Some of the announcers spent too much time talking about putts not going in for Tiger or the stress/frustration of playing in the masters, it was nice to see one of them point out all of the players had to play 4 rounds and it wasn't any easier for them. For many of them, while they don't have the expectations of winning pressure, they do have other pressures like how much more it would mean to their careers and finances with just one victory.

If you look at the numbers Immelman simply outplayed everyone. He was tops in driving accuracy, 4th in distances and tied for 3rd in putting.

For Mickelson and Woods it may have been less of a putting problem than having their 2nd/3rd shots closer to the hole and giving themselves more make able putts. No one was making a lot of long putts out there, the greens are just too tough. Mickelson did miss a few too many short ones. Woods just keep fighting it out and didn't give away any holes.

I'm thankful we won't have to hear any more about a grand slam this year. Well, unless you want to talk about Lorena Ochoa. Wow, 25 under par and that included a triple bogey on the last day.

Rich

Oh please....can anyone else get credit for winning besides Tiger? What a ridiculous headline! Love the guy but he is not the only person in the sport with talent and gusto!
Go Immelman....Go Snedeker!
---------------------------------
Elizabeth,
Thanks for reading and taking the time to write but did you read past the headline. That was exactly the point of the blog entry that Immelman won the thing, not that Tiger lost it.
It was ctitcizing the golf commentary that implied otherwise.
-- Bill O.

Give me a break. Why not give Immelmen credit for WINNING? On this weekend, he was the BETTER golfer than the media darling Tiger. Especially after the health issues Immelmen has dealth with recently, he BEAT TIger, fair and square, and I'd bet Tiger would agree.
----------------------------------------
Julie,
I can't believe that anyine who read that blog entry could conclude anything other than that was exactle my point. I'm wondering if the people who have written expressing a similar point of view that you have ever got past the headline ... but here's what I wrote and tell me if it differes with what you just said ...

For three days he played terrific golf with rounds of 68-68-69 that included a key back nine on the third day when he birded three of the final six holes just as Tiger had made his own move. Yesterday, he outlasted mere mortal challengers who were swept away by 35 mph gusts and kept the intrepid Woods at driver's length giving up two strokes on No. 16 when the match was all but over.

There's been some sentiment that this was a Masters that Tiger Woods lost rather than Trevor Immelman won and when you look at individual instances when Woods could have made a rush, you might come to that conclusion. But if you consider the body of work over four days, that Woods was constantly pressing, even if not charging, the top of the leader board, it would sell both players short to minimize what they accomplished at Augusta.

Why would you even suggest that Tiger lost because he wasn't having a great day.
Immelman won fair and square. If he hadn't had that unlucky swing on the 16th, he would have been 5 strokes ahead. ; and if Immelman's partner for the day had been lucky, ; they both woud have been better than Woods.
--------------------------------------
Herb,
Thanks for writing but did you read the entry ... my point was exactly that Immelman captured the Masters, expecially on the back nine on day three, and that Tiger did not lose it. If you read or listened to the golf specific media, it was implied otherwise and I was obviously criticizing that interpretation of what happened in Augusta.
-- Bill O.
.

I read that it was Tiger who started the rumor that he could take home the Grand Slam this year. Tiger believes he is on top of his game (like Bobby Jones when he won the slam). Trevor Immelman should be congratulated because he outscored and outplayed (statiscally and mentally) the entire field (including Tiger who believes he is at his peak).

Regardless of who won and who lost. That was an really sweet 71 foot putt that he sank!

Bill,

The comments posted just show how quick people are to judge without the full story. No wonder sound bites are so effective in politics. I read the entire article and got your point.

Simply put Trevor hit the shots and made more putts than Tiger to win. After all that is the object of the game.
---------------------------------------------------
Jerome,
Thanks for taking notice. Both guys played terrific. Immelman was just more terrific.
-- Bill O.