Golf World's John Hawkins does a nice job of analyzing Tiger Woods' lack of a come-from-behind win in a major. He doesn't overdo it, yet also offers up some interesting insights on why Tiger's approach works so well, except perhaps in come-from-behind situations.
Besides that, I thought this was an interesting concession from the mainstream press, something we might not have read just a few years ago when everyone seemed to worship super-silly setups:
No question, Woods has gotten much better at staying in contention when he doesn’t have his best stuff, maybe because he has become so used to it. That said, radically tough layouts such as Oakmont and this year’s version of Augusta National are far more likely to produce an uncommon winner. The higher the degree of difficulty, the more random the competition becomes, which levels the playing field and brings all kinds of candidates into the mix.
Harder is better for the world’s best players, but only to a certain extent. Course fairness is a very subjective matter, but at some point, skill yields ground to luck, in which case you get Ben Curtis and Shaun Micheel.