Home  »     »   Popular stars on US Open drift as McIlroy bids to end dismal run

Popular stars on US Open drift as McIlroy bids to end dismal run

| 04.06.2013

Although he endorses a well-known bank in television advertisements, investment in Rory McIlroy has proved anything but safe in recent times, and the Northern Irishman’s odds for US Open glory are understandably on the drift.

After opening as a 10/1 shot, McIlroy has lengthened to 16/1, after he just about made the Memorial Tournament cut to prolong a series of uncharacteristically lethargic displays.

The current world number two, McIlroy finished six over par in Ohio, with a double bogey on the third hole one contributory factor to him ending 18 shots behind eventual winner Matt Kuchar.

McIlroy’s play has at times been labelled erratic, and he backed up those claims in his first round at Ohio, before firing a four-under second round to ensure he made the cut.

But with inconsistency so prevalent in his game, particularly of late, it will take a brave punter to back him to repeat his 2011 US Open success.

Alternatively, the 11/4 odds regarding McIlroy missing the cut at Merion may be worth attention, especially if the 24-year-old gets off to a start equally as catastrophic as he did last time out.

Certainly, his second-favouritism for the Major looks unwarranted, and 20/1 shot Kuchar looks one of several more solid looking each-way prospects on the back of his Memorial Tournament victory.

Meanwhile, in a similar way to McIlroy, Tiger Woods’ showing in Ohio is unlikely to spark a rush of investment in his 5/1 price to land his fourth US Open title.

Woods was initially a 4/1 chance for the accolade, but shot eight over par at Muirfield Village to ‘achieve’ his worst competition finish since 2010.

The fact that he already has four 2013 tournament successes to his name suggests this could have simply been a bump in the road for the 14-time Major champion, but his final preparation for the US Open is obviously less than ideal.

All Odds and Markets are correct as of the date of publishing.



John Klee