Alan Shipnuck - is his time over finally? (*** NO POLITICS ***)

[bladehunter]

1 hour ago, Ghost of Snead said:

 

I don't think JT's family was swimming in cash as his dad was the head pro @ Harmony Landing CC. But he likely did have unlimited access to the facilities and a golf course which Koepka did not. Brooks also was a victim of where he grew up as CC prices in West Palm Beach are high compared to other areas of the state.

I’m not even clear who he was talking about.  Didn’t chipmunk just add in their names after ?  
 

but yes. I’d count JT as the helps kid.  And I’m in no way agreeing with Brooks on him being underprivileged 🙃.  I think he’s tripping on this one.  But his overall statement isn’t false , you just need the context  on your side to say it.  Tony finau can say it. But notice how those who can usually don’t.  

[tacklingdummy]

I thought no pros would talk to Shipnuck anymore after he dropped the Phil story. I always believed that Phil really said that he wanted that stuff off the record and kept private. Why would any of the pros want to talk to him or anybody else when he releases information publicly on them that torches them and/or their careers? 

[54CW]

JT protest too much methinks? These golfers should stand by what they say. Say it with your chest or don't say it. Nothing wrong with a little chaos and drama, embrace it. I wont frivolously assume these country club babies are born on third base but they sure don't do a lot to make me not assume it. 

 

You trust a journalist to keep your secrets? C'mon man. 

Edited October 6, 2023 by 54CW

[Curiouser]

I've spent a lot of my career around journalism, and it is a challenging profession even for the most intelligent, well intentioned people. They get burned by sources all the time. I mean ALL the time. A source gets mad about something, talks to the reporter on the record, then lies about it later when it all blows up. Another challenge for reporters is that people blame them when they don't like the reporting (blaming the messenger is a common human trait). Also, sometimes people will lie to reporters in order to undermine the reporter's credibility.

 

Personally, I look at situations like this one with Shipnuck and ask myself if the story sounds plausible. For example, does it sound plausible that Koepka would bash "country club pros," and to me it sounds like that is right in character for him. I realize this stuff has a lot of grey areas to it and it is hard to figure out where the truth lies. For me though, I'm not seeing Shipnuck as the villian here.

[bscinstnct]

3 minutes ago, Curiouser said:

I've spent a lot of my career around journalism, and it is a challenging profession even for the most intelligent, well intentioned people. They get burned by sources all the time. I mean ALL the time. A source gets mad about something, talks to the reporter on the record, then lies about it later when it all blows up. Another challenge for reporters is that people blame them when they don't like the reporting (blaming the messenger is a common human trait). Also, sometimes people will lie to reporters in order to undermine the reporter's credibility.

 

Personally, I look at situations like this one with Shipnuck and ask myself if the story sounds plausible. For example, does it sound plausible that Koepka would bash "country club pros," and to me it sounds like that is right in character for him. I realize this stuff has a lot of grey areas to it and it is hard to figure out where the truth lies. For me though, I'm not seeing Shipnuck as the villian here.

 

BK loves to have that chip on his shoulder. It helps him focus. 

 

But you have to hand it to him. He did grind in the Euro minor league tour, taking buses and trains, cheap hotels, no money. 
 

It’s served him well as far as being very mentally tough on the course and playing strong in crappy conditions.  

[Curiouser]

Just now, bscinstnct said:

BK loves to have that chip on his shoulder. It helps him focus. 

 

But you have to hand it to him. He did grind in the Euro minor league tour, taking buses and trains, cheap hotels, no money. 
 

It’s served him well as far as being very mentally tough on the course and playing strong in crappy conditions.  

You have to give him his due for sure. He has earned everything he has gotten. But he still acts like a ****** much of the time. 😉

[jimecherry]

6 minutes ago, Curiouser said:

You have to give him his due for sure. He has earned everything he has gotten. But he still acts like a ****** much of the time. 😉

more like a ******** than a ****** imho

[mosesgolf]

1 hour ago, bladehunter said:

Not as a blanket argument no.  Generalizing is always inaccurate….But more likely to be ?  Ehh. I’m biased having worked for a 36 hole private in my youth and experiencing 1st hand how they treat the help , so I probably am not the one to say. 🤣.  

Let’s just say i smell what he’s stepping in and leave it at that.  

Well in my experineces donkeys come from both sides of the track.

[bladehunter]

37 minutes ago, mosesgolf said:

Well in my experineces donkeys come from both sides of the track.

