Keith Mitchell: The might-have-been 2021 Zurich champion

A moment of recognition, please, for Keith Mitchell, who did not win, but might have won, the Zurich this weekend.

Officially Mitchell and teammate Brandt Snedeker finished in a tie for fourth Sunday at -18, two strokes behind champions Mark Leishman and Cameron Smith. Their failure to make up those two strokes was no fault of Mitchell.

More from Pro Golf Now

• Golf Rumors: LIV set to sign Masters Champion in stunning deal
• Fantasy Golf: Grant Thornton Invitational DFS Player Selections
• Brutal return leaves Will Zalatoris looking towards 2024
• Stars You Know at World Champions Cup Starts Thursday at Concession
• Fantasy Golf: An Early Look at the 2024 Masters Tournament

In fact had the Zurich been contested at regular stroke play – the way most every other Tour event is played – Mitchell would likely have claimed the winner’s prize.

Mitchell’s problem, to speak candidly, was his partner, Snedeker, whose week-long performance was modest at best. The table below shows how the Zurich top 10 would have looked if the rules called for straightforward stroke play.

Scores are based on two premises. If a player won a hole for his team in  four-ball, he got credit for those strokes. If a team won a hole in alternate shot, the play of the hole was examined to assess which player deserved most of the credit for that hole. (In some cases, a half stroke credit was given to both team members.) When a team bogeyed a hole, the same process was worked in reverse.

Here’s the table (with the player’s actual team  score shown in parenthesis:

Place      Player                        Score (Team score)

1              Keith Mitchell           -15.0 (-18)

2              Cameron Smith       -14.0 (-20)

3              Sam Burns                -13.0 (-18)

T4           Bubba Watson         -12.5 (-16)

T4           Tyler Duncan            -12.5 (-15)

6              Brendan Steele      -12.0 (-18)

7              Louis Oosthuizen  -11.0 (-20)

8              Richie Werenski     -10.5 (-19)

9              Tom Lewis               -10.0 (-16)

10           Cameron Champ      -9.5 (-14)

Probably the simplest way to view this data is to consider the individual’s score as a percentage of his team’s score. For example, Mitchell’s -15.5 represents 86 percent of the value of his team. His partner, Snedeker, contributed only 14 percent. Plainly, Mitchell did the bulk of the heavy lifting for that team.

The same was true for the championship team. Smith’s shots contributed 14 strokes to his team’s -20 score; his partner, Marc Leishman, only produced six shots toward that winning total.

The playoff losers, Louis Oosthuizen and Charl Schwartzel, tried to strike a blow for actual teamwork. Of their -20 total, Oosthuizen produced 11 strokes and Schwartzel nine.

Still, on its own Oosthuizen’s play would have only gotten him seventh place, while Schwartzel would have come home outside the top 10.  More than any other duo, they generated a synergy that lifted their team into contention.

Burns was easily the driving force between the -18 T4 finish he and Billy Horschel accomplished. Burns produced 13 of the team’s 18, nine of those strokes coming during a sensational Thursday four-ball session. In that round alone, Burns kicked in eight birdies to his team’s 63.

As for Mitchell, he basically carried Snedeker all week. When the team opened with a 66 in the Thursday four-ball, Mitchell was responsible for 4.5 of the six strokes. During the team’s Saturday 64, Mitchell produced four birdies plus two eagles, Snedeker contributing just two birdies. (The team also shared responsibility for a pair of bogeys.)

The Mitchell-Snedeker team played four-under golf during alternate shot, Mitchell’s play generating 3.5 of those four strokes.