Masters? More Like Napsters

I'm going to go ahead and talk some golf. I know that a lot of people don't give a flying flapjack about golf, but some of us do. And by us I mean me. So I watched the final round of the Masters on Sunday and, for golf fans, the final round leaderboard was a smorgasboard of the greatest names in the game, all looking to rise up and don the green jacket. I was salivating at the chance to see the Big Four: Tiger, Phil, Vijay, and Ernie, all rounding the turn and primed for a duel to the death. Actually, I was hoping for a 10-way tie, where the tournament directors decided that they couldn't decide it in a traditional playoff, but all had to fly to Tokyo and compete against each other in the Viking Extreme Obstacle Course. Last one standing wins (if you haven't seen The Viking on ESPN2, you're missing a stupendous show).

Anyway, the round started off well, as there were 5 or so players tied for first after about 6 holes. But as the day progressed, the players started dropping like flies, all except for Phil Mickelson, who played a steady, easy-going round. Everyone else just jumped off a cliff. Rocco Mediate shot a 10 on one hole, Fred Couples putted worse than a 5 year old girl, Ernie Els' knee injury flared up, and Vijay was glaringly inconsistent, following every birdie with a bogey. That left Tiger. His tee to green play was astoundingly better than everyone else in contention. Yet, he somehow couldn't put the ball in the hole the same we he usually does when he's leading a tournament. He gave himself two crucial eagle putts within 20 feet, and if he made them, he would have got momentum and the crowd on his side, while putting immense pressure on Phil. But he missed them both. Badly. He even missed the birdie putt coming back on one of them, ultimately leaving him tied for third, not second. I then realized that Tiger has never once truly come back to win a major tournament. He only wins when he's in the lead. He CANNOT pull off a comeback victory. After I had done about two hours of research on how Tiger has no signature comebacks, I ran across an AP article that pretty much sums it all up (and proved my research to be a colossal waste of time, thanks AP). Check it out HERE.

Because of Tiger's major flaw, the Masters turned out to be a major let down (and turned my Masters into the Napsters). I rest this all on Tiger because he's supposed to be extaordinary. He's the one player who we all think can win any tournament, any time, no matter how far back he is. But that turns out to be just hype and mystique. If you want a comeback, take a look at the video tape of Phil's monumental Masters of two years ago. He got it done. Something I'm not sure is in Tiger's golf bag.