Sure.  The issue comes when some donkeys think they’re 5 gated thourobreds 😂🫏🐴 …. Simply because they got a head start.  It’s not about right or wrong. It’s about holding the mirror up to show them , themselves.  
 

but you’re correct. On occasion some of those people reach back and pull someone else  forward.  But again.  In my personal experience - it’s very rare. and I’m fully aware that I’m stepping on toes saying that on a golf website.  But all I can tell you is what I’ve seen every day of my 43 years.  
 

 

 I build toys for those folks still. The time you find a guy who sees you instead of what you can do for HIM (or her ) is extremely rare.  Theyll buddy up to you for that sweetheart deal , or for that preferential treatment. But the moment there’s a bump in the road as far as deadline  , or a hiccup in the budget because of unforeseeable   things , they no longer know you as the friendly acquaintance they pretended you were.   
 

there was a song written about this.  Fortunate son.  While it’s mostly war centric …The group of people  is the same group.  

Edited October 6, 2023 by bladehunter

[JungleJimbo]

 

 

Edited October 7, 2023 by JungleJimbo

[tacklingdummy]

2 hours ago, JungleJimbo said:

 

 

 

 

Lots of women that are 9s working LIV golf tournaments? Interesting. But why is that controversial and even an issue? 😜

 

 

[bladehunter]

7 hours ago, tacklingdummy said:

 

 

Lots of women that are 9s working LIV golf tournaments? Interesting. But why is that controversial and even an issue? 😜

 

 

Yep I don’t get the point either.  Was he just showing/proving a source ?   And that’s the quote he can substantiate?   If so.  Lolz.  

[Soloman1]

I think being Twitterized (X’d), InstaGramed, Facebooked, TikTok’d and YouTubed constantly will make you stupid.

 

Life is hard. It’s harder if you’re stupid.

[NoTalentLefty]

Answer is Yes.

[84425]

I wonder how many players/public that question the use of anonymous sources also follow secret tour pro on twitter/x?”

[Rapidcat]

On 10/7/2023 at 2:32 PM, tacklingdummy said:

 

 

Lots of women that are 9s working LIV golf tournaments? Interesting. But why is that controversial and even an issue? 😜

 

 

 

It's obvious - some of those women think they are a 10.

[Retrop1]

Having read the Phil book that Shipnuck wrote, it seemed as if he was very throrough with identifying what was verifyable and what was simply rumor. After reading the book, my immediate reaction was, "if all his verification is through unnamed sources, how is the reader supposed to know if this is fact or fiction?". Honestly, anyone bent on watching the world burn could say anything about any player out there, and just say "I overheard it personally but want to remain anonymous", and that is verification enough? This latest thing that was supposedly said by Cantlay to Steve Sands in a very noisy environment, that Sands himself has declined to comment on has been turned into gospel because of an anonymous source. For all we know, it was an inside joke that the two had shared previously, or the "unnamed source" misheard the exchange completely. I don't know about the rest of you, but I have a hard time hearing clearly in a crowded bar or restaurant. I couldn't imagine trying to communicate verbally on the first tee of a Ryder Cup environment. 

[tacklingdummy]

7 hours ago, Retrop1 said:

Having read the Phil book that Shipnuck wrote, it seemed as if he was very throrough with identifying what was verifyable and what was simply rumor. After reading the book, my immediate reaction was, "if all his verification is through unnamed sources, how is the reader supposed to know if this is fact or fiction?". Honestly, anyone bent on watching the world burn could say anything about any player out there, and just say "I overheard it personally but want to remain anonymous", and that is verification enough? This latest thing that was supposedly said by Cantlay to Steve Sands in a very noisy environment, that Sands himself has declined to comment on has been turned into gospel because of an anonymous source. For all we know, it was an inside joke that the two had shared previously, or the "unnamed source" misheard the exchange completely. I don't know about the rest of you, but I have a hard time hearing clearly in a crowded bar or restaurant. I couldn't imagine trying to communicate verbally on the first tee of a Ryder Cup environment. 

 

 

I agree. So much is just hearsay and unless it was caught on video or audio, then what was said could have been taking way out of context or wasn't even said. Stories always change a lot when they go from person to person. A lot of the time people hear what they want to hear based on their opinions of and biases of people or their own agendas. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited October 8, 2023 by tacklingdummy

[Valtiel]

On 10/6/2023 at 2:35 PM, Curiouser said:

For example, does it sound plausible that Koepka would bash "country club pros," and to me it sounds like that is right in character for him. I realize this stuff has a lot of grey areas to it and it is hard to figure out where the truth lies. For me though, I'm not seeing Shipnuck as the villian here.

