Opinion & Analysis
The 23 golfers who can win the Masters
As the world’s most popular golf tournament plays this week, I wanted to give a rundown of the Masters from a statistical perspective.
First, I want to discuss what I call the “Critical Holes” in a golf tournament. These are holes that based on tournament history are where the top finishers have gained the most strokes versus the field. For Augusta, they are Nos. 7, 12, 15, 17 and 18. So as you are tracking the tournament, I would key in on these particular holes as they have the largest influence on a golfer’s success at Augusta.
The neat thing about the Masters is it is a limited field, and we can immediately eliminate about one fifth of the field as not having a realistic chance of winning the tournament. I would put these as most of the past champions and the amateurs.
- Ben Crenshaw
- Bernhard Langer
- Craig Stadler
- Fred Couples
- Ian Woosnam
- Jose Maria Olazabal
- Larry Mize
- Mark O’Meara
- Mike Weir
- Sandy Lyle
- Tom Watson
- Alan Dunbar
- Michael Weaver
- Steven Fox
- T. J. Vogel
- Tianlang Guan
- Nathan Smith
I would also eliminate the following:
- Players who are first-time invitees
- Players whose first Tour win came this year
Since 1935, only one winner has won The Masters in his first appearance; Fuzzy Zoeller in 1979. So I would shy away from picking these players:
- Branden Grace
- David Lynn
- George Coetzee
- Jamie Donaldson
- John Huh
- John Peterson
- Nicolas Colsaerts
- Russell Henley
- Scott Piercy
- Ted Potter Jr.
- Thaworn Wiratchant
- Thorbjørn Olesen
- Kevin Streelman
- John Merrick
No. 12 at Augusta National, a par 3 that is one of Hunt’s “Critical Holes” for a Masters Champion.
I would also eliminate players who missed the cut at the Valero Open this past week:
- David Toms
- Gonzalo Fdez-Castano
I will also filter out the European Tour players that I do not have substantial data on:
- Thomas Bjorn
- Paul Lawrie
- Richard Sterne
- Francesco Molinari
Now, we start to get to the nitty-gritty of Augusta. Over the past 10 years, Augusta has heavily favored long hitters who hit the ball well from what I call “The Danger Zone.”
The Danger Zone is approach shots from 175- to 225 yards. This is the biggest key because without quality Danger Zone play at the Masters, the golfer will not be successful.
While Augusta National is known for its greens, the make percentage on putts is fairly high from inside 15 feet; likely due to the excellent putting surfaces. The real difficulty on the greens at Augusta is from longer than 20 feet away.
Between the undulations and the super-fast green speed, it becomes a task to not 3-putt on long putts at Augusta. The big reason why long hitters do so well at Augusta now is that the course plays like a par 68 for them, and that allows them to get away with putting worse. So, if a player is not long, they had been bring their putting and Danger Zone play with them. If a player is long, they can get away with lesser putting.
First, I will eliminate the players that I think are too short to play well at Augusta National:
- Tim Clark
- Brian Gay
- Jim Furyk
- Matteo Manassero
- Ben Curtis
- Kevin Na
- Hiroyuki Fujita
- Zach Johnson
I will also take out the players that have struggled from the Danger Zone this year.
- Martin Kaymer
- Ryan Moore
- Ian Poulter
- Steve Stricker
- Hunter Mahan
- Jason Dufner
- Ryo Ishikawa
- Fredrik Jacobson
- Trevor Immelman
- Jason Day
Also, Augusta National does not take too kindly to low ball hitters.
Graeme McDowell’s only major championship win came at the 2010 U.S. Open at Pebble Beach, where his low ball flight helped him control the ball in the wind.
