With his ball sitting in the intermediate cut between fairway and rough, 237 yards from the hole on the par-five 18th, Stanley considered how to play from there with a three-stroke lead. His main thought should have been about how to make seven or better, because that’s what he needed to win. (Realistically, it was all about NOT making eight or worse, but framing the question negatively isn’t the best idea when you are trying to close out a victory.)

Three-shot lead, play cautiously, lay up was apparently the thought process. But laying up actually increased Stanley’s chances of making an eight. Third shot spinning back into the water, penalty, fifth safely over the water to the back of the green leaving a long putt, and three putts adds up to eight—and that’s exactly what happened. But second shot into the water, followed by the same sequence adds up to seven and a victory.

Stanley’s situation was complicated by apparently being between clubs. In the playoff from 240 yards in the fairway he hit a three-wood over the green rather than risking coming up short and in the water with a two-iron. So, he should have blasted the three-wood to be sure to stay dry when he played the hole for the first time, right?

That wouldn’t have been the best play, either. The green slopes sharply from back-to-front, so the possibility of catching a bad lie in the rough and hitting a poor third shot that rolls across the green and into the hazard can’t be completely ignored. That again sets up the three-putt triple bogey possibility. That scenario is less likely than the layup triple bogey, so this wouldn’t have been the worst choice but it wouldn’t have been the best.

The percentage play, as far as making seven or better was concerned, was to take the two-iron, which was enough to reach the front of the green if solidly struck, and aim at the right edge of the green. There’s almost no chance to make an eight with that shot.

The pond covers only the left two-thirds of the green, so a shot hit on that line that comes up short ends up in the fairway to the right of the pond (indeed, that’s where Tiger Woods’ second shot landed in one of his victories at Torrey Pines). Even if the shot is both short and pulled, finding the hazard isn’t a disaster. Given the extreme unlikelihood of a pro fatting a pitch shot from the drop spot into the water (no worries about spinning it back in from that distance), a seven is pretty much the worst you can make.

If the second shot comes up short and is pushed, it leaves a third shot from the rough that doesn’t have to be hit over the water (nor is there water on the opposite side of the green, as on an over-the-green second shot). The same goes for a solidly-struck pushed shot, while a solid, straight shot would leave a putt, easy chip, or routine bunker shot from the right side of the green. And a pulled but solid second shot would have landed on the front of the green in the vicinity of the flag, bounding onto the back portion and leaving an eagle putt. Imagine if Stanley had hit that shot. Everyone would have marveled at what a gutsy shot he hit; most would have wondered why he dared to be so bold. But it actually would have been the safest play with a three-stroke lead!

For that matter, after laying up (preferably farther right than he did), Stanley could have aimed his third shot at the right edge of the green. That might have seemed like a wimpy shot, but from where he was in two that was the percentage play with a three-stroke lead—no way to make an eight from missing the green to the right.

Either the bold-looking (but not really) second shot or the excessively cautious (but not really) third shot would have taken eight out of the picture. The conventional route of not risking a long carry over water on the second shot and not worrying about the water on a 77-yard wedge shot was exactly the wrong way to go.

Of course, it must be said that luck played a role for poor Stanley, who landed his third shot 10 or 15 feet past the flag and must have been stunned to see the ball spin all the way back into the water, not to mention the fact that the ball came agonizingly close to stopping on the bank before tumbling in (though it is fair to say that he should have controlled the spin better).

Then it came down to putting. That’s bad news for Stanley, who as a rookie was one of the worst putters on the PGA Tour last year when he ranked 174th out of 186 players in strokes gained-putting. Not the guy you want putting from three feet, eight inches for the victory—especially not for his first career victory after a gut-wrenching last 10 minutes. And not the guy you want in a putt-off from five feet on the second playoff hole with Brandt Snedeker, one of the best putters on Tour (ranked 10th in 2011).

This leaves two questions about Stanley. Will he be scarred by this epic disaster? And will he putt well enough to take advantage of his ball-striking ability?

Look for Stanley to recover and do what Robert Garrigus did—bounce back from losing a three-stroke lead with a triple bogey on the 72nd hole and go on to win a tournament. The 24-year-old has too much talent to remain shut out, and he can take comfort in the fact that he didn’t even strike the ball badly on the fateful 72nd hole (though, on the other hand, he did look pretty shaky for the whole back nine).

Putting is a greater concern. The good news is that even bad putters can have good putting weeks, as Stanley did last year when he finished second at the John Deere Classic and again last week at Torrey Pines. But to become an elite player and a threat to win multiple events in a year, he needs to improve on the greens.

Phil Mickelson helped the Humana field, but he wasn't a factor on Sunday. Photo copyright Icon SMI.

More than ever, the first three tournaments on the PGA Tour this year felt like a mere prelude to the real season. These events produced three nice-guy winners (and I’m not saying there’s anything wrong with that!), but with most of the big names away the Tour started with a whimper instead of with a bang.

The Hyundai Tournament of Champions has been struggling to attract the top players to its season-opening event for about a decade now, and this year might have been its worst field ever. Not only were stars like Luke Donald, Rory McIlroy (a heavy schedule in late 2011), and Phil Mickelson (said not to like the Kapalua course) no shows, there were more than the usual number of injuries and off-season surgeries, and one baby being born, leaving a thin group of 27 players.

In fact, it might have been the weakest field for any event ever on the PGA Tour, save for opposite-field tournaments. Think about it. You only had to beat 26 players instead of 143 or 155 as at a full-field event—and the Tour is deep enough that at least 100 of them have a chance to win. Some observers even consider the Tour Championship, with its field of 30, to be a cheap victory. I don’t agree with that, because at least those are 30 of the best players on the Tour (not absolutely the 30 best because of the absence of some international players and the vagaries of the point system, but still a strong group of 30). But even a full-strength Tournament of Champions would be weaker than that—there are always a few good players who go winless in any given year and a few journeyman players who are there only because they had a brief moment in the sun. When you take away the best players on top of that, you get a field that is both small and weak at the top.

Something should be done about the TofC. It needs a format tweak, whether it’s inviting winners from the past two or three years or inviting winners of select events from international tours. Or it could be shifted at least a bit later. That’s tough to do because the PGA Tour schedule is so full—but how about switching the Hawaii events so the Tour opens with the Sony Open and then goes to Kapalua, moving it a week further from the holidays and perhaps enticing those looking to rest after an active November/early December?

While the TofC needs improvement, I’m pretty much OK with the PGA Tour easing into the season—that’s a result of the fullness of both the PGA Tour and international schedules and I’m not inclined to say that playing opportunities should be taken away. It’s just that this year seemed too much of a slow start.

That said, there were signs of hope for the tournament that used to be called the Hope. The newly minted Humana Challenge, with the involvement of President Bill Clinton, was a shot in the arm for what had become a tired and, recently, sponsor-less Bob Hope Desert Classic (and further evidence that “Classic” or, for that matter, “Open,” are no longer the words of choice for new tournaments. “Challenge” or “Championship” are now preferred, the latter used even for tournaments that aren’t the championship of anything).

The tournament created more buzz, but the field was only slightly better than it has been and the group of contenders on Sunday no more compelling than recent editions. Phil Mickelson admirably recovered from an abysmal start—five-over through 23 holes of desert golf—to make the cut, but was not a main actor on Sunday. Dustin Johnson withdrew during the second round, perhaps having come back too soon from knee surgery (he cited a bad back, maybe caused because he had not walked any rounds before coming to the Humana) and Greg Norman was there mostly for his third-round role of playing with Clinton.

Mickelson gave us another head-scratcher when he said he had been hitting a new driver well during the off-season, but decided to use the old one when the bell rang—and hit it out of bounds twice in the first round. He quickly switched to the new one. Also of interest was that he used a regular-length putter. He tried a belly putter late last year for one tournament, but spoke of needing more practice with it to master the different style. The off-season would have been a good time to work on that, so the best guess is that the short putter is here to stay, though if he putts as poorly this year as he did in 2011 all bets are off.

