SI.com's Gary Van Sickle must not read Gelf. If he did, he wouldn't keep writing his ridiculous golf tournament previews that serve only to reinforce the notion that journalists don't understand math. In setting odds for players to win the last two majors, Van Sickle has been incredibly optimistic. For both the US Open and the British Open, Gelf poked fun at Van Sickle for giving odds for the individual players that—when converted to percentages and added together—were so high that several golfers should have won the same tournament. For the PGA Championship, Van Sickle again is way off.

This time, his numbers add up to 315%, meaning that he is over three times more optimistic about the individual player's chances. In fact, he reaches 100% after giving the odds for just nine players. He gives Chris DiMarco an 11.1% chance to win, while a real bookie puts DiMarco's chances at 1.2%.

What gives? Why does Van Sickle keep putting out numbers that are so out of whack with reality, and why does SI.com keep publishing them? We emailed Van Sickle to find out. If we hear from him, we'll let you know.