The American Spectator

home
ADVERTISEMENT
The Investor
Print Email
Text Size

The Investor

The Numbers Game at The Masters

Tiger Woods plays the percentages; Phil Mickelson tries to fool them. Guess who ends up winning the big one?
p> “Be the number!” br> That was what Tiger Woods yelled as his second shot sailed toward the eighteenth green on Sunday at The Masters. Like Woods needed the help. He’s the best golfer on the planet by a wide margin — no one repeated the claim that “the gap between Woods and the other players is closing” on Sunday — and he had a three-stroke lead. Naturally, the ball stopped dead, ten feet beyond the hole. /p>

All Tiger did was ask for the shot to turn out as he expected. When you know your game that well, and know what to do that well, you will probably get what you want.

p> I actually hoped for more commercials. br> With the expanded Masters coverage yesterday, I settled in for about seven hours of pure golf. When I turned on the set too early (I’m in Arizona on Pacific Time, so I assume sporting events start while it’s still dark), I watched an informercial for the Momentus Swing Trainer, featuring David Duval. /p>

The Masters seemed like it went on forever, and it takes a real stinker of a tournament to test my stamina. A week ago, I watched a tape-delay of the final round of a Canadian Tour event held, of all places, about three miles from my home in Scottsdale.

By the end of the day, I found myself trying to figure out whether anything I understood about investing could help explain the enormous difference in the success of Tiger Woods versus the success of Phil Mickelson in the most important events. I decided it was worth going through the exercise, because the golf writers haven’t been able to explain it, and there wasn’t much to watch on TV after Woods chipped in at 6 just as Mickelson was bogeying 7.

Investing and golf actually have a great deal in common. Success depends on the interplay of four factors: (1) understanding your objectives, (2) understanding yourself, (3) knowing the likelihood and magnitude of the risks and rewards, and (4) executing.

The difference in skill level between Tiger and Phil does not account for the difference in majors. Phil is as long as Tiger, though not quite as straight. When Phil’s not trying to pull some crazy shot out of his nether quarters, he is just as good, if not better, at cleaning up his mistakes. (Notice the identical bunker shots they hit on the first hole, nearly blind from 145 yards out: Tiger hit an excellent shot to the middle of the green and two-putted for par; Mickelson nearly holed it out and tapped in for birdie.) Woods has a more imaginative short game, but Mickelson’s execution is as good. They are both great long putters and inconsistent short putters. Mickelson has gotten in some big trouble for that recently, but Tiger had problems in that area in 1998 and 1999, and still fusses over his putting.

I don’t think it’s “choking” or “pressure,” either. Mickelson has been playing competitive golf since he was potty trained, just like Tiger. Although Phil won “only” one U.S. Amateur, he won a Tour event while still an Arizona State junior. He’s won 20 professional tournaments, including a couple with Woods as his primary obstacle. He has been through the crucible and, in fact, until two years ago, had a great record at closing out tournaments in which he held the 54-hole lead.

p>
Page: 1 2  

About the Author

Michael Craig is a writer in Scottsdale, Arizona.

Letter to the Editor

More Articles by Michael Craig

More Articles From The Investor

http://spectator.org/archives/2002/04/15/the-numbers-game-at-the-master

ADVERTISEMENT

SPONSORED LINKS

FLASHBACK TO: 1995

Clip of the Day

ADVERTISEMENT