Now More Than Ever It's Time To Bring Back The Skins Game

Screen Shot 2018-11-25 at 3.42.00 PM.png

More than any contribution it made to television innovation, gambling intrigue or Phil’s pocketbook, The Match reminded us that the Skins Game worked.

What a perfect time for the organizers of The Match to pick up the right to bring it back with modernized elements.

As The Match played out and the gambling possibilities were just too tricky to work out despite Shadow Creek’s endless walks between greens and tees, the simplicity of the Skins Game kept making so much sense.

With a few tweaks.

Skins died when the money became irrelevant for today’s players and you were left with oddball foursomes, including 2008’s gathering of K.J. Choi, Stephen Ames, Rocco Mediate and Phil Mickelson. It deserved to die.

And while The Match was never that interesting because of the $9 million at stake for the winner, you’re only going to get top players if it’s going to pad their pocketbook in a meaningful way.

More than anything, The Match reminded us that Skins was relatable, just unpredictable enough for viewers, and predictable enough for television to take a crack at showing it. At nine holes, it didn’t force us to sit around too long.

Perhaps a new Skins Game needs to return as a nine-hole event and for just one day with three holes played for $500k each, $1 million for the middle stretch and $2 million each for the final three. Lift the best elements of The Match, spread the wealth to four players and use the pay-per-view concept to justify renting an exotic golf course.

Oh, and make sure the credit card readers are working.

The Match: The Great, Good, Bad And Ugly

ShadowCreek_creek.jpeg

Here goes....

The Great

Charles Barkley - He should have been on the full broadcast, in hindsight. He got right to the point as Tiger and Phil struggled horrible to read Shadow Creek’s greens. He jousted as only he can with Justin Verlander’s Tweets, too. But sadly, Barkley also was not around for the last couple of hours to put a bow.

The Audio - Turns out, a feed of just open microphones would have been enough for most people. Phil was in hard sell mode early but once he settled into a normal round of golf, basically narrated the proceedings. Tiger chimed in with enough to make a player-only feed functional had that been an option. Yes, Phil was winded at times and a breather was distracting, but the real potential for this production came together as both players had driven beautifully down the 6th, the cameras were tight to both players as we could hear each in between clubs for the approach. The kind of gripping cinematic moment that the organizers had envisioned.

ShotLink Putt Probables - A simple graphic told us how far the player was from the hole and his career make percentage (ShotLink era) from that distance. Simple, clean and informative.

The Good

Live Drone Shot Down The First Fairway - It was pretty cool to move from one last player interview to a live shot down the first fairway. Unfortunately, the technology appeared limited from there on out. Perhaps too many competing cell signals?

Pat Perez - he sounded engaged and as someone who knew the players, through in a few opinionated remarks about being surprised that Tiger was giving putts and at how they were orchestrating the charity-driven side bets. And not one F-bomb!

Hole Graphics - animated hole graphics with tracer technology may have been the most vibrant and eye-catching I’ve seen. Once it was clear the drone was not reliable and the drone flyovers were needed, these jumped out as adding a futuristic feel to the telecast.

Tiger Woods’ Generosity - Wow was that many giving putts! But they all helped in the interest of pace of play and entertainment value of the match. This is a nice way of saying he twice prevented (possibly) having The Match end on a missed putt. Phil returned the favor once, by my count.

Phil Mickelson Wearing A Mic - He should be in the great category, but the hard sell mode a few times (how great is this? how great was Samuel Jackson?) dings the performance a bit. I love how he went off topic with the PGA Tour’s Mark Russell, with brother Tim Mickelson and with others. That’s about how Phil plays a normal round of golf and he gave a window into the types of conversations he has. If only…

The Bad

Announcers Talking Over Players - Everyone was guilty at some point and I’m sympathetic to the cause as this was not a normal broadcast crew, not a normal match and an unprecedented amount of sound for a sporting event to take in. Still, to miss out on Mickelson asking Russell about a rule of golf change he just does not comprehend and several other side chats about shots, was tough for the core golf fan. The more novice viewer may prefer announcer storytelling, which is why lead announcer Ernie Johnson trampled over so much talk.

The Champion’s Belt - sensational buckle design, simple brown leather look but uh, it didn’t fit Phil Mickelson, who looked visibly annoyed he couldn’t put it on. Next time, let’s make two belts, one for those with subcutaneous fat and one for those without.