Cutting the tournament to four rounds on three courses instead of five rounds on four courses was necessary in order to have a chance to attract a better field—the Hope stuck with the old format for far too long. Having two amateurs and two pros in each group, instead of a pro and three amateurs, was also a good idea. Those changes—more than the persuasive powers of a President most of them didn’t like—will cause more players to give the Humana serious consideration. Still, there’s a question as to whether that particular week works with a player’s schedule—especially the big names—so the jury is out on how much of a boost the field will get.

This week, the “real” season starts with Tiger Woods, Rory McIlroy, Luke Donald, and Lee Westwood in action in Abu Dhabi on the European Tour and a reasonably good field assembled at Torrey Pines on the PGA Tour. For Woods, it’s yet another return from an absence—this time six weeks since his victory in the unofficial Chevron World Challenge. Let’s hope he holds up well enough to get a full season out of him this time, so we can get a better idea of where he stands after a couple of lost years.

Woods is playing in Abu Dhabi mainly for the reported appearance money of $1.5 million. To that I say, can we really blame him? True, it’s a loss for Torrey Pines—but a gain for Pebble Beach, where Woods will play instead, his first appearance at the AT&T in 10 years.

A lot of people will be tuning in to the Golf Channel in the mornings to catch the tournament with the Tiger and the world’s highest-ranked players. Then again, the Farmers Insurance Open at Torrey Pines features the likes of Mickelson, Johnson, Bubba Watson, Ernie Els, Nick Watney, Hunter Mahan, Rickie Fowler, and Keegan Bradley, making it a good double bill. The preliminaries are over.

Rory McIlroy is back on the PGA Tour in 2012. Will it be a big year for him? Photo copyright Icon SMI.

Part 3 of our 2012 player previews looks at Rory McIlroy back on the PGA Tour and various players of interest. Click here for Part 1 (Luke Donald and Tiger Woods) and here for Part 2 (Nos. 2-8 on the 2011 money list).

Rory McIlroy
In rejoining the PGA Tour this season, McIlroy has a chance to build on his U.S. Open victory and possibly become the most popular European ever with American fans. Despite the fact that he grew up in Northern Ireland, McIlroy’s game is better suited to the U.S. as he implicitly admitted at last year’s British Open when he talked about not liking to play in the wind. Maybe that’s why he decided to return to the PGA Tour after a one-year absence despite his lack of enthusiasm for needing to stay on this side of the Atlantic through the dog days of late August and early September and the FedExCup playoffs.

With his talent level, it’s likely he’ll have to stay for all four playoff weeks. But more important are the four weeks of the majors where McIlroy could get a leg up on history if he can add another major by age 22 (if it’s the Masters) or 23. The Masters will be particularly interesting after his final-round collapse last year. He’s got the aerial game, though not necessarily the putting touch, for Augusta National.

McIlroy’s statistics show him to be exactly the player we think he is from watching him play. He hits the ball a long way with reasonable accuracy. But to this point in his career his putting has been mediocre and his game around the greens not so great. Even his full wedge game was nothing special last year (based on a small sample size via only a few appearances in ShotLink-measured events), but he was very good with the medium and long irons. McIlroy is likely continue to play his way into contention often. Perhaps further mentoring from Jack Nicklaus will help him to convert more of those chances into victories—but a Nicklaus-like putting touch would help McIlroy more.

Lee Westwood
Westwood and McIlroy might no longer be playing the big brother/little brother roles (if they ever really were) now that McIlroy has left the Chubby Chandler management stable. But it’s striking how similar the two are as players. Westwood morphed mid-career into being a long hitter, and like McIlroy he does it with decent accuracy. He is very good with his irons, but has question marks surrounding his short game and putting. One difference is that young Rory already has something that 38-year-old Westwood lacks—a major title.

Westwood is also rejoining the PGA Tour this year, and if they both play well he and McIlroy could develop quite a rivalry—at least until the time comes for them to be teammates at the Ryder Cup.

Phil Mickelson
Mickelson turns 42 in June, so it’s fair to ask how much he has left in the tank, especially in light of his slipping to 12th on the money list in 2001. A better question is whether he can find his putting stroke. Mickelson’s work on the greens last year was negative, losing .139 strokes per round to a Tour average putting performance. When you consider he beat the scoring average of the field by 1.31 strokes per round, that means he gained 1.45 strokes per round from tee to green. That was the third-best tee-to-green performance on Tour, behind Webb Simpson and Sergio Garcia (who, incidentally, could be a force to be reckoned with in 2012). So it could have been a very good year with better putting.

Mickelson has lost very little distance off the tee since turning 40 (ranked 22nd in 2011), but hasn’t gained any accuracy, either (177th in hitting fairways), so he’s often scrambling. He’s a good scrambler, but when you’re not converting enough of the par putts, that’s a problem.

Keegan Bradley
The PGA Championship thrust Bradley into the limelight, but he wasn’t strictly a one-tournament wonder as a rookie. Bradley also won the HP Byron Nelson Classic and had 12 top-25 finishes, signs that he might not fade into the woodwork after his moment in the sun. On the other hand, he missed 10 cuts in 2011, so consistency is something he needs to improve on.

That may come from experience, as he becomes familiar with the courses and comfortable with the environment. In terms of his game, Bradley needs to get better in all aspects of his game from 200 yards in. From outside that distance, he was terrific in 2011: 12th in total driving (20th in distance and 96th in accuracy) and very good in both GIR and proximity to the hole on approaches over 200 yards. But is approach numbers from under 200 yards were worse than average, his scrambling ranking was 125th, and he was 97th in putting.

Bubba Watson
Watson makes his living on the par fives. He overpowered them to post a 4.49 average in 2011 to rank second on Tour; the year before, he ranked first at 4.52. For Bubba, the par fives truly are par four-and-a-halves. Watson, second to J.B. Holmes in driving distance at 314.9 yards, was first in “going-for-the-green” percentage. He went for a reachable par five in two or par four in one 74.04 percent of the time; “reachable” defined as anybody in the field hitting a shot that came within 30 yards of the green in less than regulation. That was up from 61.69 percent in 2010. The difference was probably improved accuracy off the tee (176th to 152nd in hitting fairways) and five added yards in distance rather than a change in strategy: It’s unlikely Bubba was holding back in 2010.

Watson’s par-five mastery has enabled him to become one of the top players on Tour despite being among the worst in a couple of areas. He ranked 184th in scrambling (saving par after missing the green in regulation) and 183rd in par-three scoring average at 3.17. These show that 1.) his short game is poor and 2.) his iron game doesn’t hold up when he has to hit his approach shot from the same distance as everyone else even though he ranked ninth in greens in regulation. Watson is also a worse than average putter (117th and 120th the last two years).

The good news: There’s still plenty of upside for Watson. If he could put his name in the discussion for best American player with such flaws, imagine what he could do if he is able to improve in those areas.

Gary Woodland
In many ways, Woodland has a similar game to Bubba Watson. They are both in the top five in driving distance, in the top 12 in greens in regulation, and not good putters (142nd for Woodland in 2011). Woodland hits more fairways, perhaps because he hits irons off the tee more often than Watson and the other three players ahead of him in driving distance. Woodland also has a better short game than Watson, ranking in the middle of the pack (86th) in scrambling. The advantages in accuracy and scrambling enabled Woodland to be more consistent than Watson, as he made far fewer bogeys (47th in bogey avoidance compared to Watson’s 122nd) and ranked 14th in scoring compared to 64th for Watson.

In stark contrast to Watson, Woodland was excellent on par threes, ranking eighth with a 3.01 average. But Woodland couldn’t take advantage of his length on par fives, ranking 43rd with a 4.63 average. He did fine when going for the green in two, but a breakdown shows that he was 23-over on holes where he didn’t go for it—the worst on Tour. This indicates he needs work on his wedge game (he ranked poorly on approach shots of less than 125 yards), but his par-three performance shows that he’s fine with the rest of his irons.

