Quote:
|
Originally Posted by ErikGalindo
rodney_c,
can you clear something up? You finished by saying "that she really hasn't been in contention to win that much", but my quick read show that you said she was in contention in 4 of these 7 tournaments you listed, along with 1 "she was in the final group" - I take that to mean "in contention" (feel free to argue that point), and 1 "I don't know if she was in contention or not." So that leaves 1 where you said she was not in contention. Are these just her best performances of those years, or are these all the tournaments she's played in?  Thanks.
|
On that list, I just listed the very best performances.
The point I was trying to push, was that people were saying she was in contention in nearly every event she played and that was simply not the case.
2003 finishes:
9, 33, 52, 39, MC, 28, 69
2004:
19, 4, 12, 13, 33, 6, 13
2005:
2, 12, 14, 2, 23, 2, 3, dq
I didn't watch many of her pre-2005 events, so I don't know whether she was in contention for those, but the results would suggest not.
In 2005, she had many high finishes, but wasn't in contention to win.
I'm just trying to destroy the myth, of her having many collapses down the stretch when trying to win an lpga event. People often claim that, and then they mention the US Womens Open, and then they get struck for words, when trying to think of other examples.