Ben:
Put yourself in Weaver's shoes. He's watched Cox hit a ton of putts, and a bunch of terrific sub-120 yd approach shots, all day long. Cox is sitting in the middle of the fairway (having played first), with a wedge in his hand, and almost likely to be hitting a birdie putt of under 15 feet. Weaver's probably thinking -- odds are pretty good, perhaps better than 50-50, that I have to make birdie here just to stay in the match. I think from his perspective, there's a rationale argument to be aggressive and go with driver in those circumstances. That it didn't work out doesn't negate the strategic choice, in my mind. (Cox, for instance, could've made the choice on 18 tee to go with something less than driver to assure himself a second shot from the fairway. Instead, he hit driver and ended up in a really poor spot, with a lousy lie. That he hit an all-world approach, under tremendous pressure, doesn't necessarily mean he made the right choice on the tee, does it? My assumption, when Cox pulled driver on the tee on 18, was that was how he'd played the hole previously, and with much success. I'd argue the same thing with Weaver; to me there's a difference between bad strategy vs. bad execution.)