RegisterLoginLogout

Home|PGA|European|Champions|LPGA|WGC|Others


18-Hole Match Picks - PGA Tour

Tipster: Stanley

Odds: 2-Balls

 

Odds: 3-Balls

Reno-Tahoe Open
Subscribe Bookmark and Share
 
 

4-0; +8.70pts  (system plays: 2-3-1)

Round 1 play (2pts):

Chad Campbell to beat John Rollins -110 @ Five Dimes  WON by 2
Rollins is the player with the course form, having finished 2nd and 1st in the last two years, but he has admitted in interview to really struggling with his irons - he has not been hitting the ball close enough to have birdie chances and that has been reflected in his finishes: he has missed five of his last six cuts. And with the average winning score being over 18-under-par over the last five years here, he will need an enormous improvement in his form to contend once again. Campbell has a 9-4 h2h record against Rollins in the 1st round this year and should extend his lead today despite Rollins' course form.

 

Round 2 play (2pts):

Robert Garrigus to beat Paul Stankowski -161 @ Unibet  WON by 5
Having missed the cut in seven of his nine previous attempts in this event, it is no surprise that Stankowski struggled yesterday, hitting only nine greens in regulation. His putter saved him and he finished the day in 32nd place, but he will miss the cut again if he continues to play as poorly. Garrigus played much better and warranted his top-5 position, so having made his last five cuts (including 2nd at the St Jude Classic) and having finished 21st and 9th in the last two years here, he shouldn't struggle to maintain his position.

[unofficial rd2 system plays: Bowden tb Fischer -140 (L); McCarron tb Price -145 (W)]

 

Round 3 play (2pts):

John Mallinger to beat Robert Garrigus +120 @ SkyBet [also available @ Stan James]  WON by 2
Garrigus was an impressive winner yesterday, so the fact that he has now propelled himself into the tournament lead means he is a good go-against and particularly at these odds. He leads the field in driving distance and is 2nd in greens in regulation, missing only one green yesterday, but Mallinger has been playing just as well: he was the sole clubhouse leader by the time that the morning groups had finished yesterday, he ranks 1st in greens in regulation this week, also missing only one green yesterday, and he has been just as impressive when not hitting the green: he ranks 2nd in scrambling on the week. Garrigus has only led a PGA Tour twice in his career: in the 2009, he led the AT&T Pebble Beach National Pro-Am after the 1st round, but then shot 71-77 to finish 39th; and just five weeks ago, he held a two-shot lead heading into the final round of the St Jude Classic and a three-shot lead with one hole to play, but completely imploded and needed to hole a good putt for a triple-bogey to earn a place in the playoff, which he exited on the first hole. I'd certainly favour a player who is playing better and is two shots behind Garrigus when he has the lead.

[unofficial rd3 system play: Wilson M tb Blanks -105 (W)]

 

Round 4 play (2pts):

Alex Cejka to beat Chad Campbell +115 @ Five Dimes  WON by 4
Campbell as the 'name player' gets favouritism in this matchup, but Cejka cannot be dismissed as a contender even though he is five shots off the lead. In two of his last three starts, he has finished 8th in the U.S. Open and 3rd in the BMW International Open - Campbell has had just one top-20 finish in the last six month (17 events) - and in the last four years here, Cejka has finished 9th, 12th and 5th - Campbell last played in 2002. With sixteen players ahead of him, I don't see Cejka as a likely winner, which is beneficial as he has struggled when in the lead in the past, but I do see him catching Campbell who had surged up the leaderboard but then was two-over-par for the last five holes to finish three shots out of the lead.

[unofficial rd4 system plays: Quinney tb Stadler +100 (L); DeLaet tb Pampling +150 (L); Kraft tb Wheatcroft +100 (T)]

NOTES

There will be only one play per round - my 'best bet' - and these will typically be 2pts and cover only '2-ball' matches rather than '3-ball' matches. Where my analysis points to a particular mismatch that is not reflected in the odds, higher stakes may be advised, up to a maximum of 6pts.

Note that '2pts' represents 'to win 2pt' if the player is odds-on (negative in moneyline terms or less than 2.0 in decimal odds) and represents '2pts staked' if the player is odds-against (positive in moneyline terms or at least 2.0 in decimal odds).