Woods Agrees That Lawrie's Fluke Win Needs To Be Celebrated More

Douglas Lowe files this:

Paul Lawrie said yesterday that he did not get the credit he deserved for winning here in 1999, and no less a figure than Tiger Woods backed him up.

Lawrie came from 10 strokes behind on the final day to capitalise on Jean Van de Velde's infamous errors and make the play-off, and then hit a dream four-iron on to the final green to set up his Championship putt.

Lawrie acknowledges that Van de Velde's cock-up warranted the headlines, but argued yesterday that his subplot was underplayed. "I would have liked to have seen a little bit more of, 'Jean Van de Velde blew the Open, but, by God, Paul Lawrie shot 67 to win the tournament by two shots by hitting the best shot anyone has ever seen down the last hole'," he said.

Kind of reminds you of Monty in the humility department, eh?

 
I don't remember the best shot anyone has ever seen, do you?

"But that didn't happen very often. That's out of my hands. What can I do? There was a lot written about what Jean did. And rightly so. But I didn't read a lot about how well I did the last day."

And not a whole lot since.

Comments

[Ian C]

Lawrie birdied the 17th and 18th twice on the last Sunday in the Open. His approach shots in the play-off were exceptional. When he was handed a shot to win a major he took it. There are plenty of far more celebrated golfers who have crumbled when offered such a chance.

[Hawkeye]

I agree with Lawrie and Ian C - Those birdies on 17 and 18 in the play-off were unbelievable, and it's a crying shame they have been so overlooked. It was cold, gloomy and miserable, and to break out of a tie halfway with a finish like that on those two holes was simply astonishing. Especially that 4-iron on the last, as a major championship clutch iron shot it's only beaten by Shaun Micheel's 7-Iron to three inches at Oak Hill. Guess you didn't remember that one, either. I remember thinking at the time "Thank god someone actually managed to WIN it, so the media won't focus exclusively on the Van De Velde fiasco". Seems I was wrong.
But it seems that for a shot to become "classic", it must be struck by an already proven champion (or being struck to beat Greg Norman). When Tom Watson chips in from greenside rough on the 71st hole to win the U.S. Open, it becomes instant history. When Lee Janzen chips in from greenside rough on the 70th hole to win the U.S. Open (1993), nobody remembers it.

[DAW]

And I agree with the previous two posters. Lawrie grabbed the brass ring when he had his chance. I really don't understand Geoff's snark here; really, Geoff, you're in danger of becoming a parody of the curmudeon personality you like to cultivate. The man played a brilliant final day and a stunning playoff. Why shouldn't he toot his own horn when someone asks him about it?

[Tuna]

Agreed, Lawrie played 17 and 18 in the playoff with gusto.

Out of curiosity, does anyone remember the good fortune he had on his 2nd shot to 18 in regulation?

[Hawkeye]

Yup, it landed short of the burn and hopped over. I actually think Leonard went for the same shot, but his 3-wood from the rough bounced in.

[Ronald Montesano]

Geoff, you dimwit, how can you not remember the greatest shot ever. At least five people do. I believe that their recollection excuses me from remembering the distinction between Paul Lawrie and Peter Loree. Is there one?

[Smolmania]

Hawk, maybe we don't remember Lee Janzen's chip in at 16 at Baltusrol because the only thing we can recall that Open was that shot he hit into a pine tree which not only went through, but went through without touching anything. One of the greatest pieces of good fortune in major championship history. I can still see that shot, and I can't tell you what hole it was on or when in the round it occurred.

In my opinion the VDV debacle is remembered in large part because of the reaction of the announcing crew. Maybe he shouldn't have hit the driver, but that shot didn't lose the Open for him. Could he have laid up on the second after missing the burn? Perhaps, but was an 8 iron to a narrow fairway surrounded by that rough such an easy play? We know how deep the rough was up by where he was apparently supposed to lay up to because we saw his lie after he dropped.

Lawrie hit two great shots in the playoff, and his name is on the Claret Jug. 50 years from now it will still be there, and the Frenchman will be a footnote.

[Tuna]

I don't recall the details, but didn't Janzen also have some good fortune with a tree at Olympic in the final round?

Agreed that VDV had horrible luck on his 2nd shot at 18. Curtis Strange probably did exacerbate things by the "stupidest thing I've ever seen" remarks.

In hindsight, VDV probably had good luck and bad luck with his bad drive at 18.

The good luck...he missed the burn and had a good lie.

The bad luck...he missed the burn. In retrospect, if he hit it in the burn off 18 tee, he would have probably laid up short of the burn in front of the green in 3, pitched on, took a double bogey and the claret jug.

[Keith T]

I remember the janzen chip very well. Some announcer was going on and on about the lie being downgrain before it went in.

I thought janzens drive on 17? kicked out (rather than went through)

[BrianE]

Geoff
As already asked , and not just by me this time , what is your beef with Mr Lawrie ?

Never mind the best shot , how about one of the best rounds in major championship history .

Geoff have ever seen Carnoustie in person ?

[MJ]

The bottom line is Van de Velde gagged. That is the only storyline. Lawrie's 67 is irrelevant if he doesn't triple 18. Sorry, but it was not like Lawrie made his shots under incredible pressure. Sorry lads.