Somehow it feels more like Jonathan Hawkins won it than David Howell. I’m not sure why. It just does.
Perhaps it’s something to do with Hawkins leading from first to last. Or the fact that he was unbeaten over the 11 games. Then again, if you compare their respective fields he 'only' played 4GMs, 3IMs and an FM as opposed to 4GMs, 4IMs and an FM and Howell also won more games. That should count for something. Although so should having the slightly higher TPR and the fact that he would have won on a Sum of Progressive Scores tie-break if it comes to that.
Is it just that Howell ending up on top is Same Old Same Old whereas for Hawkins it’s all new? Is it a sense that Hawkins deserves it more? The latter is not something I share - I’ve never really understood what people mean when they say stuff like that - and yet it feels more like a victory for him that the other guy who shared first place nonetheless.
Which makes no sense. Whatsoever.
It was Hawkins’ tournament
8.5 points is 8.5 points: everything else is meaningless