GIANT KILLERS

Why do you think some players have worn the label of "best current player without a major championship"? Because there is a difference between a regular tournament and a championship! Winning a major championships defines a career, winning two, will probably put you in the Hall of Fame. They are that difficult to win. Watching Zach Johnson win his first Masters and beating Tiger Woods down the stretch was surprising, not because Tiger got beat, he is human, but because of all people, Zach would not have been in the "let's keep an eye on him" list of possible "giant slayers".

It didn't start now. Bobby Jones (13 majors) used to say that there was "tournament" golf and "championship" golf and he treated them different. So did Ben Hogan, Arnold Palmer, Jack Nicklaus, Tom Watson and now Tiger Woods. All of these players, along with the Mickelsons, Furyks and Singhs of every era of professional golf and along with every player in the world of professional golf treat a championship much differently. A tournament has a first come, first in basis, you have to qualify for a championship. When you see someone saying, "I treat this U.S. Open as just another tournament", they are lying through their teeth. They'd like to, so that the pressure to win would not be multiplied, but they can't. What they need to do is do what Zach Johnson did: "this is The Masters and I have a chance, lets go make some birdies" and not fold like a paper napkin.

Winning championships (majors) is not easy. There are many "giant killers" out there. Think about Greg Norman, the only player who has the distinction of having lost every major in a playoff. He is more famous for his losses than for his two major wins (British Open of '86 and '93). In 1986, he won the "3rd Round Grand Slam of Golf" when he led every major after 54 holes. He was only able to win one out of the four. Compare that to Nicklaus' 18 major wins or Tiger's 12 so far. Having a "no name" win a championship makes you appreciate the more on how difficult it is to win them.

The best thing about "no names" is that they make you appreciate the giants of the game. Winning one major is difficult, winning more than two is awesome, winning 10 or more is better than outstanding (think of this: Arnold Palmer has 7, Lee Trevino has 6, Phil Mickelson has 3, Payne Stewart had 3, Vijay Singh has 3, Tom Watson had 8, Gary Player had 7 and Ben Hogan had 9). Tiger has 12 and counting down to Bobby Jones' 13 and then on a race to Nicklaus' 18. When you see this, you realize how difficult it is to win major championships (Johnny Miller won two, Tom Weiskopf only one), so winning a dozen or more, is for true giants of the game. All the great players have been "slayed" by a giant killer at one time or another in all the majors: Hogan by Jack Fleck, Nicklaus by Charles Coody, Tiger by Zach Johnson, Greg Norman by Larry Mize and the list goes on.

Now, the question is this: in this week's Players Championhip on May 10-13, who many consider the "5th major", will there be a "giant killer" or a "killer giant"?