Jason Day
Day was the king of par-three performance in 2011, ranking first with a 2.93 average. In fact, he was significantly better than anyone else, going cumulatively 21-under on par threes when nobody else was better than 7-under and only five players were under par. His approach-shot statistics don’t suggest he would be so great on par threes, but it’s not a one-year anomaly—Day was a very good 23rd in par-three scoring in 2010.

It could be part psychological, or perhaps Day hits iron shots much better when the ball is sitting on a tee. A more concrete factor could be that on par threes his wild driving doesn’t hurt him. He ranked 163rd in hitting fairways, and while there’s no stat for how far off line drives finish perhaps he hit an inordinate number of tee shots into deep trouble. Day ranked 67th in par four scoring, but his power (14th in driving distance) helped him to rank 12th in par five scoring.

Day moved into the elite category of putters in 2011, ranking seventh in putting as he gained .624 strokes per round. That stat doesn’t even reflect his undoubtedly outstanding putting performances at the Masters and U.S. Open, finishing second in each, because the majors aren’t part of the ShotLink stats. It will be interesting to see if Day can maintain that level.

Adam Scott
A quick glance at the stats might lead you to believe that Scott was a below average putter even after switching to the long putter. Scott ranked 143rd in putting in 2011, but it’s important to consider that he didn’t go to the long putter until after his first two tournaments—a poor performance at Kapalua and an epically bad showing at the Sony Open in Hawaii. For the remainder of the year, using the long putter, Scott gained .032 strokes per round, which would have ranked 98th.

Scott needs to continue that kind of performance, or better, to maintain the top-10 standing in the world that he achieved with his WGC-Bridgestone Invitational victory highlighting the 2011 campaign. The Aussie was one of the best drivers of the ball in 2011, his rankings of 24th in distance and 62nd in accuracy placing him fifth in total driving. Unfortunately, he was pretty bad on holes where he couldn’t drive the ball—he ranked 173rd in par-three scoring average (he was eighth on both par fours and par fives).

Charl Schwartzel
Schwartzel was a steady, unspectacular player in 2011, except when he went against type and won the Masters with birdies on the last four holes. That victory was his only finish better than T9, but Schwartzel finished in the top 25 in 10 of his 15 PGA Tour starts and ranked seventh in scoring average. He went 1, T9, T16, and T12 in the majors on his way to the best cumulative scoring total, yet still was almost a forgotten man by the end of the year.

Despite his slight build, Schwartzel hits the ball long enough for that to be an asset (43rd in driving distance) and he keeps the ball in play pretty well (95th in hitting fairways), resulting in a ranking of 21st in total driving. He was only 79th in greens in regulation, but it’s fair to say his ball-striking was better than that—his GIR percentage was pulled down by playing the toughest schedule on the PGA Tour according to field scoring average. He was a mediocre putter in ShotLink measured events, gaining just .011 strokes per round, but it’s fair to say he putted better than that because the majors, where Schwartzel shined, aren’t included in strokes gained-putting.

The question for 2012 is whether Schwartzel will put together any more Masters-like bursts or will he be a player who piles up top-25 after top-25 without having a major impact?

Steve Stricker started 2012 in style with a win at Kapalua. Photo copyright Icon SMI.

Here is Part 2 of my player previews, covering Nos. 2 through 8 on the 2011 money list—including Steve Stricker and Webb Simpson, who finished 1-3 at the season-opening Hyundai Tournament of Champions. Click here for Part 1 on Luke Donald and Tiger Woods.

Webb Simpson
Was the Webb Simpson of 2011 for real? The 26-year-old made a huge leap in his third PGA Tour season, finishing second on the money list after placing 70th and 94th in his first two years. Can he continue playing at that level?

I think so, based on his week-to-week consistency. It wasn’t a case of things clicking for a few good tournaments. Simpson finished in the top 16 in 12 of his last 14 events, with two wins and a playoff loss. And he’s an explosive enough player that he’s clearly capable of going low and winning multiple times in a given year—he ranked first on Tour in percentage of subpar holes.

Simpson’s improvement in ball-striking was remarkable. After averaging 165th in total driving (combined distance and accuracy) his first two years, he moved up to 24th. And after averaging 143rd in greens in regulation, he jumped to eighth. He does it with a somewhat quirky, handsy swing. Simpson admits that he sometimes shanks the ball, but usually on the range and not on the course. The unorthodoxy of a timing-based swing and, especially, the poor ball-striking numbers from his first two years could be considered red flags. But Simpson apparently figured things out in 2011—he didn’t overhaul his swing but made an adjustment to add width to it—and players with much odder swings have been consistent performers (see Jim Furyk).

Much like the emerging star of 2010, Martin Kaymer, Simpson displayed a game last year that had no weaknesses. The one part of his game that wasn’t as much a strength as the others was putting—he ranked 57th in strokes gained-putting. On weeks when his putter was hot, he was a threat to win.

Simpson had the best tee-to-green game of anyone on Tour in 2011. His scoring average of 69.16 was 1.70 strokes better than the field average in the events he played in. The strokes gained-putting stat shows that he gained .21 strokes on the field per round. It follows that he gained 1.49 strokes tee to green. Performing the same calculation for the rest of the Tour shows that Sergio Garcia was next at gaining 1.46 strokes tee to green, followed by Phil Mickelson at 1.45, Charl Schwartzel at 1.44 and Luke Donald at 1.33 to round out the top five.

It’s important to note that this calculation is not strictly a ball-striking ranking since it includes shots around the green. Simpson has an outstanding short-game touch, as evidenced by his ranking of 16th in scrambling (saving par after missing the green in regulation) despite not being a great putter.

Simpson’s overall good play is reflected in the fact that he led the Tour in scoring average on par fours (3.97) and par fives (4.48) and was a respectable 13th on par threes (3.02). Dominating the par fives is the type of play that can lead to victories. Simpson will need to maintain his distance gain of 2011 (he added 11 yards to jump to 296.2 off the tee) to continue to go deep in the red on the par fives. Simpson’s stats were so solid in 2011 that it’s hard to find an area where he needs significant improvement, but here’s one: he ranked 111th in putting in the 3-to-5-foot range.

Nick Watney
Much like Simpson, Watney played well nearly every week in 2011 while boasting the type of power game that enables him to aim for victories and not settle for top-10 finishes. Watney is longer off the tee, averaging 301.9 yards to rank 16th, but not as accurate, with a 136th ranking in fairways hit leaving him at 31st in total driving.

Watney’s biggest improvement last year was in his short game. He went from 84th to 12th in putting and, even more dramatically, from 146th to 12th in scrambling after working hard on his wedge game. His putting included an out-of-this-world week at the AT&T National (one of his two victories) that may not be repeated, and it wouldn’t be surprising if he slipped back a notch on the greens. But he could make up for that by hitting more greens (54th in 2011).

The one dark spot on Watney’s 2011 record was the major championships, which accounted for three of his worst five showings (a 46th at the Masters and missed cuts at the U.S. and British Opens; he missed only one other cut all year). But he finished in the top 10 of two majors in 2010 and held the 54-hole lead at the PGA Championship that year, so he’s capable of better things in the big events.

K.J. Choi
A victory at the lucrative Players Championship helped Choi to his best-ever finish on the money list (fourth), but he wasn’t a one-week wonder as he added a second and a pair of thirds, had eight top-10s, and missed the cut only four times.

Choi is shorter than average off the tee (134th) and middle of the pack in driving accuracy, greens in regulation, and putting. So why was he an elite player in 2011? He’s got a great touch around the greens, ranking 27th in scrambling.