- John Senden
- Carl Pettersson
- Graeme McDowell
- Stewart Cink
- D.A. Points
These players simply have not done much this season to warrant a pick:
- Robert Garrigus
- Lucas Glover
- Retief Goosen
- Peter Hanson
- Padraig Harrington
- Vijay Singh
- Michael Thompson
- Bo Van Pelt
- Ernie Els
- Webb Simpson
That brings us down to 23 players:
- Keegan Bradley
- Angel Cabrera
- K.J. Choi
- Luke Donald
- Rickie Fowler
- Sergio Garcia
- Bill Haas
- Dustin Johnson
- Matt Kuchar
- Martin Laird
- Marc Leishman
- Rory McIlroy
- Phil Mickelson
- Louis Oosthuizen
- Justin Rose
- Charl Schwartzel
- Adam Scott
- Brandt Snedeker
- Henrik Stenson
- Nick Watney
- Bubba Watson
- Lee Westwood
- Tiger Woods
I don’t pick players that are better than 10/1 odds, so that means Tiger (7/2) and Rory McIlroy (8/1) are out. But, let’s take a look at Tiger’s key metrics so far this year:
- Driving Effectiveness: 108th
- Birdie Zone (75-125 yards): 41st
- Safe Zone (125-175 yards): 46th
- Danger Zone (175-225 yards): 43rd
- Short Game (1-20 yards): 20th
- Strokes Gained Putting: 1st
While Tiger has been extremely successful this year, his effectiveness of the tee should be a concern. Furthermore, he’s been much more conservative off the tee by leaving his driver in the bag more often than he was last year.
The reason for Tiger’s success this year is due to his putting. Not only is he making a lot of putts, but he’s No. 1 in putts made from 15- to 25 feet. Typically, putts made from more than 15 feet on Tour is a ‘volatile’ metric. Meaning, a player can rank well in putts made from longer than 15 feet one month and then rankly poorly the next month.
With Tiger’s conservative nature off the tee, he’s giving up a lot of yards to the elite players on Tour. But, between his strong iron play and incredible long putting, he is able to find the green and make putts.
Tiger Woods puts the Green Jacket on 2003 Masters winner Mike Weir.
His game reminds me a bit of Mike Weir’s game in 2003 when Weir was a mediocre driver of the ball, but a top-5 player from 125-200 yards and a top-5 putter in the world. However, Weir needed soft conditions to help him win a Green Jacket. While Tiger hits the ball much longer than Weir did in 2003, I just tend to think that he’s leaving too much to risk if he goes conservative off the tee. I can understand making Tiger a favorite, but I think he’s more realistically a 9/1 odds or so to win.
And with that, here are my top-10 picks (Rory and Tiger excluded):
Phil Mickelson (10/1)
Justin Rose (20/1)
Dustin Johnson (25/1)
Lee Westwood (25/1)
Louis Oosthuizen (25/1)
Keegan Bradley (28/1)
Rickie Fowler (45/1)
Henrik Stenson (50/1)
Nick Watney (50/1)
Bill Haas (75/1)
Now it’s time to sit back and enjoy the show.
As the editor-in-chief of this website and an observer of the GolfWRX forums and other online golf equipment discourse for over a decade, I’m pretty well attuned to the grunts and grumbles of a significant portion of the golf equipment purchasing spectrum. And before you accuse me of lording above all in some digital ivory tower, I’d like to offer that I worked at golf courses (public and private) for years prior to picking up my pen, so I’m well-versed in the non-degenerate golf equipment consumers out there. I touched (green)grass (retail)!
Complaints about the ills of and related to the OEMs usually follow some version of: Product cycles are too short for real innovation, tour equipment isn’t the same as retail (which is largely not true, by the way), too much is invested in marketing and not enough in R&D, top staffer X hasn’t even put the new driver in play, so it’s obviously not superior to the previous generation, prices are too high, and on and on.
Without digging into the merits of any of these claims, which I believe are mostly red herrings, I’d like to bring into view of our rangefinder what I believe to be the two primary difficulties golf equipment companies face.
One: As Terry Koehler, back when he was the CEO of Ben Hogan, told me at the time of the Ft Worth irons launch, if you can’t regularly hit the golf ball in a coin-sized area in the middle of the face, there’s not a ton that iron technology can do for you. Now, this is less true now with respect to irons than when he said it, and is less and less true by degrees as the clubs get larger (utilities, fairways, hybrids, drivers), but there remains a great deal of golf equipment truth in that statement. Think about it — which is to say, in TL;DR fashion, get lessons from a qualified instructor who will teach you about the fundamentals of repeatable impact and how the golf swing works, not just offer band-aid fixes. If you can’t repeatably deliver the golf club to the golf ball in something resembling the manner it was designed for, how can you expect to be getting the most out of the club — put another way, the maximum value from your investment?
