Paula Creamer Needs to Win That Difficult Second Major in 2013
Christian Petersen/Getty Images
When Paula Creamer won her her first major title at the tender age of just 24, it was thought that that would be the first of many major championships that she would go on to win.
Unfortunately for Creamer, it hasn't proved to be the case. In fact, ever since she won her first major, she has struggled to win any sort of tournament at all, never mind one of the big four.
However, the truly bizarre nature of her trophy drought is that she has been in very good form over the past two years. She is nearly always in and around the top 10 in the big competitions, but she appears to struggle to find that extra couple of shots that can change a top-five finish into a win. In 2011, for example, she had seven finishes in the top five without winning a single competition.
Her form in the major tournaments has also been strong. In 2012, her finishes were 20th, ninth, seventh and third.
Her results would suggest to me that she lacks the ruthless edge that defines the truly great players. Annika Sorenstam and Tiger Woods were remorseless in their hunt for wins, and I would suggest this is something missing from the talented Creamer.
Her lack of distance off the tee could be one reason why she fails to win the big tournaments. Power off the tee has always been key in the men's game and has become ever more prominent on the Ladies Tour. However, despite her lack of length, she is one of the best players in the world at hitting greens in regulation. Her putting could still use some improvement but isn't a notable weakness in her game.
The good news for Creamer is that she doesn't need a lot to become a multiple winner. I get the feeling that if she could just break this tournament drought, the confidence she would gain would give her the boost she needs to go on and win the multiple major titles that her talent so richly deserves.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?