Masters 2012: Analysis of Rory Mcllroy's Day 2 Performance at Augusta
Rory McIlroy shot a three-under 69 in the second round of the Masters on Friday in an impressive performance that leaves him just one shot behind Fred Couples and Jason Dufner at the top of the leaderboard.
"I know I'm playing well," said McIlroy, who overcame last year's final-round collapse at the Masters and won the U.S. Open two months later. "The recent results show that. I just wanted to come here and play, put myself in position to win another tournament, another major."
Will McIlroy win the Masters?
He's certainly on his way to winning another major after a stellar performance in the first two rounds at Augusta.
One of the better parts of his second-round performance was the few mistakes he made throughout the day. McIlroy made five birdies and two bogeys on Friday and was pretty consistent for the entire round.
His tee shots were better on Friday than they were Thursday, which enabled him to put himself in a good position to hit the green and have birdie opportunities.
"I drove the ball better. That was the big thing. Whenever you drive the ball well here it enables you to be a little more aggressive with your iron shots, and maybe go at a few more pins. That was the difference today," said McIlroy via the Chicago Tribune.
McIlroy showed a lot of composure on hole No. 18 by closing his round with a solid par, after he had bogeyed 17 just prior. It was a good end to a well-played round of golf.
Without a meltdown over the final two holes, McIlroy will feel confident heading into Saturday's third round.
His Masters meltdown last year is certainly something he will use as motivation on the weekend, as he tries to finish the job this season after allowing the tournament to get away from him in the final round in 2011.
If McIlroy continues to play like he has through the first two rounds, he will be wearing the green jacket on Sunday evening as Masters champion.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?