1996

In terms of dramatic impact, 1996 was kind of like watching a bus accident. In slow motion. For four hours. Golf really is the most humbling game. Greg Norman was so dominant over the first three rounds, there was just no way he was going to lose. And then he lost. He was beaten by 11 strokes in the final round. 11 STROKES!!! Faldo shoots an absolutely perfect 67 and turns a six-shot deficit into a five-shot win. But let's be clear, if you're Nick Faldo the night before, do you really think 67 is going to get it done? With the way Norman was playing? Probably not. But what Faldo did that was genius was play to his own strengths and on that Sunday were those strengths accentuated Norman's weaknesses. Faldo was like a robot hitting fairways and greens, while right from the start, Norman was erratic. After Faldo wrestled the honour away from him, it must have definitely affected Norman psychologically to see Flado stripe fairway after fairway while his own swing was becoming less and less certain.

One thing that really sticks out for me is Norman digging his fingers into the back of his shoulder after hitting it in the water on 16. Like he was punishing himself physically for such a bad shot. It was very intense and I remember it very clearly.

Another painful aspect of that shot on 16 was that Norman's eagle chip on 15 just lipped out. If that had gone down, perhaps Greg might have righted the ship. He would've been only one down with three to play and would have had the honor on 16 tee.

We normally think of choking in golf as a very quick process, one or two holes tops, but mostly it's just one terrible shot (Calc at the Ryder Cup topping it into the water or Scott Hoch at The Masters against the same Nick Faldo). A few times though, it lasts a while. Great players blow huge advantages over a round or a nine and you wonder how in the world they can even pick up a club again? Palmer blew a 7 shot lead to Billy Casper in nine holes in the '66 US Open (although Palmer did not lose outright until the playoff the next day). I was really happy when Norman rebounded to play well in the '99 Masters. Also, while Norman is certainly a guy whose potential was unrealized (remember in '86 he won the Saturday Slam...leading all four majors going into the final round, and I'm pretty sure he's the only player to lose each of the four major championships in playoffs), he was snake-bitten a few times. Tway and Mize both sank miracle shots to beat him, and Nicklaus was not going to lose the '86 Masters. Further, Norman shot a 64 in the final round of the '93 Open Championship to win by 2. Only Johnny Miller's 63 at Oakmont in '73 is a better final round by a champion in a major. Weep not for Greg Norman...especially since he's richer than God, but it was easy to feel for him that day.

I view that Masters like the BBC version of THE OFFICE. It's amazing television, but, at times, almost painfully unwatchable.