A sports writer hypothesized that Tiger Woods plays better on par 3 holes than on par 4 holes. He reviewed Woods' performance in a random sample of golf tournaments. On the par 3 holes, Woods made a birdie in 20 out of 80 attempts. On the par 4 holes, he made a birdie in 40 out of 200 attempts. How would you interpret this result?

(A) The P-value is < 0.001, very strong evidence that Woods plays better on par 3 holes.

(B) The P-value is between 0.001 and 0.01, strong evidence that Woods plays better on par 3 holes.

(C) The P-value is between 0.01 and 0.05, moderate evidence that Woods plays better on par 3 holes.

(D) The P-value is between 0.05 and 0.10, some evidence that Woods plays better on par 3 holes.

(E) The P-value is > 0.10, little or no support for the notion that Woods plays better on par 3 holes.