Choi’s stats are a bit misleading because he played the third toughest schedule on Tour based on the adjustment necessary for scoring average relative to the field (he was 19th in adjusted scoring average but 47th in raw average). So he’s actually a better ball-striker than his rankings of 91st in hitting fairways and 81st in hitting greens indicate. Still, the short game is the key for him as it helps him to avoid bogeys. He ranked 13th on Tour in bogey avoidance, even with that tough schedule, while ranking only 112th in percentage of subpar holes.

The only period Choi has been a very good putter was 2007-8 when he ranked 10th and 20th. He was 73rd in 2011, but did take advantage of a great putting week at the Players.

He turns 42 in May, so at this point of his career we’re not likely to see many changes in Choi’s game other than a decline due to age. But if his putter heats up at the right time, he can still be dangerous.

Dustin Johnson
Here’s the good news about Dustin Johnson in 2011. He harnessed his driving, ranking 147th in hitting fairways after never ranking better than 169th in his first three years. For a player who launches it an average of 314.2 yards off the tee to rank third, that’s decent accuracy.

Here’s the bad news. After being an OK putter in 2009 and 2010 (average ranking of 89th), he was awful in 2011 at 171st in strokes gained-putting, losing a half-stroke a round on the greens. His chipping and pitching were bad, too, as he ranked 181st in scrambling.

Johnson’s inconsistency was reflected by a ranking of 51st in adjusted scoring average, but he still managed to finish fifth on the money list because his good weeks were very good and came in big events—a playoff win at the Barclays and seconds at the British Open and WGC-Cadillac. Johnson’s length off the tee combined with very good iron play (27th in GIR despite a tough schedule and 2nd in proximity to the hole on approach shots from the fairway) enabled him to contend on the rare weeks his putter was cooperating. Johnson’s putting was better than average in only five of the 16 ShotLink-measured events he played in, and he had a win, a second, a third, and a fourth in those events.

Beyond the statistics, Johnson continued to be plagued by mental mistakes (missed tee time at the Northern Trust Open) and hitting the wrong shot at the wrong time (an iron shot out of bounds that ended his British Open bid). He’s an exceptionally talented player, with five wins at the age of 27, and he shows a knack for coming to the forefront in the game’s big events (though not for all 72 holes yet). If he can bear down and improve his short game and cut down on the mistakes, he could win majors and perhaps reach No. 1, even after a slight step backward in 2011.

Matt Kuchar
Kuchar was not quite as good across the board in all statistical categories in 2011 as he was in his breakout season of 2010. But the biggest difference was that whereas he managed to sneak in a victory among his 11 top-10s in 2010 to lift him to No. 1 on the money list, he didn’t have any wins among his nine top-10s in 2010 as his consistency still enabled him to finish sixth in earnings.

Kuchar is good at making birdies—he ranked 17th in subpar holes—but he’s better at avoiding bogeys—fifth in that category. He’s a very good at saving pars, ranking 13th in scrambling in 2011 after being 10th the previous year. His putting slid from eighth to 26th.

Job No. 1 for Kuchar in 2012 will be to find a way to convert his consistency into victories—not that there’s a magic formula for that.

Bill Haas
Haas remained pretty much the same statistically in 2011 as he was in 2010. He’s a very good driver of the ball, with rankings of 48th in distance and 67th in accuracy placing him 11th in total driving. He was also 11th in GIR, but he remained a mediocre putter at 84th (though up from 114th).

There are a couple of anomalies in Haas’s stats. He’s bold in going for the green in less than regulation (his “go-for-it” percentage rank of 18th outstripped his driving distance), but only ranked 41st in percentage of subpar holes. He was 14th at avoiding bogeys, more because of his GIR percentage than his scrambling, which was mediocre. He ranked 154th in proximity to the hole on approach shots, only partially explained by l going for more par fives in two and thus having more long approaches. His GIR ranking was better than his proximity to the hole ranking from nearly every distance of approach shot, which suggests that he doesn’t shoot for the flag as often as the Tour norm. So while he’s bold at going for par fives in two, he plays it safe on approach shots. He could improve his birdie rate by aiming more at the flag.

It was also an anomaly that Haas generally struggled in crunch time in 2011, but ended the year by winning the biggest money tournament of all, the Tour Championship. For the year, he ranked sixth in scoring before the cut but 122nd in the final round, sliding out of contention on several Sundays. He hit some wayward shots down the stretch at the Tour Championship, too, but—against type—saved himself with some great scrambling. And if there were a category for scrambling out of water, Haas would have led it.

Steve Stricker
The biggest question mark about Stricker entering 2012 was physical after he suffered numbness in his left arm last fall due to a neck problem. He wasted no time proving his fitness by winning the season-opening Hyundai Tournament of Champions. There’s also the matter of age, as Stricker turns 45 in February. He now has nine wins since turning 40 (out of 12 in all), but in general victories become much rarer after hitting 45.

The short game was the key to Stricker taking over as the top American on the world ranking heading into 2012 (not to mention the failure of any other American to step forward). Stricker wasn’t quite as accurate with either his drives or irons in 2011, but he was deadly with the putter, improving from 22nd in 2010 to second in strokes gained-putting last year, shaving off .769 strokes per round. He was also second in scrambling, saving par 64.93 percent of the time.

Stricker’s wedge prowess extends beyond the area immediately surrounding the green. He was in the top 20 in proximity to the hole on approach shots from 50-75, 75-100, 100-125, and 125-150 yards. That explains how Stricker, who is medium-short off the tee, was able to rank second in scoring average on par fives at 4.49, tied with long-hitting Bubba Watson. Stricker’s iron accuracy dropped off significantly from beyond 150 yards.

Stricker is still going strong, but his window might be closing. That makes 2012 a big year as he pursues his first major title.

Improved driving was a major factor in Luke Donald's rise in 2011. Photo copyright Icon SMI.

In Part 1 of our 2012 player previews, we look at how Luke Donald reached No. 1 last year and what he needs to do to stay there and what progress (if any) Tiger Woods made in 2011 and what he needs to do to get back to No. 1.

Luke Donald

Donald made a big leap forward in 2011 because he morphed from a player who makes a lot of pars to a player who makes a lot of birdies. In 2010, Donald ranked 109th on the PGA Tour in percentage of holes where he made a birdie or eagle but still had a good season because he ranked ninth in avoiding bogeys. Donald made an extraordinary jump to fourth in percentage of subpar holes in 2011 (23.80 percent birdies or eagles) while moving up to first in bogey avoidance (12.77 percent bogeys or worse).

But how did he accomplish this? Largely by making a quantum leap on par fives. Donald’s scoring average of 4.71 on par fives in 2010 ranked 107th, but last year he averaged 4.55 to rank seventh. The top 10 in this stat is usually the province of long-ball knockers, but this year the slightly-built Donald was one of two shorter hitters to sneak in, joining Steve Stricker.

He was able to do that thanks to improved driving. Donald was one of the worst drivers on the Tour in 2010, with rankings of 177th in driving distance and 120th in hitting fairways. He was able to boost that to 147th in distance and 57th in accuracy. That still left him 127th in total driving—a combination of the distance and accuracy stats—but that’s a lot better than the 186th of the year before.

As a result of gaining seven yards off the tee (277.0 to 284.1) and being in the fairway more often, Donald was able to go for more par fives in two shots. After ranking 179th in percentage of times going for a reachable par five in two in 2010, he moved up to 125th in 2011 (a “reachable” par five defined as one where any player in the field went for it).

That enabled him to make more easy birdies. But for a shorter-than-average hitter to do so well on par fives, great wedge play has to be part of the equation. After mediocre performances on approach shots in 2010, Donald was outstanding last year, especially in the range of 100 to 125 yards. On shots from that distance, he was first in proximity to the hole, first in greens in regulation, and first in scoring relative to par.

Donald ended up with birdie or eagle (mostly birdie, since he made only three eagles all year) on 52.71 percent of the par fives after breaking par on only 39.07 percent of them a year earlier.

