Share This Page

Golf roundup: Garrigus leads in Malaysia

| Friday, Oct. 26, 2012, 9:03 p.m.
Tiger Woods smiles on the 18th hole during Round 2 of CIMB Classic at the Mines Resort and Golf Club in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia on Friday, Oct. 26, 2012. (AP)

KUALA LUMPUR, Malaysia — Five strokes off the lead after two rounds, Tiger Woods thinks the CIMB Classic course “can be had” and expects a score of better than 20-under-par to win it.

Robert Garrigus, the second-round leader by two strokes over Jbe Kruger, upped the ante. At 14-under 128, he's looking to go 10 strokes beyond Woods' projection.

“I'm going to try to get to 30 if I can,” he said.

Garrigus' 128 is his lowest 36-hole total on the U.S. tour, improving on the 130 he had when he finished second at this year's Canadian Open. He has one tour title, in 2010, but has six runner-up finishes including three this season. A win here won't officially count on the PGA Tour, but the CIMB Classic is being added to the schedule next year.

LPGA Tour

In Yang Mei, Taiwan, Suzann Pettersen shot 7-under 65 to share the second-round lead with Inbee Park at the LPGA Taiwan Championship.

Champions Tour

In San Antonio, Mark Calcavecchia shot 5-under 67 to take a two-stroke lead over Kenny Perry in the suspended first round of the AT&T Championship.

European PGA Tour

In Shanghai, Peter Hanson shot 8-under 64 to take a two-stroke lead on Rory McIlroy after the second round of the BMW Masters.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.