Ernie Johnson - As Phil Mickelson is looking through his rangefinder for a yardage, Ernie Johnson is telling us on the 18th hole that Phil “has the laser out.” Somewhere Frank Chirkinian was screaming. Unfortunately, Johnson regularly spoke over on-course conversations, stated the obvious (what we saw on screen) and did not embellish the action. He would have been better served by having his Inside the NBA counterpart Charles Barkley in the booth, perhaps.

Natalie Gulbis - She appeared for some first hole observations and surfaced again at the 18th tee for a bad interview after Tiger’s chip-in. Her absence in between was not missed.

The Ugly

The Playoff Hole - a wise move by promoters to be ready for a tight match and sudden death, the 93 yard shot required a hole location change and had a strange feel to it given the amount of money at stake.

Capital One Ads - Presented in Playing Through mode as we saw golfers walking off the tee, we missed out on match discussions to be annoyed by Samuel Jackson and Charles Barkley asking what’s in our wallet. Better than Capital One cafe spots, but still pretty annoying commercials given that some of us paid for the match.

Gambling - All of the stakeholders learned a valuable lesson today: golf is tricky to bet on and real-time gambling is even trickier. While Mark Broadie supplied some stats that were of note. But the whirlwind nature of a two-man golf match—yes it moved amazingly fast—made it hard to embed bets or betting scenarios to enjoy. The most interesting pointed out may have been at the 7th tee when we learned the great 5-1 price punters got on the match being even after nine, was in play. Otherwise, the action moved too fast for fun gaming.

Gambling 2 - We heard about what MGM punters were betting on each hole but was it interesting to hear what punters were putting on each hole, without any real reason to be better players on particular holes? Not at all.

Shadow Creek - The course lived up to its name, serving up shadows while the late light hit the treetops. This created an unimpressive look to a course once ranked in Golf Digest’s top ten in the U.S. Add on the excess of Flinstone rocks, strategically-light design and tree overplanting, and Shadow Creek did not pop. The course exuded underwhelming television appeal in part because of the odd lighting situation. The 17th hole was deemed a genuine centerpiece but came off looking like something even waterfall lover Donald Trump would say was sooooo last century.

AT&T/Turner/Bleacher Report Synergy - Seen as the future of sports broadcasting, the inability to conduct normal transactions and ensuing decision to give away a pay-per-view match overshadowed everything. The disastrous rollout of the supposed future of broadcasting and sports packaging provided a stark reminder that the rush to usher in a new era is just that: rushed.

The Match: Technical Failure Causes Turner To Stream The Match For Free

Screen Shot 2018-11-23 at 5.19.46 PM.png

Darren Rovell first broke the news on Twitter after most potential online buyers of The Match’s $19.99 stream could not even reach the point of giving BR Live and AT&T their money. His ESPN.com story explaining what caused the backers to throw in the towel and give away the stream.

Anyone on Twitter heard immediate reports of viewers unable to even get a purchase going, while others mentioned getting The Match free without ever paying. Which, it turns out, was around the time executives huddled somewhere and uh, cut the pay cord.

Given the number of sports organizations and media tycoons taking The Match’s pay-per-view streaming temperature, the failure could rank with the great debacles in sports television history. Then again, maybe many weren’t paying and the decision was easy.

Who will be hurt most by losing paid streamers we won’t know since AT&T, Turner and its various affiliated brands were making a grand synergy play here.

Did Tiger and Phil receive a cut of the paid subscriptions?

We also won’t know that unless one of the parties publicly complains. Or sues.

The culprit behind the technology failure is also not known, though SBJ’s Austin Karp noted Turner’s $200 million purchase of iStreamplanet as a possible source to consider.

As for those who did pay—myself included—the experience via a cable pay-per-view pass was excellent until non-AT&T-owned outlets ended the stream before the trophy ceremony where Phil Mickelson was unable to get the winner’s belt around his waist.

One Verdict Of The Match Before They Even Tee Off: Vegas Needs To Get More Sophisticated With Golf Betting

Screen Shot 2018-11-19 at 9.47.21 AM.png

As we get ready for The Match to tee off, I’ve been most intrigued by the test run here for golf wagering. The telecast promises some Mark Brodie-influenced stats to play along with for those sitting in the sports books and to allow the rest of us to visual what real-time gambling on a match could look like with the proper tools at our disposal.

While I’m reserving judgement until those elements are presented today, The Match has provided another reminder that the bookmakers still do not understand golf and how to craft compelling wagers.

I’ve attached some of the prop bets below and here is Golfweek’s updated list.