The area of his game Donald didn’t need to improve was putting. The Englishman led the Tour in strokes gained putting in 2009 and 2010, and he repeated in 2011. But while he was only a slightly above average from tee to green the previous two years, he was well above average last year.

Donald led the Tour by beating the field scoring average by 2.17 strokes per round in 2010. The strokes gained putting stat shows that he putted .84 strokes better than average, so he gained 1.33 strokes with the other aspects of his game from tee to green. In 2009, putting accounted for .93 of the 1.10 strokes he gained on the field (the rest of his game accounting for a gain of only .17 strokes) and in 2010 putting accounted for .87 of a total of 1.30 strokes per round better than the field (.43 for the rest of his game).

While Donald is quite good at making putts, he’s really impressive at avoiding three-putts. He three-putted only 1.24 percent of the time in 2011, the best rate on the PGA Tour. Even from longer than 25 feet, he three-putted only 4.74 percent of the time (nine times out of 190), much better than the second-best player at 5.49 percent. And his streak of 483 consecutive holes without a three-putt was nearly twice as long as the next best streak (245).

He’s also good at scrambling, ranking eighth in saving par when missing the green. That, along with the lack of three-putts, enabled him to make the fewest bogeys on Tour despite ranking only 41st in greens in regulation (which, incidentally, was vastly better than the 152nd of the year before).

It will be tough for Donald to improve on a year when his adjusted scoring average was four-tenths of a stroke better than anyone else on Tour. His strength training already having paid off, he’s unlikely to be able to increase his driving distance more than marginally. Probably the only area he could do better would be to become a super accurate driver, which in turn would help him hit more greens. In some areas, there’s no way to go but down—how long can he remain the No. 1 putter?

But there are ways for Donald to have a better year in 2012. Most importantly, with better performances in the major championships, where his showings in the U.S. and British Opens were particular disappointments in 2011. Even with a slight downtick in his overall play, a major championship would make 2012 a big year for Donald.

The big question is if Donald can continue to be a birdie machine in 2012 or if he will drift back toward being a steady but unspectacular player. Donald’s pre-2011 career was marked by plenty of top-10 finishes but not many victories. His new-found ability to make a lot of birdies helped him to four wins in 2011.

For much of the year, and from a U.S. perspective, it didn’t seem like Donald was shedding the tag of a player who doesn’t win as much as he should. Two of his victories were in Europe. He entered the final event of the PGA Tour season, at Disney, with 13 top-10s on the PGA Tour and a lone victory at the Accenture Match Play Championship. (It wasn’t a cheap match play win—he clearly played better than anyone else over the course of the week—but he was still looking for a U.S. stroke-play victory.)

Then he won the PGA Tour finale by reeling off six straight birdies on the back nine during the final round, convincingly locking up Player of the Year honors. Is that the new Luke Donald? We’ll find out in 2012.

Tiger Woods

2011 was a lost season for Woods. He got off to a disappointing start to the year, looked to be making a breakthrough at the Masters only to fail to deliver on the back nine, suffering an injury during the week that would keep him on the sidelines for most of the campaign.

November/December performances at the Australian Open, Presidents Cup, and Chevron World Challenge (a victory in his own unofficial event) bode well for a return to some kind of good form in 2012, whether it’s merely becoming a winner again or regaining his old dominance. At the end of the year, Woods pronounced himself fit again, with knee and Achilles problems finally healed.

Some question marks remain: At age 36, will he remain fully healthy or will those physical issues pop up again? With so much inactivity over the last four years has too much rust accumulated to expect him to ever be the same player? After two years, and still counting, without an official win, will he regain the confidence and swagger he had when he seemed invincible?

Regarding his game, statistics from his curtailed 2011 season show where Woods needs the most improvement—driving the ball and scrambling.

It’s a very small sample size, since Woods played in only seven measured events, but Woods’s driving distance of 293.7 yards would have ranked only 71st if he had enough rounds to qualify. That will undoubtedly improve if his knee is truly fine and he becomes comfortable with his swing changes. Still, he’s likely to remain a notch behind the PGA Tour’s power quartet of J.B. Holmes, Bubba Watson, Robert Garrigus, and Gary Woodland and won’t quite be able to overwhelm courses as he did in his prime.

Perhaps of more concern, Woods didn’t even manage to hit 50 percent of the fairways in 2011 and would have ranked 186th (last) in that category. He’s got to do better than that.

We can see the effect of poor driving in the fact that Woods averaged 4.07 on par fours, which would have ranked 132nd. He was better on par fives at 4.59 for a rank of 30th, but that’s still not what a player like Woods needs on those most vulnerable holes.

The bright spot for Woods was his iron play. His 3.00 average on par threes would have ranked fifth and is proximity to the hole on approach shots would have been in the top 10 in each category from 125-150, 150-175, 175-200, 200-225, and 225-250 yards.

His wedge game needs work, though. He wasn’t so good from between 50 and 125 yards, and his scrambling numbers have fallen off the cliff in 2010-11. Once renowned for having one of the finest short games in golf, Woods has been having trouble saving par when missing the green—his scrambling rank would have been 166th and 141st the last two years. That’s partly attributable to often leaving himself in such bad spots off the tee that he doesn’t end up in position for easy up and downs, and partly attributable to putting troubles. But it also means his touch around the greens hasn’t been what it once was.

Woods’s putting did move back into positive territory in 2011, gaining .258 strokes per round on the greens after losing .033 strokes per round in 2010. The caveat is that his 2011 figure is based on only five tournaments and would have been worse if the Masters were included (putt distances aren’t lasered at the majors), since he struggled on the greens at Augusta. So, really, his putting is a question mark rather than a strength or a weakness right now.

Indeed, almost everything about Woods is a question mark heading into 2012. He’s coming off an impressive singles win at the Presidents Cup and a victory at the World Challenge. Then again, he entered 2011 coming off an impressive singles win at the Ryder Cup and a near victory at the World Challenge, and that didn’t lead anywhere. Let’s just hope that he’s actually able to play a whole year to try to answer those questions.

Yani Tseng made it a dozen victories in 2011 with a win in her homeland of Taiwan at a tournament called the Swinging Skirts Invitational. The event was sponsored by a women’s and men’s amateur golf organization whose players compete in skirts or kilts.

Perfect for the silly season, right? Don’t laugh, though. Tseng won over a field that included Suzann Pettersen, Cristie Kerr, Paula Creamer, Na Yeon Choi, Stacy Lewis, Brittany Lincicome, Jiyai Shin, and U.S. Women’s Open champion So Yeon Ryu. (The players didn’t all wear skirts, by the way.)

That’s the most world-wide wins since Annika Sorenstam had 13 in her extraordinary season of 2002. Five of Tseng’s wins have come outside the LPGA Tour, but when your main tour only has 23 events, you’ve got to do some freelancing on the side.

Some thoughts on the LPGA season as 2011 comes to a close.

Year of Yani: Tseng put together a season that was Annika- or Lorena-like. The standard line is that it received little attention, but it’s getting a lot of attention for receiving little attention, like a baseball player who is so often referred to as underrated that he isn’t underrated anymore. That’s inside the golf world—outside the golf world it really didn’t register very much.

But the LPGA is a niche within a niche sport, and a smaller niche than it used to be with its reduced, stop-and-start schedule. The only way, short of fashion-model looks, for an LPGA player to get attention in the wide world would be to win the first three majors and go for the Grand Slam, win five or six tournaments in a row, shoot a 58, or play in a men’s tournament. Even teeing it up with the men wouldn’t have the ground-breaking impact for Tseng of Annika Sorenstam at Colonial in 2003 or the polarizing effect of Michelle Wie in numerous men’s events.

Tseng floated the notion in the fall that she would like to play with men golfers “if the opportunity presented itself.” The Puerto Rico Open, a secondary PGA Tour event, almost immediately invited her, but she turned it down. Her agent indicated that while she might eventually want to play a men’s event, she didn’t want to do so right away because it might be “a distraction” at this point in her career.