Similarly, game improvement equipment can only improve your game if you game it. In other words, get fit for the clubs you ought to be playing rather than filling the bag with the ones you wish you could hit or used to be able to hit. Of course, don’t do this if you don’t care about performance and just want to hit a forged blade while playing off an 18 handicap. That’s absolutely fine. There were plenty of members in clubs back in the day playing Hogan Apex or Mizuno MP-32 irons who had no business doing so from a ballstriking standpoint, but they enjoyed their look, feel, and complementary qualities to their Gatsby hats and cashmere sweaters. Do what brings you a measure of joy in this maddening game.
Now, the second issue. This is not a plea for non-conforming equipment; rather, it is a statement of fact. USGA/R&A limits on every facet of golf equipment are detrimental to golf equipment manufacturers. Sure, you know this, but do you think about it as it applies to almost every element of equipment? A 500cc driver would be inherently more forgiving than a 460cc, as one with a COR measurement in excess of 0.83. 50-inch shafts. Box grooves. And on and on.
Would fewer regulations be objectively bad for the game? Would this erode its soul? Fortunately, that’s beside the point of this exercise, which is merely to point out the facts. The fact, in this case, is that equipment restrictions and regulations are the slaughterbench of an abundance of innovation in the golf equipment space. Is this for the best? Well, now I’ve asked the question twice and might as well give a partial response, I guess my answer to that would be, “It depends on what type of golf you’re playing and who you’re playing it with.”
For my part, I don’t mind embarrassing myself with vintage blades and persimmons chasing after the quasi-spiritual elevation of a well-struck shot, but that’s just me. Plenty of folks don’t give a damn if their grooves are conforming. Plenty of folks think the folks in Liberty Corner ought to add a prison to the museum for such offences. And those are just a few of the considerations for the amateur game — which doesn’t get inside the gallery ropes of the pro game…
Different strokes in the game of golf, in my humble opinion.
Anyway, I believe equipment company engineers are genuinely trying to build better equipment year over year. The marketing departments are trying to find ways to make this equipment appeal to the broadest segment of the golf market possible. All of this against (1) the backdrop of — at least for now — firm product cycles. And golfers who, with their ~15 average handicap (men), for the most part, are not striping the golf ball like Tiger in his prime and seem to have less and less time year over year to practice and improve. (2) Regulations that massively restrict what they’re able to do…
That’s the landscape as I see it and the real headwinds for golf equipment companies. No doubt, there’s more I haven’t considered, but I think the previous is a better — and better faith — point of departure when formulating any serious commentary on the golf equipment world than some of the more cynical and conspiratorial takes I hear.
Agree? Disagree? Think I’m worthy of an Adam Hadwin-esque security guard tackle? Let me know in the comments.
@golfoncbs The infamous Adam Hadwin tackle ? #golf #fyp #canada #pgatour #adamhadwin ? Ghibli-style nostalgic waltz – MaSssuguMusic
Episode #16 brings us Cliff McKinney. Cliff is the founder of Old Charlie Golf Club, a new club, and concept, to be built in the Florida panhandle. The model is quite interesting and aims to make great, private golf more affordable. We hope you enjoy the show!
Last week, I came across a reel from BBC Sport on Instagram featuring Scottie Scheffler speaking to the media ahead of The Open at Royal Portrush. In it, he shared that he often wonders what the point is of wanting to win tournaments so badly — especially when he knows, deep down, that it doesn’t lead to a truly fulfilling life.
View this post on Instagram
“Is it great to be able to win tournaments and to accomplish the things I have in the game of golf? Yeah, it brings tears to my eyes just to think about it because I’ve literally worked my entire life to be good at this sport,” Scheffler said. “To have that kind of sense of accomplishment, I think, is a pretty cool feeling. To get to live out your dreams is very special, but at the end of the day, I’m not out here to inspire the next generation of golfers. I’m not out here to inspire someone to be the best player in the world, because what’s the point?”
