As usual, Match Play will be utterly unpredictable
The PGA Tour Needs More Match Play
Yes, Tiger Woods has won the Accenture Match Play Championship. Which proves the event's champion isn't always a surprise.
Then again, other winners include Kevin Sutherland, Steve Stricker and Jeff Maggert. So if you're trying to pick your way through the brackets, good luck. You'll need it, write Jason Sobel and Bob Harig in this Match Play edition of Alternate Shot.
| The field of 64 |
|---|
| What does this year's Accenture Match Play Championship bracket look like? Check it out right here. Bracket |
Sobel: You know, predicting the winner at a stroke-play event is difficult enough, but doing so at the Match Play is just brutal. Last year's final four was comprised of the 23rd-, 41st-, 52nd- and 59th-ranked players, so as much as we'd all like to see semifinal matches featuring Tiger Woods, Jim Furyk, Adam Scott and Phil Mickelson, we have just as good a chance of getting Shingo Katayama, Jeev Milkha Singh, Yang Yong-Eun and Bradley Dredge. Talk about your bracket busters.
Harig: No doubt, this is nothing like the NCAA Tournament bracket, where a 16th seed has never defeated a No. 1 seed. It happens all the time in golf. And it is especially true in 18-hole matches, when a player just does not have time to recover. While there is a big difference in the world ranking between Tiger Woods and the rest of the field, there really is not a big difference between anybody else, especially on any given day.
Harig: All of those names playing in the first round sort of furthers my point about anything can happen in match play. Really, nothing would be a surprise. It's a shame that so many good players will be sent packing after one day. And as for your upset specials? I'm not sure any of them would really be an upset. Take Els for example. How do you explain all of his success in the World Match Play Championship at Wentworth and his lack of success in this event? He's been knocked out the first day each of the last two times he's played.
Sobel: Maybe if Els had a home just off the course at the Gallery -- like he does at Wentworth -- he'd fare better this time around. I really think that in more than any other event all season, desire plays such a major factor into who goes far at this event. Now, I'm certainly not suggesting anyone would tank a match, but the prospect of going home on Wednesday afternoon and getting an extra four days of rest isn't the worst consolation prize for some guys who are already feeling the grind of the season's first two months. Others see the format as a true test of competition and a great opportunity to raise their standing on the World Ranking.
Harig: You might have something there with the desire angle, as Els never did like La Costa -- which is why he skipped it a few times. And if you do make it to the weekend, you're facing 36 holes on Sunday, which for some might appear a bit daunting. But still, none of these guys likes to lose and getting knocked out on Wednesday or Thursday has to be a blow to the ego. If they really wanted to make it interesting, they'd pay nothing to the first- and second-round losers, or maybe just a nominal amount.
Sobel: Yup, and couple that with the facts that anything can happen in match play and this new venue is an unknown variable and, well, let's just say none of us should be running off to Vegas to make our official picks. Other than Woods' back-to-back victories in 2003 and '04, the champions list at this tourney includes a veritable mishmash of second-, third- and fourth-tier players, with Geoff Ogilvy, David Toms, Kevin Sutherland, Steve Stricker, Darren Clarke and Jeff Maggert each winning once since its inception in 1999. You're right about the NCAA hoops comparison; other than the fact that both tournaments include 64 players/teams aligned in brackets, they're nothing alike.
Harig: As much as I like the symmetry to the basketball tournament, I'd still prefer there be a stroke-play portion to this tournament, sort of like the U.S. Amateur. I realize that no tournament is as compelling on a Wednesday or Thursday as this one, but it would likely be better for all concerned if they maybe expanded the field to 128 and played stroke play for two or three rounds and then took either the top 16 or 32 for match play. Those stroke play rounds would still be compelling, but you'd still have a chance to recover from a bad day.
Sobel: Tell you the truth, I'm surprised the PGA Tour hasn't implemented your theory. To further the gambling comparisons, this current structure is like throwing all the chips on a single number at the roulette table for both the tournament and its TV partners. Of course, the event would generate huge interest if, say, Woods and Mickelson ever faced each other for 36 holes on Sunday (an impossibility this year, since they're on the same side of the draw), but the nature of the format always ensures some surprises along the way, which leads to unenthusiastic final-round coverage, even when the finalists aren't necessarily unknown sleepers. I just can't imagine too many folks were glued to the screen for last year's championship, even though both Ogilvy and Davis Love III are terrific players. Your suggestion would increase the likelihood of an elite-player matchup in the final.