Tseng clearly doesn’t have grandiose ambitions about playing with the men, but said she could use the opportunity to “learn more from male golfers.” That’s the way Sorenstam used her Colonial experience, which ultimately helped her on the LPGA Tour, especially in major championships, having steeled herself under the pressure of the Colonial spotlight.

Having a woman in a men’s field has the danger of devolving into a sideshow, but I’m intrigued from a golf standpoint to see how a top woman player fares on a PGA Tour course. Tseng led the LPGA Tour in driving distance at 269.2. That’s long enough to not be overwhelmed by a men’s course, even though it would make her the shortest hitter on the PGA Tour (virtually even with Brian Gay, who happens to be a Tour winner).

Tseng’s ball-striking is truly impressive. She ranked second in greens in regulation at 74.3 percent, narrowly behind Pettersen (74.5) and 86th in hitting fairways (69.0), very respectable for the distance she hits it. Tseng ranked fifth in putts on greens hit in regulation, probably an indication that she putts well and hits the ball close to the hole.

Something to watch in 2012: Can Tseng win the U.S. Women’s Open and complete the career Grand Slam at age 23 in the last year before the LPGA goes to five majors in 2013? (At that point, she will also need to win the Evian Masters to complete the Fab Five, or whatever we’re going to call it.) Let’s hope she wins the Women’s Open sooner rather than later—we don’t really want another Kathy Whitworth/Nancy Lopez situation where an all-time great gets shut out at the biggest women’s event.

American Drought Continues: With Tseng ascendant, the U.S. still hasn’t produced an LPGA Player of the Year since Beth Daniel in 1994. Since then, Sorenstam has claimed that honor eight times, Lorena Ochoa four times, Karrie Webb and Tseng twice each, and Laura Davies once. With Wie looking more like a potentially very good player than a transcendent one, Cristie Kerr just not quite able to reach the highest rung, and Paula Creamer having hit an early plateau, is Lexi Thompson America’s best bet? Not for 2012, but to at least be the next Player of the Year to hail from the U.S.

Even more discouraging, U.S. players won a grand total of four of the LPGA’s 23 events in 2011—two by Brittany Lincicome, one each by Stacy Lewis (a major—the Kraft Nabisco) and Thompson. Kerr was shut out despite finishing second on the money list and Creamer didn’t win, either. On the bright side, there were five Americans in the top nine in earnings (Angela Stanford was another who didn’t win a tournament).

Koreans Mark Time:It wasn’t a big year for the Koreans, either. They managed only three victories among them, none for erstwhile leader Jiyai Shin. Ryu did capture the U.S. Women’s Open and Korea showed impressive depth for a small country. They had 14 players in the top 40 on the money list compared to just 11 for the U.S.

International Scorecard: Tseng’s seven victories on their own made Taiwan the winningest country on the LPGA Tour. With the LPGA’s limited schedule, that left only 16 for everybody else. The U.S. won four, Korea three, Australia, Norway, and Japan two each, and Germany, Sweden, and the UK one each.

By continent, that’s 12 wins for Asia, five for Europe, four for the U.S., and two for the rest of the world (both Australia). Looking at the money list, Asia had the most top-25 players with 10, followed by the U.S. with eight, Europe with six, and the rest of the world (Australia) with one. If there were a Presidents Cup for women, the international team would be strong favorites.

Shrunken Schedule: With the loss of the Springfield event (no replacement sponsor for State Farm could be found) announced last week, it appears that there will be little or no net gains on the schedule next year. There was one bit of good news recently: the RR Donnelly Founders Cup, played strictly for charity in last year’s inaugural with no purse for the players, announced there will be a $1.5 million purse next year.

That’s good news, because it wasn’t fair to the rank-and-file to have a no-purse tournament on a 2011 schedule that included just 13 full-field events. Nearly half of the schedule was outside the country (in 2012 it might be more than half), and most of those international events all have limited fields. It has become very hard for young players to break onto the tour.

Players without the highest priority coming out of Q-School have even fewer chances. With the schedule having built-in breaks, there’s no reason for exempt players to skip many tournaments, leaving fewer spots for up-and-comers. Unlike on the PGA Tour, even the best players tee it up in nearly every tournament. The top 10 on the money list played in an average of 21.2 of the 23 tournaments in 2011.

With so few opportunities, it’s a challenge to earn enough money to keep your card, not to mention to earn a living. For many, playing the LPGA Tour is just a part-time job, one with limited chance for advancement.

Rory McIlroy joined Tiger Woods as a winner on the first weekend of December. Photo copyright Icon SMI.

Based on the results of last weekend, the 2012 season looks like it could be very interesting.

In California, Tiger Woods won for the first time in just over two years at his own Chevron World Challenge. An unofficial, 18-player event, to be sure, but at this point any ‘W’ is a good one for Woods—and a positive sign for what lies ahead.

In Hong Kong, Rory McIlroy scored a European Tour victory. In South Africa, Lee Westwood won the Nedbank Challenge, a 12-player event that was the international version of the Chevron.

That’s victories for two former No. 1 players (Woods and Westwood) and the current No. 2/maybe future No. 1 (McIlroy). And wins for the two players who move the needle more than any others (Woods and McIlroy). Here’s the kicker: McIlroy and Westwood both announced recently that they will be joining the PGA Tour next year. And here’s another kicker: Sergio Garcia won a couple of European Tour events this fall, and he could be a factor in 2012, too.

Luke Donald is going to have some serious competition next year as he tries to maintain the No. 1 spot on the world ranking. The major championships could be compelling, and so, dare I say it, could be the FedExCup. Nineteen of the top 20 players on the world ranking are now PGA Tour members (all except Martin Kaymer).

Donald will also have some competition at this week’s Dubai World Championship as he tries to wrap up the European Order of Merit instead of it being a walkover. McIlroy’s Hong Kong victory gave him somewhat of a chance—but he has to win and have Donald finish in a tie for ninth or worse. So it still looks good for Donald to sweep the European and PGA Tour money lists.

(By the way, so much for the Race to Dubai enticing non-Europeans to join the European Tour. This week’s Dubai World Championship has just eight of the top 20 on the world ranking—though it does boast the top four. This is the last of the three-year contract, and if there’s a race next year it will be to somewhere other than Dubai, where the economy went in the tank. However, it might be a race to nearby Abu Dhabi, the current economic kingpin of the United Arab Emirates.)

A McIlroy victory also would give him a case as international Player of the Year. Until a few weeks ago, his U.S. Open triumph was his lone victory of the year but he has since added the Shanghai Masters (an unofficial, limited-field event) and Hong Kong. Donald has four international wins (two each in Europe and the U.S.), one or probably both money titles, and the most world ranking points in 2011. But McIlroy holds a very good trump card with a major title.

McIlroy’s victory came on the 10th week of a hectic 12-week schedule that has taken him from Scotland to Korea to China to Bermuda to Turkey (weekend rest after the 36-hole Grand Slam of Golf) to China for two weeks to the Maldives (where he took a two-week break) to China to Japan (for an exhibition) to Hong Kong to Dubai and then to Thailand next week.

“It’s probably something that I won’t do again,” admitted McIlroy, whose schedule, as you might have guessed, was influenced by the opportunity to collect appearance fees.

But while he said his “energy levels were down” after the second round in Hong Kong, McIlroy overcame fatigue to win with a final-round 65 that included holing a bunker shot on the final hole for a two-stroke margin. It was an important win for the Northern Iriishman who, except for the U.S. Open, has had trouble closing out tournaments. The victory was just the fourth official one of his career—pretty good for a 22-year-old but not a large number considering how often he has been in contention.

