Sure know how to pick em...

Being right is not the most important thing in the world, but having a prediction validated is a very satisfying feeling. Prior to the beginning of last golf season, I named ten players worth watching throughout the 2008 year. Let's see whether my eye for talent is as keen as I think it is:

1. Aron Price - won on Nationwide Tour; earned PGA Tour card

2. Ryuji Imada  – won AT&T Championship on PGA Tour

3. John Mallinger  – retained PGA Tour card; 3rd @ AT&T Invitational

4. Jin Park  – struggled

5. Martin Laird  - finished 125th PGA Tour money list

6. Chris Stroud  – had to return to q-school, but regained playing privileges  

7. John Merrick  – retained PGA Tour card; 8th Mayakoba Classic

8. Garret Osborn  – 38th on Nationwide Tour money list

9. Thomas Aiken  – 131st European Tour Order of Merit

10. Garth Mulroy  – 55th Nationwide Tour money list

More positive than negative. However, perhaps a sweeping survey of professional golf should have been a bit more pointed. Perhaps picked one player from any of the major world tours who might make an impact. Yet, a rethink of method comes a bit too late to posit a list for the 2009 season.  

So, what is the point of all this retrospection and prospection? It's bar talk, mostly, a topic as banal as the weather to make passing time more fun. Following the syllogism of speculative comparison is intriguing.

When someone sets to prove a point, make an irrefutable argument, he will rely on evidence to make the case as tight as possible. Sometimes, whether human nature, a slip of the tongue, or irrascible contrarian behavior be the cause, a person will have to defend a proposition he might not have made if he thought before speaking. Then things get interesting as the postulator scrambles to cobble as much as he can to affirm his contention. As he tries to convince whomever happens to listen to the makings of his rant, he must also convince himself, and it is amusing watching the gymnastics, the potential Schadenfreude of seeing him paint himself into a corner.

Then the real fun begins. After seemingly locking into a string of thought and defending it so fiercely for no real reason other than pig-headed pride, he will look for something valid in the uninterrupted drivel he has spewed for what has gone on longer than the standard Prime Minister constructive argument. From there, he will try to 'spiral' up and out of that inextricable position, for knowing he has lost the race down, he can still win it coming back up. 

Of course, it never ends well for the speaker. There is no way to save face at that point, especially when the losses ought to have been cut three beers sooner. So, is there a solution to the puzzle of discourse?

On the one hand, speaking instinctively, with conviction provides the necessary pathos to make a compelling point. Unfortunately, the logical, sensible aspects suffer. Take even a fraction of a second too long, and the answer sounds equivocal, or makes the speaker seem unready for the thrust and parry of banter. In the end, the hapless twit must concede defeat and fall on his sword. He will down another beer, compose himself, wish he had a team of script and speech writers lodged somewhere in his frontal cortex, and get ready as the conversation shifts to football. No way he can lose now.

There is a good chance that DY will have some sort of list concerning golf for (mini) mass consumption at some point this year. Not too sure what it would be. Unfortunatley, DY has come up with a far less innocuous idea for a blog post as he has concluded this one. 

DY will be headed for elsewhwer next week though he reckons the already sporadic drip from his keys will not lapse entirely as it has on previous sojourns to warmer climes. Yardage Out.