by Brian Phelps
Last week, Bubba Watson won the 2012 Masters tournament at Augusta. He won in a thrilling two hole playoff with Louis Oosthuizen which included an amazing shot out of the woods that put him in position to win. Now, I'm not taking anything away from Bubba Watson's win. He played a great tournament, but let's be honest. Phil Mickelson lost the Masters more than Bubba Watson won it.
Phil Mickelson began the final day only one shot off the lead until he triple bogeyed on the 4th hole. He ended up finishing the tournament losing by two shots. Had Phil Mickelson simply went Par on no.4 then he would've ended up winning the Masters by a single shot. Shoot, even if he would've single bogeyed on no.4 he would've ended up tying with Bubba Watson and Louis Oosthuizen at 10 under par in which Phil Mickelson still would have had a chance to win because there would've been a three way playoff to decide the winner.
Even Louis Oosthuizen beating Phil Mickelson was a fluke. I mean the guy Double Eagled on the 2nd hole. Why is that a fluke? Out of 76 Masters tournaments, that was just the 4th Double Eagle EVER. The math indicates that so far in the history of the tournament the odds of anyone hitting a Double Eagle at a Masters tournament is 5%. That means statistically if you lived to see 100 Masters tournaments, you would only see 5 Double Eagles in 100 years. A single individuals chance of hitting a double eagle at the Masters is less than 1%.
So, in conclusion had Phil went par on the 4th hole he would've won, and even if he single bogeyed on the 4th hole he would have still had a chance to win. That tells me that he lost the tournament more than Bubba Watson won it. I think Bubba Watson played a great tournament and deserved to win, but I honestly can't ignore the fact that the win was really more of a fluke and less that he outplayed Mickelson.
No comments:
Post a Comment