How does that stand up to throwing Spieth/Thomas into the quote though? It's straight up textbook "yellow journalism" that is the difference between him being the villain here and not. 

[golfheaven69]

Look forward to reading. 

[Guest RobS]

On 10/8/2023 at 9:14 AM, Retrop1 said:

Having read the Phil book that Shipnuck wrote, it seemed as if he was very throrough with identifying what was verifyable and what was simply rumor. After reading the book, my immediate reaction was, "if all his verification is through unnamed sources, how is the reader supposed to know if this is fact or fiction?". Honestly, anyone bent on watching the world burn could say anything about any player out there, and just say "I overheard it personally but want to remain anonymous", and that is verification enough? This latest thing that was supposedly said by Cantlay to Steve Sands in a very noisy environment, that Sands himself has declined to comment on has been turned into gospel because of an anonymous source. For all we know, it was an inside joke that the two had shared previously, or the "unnamed source" misheard the exchange completely. I don't know about the rest of you, but I have a hard time hearing clearly in a crowded bar or restaurant. I couldn't imagine trying to communicate verbally on the first tee of a Ryder Cup environment. 

I imagine Shipnuck does his due diligence but the material is clearly framed for the dramatics.  You bring up a good point with Cantlay and Sands.  It's not unreasonable to consider that they could have been joking and that the full context of the exchange wasn't understood or conveyed from the source.  Look at the Koepka quote.  While believable, he supposedly said it at the end of a party where a lot of drinking was going on. Maybe Koepka, like a lot of guys after they've down a bunch of drinks, was engaging in a bit of hyperbole, aka talking some you know what. A lot of this is 'got ya' reporting where context or intent is left out.  Life is nuanced and it's easy to make someone look bad if you wait around long enough for them to say something that sounds crazy on paper, independent of tone and context.

Edited October 10, 2023 by RobS

[st1800e]

To the original question,  I believe he’s about 50 years of age, so probably got another 30 years of writing to go.  I don’t imagine he’s in any frame of mind to stop.  

[golfortennis]

On 10/8/2023 at 9:14 AM, Retrop1 said:

Having read the Phil book that Shipnuck wrote, it seemed as if he was very throrough with identifying what was verifyable and what was simply rumor. After reading the book, my immediate reaction was, "if all his verification is through unnamed sources, how is the reader supposed to know if this is fact or fiction?". Honestly, anyone bent on watching the world burn could say anything about any player out there, and just say "I overheard it personally but want to remain anonymous", and that is verification enough? This latest thing that was supposedly said by Cantlay to Steve Sands in a very noisy environment, that Sands himself has declined to comment on has been turned into gospel because of an anonymous source. For all we know, it was an inside joke that the two had shared previously, or the "unnamed source" misheard the exchange completely. I don't know about the rest of you, but I have a hard time hearing clearly in a crowded bar or restaurant. I couldn't imagine trying to communicate verbally on the first tee of a Ryder Cup environment. 

 

And here I thought I was the only wondering how the TV shows could show people having the conversations they do in bars.  I can't hear a darn thing!  And forget about answering the phone.

[CDM]

On 10/8/2023 at 7:14 AM, Retrop1 said:

Having read the Phil book that Shipnuck wrote, it seemed as if he was very throrough with identifying what was verifyable and what was simply rumor. After reading the book, my immediate reaction was, "if all his verification is through unnamed sources, how is the reader supposed to know if this is fact or fiction?". Honestly, anyone bent on watching the world burn could say anything about any player out there, and just say "I overheard it personally but want to remain anonymous", and that is verification enough? This latest thing that was supposedly said by Cantlay to Steve Sands in a very noisy environment, that Sands himself has declined to comment on has been turned into gospel because of an anonymous source. For all we know, it was an inside joke that the two had shared previously, or the "unnamed source" misheard the exchange completely. I don't know about the rest of you, but I have a hard time hearing clearly in a crowded bar or restaurant. I couldn't imagine trying to communicate verbally on the first tee of a Ryder Cup environment. 

 

"Watching the world burn"....100% great point. 

 

I am now at the conclusion it is not about real reporting anymore. It is all about generating hype to sell books and clicks to get that MONEY...!!   