Ironically — or perhaps perfectly — he went on to win the claret jug.
That question — what’s the point of winning? — cuts straight to the heart of the human journey.
As someone who’s spent over two decades in the trenches of professional golf, and in deep study of the mental, emotional, and spiritual dimensions of the game, I see Scottie’s inner conflict as a sign of soul evolution in motion.
I came to golf late. I wasn’t a junior standout or college All-American. At 27, I left a steady corporate job to see if I could be on the PGA Tour starting as a 14-handicap, average-length hitter. Over the years, my journey has been defined less by trophies and more by the relentless effort to navigate the deeply inequitable and gated system of professional golf — an effort that ultimately turned inward and helped me evolve as both a golfer and a person.
One perspective that helped me make sense of this inner dissonance around competition and our culture’s tendency to overvalue winning is the idea of soul evolution.
The University of Virginia’s Division of Perceptual Studies has done extensive research on reincarnation, and Netflix’s Surviving Death (Episode 6) explores the topic, too. Whether you take it literally or metaphorically, the idea that we’re on a long arc of growth — from beginner to sage elder — offers a profound perspective.
If you accept the premise literally, then terms like “young soul” and “old soul” start to hold meaning. However, even if we set the word “soul” aside, it’s easy to see that different levels of life experience produce different worldviews.
Newer souls — or people in earlier stages of their development — may be curious and kind but still lack discernment or depth. There is a naivety, and they don’t yet question as deeply, tending to see things in black and white, partly because certainty feels safer than confronting the unknown.
As we gain more experience, we begin to experiment. We test limits. We chase extreme external goals — sometimes at the expense of health, relationships, or inner peace — still operating from hunger, ambition, and the fragility of the ego.
It’s a necessary stage, but often a turbulent and unfulfilling one.
David Duval fell off the map after reaching World No. 1. Bubba Watson had his own “Is this it?” moment with his caddie, Ted Scott, after winning the Masters.
In Aaron Rodgers: Enigma, reflecting on his 2011 Super Bowl win, Rodgers said:
“Now I’ve accomplished the only thing that I really, really wanted to do in my life. Now what? I was like, ‘Did I aim at the wrong thing? Did I spend too much time thinking about stuff that ultimately doesn’t give you true happiness?’”
Jim Carrey once said, “I think everybody should get rich and famous and do everything they ever dreamed of so they can see that it’s not the answer.”
Eventually, though, something shifts.
We begin to see in shades of gray. Winning, dominating, accumulating—these pursuits lose their shine. The rewards feel more fleeting. Living in a constant state of fight-or-flight makes us feel alive, yes, but not happy and joyful.
Compassion begins to replace ambition. Love, presence, and gratitude become more fulfilling than status, profits, or trophies. We crave balance over burnout. Collaboration over competition. Meaning over metrics.
Interestingly, if we zoom out, we can apply this same model to nations and cultures. Countries, like people, have a collective “soul stage” made up of the individuals within them.
Take the United States, for example. I’d place it as a mid-level soul: highly competitive and deeply driven, but still learning emotional maturity. Still uncomfortable with nuance. Still believing that more is always better. Despite its global wins, the U.S. currently ranks just 23rd in happiness (as of 2025). You might liken it to a gifted teenager—bold, eager, and ambitious, but angsty and still figuring out how to live well and in balance. As much as a parent wants to protect their child, sometimes the child has to make their own mistakes to truly grow.
So when Scottie Scheffler wonders what the point of winning is, I don’t see someone losing strength.
I see someone evolving.
He’s beginning to look beyond the leaderboard. Beyond metrics of success that carry a lower vibration. And yet, in a poetic twist, Scheffler did go on to win The Open. But that only reinforces the point: even at the pinnacle, the question remains. And if more of us in the golf and sports world — and in U.S. culture at large — started asking similar questions, we might discover that the more meaningful trophy isn’t about accumulating or beating others at all costs.
It’s about awakening and evolving to something more than winning could ever promise.
