|
|
 |
 |   |
|
EVENTS Fantasy Central Inside Game Video Plus Statitudes Your Turn Message Boards Email Newsletters Golf Guide Cities 
CNNSI.com GROUP
COMMERCE
|  |
Woods' approach is evolving
Tiger Woods is in a slump. If a major leaguer with a lifetime .330 average goes hitless for six games, he is in a slump. If an NBA scoring leader shoots 25 percent from the field for six games, he's in a slump. If Tiger Woods -- who, after his victory at Canada last year, had captured 16 of the previous 30 tournaments he'd entered -- doesn't win in eight straight events, regardless of how high he finishes, he's in a slump. Woods seems to feel the word slump has demeaning connotations, but it's just a catchphrase to describe substandard performance over a sustained period. I'm always surprised at how defensive he is to criticism of his golf from others, especially when he is generally so refreshingly tough when evaluating himself. Must have to do with that "me against them" mentality he uses for fuel. The fact is that Woods hasn't played very well lately. Sure, some of it is due to the capricious nature of putting, but there's more going on. Last year he dominated the tour's statistical categories like no one in history, finishing first in an incredible 23 of 34 areas and second in five more. After 20 rounds this year, he leads in none. It's true he didn't benefit from the stats bonanza available at the Hope. But after setting a tour record in greens-in-regulation percentage at 75.2 last year, Woods is currently 30th at 71.9. He just hasn't been sharp. With the pressure on versus Thomas Bjorn on the 72nd hole at Dubai, Woods' swing -- and maybe even his seemingly choke-proof head -- failed him. However, it's not that big a deal. Woods is right to point out that the line separating his virtuosity in 2000 from his performance over the last two months is thinner than most observers understand. In the big picture, he is still an improving golfer. Personally, I believe he will keep getting better for the next 10 years. When he pops out of this little slump (and he will be very motivated to shut everyone up when he returns next week at Bay Hill), I think his best golf of 2001 will equal or exceed his best golf of 2000. He works too hard, wants it too much and is too good a student not to keep getting better. Having said that, I think we are starting to see the beginnings of a subtle but fundamentally different approach from Woods. What it comes down to, in my opinion, is his growing understanding that he can't afford to be mentally primed every time he plays. Woods would never admit to this, and he probably doesn't even agree with the idea; it comes too close to suggesting that he is not playing to win. But I believe that, consciously or unconsciously, his approach to regular tournaments is changing. When Woods first turned pro, his intent was to dominate; to prove to himself and everyone else that he had the stuff to become the greatest golfer who ever lived. He was inspired by the results he got right off the bat, and his momentum and motivation only grew. He expended tremendous energy and passion to win and take no prisoners every time he teed it up. But after last year, the point was made. What's left is Jack Nicklaus' record of either 18 professional majors or 20 total majors (Woods either has five or eight, depending if you count his three U.S. Amateurs). It's going to be a long haul, and the issue -- the same one Nicklaus himself dealt with -- is how to best marshal his energy. The way Woods prepares and plays -- not to mention the demands of being the most famous athlete in the world -- takes a near-total mental and physical commitment. The act of winning itself is draining, which is why normal players often take off the week after a victory, too spent to compete again right away. At the same time, the fact is that victories in regular tour events no longer add much to his portfolio. Even if Woods were to ultimately pass Sam Snead's all-time total of 81 tour victories, it wouldn't have as much impact as passing Nicklaus in total majors. So while there's no question Woods will pay the price to peak for the majors, there is a legitimate question as to what level of preparedness and intensity is most sensible for him to take into regular events. My guess is that he is still looking for the answer -- and that, more than anything else, is why he hasn't played well in 2001. Woods' nature is to go all out, but he also knows he wants to have a full tank mentally and physically for Augusta and the other three majors, and right now he is figuring out the right balance. But that elusive state of total clarity he achieved at Pebble and St. Andrews is why all those putts went in, and whatever it takes to reenter that state at the appropriate time is what Woods will do, even if it means not being as intense or sharp at regular tournaments as he has been in the past. I'm not suggesting that Woods is through winning regular events. He'll win a bunch, with his A, B or C game. And if he continues to play the way he has played in them so far this year, pride alone will get him to step it up. But more and more for the rest of his career, regular tour events will be his steppingstones to majors, not ends in themselves. The danger in this dynamic is that it puts even more pressure on Woods when the majors do roll around. Nicklaus used to feel the heat, and when he didn't win the Masters he had to fight to make sure the letdown didn't ruin the rest of his year. Woods is well equipped to handle the all-or-nothing stakes. As a junior and an amateur, he always geared his schedule to peak for "majors," from the Optimist to the USGA Junior to the U.S. Amateur. And his greatest and most distinctive gift is this: The more he wants it, the better he plays. It may not seem like it right now, but I think Woods is on track to win the Masters. Sports Illustrated senior writer Jaime Diaz is a regular contributor to the magazine's Golf Plus edition. Click here to send him a question or comment.
| ||||||||||||||||||||
