Phil = or < Tiger?
OK, there’s been much banter on the sports shows today about how Phil Mickelson is playing as the best player today, even better than Tiger, at least for the moment. But I don’t think anyone is really suggesting that Phil is better than Tiger Woods, all round.
The real question, I think, is whether Mickelson has proven himself to be a worthy adversary or rival to Tiger — the adversary we’ve all been waiting for. Is Mickelson better than Retief, Vijay, and Ernie, in terms of competing with Tiger? I think he clearly is, but what do others thinks?
Next question: why is Tiger’s collar so messed up?