If McIlroy was over-golfed, Woods—even more in need of a win after a two-year drought—had the opposite problem as he has been under-golfed in 2011 due to injuries and then missing the FedExCup. But he had sharpened his game by playing two of the last three weeks in the Australian Open and the Presidents Cup. Woods wasn’t quite ready at the Australian Open, where he lost the 36-hole lead. The same thing happened at the Chevron World Challenge, except this time he rallied in the final round and birdied the last two holes for a one-stroke victory over Zach Johnson.

That finish was vintage Woods, promising a likely return to the official winner’s circle in 2012. Is he all the way back? We’ll know better when 2012 plays out. For Woods, that starts in late January in Abu Dhabi—a tournament that will probably also feature McIlroy. Woods trying to get back to No. 1 at the same time McIlroy is trying to get there? Yes, 2012 could be special.

Are things finally looking up for Tiger Woods? His ball-striking in his last two Presidents Cup matches was impeccable. Photo copyright Icon SMI.

Tiger Woods didn’t exactly make Fred Couples look like he made a great move by using a captain’s pick on him for the Presidents Cup. But he at least made it look like a defensible move.

Woods’ 2-3 record was nothing to write home about, but it was the best of the four captain’s choices. Bill Haas went 1-3-1 for the U.S., Aaron Baddeley 1-3-1 for the Internationals, and Robert Allenby 0-4 for the Internationals. Apparently, Allenby’s victories in 1992 and 1993 at Royal Melbourne didn’t translate well nearly two decades later. I can’t come down too hard on Norman, though, since I said Allenby was a good pick.

I also said that Keegan Bradley should have been picked over Woods. In the end, it surely wouldn’t have mattered, as the U.S. won by 19-15 margin. It would have been nice for Bradley to get some experience in international competition. For Woods, it was nice to get in some “reps,” as he likes to say.

Woods’ overall record might have been lackluster, but his ball-striking in his final two matches was outstanding. In fact, in his Saturday afternoon four-ball match, it was flawless.

Under different circumstances—like a singles match with the Cup on the line, and with better putting—it might have been the stuff of legend. Woods hit 17 greens in regulation and putted from the fringe on the other one. He hit both par fives in two, meaning he hit the greens in one better than regulation. He also hit 12 of 15 fairways, a stat aided by the fact he didn’t need to hit many drivers at relatively short Royal Melbourne but still impressive.

He couldn’t hole much on the greens, though, and settled for a three-birdie, 15-par round (giving him the benefit of the doubt on some two-putts he didn’t need to complete). Woods only hit two approach shots inside 10 feet, but he did have eight birdie or eagle putts in the 11-to-18 foot range. He only made one of those, and endured a stretch of six holes in a row from the second through seventh where he missed from 15, 14, 11, 13, 9, and 18 feet. Woods made up for a little bit of that by holing a 34-footer on the 10th hole, but canceled it out with a costly three-putt par from 67 feet on the 15th hole (missing the second from eight-and-a-half feet) to enable K.T. Kim and Y.E. Yang to take a 1-up lead in a match that Woods and Dustin Johnson eventually lost by that margin.

Then in Sunday’s singles, Woods played the best golf of anyone, going 5-under for 15 holes in closing out Baddeley 4 and 3. This time he missed four greens, but he one of the par fives in two. So, for his last 33 holes, Woods reached the greens in just two less than regulation. He hit 23 of 27 fairways, including 11-for-12 in his singles match. And his putting came around on Sunday, as he made three birdie putts of 17 feet or more and two par-savers from 10 feet.

Woods’ 2-3 record can be partly attributed to lack of support from his partners. He didn’t play very well in Thursday’s lopsided foursomes loss, costing his team three holes with poor shots, but partner Steve Stricker played worse, and opponents Adam Scott and K.J. Choi would have been tough to beat anyway.

Friday’s four-ball was a 1-up defeat to Baddeley and Jason Day where Woods’ likely stroke-play score would have been even par on a very tough day for scoring, while partner Johnson was headed for 5- or 6-over (giving him about half of the 6- to 8-foot putts he didn’t have to hole—and that’s being generous the way Johnson putted for the week). In Saturday’s four-ball defeat, Johnson only helped on one hole. Johnson did team up fairly equally with Woods in a Saturday foursomes win over Scott and Choi.

While I’m not one who thinks that Couples chose Woods for this reason—nor should he have—it has to be said that Tiger added sizzle to an event held halfway around the globe against an International team that hasn’t defeated the U.S. since 1998.

It also served to whet the appetite for a possible long-delayed Woods comeback in 2012, if not to dominance at least to winning again.

Of course, we were saying the same thing after his Ryder Cup singles beat-down of Francesco Molinari in 2010. That didn’t work out so well. It was partly due to injury, but Woods wasn’t exactly a world-beater in his early-season 2011 tournaments before he was derailed at the Masters.

Two tournaments in Australia don’t tell much of a tale, but Woods’ swing and demeanor both look better than they have in a while and his putting is there on certain days. The thing he’s not doing now is stringing four good rounds together.

At the Australian Open, his first, second, and fourth rounds were good enough to win, but he put up a stinker in the third round. It seems weird to compare Woods to an inexperienced rookie, but that’s almost what it was like as he didn’t seem ready to handle the situation of holding the 36-hole lead as he got on the bogey train early in the third round. At the Presidents Cup, it was a slow start followed by a fast finish.

Dare we say that Woods appears “close”? Close to something good, anyway, though it’s hard to predict just what. We don’t know the upside potential of this version of Woods yet.

Note: Wouldn’t it have been a perverse pleasure if Phil Mickelson and Jason Day had been matched in the singles? Mickelson’s likely stroke-play score would have been 6-over for the first five holes of his loss to Adam Scott, while Day would have been 9-over for the first nine of his loss to Hunter Mahan.

Mickelson-Day would have been a glamour match-up that would have degenerated into a battle of who wanted to lose more, though they did both improve on the back nine. They would have halved three holes with bogeys on the front nine, and Day would have won one with a bogey.

Here’s how it would have gone: Day goes three up through five thanks to his pars on the second and fifth and bogey on the third. Mickelson wins the sixth and seventh with a birdie and a par, Day putting the ball in his pocket before the double bogeys he was headed toward, and Phil squares the match with a par at the ninth.

Day wins the 11th with a birdie, loses the 13th with a bogey, and wins the 14th with a birdie to go 1 up. A Mickelson birdie at 15 squares it as Day picks up before making a bogey (Mickelson was 6-over and Day 10-over through that point, but they would have won the same number of holes).

We can’t project after that, because Day’s match ended after 15 holes. But Mickelson’s birdie at 16 and par at 17 probably would have put him 1 up or maybe won him the match.

Day, incidentally, was a big disappointment with a 1-3-1 record which was largely deserved based on his play. That points up a big problem with the International squad—they don’t have the kind of strength at the top they had when Vijay Singh, Ernie Els, (a little earlier) Greg Norman, and Nick Price were in their heyday. Scott and Day were the Internationals’ two highest-ranked players in the world ranking (7 and 8), but neither is a real heavyweight.

Ernie Els has three victories at Royal Melbourne, site of this week's Presidents Cup. Photo copyright Icon SMI.

There has been plenty of talk about Robert Allenby as a Royal Melbourne specialist on the Presidents Cup team, but what about Ernie Els?

Allenby grew up nearby, loves the course, finished second there in the 1991 Australian Open as an amateur and won the 1992 Johnnie Walker Classic and 1993 Players Championship there in his first two years as a pro.

But Els has some more recent history, winning the Heineken Classic at Royal Melbourne in 2002, 2003, and 2004, then finishing second in 2005. That accounts for the the course’s entire four-year run as host of that event.

Els’s 2004 win was one of the strangest victories of recent times. He shot a 60 in the first round and carried an eight-stroke lead into the final round. He proceeded to lose all of that eight-stroke advantage with a 42 on the front nine, falling into a tie with Adam Scott (another 2011 Presidents Cup team member). Els then birdied four of the first five holes on the back nine on the way to a 32 for a 74 and a one-stroke victory over Scott.

