General / Paul Krishnamurty / 02 September 2008 /

Without a win for nearly a year, this has been an unexpectedly expensive year for backers of Lee Westwood. But why? asks Paul Krishnamurty.

A regular conversation amongst the golf betting fraternity concerns which players we love to have onside when in contention, and which we love to avoid. At any stage this century, my answer would have been the same. Besides the obvious Tiger Woods, there's no player in the world I'd rather back in contention than Lee Westwood.

The argument was easy to make for a very long time, due to Westwood's tremendous conversion rate. At the relatively young golfing age of 35, Lee has 29 worldwide victories to his name. Compare that to the 16 won by his pal Darren Clarke over roughly the same period. Or even the 24 titles of Europe's new Major-winning legend Padraig Harrington, who is two years older than Westwood and whose tally includes five low-grade wins in the Irish PGA. And anyone requiring further evidence of his winners' temperament need only look to an awesome record in the Ryder Cup.

That reputation probably peaked eight years ago, when he became the first player to overhaul Tiger Woods from behind on the final day of a tournament in the Deutsche Bank Open. That win, and again with two titles in 2003, were particularly impressive as they came off the back of the lowest spells of his career.

However, that argument is getting a bit long in the tooth. 24 of those 29 wins came before 2000, and over the last year he has started to gain a reputation in complete contrast to his previous heroics. Indeed, my fellow columnist The Punter correctly argued last week that he was a player to oppose at short-odds precisely because his recent win ratio is so poor.

It's becoming increasingly hard to disagree with that analysis after a very expensive year for Westwood followers. Questions must begin to be asked, because his overall game is anything but in decline. In fact, most shrewd judges reckon Westwood is a more complete player than ever before.

He must be scratching his head when looking up at Padraig Harrington's commanding lead in the Order of Merit, because Lee has been by far the more consistent player this season. Whereas Harrington has ten top-10s in the last twelve months to his name, Westwood has seventeen. The key difference of course is finishing. Harrington, a player often accused earlier in his career of being a 'bottler', has proved his mettle in the Majors while Westwood's reputation has suffered an opposite fate. His last win came 11 months ago at the Belfry, and since then he hasn't once produced his best on the final day.

Some suggested he lost his nerve in June's US Open, where he missed a play-off by a single shot. It's true his back-nine at Torrey Pines was far from perfect, but I felt his critics were quick to overlook how hard that course was. Nobody, Tiger included, had an error-free final day. Similarly, when he finished a close second to Vijay at the recent WGC-Bridgestone, his weekend performance wasn't flawless but he certainly didn't throw away the event.

Those prestigious titles would have been the icing on the cake of a superb career, but for now I suspect he'd just take another European Tour victory. The one that really got away was the Open de Andalucia back in March, where he'd traded at [1.5] before falling away badly against Thomas Levet and Oliver Fisher, looking particularly weak over those crucial short par putts that really test a player's nerves.

Most recently Westwood backers, of which I was one, were left tearing their hair out on Sunday. Going into the final round, he headed the market and looked a certain contender starting just two off the pace and surrounded by vastly inferior players. To see him shoot 75 from there and play no part in the finish was extremely disappointing. Up until Sunday, I'd been prepared to overlook this barren spell as a matter of luck, that would turn around sooner or later. Now I'm not so sure.

So for now, I'm sad to say, he's on probation as far as my betting is concerned. There's still plenty of time to land titles before the year is out, including tournaments at venues where he's emerged triumphant in the past such as The Belfry and St Andrews. But it will be hard to justify a bet at what are certain to be cramped odds. The greater dilemma for me will not be whether to take a short-price or not, rather it will be whether to reverse my long-held faith in Westwood and lay him the next time he's seen at short odds in contention.

Have your say: Is Westwood's barren run due to a lack of bottle, or has he simply been unlucky of late?

'.$sign_up['title'].'

'; } } ?>

:

:

:

?

: