Golf is a Zero-Sum Competition, Guys

Phil Mickelson just (i.e. several hours ago, but they just showed it on a tape delay) missed a par putt at the Wells Fargo Championship at the Quail Hollow Club. One of the announcers commented that that was not the visual that Nick Watney, Phil's playing partner and up-until-then co-leader, wanted to see before stroking his own par putt. Watney, of course, sank his putt, and is now ahead of Phil and, in fact, the outright leader. The announcer's comment is a common genre, most frequently heard on the intensely watery par-3 holes like the 12th at Augusta or the 17th at TPC Sawgrass. If the first two players in a group, say, have hit the green, or have gone in the water, the announcers will say something about how that gives the third player a good/bad visual. Now, on a Thursday or a Friday or something, where the pairings are pretty much random and the odds that two players in the same group will be in direct competition come Sunday are pretty small, I can sort of see that. But on Sunday? In one of the late groups, among people vying for the tournament? They're in a cut-throat, zero-sum competition for millions of dollars. Every stroke your competitor throws away is money in your pocket. If I were in contention at the Masters on Sunday, say in the final group or something, and my playing partner hit in the water ahead of me, I'd be ecstatic. I wouldn't feel like that meant I was going to do the same thing, or something: I'd feel like it meant I had an opening to make up some serious ground on one of my chief rivals just by hitting a non-disastrous shot. Now, at the same time, I never have been in that situation, so I could be wrong. Maybe the PGA Tour professionals, the guys who, after all, are playing the game for a living and are supposed to have good competitive mindsets, really do get rattled when things happen that, on paper, ought to be pretty directly beneficial to them. But it would kind of surprise me.