You don't think the market had fair idea of expected score for Sunday, or at least better than you?

Why don't you look at 54 hole scores for the past x years and compare them to this year and get back to me.

Still waiting for the expert picks. I got a feeling you won't providing much in the way of that.

Because you're too lazy to do it?

I'm still waiting for you to stop being an *******. Got a feeling we won't be seeing much of that either.

This conversation would have been laughable prior to Dec. Now not so much...

You always think "the market" is 100% correct? Give it up.

But all you have is nonsensical numbers made up to support some point that isn't relevant to the decision under debate. That's not rigour. That's a guy waving his hands and making silly noises.

What is your estimate of the EV of going for it? What is it for laying up?

You toss around "EV" as if you've actually done the work-- show it.

****, are you even paying attention? I was showing the idiocy of calling the shot ballsy, not the percentage of the shot itself. I've already discussed what I thought the EV of the shot was.

I give. The shot was ballsy and the greatest of all time.

And you were doing it with numbers that have no relevancy to anything. Your argument there hinges entirely on Phil making the wrong choice-- which you haven't shown.

As I said, one might call the correct choice gutsy. Someone might admire Bill Belichick flouting convention when he goes for two points or goes for it on 4th and long where his peers wouldn't. It takes some guts to forge your own way and not rely on received wisdom.

This entire digression is just a reason to flap your gums, though. I don't think Phil was congratulating himself for courage or balls, but making a clever observation about how people judge things.

You asserted there was a greater than 20% chance he put it in the creek. That number is pulled directly from your butt.

If it is true that he had a stock 6-iron sitting up on the pine straw from 205 with no swing problems, stance problems, and a clear line of sight-- 20% in the water is ludicrous.

I'm willing to admit I don't know what was strictly the better choice. There's no way for me to evaluate the line of sight, the television broadcast doesn't give enough evidence, and even then it would be tough to know the margin of error in staying on it.

And even accepting your ridiculous estimate, it is still not certain that laying up showed a better EV-- it depends on how you estimate the other outcomes.

Estimates aside, I think it's fair to say that his miss in that spot was either where it ended up (saying he WAS playing to the fat of the green), or that his miss was leaving it out to the left onto the fat part of the green. I'm sure he was playing safe/numbers tournament golf there from outside 200 yards.