‘Why would anybody want to change that swing?’ – Brandel Chamblee says PGA Tour star was wrong to change his swing
‘The stupidest freaking thing I’ve ever heard’ – Billy Horschel slams Open idea suggested by Padraig Harrington
WITB Time Machine: Brandt Snedeker’s winning WITB, 2018 Wyndham Championship
Golfer proudly posts photo of ball mark on iron, receives immediate roasting
WITB Time Machine: Matthew Wolff’s winning WITB, 2019 3M Open
Oakmont Country Club bans Wyndham Clark over locker incident; Reveals specific conditions to earn reinstatement
Adam Scott puts Callaway blades in the bag at Wyndham Championship
Report: LIV star fires caddie and coach in shock shake up
Rickie Fowler makes equipment change to ‘something that’s a little easier on the body’
The championship formula: How 3 key stats separate winners from the field
Peter Malnati WITB 2025 (August)
Peter Malnati what’s in the bag accurate as of the Wyndham Championship. More photos from the event here. Driver: Titleist...
Cameron Young’s winning WITB: 2025 Wyndham Championship
Driver: Titleist GT2 (9 degrees, A1 SureFit setting) Buy here. Shaft: Mitsubishi Tensei 1K Pro Orange 70 TX 3-wood: Titleist...
Camilo Villegas WITB 2025 (July)
Camilo Villegas WITB accurate as of the Wyndham Championship. Villegas was undecided on a 3-wood when we shot his bag. ...
WITB Time Machine: Brandt Snedeker’s winning WITB, 2018 Wyndham Championship
Brandt Snedeker fired a final-round 65 at the 2018 Wyndham Championship to outlast Webb Simpson and C.T. Pan. His 5-under...
gus Terranova
Apr 15, 2013 at 6:26 pm
Fowler will never win a major.
harry
Apr 15, 2013 at 8:15 am
I’m impressed, 8 of the top 10 in your 23. Well played, and another 4 in the next 13. Please do this more often!
Rimrock
Apr 11, 2013 at 9:35 am
Great post. However, too many times I have seen Mickelson fade in the last round especially his putting. Also, he is older and physically I don’t know if he is up to 72 holes especially if it gets hot. Justin Rose would be my pick.
Glad to see you didn’t put Tiger in there.
As we all know, anyone can breakout and play over their heads but with the pressure of “The Masters”, the weather and the media (not to exclude playing golf itself) for me it is anyones guess and all the stats go into a cocked hat.
Chad
Apr 10, 2013 at 11:41 pm
Very good post. But how did Luke Donald escape your “too short to play well at Augusta” list?
Richie Hunt
Apr 11, 2013 at 8:34 am
The too short list is more about clubhead speed than actual distance. Luke is not long off the tee due to having a downward attack angle with the driver. But, he generates 110-111 mph of clubhead speed. Not super fast, but fast enough where he can contend.
He is probably the most similar player to 2003 Mike Weir. Last year he struggled with his switch to new irons. But, if he can regain his iron play form from 2011, he has a shot with his putting and how forgiving the fairways and rough are at ANGC.
Brad
Apr 10, 2013 at 8:37 pm
John Merrick has played twice in The Masters. He missed the cut in 2010, but he had a t-6 (-8)in 2009.
Richie Hunt
Apr 11, 2013 at 8:36 am
Merrick is in that part of the list (along with Streelman) because I grouped players who fit one of the following criteria:
1. First time invitee
or
2. Won their first Tour even this year.
Both Merrick and Streelman are #2. I understand…it wasn’t really worded clearly.
Josh
Apr 10, 2013 at 7:41 am
Paddy Harrington has 2 top 10s in his last 2 starts worldwide. How can you claim he hasn’t done enough this year to qualify when Cabrera doesnt have a top 15 all yr
Richie Hunt
Apr 10, 2013 at 9:54 am
I didn’t put Cabrera in my top-10 either. But with Harrington his metrics haven’t been very strong in some key areas. I will say that I like where his game is headed from a statistical standpoint. Much better than it was a couple of years ago.
Brad
Apr 10, 2013 at 12:00 am
Great column Rich. Well done. You don’t think Hanson is playing well enough? He ticks a lot of key boxes this week (Driving Distance, scoring average, scrambling, par 5 performance).
You also selected Shrek. Is this based on his danger zone play? The rest of his stats or just okay, he’s not that long, and his form is in question no?
