As Phil Mickelson crouched over his suddenly meaningless putt on the 18th hole at Winged Foot Sunday, one couldn't help but cringe at the entire scene. The driver in the trees, the three iron off a tree, the plugged lie in the sand, the Phil-bashing that would surely follow, the second and third guessing, and on and on.

Johnny Miller said it was "one of the biggest collapses in U.S. Open history." Ouch. I wouldn't go that far, though. If Phil had blown a four shot lead in two holes, or took and eight when a seven would win, then, yes. But par was a tough score on that or any other hole, save maybe a couple, at Winged Foot. Colin Montgomerie made double bogey after hitting his drive in the middle of the fairway. Don't forget that the winner of the tournament did finish five over par, and this was the sight of a 'Massacre' in 1974, when Hale Irwin won with a score of seven over par. Par therefore actually was a very good score. Although I can understand Mickelson's reasoning for hitting driver, (i.e. if you're going to be in the rough, hit it long and in the rough), a long iron or the four wood he was carrying certainly would have been the more prudent play, with it being the final hole. That aside, I don't know how much he can be faulted for trying his second shot, a three iron around a tree from 210 yards off a decent lie, especially having just witnessed his five iron on 17 in 'rough'ly the same situation. He made the green there, and two putted for par. Watching him address his second shot on 18, I actually expected him to wind up on the green or very near it, and make par to win. I think most golf fans did. That's what he had been doing all day after missing fairways. Perhaps luck just ran out on him, having hit only two fairways all day, which would make the case for hitting a different club off the tee that much stronger. Mickelson's a smart guy, and we say he should have known better. He's also Phil Mickelson, and if any of us were in his shoes with that kind of talent, the chances are pretty good we would have done the same thing, because we've done it before and would bet that we can do it again. In fact, didn't a lot of us expect him to chip in from the rough to make bogey and force a Monday playoff?

The beauty of golf is simple, yet complex, and sometimes very hard to explain or comprehend. There are no bad calls. Usually there are no calls at all. There are no teammates to rely on, nor to blame. No timeouts when you get in trouble. No silly stats like fourth quarter comebacks or quality starts. No player strikes or owner lockouts (yet). Just the player versus the course and the field. The results a player gets are almost always what the player deserves. Your soul is bared to the world when you fail, and you are the sole recipient of the accolades when you win. It, perhaps more than any other sport, is a game based solely on the current status of your ability.

I've wondered many times since Sunday's conclusion what would have happened had Mickelson played more conservatively and hit an iron off the tee. (Can you imagine the outcry had he played it safe and still lost? "What the heck is he doing? That's not Phil! He never plays like that and he picks NOW to do it?!" That certainly would have been an interesting discussion, as well.) There is no guarantee he would have made par even then, though chances are he would have made no worse than bogey. But then the chances were he makes no worse than bogey with driver in his hand, either. (If I'm working at Titleist, I'm proposing a new driver to Lefty. The Callaway just doesn't seem to be 'cutting' it these days).

Arnold Palmer led Billy Casper by seven shots at the turn in the '61 U.S. Open. Palmer decided to go for the record score. His over-agressiveness not only squandered the seven shot lead, but he also lost a playoff the next day, and never won another U.S. Open, though he had already won that tournament in the past. Phil's fall at Winged Foot could very well result in the same fate, leaving him only with a handful of second-place finishes. Only time will tell. We may never know exactly what Phil was thinking on the last hole, but I have a feeling it was something along the lines of "win it here and now. Forget the playoff."

It needs to be noted that Geoff Ogilvy hit two great shots the last two holes to remain at five over--the chip in at 17 and the chip onto the green at 18. The U.S. Open is a war of attrition, and Ogilvy was the last man standing. He deserves 'major' credit for this, and this could catapult him to the next level. That would be bad news for the rest of the tour, since he's proven over the last few seasons that he has the game to compete with just about anybody. And now he has shown he has the mental moxie as well.

Mickelson handled his crushing disappointment with class, as he always does. That is why he has so many fans. He is famous as much for who he is as what he is. He is one of the most prolific autograph signers on the PGA tour, and the masses love him for it. One can only hope he'll be back in major contention, and soon. He said during the Open that he likes the tournament because it's a severe test and it shows him where his game is at. He got an answer he wasn't prepared for at Winged Foot. Where his game goes from here is how he'll be judged in the future. Here's hope that he returns to the top of it.

Thanks for taking the time to read. 

With Vijay Singh fresh off his win at the Barclays Classic, he heads to the U.S. Open with renewed confidence. If a fall from number two in the world to number three can be called a slump, he just broke out of it. And not a moment too soon. Singh now has to be considered a favorite again, and chances are he'll be in contention this week. But the player they all will be chasing is Phil Mickelson, who is the best big-game hunter on tour right now, having won the last two majors. Here's why he'll also win this week at the extremely difficult Winged Foot (or who might if he doesn't).

