuant to US Code,Title 7,Chapter 5,Subchapter II,227,all nonsolicited commercial Email sent to this address is subject to a download & archival fee in the amount of $500US. E-mailing to this address for commercial purposes denotes acceptance of these terms. Violators will be prosecuted to the maximum extent of the law.
Response:
tapped in for birdie; and his 2nd shot on the par five 13th, that darn near hit the flagstick (was I the only one thinking of Sarazen’s "shot heard ’round the word" at that moment?).
No… I was thinking "Oh, baby!" 
What it got, instead, was a workman-like win by an exceptional, if somewhat less-than-charismatic, player.
Well I don’t agree with you… I love to watch Jose and the magic touch around the greens. Those shots are far more interesting to me than huge drives. I was rooting for Norman, too… but I like Jose and don’t think he OR his game are ‘workman-like’. — — — David "Thor" Collard — http://ttsoft.com/thor
Response:
Another great essay. Thanks again Randy. (But where was "ploppage")? — Someone likes every shot! BK… —
Response:
Wonderful post Randy. I thought I was the only one who felt the same way as you’ve described regarding Olazabal. Not dislike, but indifference. I have every Masters broadcast since ‘90 on tape and on rainy days in the winter will watch them and reminisce. The ‘94 tape where he won the first time never gets watched. I suspect this years will be the same.
Response:
I gotta admit I’m a romantic. Something about closing out the millennium with a win for the ages appealed to by sensibilities. (I know, I know, the year 2000 is technically the end of the millennium. So the last tournament played in a year starting in "1.") The story could have played out in a number of ways… Davis Love’s unbelievable hole-out for birdie on 16 leading to an unforgettable win for a Georgia boy just 35 years (a nice round number) removed from his dad leading Round 1 at Augusta with a 69 (same thing Davis did this year). That would have been a great story. David Duval, everybody’s everything, capping a three-straight streak to finally break through for his first major. It would have been the crowning achievement on a spectacular two year ride, and would have made a nice bookend to his 59 earlier this year. It was an obvious choice, and no one would have questioned whether the "best" player won. Tiger Woods, the man Jack once said would exceed the total wins at Augusta registered by both him and Arnie combined. Tiger-proof Augusta? You gotta be kidding. A win would have been a statement of, "Take that, you Tiger-proofers!" Would’ve been a good story, but it didn’t happen. Not even close. Greg Norman, golf’s all-time career leader in disappointments. A win at Augusta would have been a storybook ending to a climb back to golf’s mountaintop, just a year removed from a career-threatening injury. Norman, who has often been criticized as a choker by ignorant sports fans who would find their April weekends better spent watching celebrity wrist-wrestling on TV, is unquestionably one of golf’s all-time heroes, and one of its great champions. Yet he will best be remembered by his failures, and by being a tragic figure. In this, his return to Augusta after a year’s layoff, there was no pressure, and strangely, he seemed to have metamorphosed into an "elder statesman" of the game. A Norman win would have been the perfect punctuation mark on the ’90s, and in almost poetic fashion, would have brought down the curtain on the saddest chapter of one of the game’s most beloved personalities. Somehow, it seemed as though in this, the first Masters Tournament played in four decades without a player named Nicklaus in the field, that golf’s script-writers would have give, us a gem for the ages. Instead, quite frankly, it was, at least for me, anti-climactic. The spoiler of all spoilers, the man who, just five years earlier, denied another of American golf’s favorite sons, Tom Lehman, the same green jacket, did it again, this time to one of World golf’s all-time favorite sons, Greg Norman. In a Masters Tournament where five players were tied for the lead as the final group was playing number 11, the tournament was over as the final group was teeing off on 17. As storybook endings go, this one ended too early, and did so on a strangely sour note. Jose Maria-Olazabal is a fine player. A world-class player. A man with two majors on his resume, and probably two or three more in his bag. He’s good. He’s real good. He’s better than most of us Americans give him credit for, since he plays most of his golf (quite well, by the way) in a far away land. The ‘99 Masters was a victory for us short-knockers, and in an age where conventional wisdom suggests that it’s the Tiger Woodses and John Dalys who should eat up Augusta National, that a man who averaged just over 250 yards off the tee won his second green jacket in five years should not be taken lightly. Any questions about the value of a short game? It’s true: Drive for show. Chip and putt for green jackets. Congratulations to Jose Maria. Like Faldo three years ago, he earned it. Though everyone remembers Greg’s faultering in ‘96, Faldo’s performance on Sunday that year was one of the great ones. And though Norman gave it away, he didn’t give it *to Faldo*. Faldo had to go get it. And last week in Augusta, Georgia, Jose Maria Olazabal went out and got it. Again. He was simply better than the others. Everything Norman and the others threw at him, he simply one-upped them. Every time. But for those of us looking for a Mize-like miracle, or a not-a-dry-eye-in-the-house Crenshaw-like finish, or a final-hole O’Meara-esque lightning bolt, or a stop-the-presses Tiger-like stampede, or a Nicklaus-in-86-like whodathunkit, this was all too clinical, too restrained, too much like any old garden-variety Fruit-of-the-Loom Boxer Shorts Open, with another very good pro winning in ho-hum fashion. Not the heroics or emotion we’ve come to expect from this majestic tournament that signals the beggining of "the *real* golf season." But maybe my perception is tainted by my being an American. I’m sure the folks in Spain see it quite differently. As well they should. I guess I just don’t have any emotions attached to watching Olazabal win a golf tournament. He’s certainly deserving. He’s a great champion. But I just don’t care about him one way or the other. I’m glad his foot is better, but to be candid, I didn’t miss him when he was gone. It’s not that I don’t like him, I’m just ambivalent towards him. If I were the scriptwriter, Norman would have holed out from the fairway to steal it at the end. Then, finally, there would have been a measure of justice. The good guy wins in the end. But as we all know, in golf, there is no justice. Funny thing is, though, Greg darn near *did* hole out from the fairway — not once, not twice, but THREE TIMES. His spinning the ball back out of the 2nd cut on 7 where it nearly went in for a 2 (then he missed the putt); his spinning the ball back with his pitch on the par five 8th (nearly went in for eagle), which he tapped in for birdie; and his 2nd shot on the par five 13th, that darn near hit the flagstick (was I the only one thinking of Sarazen’s "shot heard ’round the word" at that moment?). How do you suppose *that* would have changed the way this Masters Tournament will be remembered? Not only did Norman not choke, he played GREAT. He missed a couple of shots coming down the stretch, but in case you forgot, so did the winner. So does everyone. Make no mistake — a Norman win was what I was hoping for. It’s what the moment called for. It’s what golf needed. What it got, instead, was a workman-like win by an exceptional, if somewhat less-than-charismatic, player. It was not, however, a Masters Tournament that will go down as one of the most memorable. Not even in the top 20. At least not for me. Though I’m gonna go out on a limb and guess that for the Olazabal family, it’ll go down in the Top 2. Randy