Unfortunately, with two players who have no public track record on the course, playing match play and with their games having been out of view since early October, the pre-match wagers have not been the kind of fun head-scratchers you’d hope for. While that is not entirely the fault of bookmakers, anyone who knows golf realizes the stupidity and lack of value being offered.

Will there be a hole in one? +550? Seriously?

Will Phil win the first three holes?

Which player will have the most birdies?

Will they hit the first fairway? (We have no idea how wide it is…)

Hole by hole odds? For the chance to win $20 on a $100 bet?

Even something like the first to go 2 up just doesn’t have much spark when we don’t have track records to look at.

You can get way better value at the race track. Or the dog track.

Some of the prop bets sent out to writers intrigue but do not appear to be offered by the promoters or the most commonly used offshore websites. So a friend tells me.

These would have enticed some interest, had I been able to access such a site…

Will Phil Mickelson record an official three-putt?

Yes +700

No -2000

Of course he will!

Will Tiger Woods record an official three-putt?

Yes +800

No -2500

Worth a few bucks…

How many side bets will be made by Tiger and Phil?

Over 12.5 

Under 12.5

Under…that seems like a lot!

Amount of largest side bet

Over $50,000 

Under $50,000 

Totally over.

Total curse words said by Tiger Woods and Phil Mickelson

Over 21.5

Under 21.5 

Oh please, under! They aren’t sailors!

Then again, are we going with Carlin’s definition or something else?

Total times Tiger Woods twirls his club

Over 3.5

Under 3.5

Oddly, I feel he’s got four in him against Phil, on TV, feeling frisky.

Will Tiger Woods wear a red shirt?

Yes +350

No -600

Is John Daly overweight? Of course he’s wearing red.

A better bet on Phil might have been long or short sleeve since +100 on black isn’t very compelling.

Anyway, given the vagaries of our sport, golf will need to convince the masterminds that offering such prop bets to promote discussion and to liven up the entertain values. Trying to speculate on elements related to a course we don’t know, with no track history and played by two players who haven’t been visible for nearly two months, isn’t even interesting enough to ponder. Much less, bet.

Now, I do see some form in that fifth race today at Turf Paradise

Poncho-Wearing Anthony Kim Resurfaces From Upscale Kennel To Promote The Match

The reclusive Anthony Kim has surfaced in a video Tweeted by No Laying Up.

Reportedly living off insurance money while nursing injuries and harvesting manbuns, has resurfaced. Sitting with at least five of (presumably) his dogs, sounding eerily like Luke Walton and declaring his intention to place his first-ever bet on Phil Mickelson in The Match, Kim was golf’s break-out star in 2008.

I’d nominate him to be The Match’s honorary standard-bearer but given his injury history, probably not the best idea…

Instant Poll: Taking The Match's Temperature Four Days Out

TheMatch_LRG.jpg

The Match week is here! Calm down!

The Athletics Richard Deitsch assembled a panel of writers to discuss ramifications and interest level of the Tiger Woods vs. Phil Mickelson pay-per-view showdown this Friday.

Bob Harig at ESPN.com makes the case for watching and while Virginia v. Virginia Tech fans may disagree…

Yes, having to pay for it is annoying, but, as even Mickelson noted, that $20 can be split among friends who take in The Match together. While not suggesting how to spend other peoples' money, we are talking about a discretionary income choice that many would squander on other dubious endeavors. And it is Black Friday after all, a day associated with money-spending opulence.

Christine Brennan at USA Today makes an opposing case.

But in a holiday weekend overflowing with real, meaningful sports events, faux golf is out of place. Look at the trade-off you’ll be making if you watch: while either Tiger or Phil will make $9 million in the winner-take-all match, you’ll give up four hours of your life that you’ll never get back.

Tiger and Phil will preview their head-to-head match play competition in Las Vegas, minus a weighing-in ceremony. The press conference will stream live on B/R Live.

So with all of that presented, I’d love to hear where you stand on The Match and will you fork over the money? Here were the results from earlier this year when we were speculating on prices you would pay.

Will you pay to view The Match?
 
pollcode.com free polls

More Details For The Match: No Lights, No Tickets Available

Screen Shot 2018-10-11 at 8.45.06 PM.png

As a TV show it’s not a surprise they are limiting this to high rollers and other corporate drones, but it’s a bit disappointing that the “under the lights” element Phil Mickelson predicted for his pay-per-view match with Tiger Woods will be played only in daylight.

Brian Hurlburt reports for the Las Vegas Journal-Review on the $9 Million (Because The PGA Tour Says So) match set for next month at Shadow Creek.