Favorites:

-Phil Mickelson-After bucking the #### off his back at the 2004 Masters, Phil has become arguably the best player in golf. As I mentioned, he's won the last two majors, showing a mental toughness to go along with the most talented arsenal in the game. All the while flashing a Cheshire cat grin, as if he knows something we don't. He knows, all right. He knows that he is currently the best player in the world. And whether he actually is or not, believing it is his big difference. He's finally been able to pair his exquisite shot-making ability with the grit shown by the all-time greats. The next hurdle he would like to jump--beating Tiger head-to-head in a major championship. (Coming soon to a theater near you.) The one thing going against him this week-he has been on the brink of a few U.S. Opens, and hasn't been able to close the deal. (Still the pick here, though. Possibly going away).

-Tiger Woods-True, he hasn't played any serious golf since the Masters, but can he ever really be counted out? He obviously has the mental aspect of these majors down, but what his game is going to be like after the layoff is the question. Keep this in mind, though: the Open finishes on Father's Day, and since this is the first major without Earl watching, what better motivation could Tiger possibly have than that?

-David Toms-Admittedly, he doesn't hit it as far as the big guns, but distance off the tee doesn't always equate to Open success (see Stewart, Payne; Janzen, Lee; Pavin, Corey; et al.) He's been there before, having a PGA Championship under his belt, and has everything else needed to win this week: a solid short game, solid putting, just solid in general. He has a game (and mindset) similar to Stewart, Janzen, and Pavin--very few mistakes. Keep the ball in play. Win U.S. Opens. If not this year, certainly soon.  

-MIchael Campbell-It seems that once a player wins a U.S. Open, he seems to contend for several years after that. (Stewart, Janzen, Els, etc.). After last year's victory, Campbell now knows how to play the disciplined, pressure-packed game to win. His final round 69 (-1) matched Tiger's and gave him a two-stroke victory over Woods. He'll draw on that if he's in the running Sunday.

-Vijay Singh-Phil Mickelson won the week before the Masters. Vijay won last week. Could be a good omen for Singh. No need to go into his credentials here. He's more than capable.

Don't Be Surprised If:

-Chris DiMarco wins. The temptation to say simply that he's due and leave it at that is overwhelming. But taking into consideration his top ten finishes in majors the last four years, it appears that he's, well, due. Like Toms, not a big hitter, but that's not a factor when he's playing well, as witnessed by his playoff with Tiger at the 2005 Masters, when both of them were seven shots better than the rest of the field. He came withing an eyelash of winning that, and you have to think that he's, well, due, right?

-Stuart Appleby wins. Good international, veteran player who has quietly crept up the world rankings. He's won just enough to stay in the headlines, but still tends to be overlooked by most when it comes to the Big Four tournaments. Doesn't have a weakness in his game, and could be the next great player to emerge.

-JIm Furyk wins. As I said earlier, former Open winners have a knack for playing well in subsequent Opens. He's as steady as they come under pressure, as witnessed by his Ryder Cup play in recent years. He cannot be overlooked. (Don't look now, but he's second on the money list this year).

Dark Horses:

-Kenny Perry-Look at total driving the last couple years (distance and accuracy). He's up there. In fact, he's up there in a lot of stats that matter. Can he do it on golf's grandest stage? No reason to think he can't, unless too many great players get in his way.

-Tim Clark-Finished third in last year's Open. Second in this year's Masters. Donated his first place money in the Nelson Mandela Classic in South Africa in November of 2005 to a deaf girl who needed implant surgery. Go Tim!

-K.J. Choi-Okay, a hunch. Strictly a hunch. But I think he's got the game.

Other 'dark horses' to watch: Scott Verplank, Justin Leonard, Darren Clarke, Padraig Harrington, Thomas Bjorn.

Not Quite Ready Yet:

-Adam Scott-A trendy pick by some. A solid pick in a few years. Great tools, great game. But not now. Too many good players with experience ahead of him.

-Sergio Garcia-As good a ball striker as there is, but his average (at best) putting won't get it done this week. But soon . . .

-Geoff Ogilvy-A real up-and-comer. He'll contend in majors in the next couple years, and could very well have a good showing this week. But he's not quite ready-yet.

What A Great Story It Would Be:

-Fred Couples-One of the most popular players on tour, it was great to see him in contention at Augusta. And it would be great to see it again this week. He still has the game, but time is his enemy. He's got maybe a year of top notch golf left?

-Mark Brooks, David Duval, or Colin Montgomerie, for various reasons. Brooks and Duval are former major winners who haven't done much in a long time. Montgomerie has never won a major, although he's had many close calls. Brooks had a very good stretch in the '90s, including winning the '96 PGA, but has finished out of the top 125 on the money list three straight years. A good showing by him couldn't come at a better time. Duval once had the best game in the world, though it was short lived. He'll certainly be overlooked here, so with no pressure, perhaps he can sneak up on the field. As for Monty, he was Europe's best player for about eight years running, but has no major victories to show for it. He still has a pretty solid game, but his margin for error will be almost non-existent. Granted, all three are (very) long shots, but that's what would make each a great story. 

Thanks for taking the time to read.