Courtesy: CBS News

Tiger Woods won again on Sunday in a storming, come-from-behind charge. Granted, he put himself in that position with some sloppy play midway through his round.

Phil Mickelson played well enough on Sunday to take a one shot lead over J.B. Holmes in Phoenix only to see a badly faltering Holmes drain a key putt on 18 to force a playoff. Mickelson then lost on the first playoff hole with a poor approach shot.

Those are the facts on Tiger and Phil. And, early in 2008, Tiger is still ranked number one and Phil is still ranked number two.

But look a little more closely and there's an enormous difference between first and second.

World rankings are determined strictly on a points basis. It's complicated but essentially for every tournament in which a player wins or at least finishes, points are awarded. The majors and a few of the more significant weekly tournaments receive a heavier points weighting because of their special place in tournament play.

The rankings are also rolling rankings, with points accumulated over a two-year period.

So, to the numbers. Tiger currently has 110 points in 2008; Phil has 46.2. Tiger's rolling number is 817.16 based on his past 40 tournaments; Phil's rolling number is 394.71 based on his past 43 tournaments.

Factor out injuries and time off for family crises. Factor in the play of the two golfers on Sunday.

What we have is a world number one who is more than twice as good as the world number two on points alone.

I know that the great American writer, Mark Twain, once famously said "there are three kinds of lies: lies, damn lies and statistics".

The points ranking certainly qualifies as a statistic.

But recall how Tiger dominated another tournament, on foreign soil, slipped up on Sunday but found his famous reserves and reeled off five birdies for victory. That's the stuff of a number one player.

Phil, on the other hand, didn't putt well (when has he lately?) - even in the state where he played his college golf - and couldn't make a clutch approach shot in a playoff against a young tour player who was stumbling like a drunken sailor on shore leave. That is not the stuff of a number two player.

So Twain is right; in this case, statistics do lie. Mickelson is not a world number two player. Not at the moment.