 

Over the last few years of all the reporters in golf, Alan hands down has more "anonymous" quotes to everything he writes then anyone I have seen.   I can not recall one person he named, besides Phil and his gambling partners, that he quoted.... 🤔 

[golfortennis]

2 hours ago, CDM said:

 

"Watching the world burn"....100% great point. 

 

I am now at the conclusion it is not about real reporting anymore. It is all about generating hype to sell books and clicks to get that MONEY...!!   

 

Over the last few years of all the reporters in golf, Alan hands down has more "anonymous" quotes to everything he writes then anyone I have seen.   I can not recall one person he named, besides Phil and his gambling partners, that he quoted.... 🤔 

 

On the flipside though, maybe he has documentation, and the reason people talk to him is that he keeps his sources confidential?

[Retrop1]

10 minutes ago, golfortennis said:

 

On the flipside though, maybe he has documentation, and the reason people talk to him is that he keeps his sources confidential?

I certainly hope so, but it does make one wonder. In theory, the reporter is the inflection point between the source and the reader. It is on the reporter to verify, but to also maintain the identity of the source. It just makes me wonder why so much of the information comes from "anonymous sources" so often. Like the whole Cantlay hat thing. Some of that information had to come from someone inside the team room, or someone extremely close to the team room. No way all that information came from a 3rd person near enough to hear a private moment between Cantlay and Sands in a very loud environment. I would think the team room would be pretty sealed off to anything like that, but apparently Jamie Wier had what he felt was credible information. Regardless, it just stinks for my faith in humanity. Either way, someone lied, or violated trust in a delicate situation. 

[CDM]

3 hours ago, golfortennis said:

 

On the flipside though, maybe he has documentation, and the reason people talk to him is that he keeps his sources confidential?

 

I fully agree.  I just thought it was "odd" during the Phil situation that Alan was put on the spot a few times and asked "Put up or shut up" type aspect.  He would never release anything noting it was listed as ON record or OFF record.  

 

All he did was say "Phil never said it was off record"......... well prove it.    

 

Not defending Phil, we all know how he can be over the years, it was purely Alan had the chance to prove the truth and he did not which leads to people wondering. IF he had listed it I think everyone would think he is more credible.

[golfortennis]

1 minute ago, CDM said:

 

I fully agree.  I just thought it was "odd" during the Phil situation that Alan was put on the spot a few times and asked "Put up or shut up" type aspect.  He would never release anything noting it was listed as ON record or OFF record.  

 

All he did was say "Phil never said it was off record"......... well prove it.    

 

Not defending Phil, we all know how he can be over the years, it was purely Alan had the chance to prove the truth and he did not which leads to people wondering. IF he had listed it I think everyone would think he is more credible.

 

I for one think Shipnuck is the golf writer equivalent of the politician who makes you check for your wallet whenever he comes around.  Anyone who doesn't know to make triple sure they are off the record when talking to him is at fault.

 

But either he makes stuff up, or he really does not reveal his sources.  While I can see the wanting to believe it's the former, I have to think the threat of lawsuits over some of the things he has written would suggest it's unlikely. 

 

Unless the conversation was recorded, and I don't know whether it was or wasn't, it's a he said/she said about whether it's off the record, no?  How do you prove a negative? 

[jdl]

On 10/7/2023 at 8:30 AM, Soloman1 said:

I think being Twitterized (X’d), InstaGramed, Facebooked, TikTok’d and YouTubed constantly will make you stupid.

 

Life is hard. It’s harder if you’re stupid.

The best thing about social media - everyone has a voice!

 

The worst thing about social media - everyone has a voice!

[ahenderX]

1 hour ago, CDM said:

 

I fully agree.  I just thought it was "odd" during the Phil situation that Alan was put on the spot a few times and asked "Put up or shut up" type aspect.  He would never release anything noting it was listed as ON record or OFF record.  

 

All he did was say "Phil never said it was off record"......... well prove it.    

 

Not defending Phil, we all know how he can be over the years, it was purely Alan had the chance to prove the truth and he did not which leads to people wondering. IF he had listed it I think everyone would think he is more credible.

If Shipnuck is writing a Phil book, tries several times to interview him, then Phil calls him out of the blue and says let’s talk. On the record or off the record? My bet is on the record. Why would he call otherwise? It was a normal interview until Phil went off the rails with his SA comments.