And as the old saying goes, "Opinions are like...", well, you know the rest. Guys like Chamblee certainly impress the masses because he looks good on camera and speaks well and the public believes that anyone with a microphone and thirty seconds of air time is automatically some kind of expert anyway. But from a player's perspective, Chamblee's street cred is virtually non-existent because his only claim to fame is winning the Greater Vancouver Open and if I'm a fellow Tour player - especially someone like Tiger, I'd politely thank him for his observations and then I'd walk away. Perception is reality and I just can't see a top-shelf player like Tiger putting a whole lot of stock in the opinions of a guy whose career consisted largely of showing up for a tournament and little else. It's like Monday Night Football. When Jaworski and Gruden start talking "X's and O's", Tirico seems like a fish out of water because he never played a down of pro football. Thankfully, Tirico recognizes this and sticks to what he does best; play-by-play, and leaves the "been there" stuff to the players. If Chamblee were some renowned golf instructor - like Kostis or Ledbetter, then he'd have more credibility. But Chamblee has no such credentials (to my knowledge) and since his career consisted more about making Friday evening travel plans than kissing trophies, I just don't see a whole lot of players putting a whole lot of stock in what he has to say. From a layperson's point of view, I'm sure he comes off as some kind of Einstein. But from a player's point of view - from a jock's point of view - there has to be some "Been there, done that" angle for them to take him seriously and Chamblee's career just doesn't bear that out. Like I said, "Opinions are like..." and that's mine. -JP