It's been a while since I've read a total misfire of a column. Even more surprising, it came from one of the best in the business in AP's Tim Dahlberg.
But after watching most of Tiger's golf over the weekend at Carnoustie, I disagree with Dahlberg's assessment that Woods is the player he describes. No, Tiger is not back to 2000 or 2005 standards nor will he ever be that unbelievably dominant again, but some of Dahlberg's statements are ludicrous given that Woods had a one-stroke lead with nine holes to go on a golf course where the slightest miscalculations by many of the world's best were magnified.
A few of the more excessive lines:
But what felt like old times for a brief moment ended up as just another collapse story, like the ones Woods' fans have seen more recently.
Collapse? Jean van de Velde collapsed. Tiger merely didn't get the job done after putting himself in position to win.
Woods flinched when it mattered most, the nerves of a 42-year-old on display for all to see. Just when he took the lead and everyone's imagination began to swirl about what might be, he kicked away his best chance of breaking a decade-long drought in major championships.
Let's assess where the nerves got to Woods. He stepped on the 11th tee facing a stiff wind, where both he and Molinari missed the fairway. Woods drew a difficult lie, the club face turned and he luckily hit a spectator. On the wedge recovery, Woods definitely got too cute instead of just wedging to 15-or-so-feet past the hole and making bogey at the worst.
A strategic mistake in hindsight when he walked away with double bogey, yes. Nerves getting to him? We'll never know.
Woods had the tournament in his hands after hitting a brilliant fairway bunker shot to make par on No. 10. He walked to the next tee with a one-shot lead.
Brilliant shot it was, but the tournament in his hand with a one-stroke lead, 20-25 m.p.h. winds and so many incredible players right behind him on a firey links? Wow.
Then his tee shot went right, and his second shot veered way left. Woods got a break by hitting someone in the gallery, but then left his pitch hanging precariously on the side of a pot bunker.
When he missed an 8-footer to make double bogey he was out of the lead. Another bogey on the next hole, and he was basically out of the tournament.
It used to be that Woods was steely and superhuman, and no one dared get in his way. Now he's more of a nostalgia act teasing fans with sparks of his past greatness.
Nostalgia act seems like a wildly short-sighted thing to say given how far Woods has come since January. Remember when folks used to debate his swing mechanics, his short game or whether he'd finish a round. Or if we'd ever see him play again? Now he's written off after taking a small lead with nine to go!
It wasn't like the course wasn't gettable.
Wasn't gettable? Did I miss the part where all of the leaders shot 65 and declared Carnoustie vulnerable?
Final round scores of the top 11: 69, 69, 70, 74, 74, 67, 71, 73, 71, 72, 76.
Also, the 67 by Eddie Pepperell was low round of the day and posted well before the leaders.
And finally...
Another major would have validated years of struggles. A tie for sixth means nothing.
Three strokes is the difference between validation and a meaningless week?
Golf at this level, played with the intensity, difficulty, consistency and precision that was on display at Carnoustie is so much more complicated than the sport Dahlberg describes.
Yes, Woods did not finish off this major the way he or many hoped. I'd argue that the quality of his play under major pressure and after everything else that's happened was not only his greatest career performance without registering a win, but suggests incredible things are to come if he can remain healthy.
A nostalgia act, Tiger Woods most certainly is not.
