Pavin Proves Size Doesn't Matter

Hello. Congrats to Corey Pavin for wining the US Bank Championship and for setting a PGA Tour record of 26 for 9 holes, 8 birdies and a par on the par-34 front nine at Brown Deer in Milwaukee.
This is Corey's first win in 10 years, continuing a trend set by Tim Herron and Jeff Maggert this year of 40-somethings winning many years after their previous victory. The 2-year exemption will take the 46-year-old Pavin closer to the Champions Tour, and obviously save a lot of worries about qualifying.
So, again, the same two questions come to mind:

1. Where are the "sure thing winners"? Here we are a few weeks away from the Ryder Cup standings being finalized. Davis Love, Fred Couples and others who enjoy playing Ryder Cup but haven't qualified for it yet are no where to be seen at this tournament. Are they breathing easier because sure-fire Captain's pick Chris DiMarco is now in 6th place in the Ryder Cup points? Do they know for sure Tom Lehman will pick them? And what of Adam Scott, Sergio Garcia, etc who haven't won this year? Are they content with being in the top-30, but winless? Maybe so.
2. Was everyone excited about this event? Hope so, because next year the Canadian Open will have a similar field, since it will be at the same date. Maybe that's why the 2006 Canadian Open is a little more than a month away and there STILL is no title sponsor. It's probably too late for one now anyway, because they'd get relatively minimal advertising.

Actually, the Canadian Open will have a tough time getting the coverage this tournament got because of Pavin's record, and the interest in seeing if he could hold on. Sad indeed.

Regards,

Steve

Evian The 5th Major

Hello. The tournament preceding the British Open on the PGA Tour, the John Deere Classic, has a less than stellar field, to say the least. The same cannot be said for the LPGA's stop prior to the Women's British Open. The Evian Masters has as good a field as any tournament.
While I have been critical of the LPGA's scheduling in the past, it really was a stroke of genius to put these two tournaments together. It gives the players more justification to make the trip across the pond. They get a chance to get used to the European time zones. And competing for 2 large purses doesn't hurt either.
Lorena Ochoa and Michelle Wie are at the top of the leaderboard, which is no surprise. What would be a pleasant surprise for either of them is if they won.
While Ochoa has won before, and is the current money leader, her titles pale in comparison to the Evian or a major. Winning this week would be a big step towards Player of the Year honours. It would help her surpass majors winners Webb, Pak and Sorenstam.
As for Wie, it was mentioned on the Grey Goose 19th Hole on The Golf Channel how she sounds and plays like Sergio Garcia, which was not a compliment. The novelty may be wearing off Michelle's appearances, especially on the PGA Tour. The last thing I or anyone else wants is for her to become a laughing stock. A win here would go a long way towards giving her the credibility she currently lacks.
All the best ladies as you tackle the Evian.

Regards,
Steve

Watson Now Follows Woods In Everything Except Alphabetically

Hello. When I was a teenager, Tom Watson was THE MAN. Sure Jack Nicklaus won some important tournaments during that time. But Watson did beat him head-to-head in the Masters, US Open and British Open, when it was just the two of them. The 1977 Turnberry duel, where Watson is this week for the Senior British Open, was one of the all-time classics, 2nd only in my mind now to the 2000 PGA between Tiger Woods and Bob May for drama.
And this realization has led me to another one - Tiger Woods has more wins and more majors than Tom Watson. Many more, as in 3 more majors and 10 more tournaments. And he's just 30. And he's hardly played this year, yet won 3 times, including a major. And he's the overwhelming favourite to win now every time he tees it up for at least the rest of this year. And, and, and.....
The fact that Tiger Woods could be ahead of Watson, who makes anyone's list of Hall of Famers, so relatively early in his career, is amazing to me. What's even more amazing is that Tiger has a chance to equal or exceed Watson's 5 British Open wins. Considering that last week at this time I was wondering if he'd ever win a British Open anywhere else other than St. Andrews, that's quite a change in perspective. But now Woods has to be considered the favourite in all future British Opens, especially since his most recent serious opponent, Phil Mickelson, has a relatively poor record in the event.
How will we measure the careers of someone like Tom Watson now that Tiger is on the charge to maybe own all golf records at the end of his career? Will we think of Watson as a "one event pony" because he won 5 British Opens, but "only" 2 Masters, 1 US Open and no PGAs? Will his win total look small because Tiger may have twice as many when he's done?
And will the Golf Hall of Fame qualifications also rise to higher standards? Will Davis Love III get in, with only one major? Will Fred Couples? Will Curtis Strange, who I think should've been in years ago? Will people wonder why Tom Kite, with only one major, is in, even though he was career leading money winner for a decade?
Tiger has made all these questions safe to ask now, when before they would've been ludicrous. He has changed our way of thinking about greatness. And we're all the better for it.

Regards,
Steve

The End For Garcia?

