Posted by
gilroy man on Sunday, August 10, 2008 6:13:00 PM
For years, the talk in the golf world has been about Tiger proofing courses – growing the rough deep, narrowing the fairways, toughening up the majors so that Tiger can’t win them by 10 strokes over anyone else. It’s even spilled into the videogame market, where home based PGA tour wannabees can vary the level of difficulty in their virtual golf games. And yet, Tiger keeps winning majors, inexorably closing in on Jack Nicklaus’ record of 18 majors. But that doesn’t mean the Tiger proofing has had no effect. In fact, if you examine the effect that Tiger proofing has had, you’ll see that Phil Mickelson’s chance to win majors has been virtually eliminated.
Let’s take the major venues, one by one. Most experts agree that the British open, with it’s wild winds, waist high rough, head high bunkers, and unpredictable conditions is “real mans” golf – the toughest test of any of the majors. American courses may be lengthy, but golfers can almost always find their ball in the rough, and I have yet to see a golfer play the ball backwards out of any American bunkers. So there’s been no Tiger proofing of the British open because it’s not needed. Predictably, Mickelson has never won a British open, and rarely is competitive.
Next, let’s take the US open. Wherever it is, the fairways and greens always seem to be bone dry, which challenges everyone to stay below par. You have to hit fairways to win the US open, something Mickelson has never been accurate enough to do. The surprising thing is that Mickelson has gotten close enough to post 4 runner up finishes. Some people take those runner up finishes as a clue that Phil will eventually win a US open. I take it the opposite way – he’s been lucky to be runner up there, and his luck is rapidly running out at age 38.
How about the PGA? Well, Mickelson won once there in 2005, so there’s a glimmer of hope. However, the PGA has felt the competitive pressure from the other majors, and has copied the Tiger proofing steps to try to restore their credibility. This years PGA looked just like a US open setup. Phil’s game, which is based on length and the ability to make recovery shots out of the rough, cannot survive in such conditions. Look at the contrast between “regular” courses and the majors. Mickelson can and does win 2-4 events a year when he can overpower other golfers and the rough is moderate length. His inability to hit fairways can be ignored. But once Tiger proofing takes hold and you are forced to hit fairways, Mickelson’s game drops a notch. He’s had several years to adjust, even going without a driver for a couple of days at the US open, and nothing has worked. This year, with Tiger out injured, Phil could not take advantage of Tiger’s absence. So we can eliminate any more PGA trophies from Phil’s potential major collection. He just doesn’t have the game.
With 3 out of 4 majors eliminated, Phil’s only chance to win more majors is at the Masters. With 2 Masters wins under his belt, you’d think Mickelson’s chances are good to win another. However, his results in the last 2 Masters have not been encouraging. If he hits the fairways, his putter gives out on him. If he makes putts, his iron play goes haywire. He’s certainly not shown the confidence there recently that a past champion should have.
Then there’s the Winged Foot factor. Since his collapse in 2006, Mickelson has scored a top 10 finish in only one major. You can make a good argument the Phil’s confidence is shot. Even more telling, his wins at the “regular” tournaments, once by wide margins, are now narrow wins in playoffs(Riviera, 2008) or close shaves(Colonial, 2008) or losses in playoffs(FBR, 2008 and Riviera, 2007). Other golfers aren’t afraid of Mickelson anymore, knowing that he can be beaten.
Mickelson remains the most popular golfer on tour, with massive crowd support and lucrative endorsements. And he may retain his hold on the #2 ranking. But anyone looking for a Nadal like pursuit and overtaking of the dominant Federer #1 type player will be sorely disappointed.