Will Golf’s man of the moment Jon Rahm do it again this weekend?
If there was a perfect way to win your first event the PGA Tour, an eagle on the 18th is probably the way to do it. And that’s exactly what Spaniard Jon Rahm did last time out.
Question is, what can the PGA’s latest winner do this weekend at the Waste Management Open?
Touted as Europe’s next Ryder Cup hero, Rahm sunk a stunning 60-foot monster to eagle the last at Torrey Pines, and claim the win by three shots.
And the 22-year-old landed himself in good company, with a then-23 year-old Tiger Woods also eagling the last to claim the tournament back in 1999.
Oh, and it wasn’t even Rahm’s only eagle on the back nine on Sunday. – he hit two.
He has also surpassed both Woods and Jordan Spieth as the quickest player to claim $2m in prize money, doing so from just 12 events.
No wonder then, that we’ve felt it necessary to install the Spanish star fourth favourite at 20/1 for this weekend’s visit to Phoenix, Arizona.
And there’s every reason Rahm could make it two on the spin, having shone here two years ago to finish fifth when still an amateur.
The Japanese ace is the reigning champion, and was second in Phoenix in 2015 and third in 2014. Amazingly, Mastuyama has carded 270 in each of the last three years, so he’s sure to be there come Sunday evening.
Justin Thomas is also expected to be in the mix at 12/1, and statistically nobody is sinking more putts per greens in regulation, while only Spieth can boast a lower scoring average.
Plenty will be backing Phil Mickelson at 28s, be it through loyalty or perhaps that leftie is a three-time winner in Phoenix, the most recent success coming just four years ago.
Bubba Watson goes well here too, with a pair of runner-up spots in 2015 and 2014. He upset some of the crowd with his comments on the TPC Scottsdale course a year ago, but that’s unlikely to faze the big-driving American at 28/1.
But don’t be surprised to see Rahm topping the leaderboard and the headlines, as it’s a name we should really get used to from here on in.
All Odds and Markets are correct as of the date of publishing