Lastly, no room for Adam Scott and Charl in your top 10? Great stats and distance numbers.
Richie Hunt
Apr 10, 2013 at 9:52 am
Stenson is in my top-10. He’s played fantastic this year from a ballstriking perspective and hits it a mile. Westwood’s main strength is from what I call the Safe Zone (shots from 125-175 yards). He’s usually pretty good from the Danger Zone as well and a very good driver.
Last year he struggled from the Danger Zone for a while and then eventually improved from there. But, it cost him big events, particularly the US Open.
This year he seems to be on track except for the putter.
I like Schwartzel’s game from a statistical perspective a lot. But this year he just hasn’t gotten it going. And he ranked 66th out of 120 players from the Valero Open in my Driving Effectiveness ranking. I just think he’s not playing all that great for him at this moment.
I really considered both Schwartzel and Scott. But with Scott he is another guy that hasn’t logged in a lot of rounds this year so there’s insufficient data. That’s not always a problem if the rest of the group hasn’t shown me much.
But, Rickie Fowler’s metrics are quite strong this year. Dustin Johnson has struggled from the Danger Zone, but I think that was the entire winning the 1st tournament of the year and dating Paulina Gretzky. I think he’s getting back close to form and the course fits him pretty well. In particular, he’s putting quite well this year which is a scary thought with his game.
Alec Hilliard
Apr 9, 2013 at 10:45 pm
Id like sneds in the top 10, but thats just me, and im assuming that tiger and rory are in that top 10. (12) with them included
Richie Hunt
Apr 11, 2013 at 8:40 am
I liked Snedeker’s chances a few week ago, obviously. He’s a great putter and hits the ball high, which plays into Augusta. The problem for him is that he’s always been suspect from the Danger Zone and off the tee and that’s why I think he hasn’t won a major yet despite having the opportunity. We saw this at the Ryder Cup, particularly in the Furyk/Snedeker vs. Rory/McDowell 1st match. They tied it up and Sneds was teeing off #18 and put it into the woods. Somehow, Furyk got the blame for the loss.
Anyway, he hasn’t played well since the rib injury and the courses he has played well at have fit his style (sans Torrey Pines, which he always plays well at for whatever reason).
And yes, Tiger and Rory are included for a ‘top-12’, but the return on betting on them is too small for my tastes.
Troy Vayanos
Apr 9, 2013 at 5:28 pm
Great post Rich,
Yes I had my top 5 in that list as well. Tiger is the number one choice for me but I see dangers in Phil Mickelson, Matt Kuchar, Justin Rose and Louis Oosthuizen. I expect all of them to be thereabouts come Sunday.
I have this feeling Matt Kuchar is going to be in the top 3 again this year!
Socorr4
Apr 9, 2013 at 5:03 pm
Nerves aree fundamental for success at majors unless you’re lucky enough to slide in the back door. The big hitters have an advantage of putting for eagles on on par 5’s, but it’s rare to get the ball close enough for a realistic chance to pick up a stroke on the field on these four holes. The par 3’s are equal for all, so what the winner must do is hit consistently to within 20 feet on the par 4’s. Almost everyone will be using 7 irons or less to the majority of their second shots on these holes. Long hitters have an advantage because they’ll use shorter clubs to aim for the pin, but they sometimes lack the skills required to save par on any missed greens.
As is almost always the case, it all comes down to putting, and whoever has the best reads throughout four days should win. You cast Tiger and Rory aside for a frivolous reason and at some risk. The next best putter on your list of 23 is Snedeker, and it’s not clear why you left him off the short list. Of those on the short list, I like Bradley unless the demons get to him, and especially DJ if he can keep his putting game under control.
Steven
Apr 9, 2013 at 5:13 pm
Snedeker has missed his last two cuts. He hasn’t been the same since his injury.
Brad P.
Apr 9, 2013 at 3:50 pm
Good analysis. Who is actually going to win though? Kuchar. And he’s not in your “Top 10”
Richie Hunt
Apr 9, 2013 at 4:31 pm
Kuchar was in my top-10 last year and came in 2nd. This year it’s hard to tell because he hasn’t logged many rounds and when he has, he’s been rather unspectacular. That doesn’t mean he can’t win because as players like Kuchar become more success, they log in less rounds. However, I’d rather pick players who have more data from this year and have performed well at key spots.