Captain Greg Norman, by the way, should also be able to impart local knowledge—he won three of his five Australian Opens at Royal Melbourne.

Els’s 60 led to cries that Royal Melbourne, which plays at about 7,000 yards (just under then, just over now), was obsolete as a tournament site. As far back as 1991, the last time the Australian Open was played there, Jack Nicklaus called it a “good members’ course.”

Nicklaus later explained that he meant it as a compliment. Much like Augusta National, another Alister MacKenzie design, Royal Melbourne has wide fairways that enable the average player to get around, but subtleties—undulating greens, drop-offs around the putting surfaces, and placement of bunkers—that make it a challenge for the best players when the greens are especially firm and fast. In fact, Royal Melbourne embodies the principle of being a course for everyone even more than Augusta, since it doesn’t have water hazards.

The challenges become more evident when the wind is blowing, which it wasn’t when Els shot his low number on a course rated among the world’s 10 best. But in any case, the Presidents Cup is a match-play event, which makes scoring less of an issue. The scores might be low because the course is fairly short, but what matters is that the golf is interesting and at Royal Melbourne the rewards don’t come without some risk.

This is Royal Melbourne’s first event since 2005. There haven’t been a lot of changes since then. Four holes have been lengthened by small to moderate amounts, but that includes two par fives and a short par four that will still be reachable in less than regulation. There are only two par fives this time, with one hole that normally plays as a par five changed to a par four from a shorter tee box.

A fairly subtle change is a switch to Legend couch grass on the fairways, which is a bit stickier so that the drives won’t get quite as much roll. An area of fescue grass was installed around the greens in order to preserve the ability to bounce the ball onto the putting surfaces.

The greens use a strain of grass called Suttons mix, which came from England in the 1920s but now is found only at Royal Melbourne. The club switched to Penncross bent greens from 1989 through 1999, a period that included the 1998 Presidents Cup, but unhappy with those surfaces work began in the mid-1990s on developing a “new” Suttons mix. The greens were converted to the new Suttons in 1999, allowing for the firm, fast surfaces for which Royal Melbourne is famous. Those greens have recovered from drought-induced problems that plagued them late in the last decade.

There have been some changes to the configuration of the Composite Course since the last Presidents Cup. Royal Melbourne has West and East courses, the West designed in 1926 by MacKenzie and the East a few years later by his Australia associate Alex Russell. While the West is one of the world’s greatest courses (ranked 13th in the world by Golf Magazine), it has four holes across a road. When the World Cup came to Royal Melbourne in 1959, it was decided to create a composite course choosing 18 of the 21 holes that are in the main “paddock” to avoid any road crossings. (The East course has 11 holes across a different road.)

The Composite includes 12 holes from the West and six from the East. There have been three different orders of holes used, including a new one for the 2011 Presidents Cup. This is the first time a different hole has been used, with the par-three 16 East (it’s the 14th on this Composite routing) in play instead of the nearby par-three 4 East. This was done to greatly improve spectator viewing on the par-four 3 East (13th Composite). The “new” hole is shorter, but, again, with match play scoring isn’t as much of an issue.

The routing has also changed so that the old Composite 18th (18 East) will now be played as the 16th. The thinking was that this will be good for spectators, as nearly all matches will reach that strong hole with its green next to the clubhouse. The new Composite 18th (2 West and formerly the 10th on the Composite) is another strong par four—converted from a par five, played from a shorter tee box, with its green also near the clubhouse.

Another positive effect is that the par-five 15th is a good swing hole down the stretch, whereas the last Composite didn’t have a par five after the 10th and finished with seven straight par fours.

The last time the Presidents Cup came to Royal Melbourne, the U.S. was dusted 20.5 to 11.5 for its only loss in the eight times the Cup has been contested (with one tie). On that occasion, the U.S. players were unenthusiastic about having to travel halfway around the world, and the Internationals took advantage.

The U.S. seems more sanguine about the journey this time, with eight team members having competed in the Australian Open last week and another in Singapore. Three of the U.S. players were on the 1998 team at Royal Melbourne, Tiger Woods going 2-3, Jim Furyk 1-3, and Phil Mickelson 0-2-2. Woods, by the way, played two of his team matches with Fred Couples, this year’s captain, going 1-1. Woods and Furyk won their singles matches and Mickelson halved his, but it was too late as the Americans were hopelessly behind after the first three days.

Els is the only 2011 International player who was on the 1998 squad. He went 3-1-1, another positive experience at Royal Melbourne. Allenby was heartbroken to miss that team after playing in 1994 and 1996, failing to qualify or be a captain’s pick due to a down year in 1998 after suffering an injury at the end of the previous year. He didn’t make it on points this time, but captain Norman picked him this time.

Steve Williams has put his boss Adam Scott in a tough position. Photo copyright Icon SMI.

Taking a middle-ground approach to the Steve Williams mess:

Was what Williams said racially offensive?: Of course it was. In some quarters, you’ll hear that since Williams only used the word “black” it was merely factual. These people are not thinking clearly. When you add the word “black” in a comment about an “ass” (or “arse” or “a-hole” or “arse-hole,” whatever it was he said), the “black” is part of the insult. It’s not necessary to bring up the race of the person, nor to distinguish him from any white a-holes you might have known.

Is Williams a racist?: We don’t know, but I think probably not. It’s not so much because he worked for Tiger Woods for 13 years—that was a lucrative gig that even a racist wouldn’t have turned down—but that they formed a bond, were best men at each other’s weddings, etc. He made the comment at a rude and crude caddie affair. He probably got carried away, and just wanted to make his insult more dramatic.

If it came in the context of a rude and crude evening, can it be excused?: It can’t be excused or ignored. On the other hand, the circumstances are extenuating to some extent. It shouldn’t be viewed quite the same as if he had said it in a television or magazine interview.

Is the media blowing it out of proportion as part of an obsession with anything to do with Tiger Woods?: No, it’s not the media, it’s the public. Check out the size of the comments section of stories about Woods compared with other golf stories.

Is the racist angle overshadowing the aspect that Williams is, once again, acting (or at least speaking) like a jerk?: Yes and no. While the race aspect is getting the most play, you have to consider whether this would be such a huge story if so many people didn’t think Williams was a jerk to begin with.

Should Adam Scott fire Williams?: There are a few professions where making racist comments is a firing offense, but caddie is not one of them. In that sense, no, Scott doesn’t have any moral obligation to cut Williams loose. Of course, the player/caddie business relationship is one independent contractor hiring another, so it’s not the same as a company/employee relationship. Caddies are subject to being fired (if you can even call it that) for any reason, or even just on a whim. Scott obviously thinks Williams is a very good caddie, one who can help him perform better. On the other hand, having Williams on the bag could become such a distraction that it could become a negative. I think Scott has some feelings of guilt about getting Williams into the mess in the first place that kept him from pulling the trigger right away. First, about hiring Williams to work in the summer while Woods was hurt, which was apparently the reason Woods fired Williams. Also, Williams reportedly only attended the caddie dinner because Scott encouraged him to.

What should the PGA Tour do?: It’s been reported that the Tour can impose disciplinary action on caddies. While not a firing offense, public comments such as those Williams made could be grounds for a short suspension, maybe one week. Perhaps the Tour will suspend Williams for the Presidents Cup, where this mess could detract from the event (though it could be argued that any publicity is good publicity and that the possibility of Williams caddying in a match involving Woods would create interest).

If the Tour doesn’t take any action, does that reflect badly on golf as still a bastion of racism?: That’s taking it too far. Yes, there was a racially insensitive (at best) comment made in a public place, but considering all the circumstances it wasn’t a major incident—except that the personalities involved made it so. The tricky part is that the Tour doesn’t make public its disciplinary actions—though if there is a suspension, it will probably come to light one way or another.

Am I tired of writing about this?: Yes.