Masters Reaction 2

__"We must believe in luck. For how else can we explain the success of those we don't like?"

--Jean Cocteau__

The verdict is in. Sunday was great. Thursday, Friday, Saturday not so much. Ratings are up. And most of you thought the finish was plenty Masters-like. But, please, more birdies! More noise! Shane Bacon on Dogs That Chase Cars has more on the debate and  the Sunday finish.  I'm also hearing a split between golf insiders and casual fans on the great "Have They Ruined the Masters?" debate.

Here's Jeff Blessman of Algonquin, Illinois: "I watched the Masters this past weekend and am wondering what Masters all of the reporters watched?  The Masters I watched showed Zach Johnson taking the lead and winning the Masters on Sunday with superior golf under the conditions.  The only player who played better might have been Retief Goosen, who was under par for both Sat and Sun.  Many of the reporters seemed to say that Tiger lost the Masters when in reality Zach Johnson WON the Masters.  Tiger is a fantastic athlete but he is a human being not a god.  I applaud Zach Johnson and congratulate him on job well done.  Just because Tiger did not win, does not mean it was a fluke that Zach did.  He is a fine steady player or else he would not be on the PGA Tour.  All of the announcers were critical of him laying up on 13 and 15 when that was the correct thing to do for his game.  Peter Koskis even said that with his strong grip, going for the green could have lead to disaster.  Give Zach the credit he deserves and congratulate him for WINNING THE MASTERS!  Good job Zach."

I'm with you. I love Zach. Tiger had his chance. He didn't get it done. As Ron Sirak says, he's now only 16 away from Jack's record—of seconds.

-- Bob Carney