Tiger Woods: Did Martin Kaymer Assess Him Properly?
Martin Kaymer is currently sitting, waiting to be overtaken by the likes of Luke Donald or Lee Westwood. It is very much similar to the way Lee Westwood had to watch as Kaymer secured the No. 1 rank in the world.
However, it's not that which Kaymer is making headlines for. Yesterday, Martin Kaymer called out Tiger Woods on his intimidation factor. Saying that the last Masters proved it, he said Woods was no longer intimidating to the professional golf community.
He told Scotland's Daily Record: "You could see it a couple of weeks ago at The Masters. Tiger was playing fantastic the first nine on Sunday but there wasn't really somebody who was scared of him any more."
Let's take a look at this comment made by Kaymer.
Tiger Woods went into the final round of the Masters back seven strokes of Rory McIlroy, who had not faltered until the final round of course. Fact: Tiger Woods has never come from behind to win a major.
Not only did Woods come in back strokes, he had also had a rough round prior. Fact: Tiger Woods has not put together multiple solid rounds in one tournament in the 2011 season.
After you consider both facts that Tiger had the odds against him because of himself, realize he only posted 10-under par. At that point of the tournament, that placed him in a five-way tie for first place. He had zero holes left to play. The people he was tied with all had four or five holes left. There are birdies to be made before the 18th hole, and not many bogey holes.
Why didn't Tiger Woods intimidate the field?
So after we have considered all of the facts of the 2011 Masters, Martin Kaymer had one thing right: Tiger Woods' name was not intimidating at the Masters. Sitting at 10-under par, with holes to play for the rest of the field, Tiger Woods did not intimidate because the situation was not right.
The best gauge that is possible to see if Tiger Woods is intimidating is to see someone tied with him at Quail Hollow going into 18. Let's see what happens to whoever is sitting in that position. Or let's stick them at 18 in Congressional for the US Open.
Any way you look at it, Tiger did not intimidate because he isn't intimidating anymore. He didn't intimidate because nobody in his position would have intimidated the field.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?