Harig: Maybe it's wrong to view it that way and try to "stack'' it so the best players make it to the weekend, but even if all of these players were in a stroke-play event, there is no guarantee they are there on Sunday. A system that would funnel them into a bracket would help make that happen and it would still make the early rounds very compelling. And then you simply seed them based on their finish in stroke play, not by the World Ranking.
Sobel: Good point. For all the events out there that are "broken" and could use some fixing, this one's probably near the bottom of the list. Filling out brackets gives even the most casual golf fan something to care about and root for, and players know they can't have one off day and still remain in contention during the weekend. Simply put, it's a fun watch and people can relate to the win-and-move-on, lose-and-go-home mentality of the tournament.
Harig: At the risk of getting off topic, is there anything we can do about the other WGC events? We can agree that this is by far the best one. It is compelling with the lose-and-go-home nature. It's really the first true big golf event of the year. But the other ones are money-grabs and not nearly as interesting.
Sobel: I know how much you dislike those events. Not sure I agree. I mean, they are what they are -- somewhat prestigious tournaments with great fields that include all of the best players. The one bone I have to pick with them is that if they're truly supposed to be World Golf events, why are they scheduled to be played in Tucson, Miami and Akron every year? That's a pretty insular world that Tim Finchem is living in. What's wrong with one U.S.-based WGC tourney each year, with another in Europe and a third in Asia or Australia? It would be a great way to show the world's elite players to the rest of the world, which was the founding principle of this whole thing in the first place.
Harig: Good points all, but you know the reasons: the tour is afraid that the top American players won't visit those places around the world. And that would look bad. Remember when the Match Play went to Australia at the beginning of the year? Tiger didn't show. Neither did about 30 of those eligible. It was embarrassing. But it's true, they should not be anchored. That makes them like any other tournament. There is no easy answer, other than to perhaps play one of them the week after the British Open somewhere in Europe.
Sobel: It's just a shame, I guess, that the best players from Australia see fit to make it to the biggest tournaments in the U.S. -- of which, there are plenty -- and yet, the tour feels like it couldn't schedule one WGC event in a place like Australia for fear that the best American players wouldn't make the trip. And of course, money is always a determining factor in these things; the almighty sponsorship dollar packs more of a punch here in the States than it would at other venues around the world.
Harig: No question, it's tough. If they go to Australia -- which is 14 hours ahead of the East Coast of the U.S. -- they can't really show it on live TV. American corporations are less likely to become involved with sponsorships. And U.S. tour players have it so good here they don't need to travel halfway around the world for a tournament. Maybe if they had an off week built into the schedule … now we're really talking crazy.
Sobel: Speaking of crazy, I say Tiger doesn't win this week, thereby leaving pundits like us to refer to his current run as a PGA Tour-only, stroke-play streak, which will include more asterisks than anything Mark McGwire and Sammy Sosa accomplished in the late '90s. Before anyone reminds me how foolish I've looked picking against him in the past, remember, this is a guy who's lost to Chad Campbell and Nick O'Hern at this event the last two years. And I'm guessing Woods had never seen The Gallery before this week, which can't be very beneficial to his cause.
Harig: This is scary, because we're amazingly on the same page. I don't think Tiger will win, either. And that's no knock on him. It's just the nature of the competition. Anything can happen. But I do find it funny that people are picking on him for skipping the Nissan, as if the guy doesn't always get it done against the best competition. If he does go on to win the Match Play, it ought to count for more than one win, that's how tough it is.
Sobel: We talk about Tiger's streak -- and I know he doesn't like that term since he's lost on other tours during that time, but it's still a PGA Tour mark -- and just in case we needed even further proof that of how difficult it is, we saw Phil Mickelson's bid for two in a row come up short at Riviera. Kind of puts Woods' run into context, huh?
Harig: Or you can look at it this way: Tiger has won seven in a row; Phil has won seven tournaments since the start of the 2005 season. Sunday would have been eight, and more proof that it's not that easy.
Sobel: Winning tournaments never is, man. Gonna get even tougher this week -- as usual at the Match Play.