Gary Lewis
Apr 9, 2013 at 1:01 pm
I like your picks. I am hoping someone like Westwood will break through and win a major but always want Phil to win another one. If Tiger can drive the ball well enough he should have a good chance, but that has been a big problem for him of late. Should be very interesting, as it always is.
Steve
Apr 9, 2013 at 12:50 pm
Hmm, certainly a lot of thought put into this. Having said that, the majors are a completely different animal from regular tour events and personally I feel need to be analyzed differently.
Removing Zach Johnson from the mix due to his short length is a bit silly really, given that he’s a past champion, but that’s already been mentioned.
Also, while I agree that players competing in the Masters for the first time are at a disadvantage, I wouldn’t throw David Lynn under the bus quite so quickly as you did. Second place finish to Rory at last years PGA with flashes of form recently whisper to me that he could be up there. While of course I doubt he can win it, he is long odds and, in my eyes, a perfect E/W.
In summary, I like your top ten, however I would replace DJ with Zach Johnson. Stenson is another one who I’d be a bit wobbly about, but he does seem to like Augusta National.
Richie Hunt
Apr 9, 2013 at 1:01 pm
First, Zach has not played well this year. But ANGC simply no longer allows short but accurate hitters to truly contend unless something happens with the weather. Look at the top-10 finishers over the past 3 years. Essentially, the shortest hitters in the bunch have been either KJ Choi, Poulter or Matt Kuchar who are about average to slightly below average in length. They were also great Danger Zone players in those years. And none of them won.
Dustin Johnson concerns me because he has struggled from the Danger Zone this year. But he has been a top-10 player from that Distance throughout his entire career. I chalk it up to the ‘Paulina Gretzky flu’, but I think he’ll regain his old form (and he’s been playing better recently).
Rob
Apr 9, 2013 at 12:44 pm
Nice catch Ed! I agree with your comments about Tiger and his driving. That will be his downfall in the Masters and the other majors this year. I see another 0-4 record in 2013.
Pingback: Happy Masters Week – Day #2 – Apps and Articles | The Rogers
john
Apr 9, 2013 at 12:20 pm
You could have made it even easier and eliminated all but the one who is going to win it…Tiger, Tiger Woods yall!
Ed
Apr 9, 2013 at 12:19 pm
Craig Stadler did not win in his first appearance, but his 6th. Fuzzy Zoeller is the only modern player to win in his first appearance.
Richie Hunt
Apr 9, 2013 at 12:55 pm
Thanks for pointing that out as I got the two mixed up on a bad error on my part. With that said, it still proves the point that first time invitees do not fare well in winning the Green Jacket as Zoeller won back in ’79.
chris
Apr 9, 2013 at 12:06 pm
Nice job Rich. I would say you are spot on with the winner being…..Phil of course 🙂
Jason
Apr 9, 2013 at 12:02 pm
I don’t like how he cut out players that are “too short” to win the masters including Zach Johnson. Zach proved you don’t have to be long to win. He didn’t go for a single par 5 in two the year he won.
Richie Hunt
Apr 9, 2013 at 12:53 pm
Zach won when there was record cold temperatures at Augusta. That made the par-5’s less reachable for the long hitters and they had to use more wedges into those greens so the advantage shifted back towards Zach. The weather is supposed to be nice this week in Augusta outside of some late showers on Friday, so this does not bode well for short hitters.
Billy
Apr 9, 2013 at 11:43 am
Sorry missed Rickie in your top ten!
Billy
Apr 9, 2013 at 11:43 am
Interesting analysis. I like your top-ten, but I would opt for Rickie over Westwood. While Rickie may have a few more loose shots in his bag, I’ll pick Rickie’s putting over Westwood’s everyday. If Westwood can putt this week he’ll have a good chance, but he’s liable to have terrible putting.
Nik
Apr 10, 2013 at 1:51 pm
Rickie’s not that good of a putter. He putted well at Bay Hill but it kind of an anomaly.