Originally Posted by brocks
No contest. Albatross. Bubba didn't even make the putt, so anywhere he could get up and down from would have been just as good.
This is the same thing people said about Mickelson's shot out of the pine trees in 2010, and it's as illogical a response to this question now as it was then. (See my last paragraph before you respond, though; I don't think it's a bad observation at all.) The putt doesn't even enter in to the discussion of the shot to hit the green. The shot was a difficult shot in a high-pressure situation, and he pulled it off.
While the albatross was rarer, it was a stock shot that was executed well and got lucky. It wasn't really any better of a shot than an approach that winds up 6 feet or less from the hole on any of the par 5s on Sunday, which is probably what it'd have been if it had happened to land a couple inches from where it did.
Certainly Oosthuizen's shot was more accurate and a better result than Watson's, but it didn't involve the touch or the pressure: it wasn't making a routine par or better out of what, by all rights, was a completely blown play-off hole for the Masters.
The putt is relevant if we're talking about the most impressive moments or performances. Watson did come up short of the miracle birdie to win the Masters "with force." Had Oosthuizen come up with a better pitch, there'd have been another hole and Watson's shot would have been an interesting footnote. So I think the shot itself would be in the top few shots, but the overall win was less impressive than it would have been had it not relied on the good fortune of a poor pitch from the opponent. Still... don't get me wrong, the guy still won a major with it, so this is just a relative comment---in absolute terms, it's impressive as all get-out.