Hello. Next month the PGA returns to Medinah in Chicago. In 1999 Tiger Woods won his 2nd major over a 19-year-old Sergio Garcia. What a difference 7 years makes.
Just think, if Garcia would've won that tournament, he would've been tied with Woods at a major apiece. And, being 4 years younger, their rivalry would've been the talk of the golf world.
Garcia has been part of Ryder Cup victories. But that's as close to a major as he's gotten. In fact, he's never finished better than 5th in a major since, even when being close to the lead like on Sunday. Meanwhile, Tiger has won 11 majors.
What happened? You could argue successfully that Garcia is as talented as Woods. He seems to be able to hit the ball well and scramble. And his putting is no worse than Tiger's putting was at the Masters and US Open.
Then why the difference? How is Tiger able to become an elite putter by the British Open, while Garcia still struggles? Is it more focus and dedication? Less beer commercials? A shorter memory for bad strokes?
Garcia didn't even really get an experience of playing with and chasing the leader. He was 2 over after 3 holes, and never came close to catching Tiger. Why was Garcia unable to carry on his play from shooting 65 Saturday?
I think I found the answer tonight while golfing. I 3-putted the first hole, then lost a ball on the 2nd on the way to a double bogey. Three more 3-putts on the front gave me a 42. Then on the back I shot 35 with 2 bogeys.
What happened? I was more relaxed, because my chance at a career score was over. I think this is what happened to the field in general, and Sergio in particular, on Sunday. They "know" Tiger won't make any mistakes, so they press for a good score, resulting in mistakes. Once the gap is wider, they relax because there's no chance to win, and play better. Of course, once they make their mistakes, Tiger relaxs because his lead is bigger, and plays better.
Sergio must learn to be more relaxed when he's around the lead, a tough task for a fiery personality. Otherwise, he may stay with Colin Montgomerie in the "zero major wins" category.

Regards,
Steve

11th Heaven

Hello. Congratulations to Tiger Woods for his 11th major victory at the British Open. When thinking of one word to describe Woods' performance, "clinical" comes to mind. He surgically disected the course. And he managed to turn off the emotions that came gushing out after his victory. That he was able to do either was incredible, let alone both. And then to gather himself and talk about his father at the closing ceremonies was remarkable.
Because Tiger was far beyond good, he will be excluded from my lists below:

Good

1. Chris DiMarco. 3 weeks after losing his mother suddenly, DiMarco was the only one to give Tiger a challenge Sunday. Unfortunately a bogey on the 1st hole gave Tiger more of a cushion that DiMarco couldn't quite overcome. Chris is guts personified, and according to one of my sisters-in-law, a "cutie". Quite the combination. He's now been a 3-time major runner-up, and the only one who seems to really want to break through.
2. Andres Romano. The young Argentine was under par every day, finishing -9 and tied for 8th. Well done.
3. Hideto Tanihara. Japanese star put himself on the map shooting -11, finishing tied for 5th.
4. Jim Furyk. Only one of the US Open runners-up to distinguish himself finishing 4th and snapping a 5-consecutive-missed-Open-cuts string.

Bad

1. Sergio Garcia. Since the 1999 PGA, Sergio hasn't finished better than 5th in a major, even if he starts just off the lead like Sunday. One of only 3 players in the top 15 to shoot over par Sunday. More tomorrow about him.
2. Ernie Els. After rising to Friday's challenge by Woods of matching his 65 to be one off the lead and two shots clear of 3rd place, Els shot 71-71 on the weekend.
3. Retief Goosen. Came in with little confidence, got in position on Friday, then shot 72-73 on the weekend.
4. Mike Weir. After shooting 68 the first day (and making me think I know something about predicting), he's +5 for the remaining 54 holes, finishing tied for 56th with David Duval. Back to the drawing board.

Ugly

1. John Daly. -2 after 35 holes, could bogey the par 5 18th and still make the cut. Hits his drive and 4th shot OB. Hope he enjoyed the legendary Cavern in Liverpool.
2. US Ryder Cup points. Apparently John Rollins got more points for wining the BC Open than DiMarco got for finishing 2nd in the Open. That sound you heard was me falling off my chair.
3. The 2007 Canadian Open. It will be played this week next year. Do you think anyone will come besides Vijay Singh? Neither do I.
4. The 2006 Canadian Open. Still no main sponsor, with <>

Regards,

Steve

Deja Vu (Sort Of)

Well, it was quite a first round. Mike Weir and Jim Furyk made my predictions last night look good at -4. Darren Clarke is -3, Stephen Ames is -2, Tim Clark is even, and Trevor Immelman is at home with his wife celebrating the birth of their child. All of them are probably very happy where they are today. Only Padraig Harrington is a disappointment at +3, which at most Opens is respectable, but here is tied for 124th.
The only thing that could upset the players I picked today is a guy sitting at -5, one behind leader Graeme McDowell, who shot a course record 66. Some guy named Tiger Woods.
I had originally discounted Woods because of his lack of accuracy off the tee. I figured if he tried to play at Royal Liverpool like he did at St Andrews last year (and Winged Foot this year), he'd be in big trouble.
Fortunately for Tiger, he started hitting irons off the tee to stay in play, even when it meant having 200+ yards into the par 4 17th hole. And he putted beautifully as well, especially after a 3-putt on the 1st hole.
In short, Tiger Woods became Fred Funk and Brad Faxon combined.
What does this mean for the rest of the field? Big trouble. If the weather stays nice and dry, the course is going to get faster, meaning tee shot distance control will be needed. It's much easier to control an iron's distance than a driver's distance. Advantage Tiger.
And if it rains and gets windy, who do you think that will favour? Probably someone who can hit it far, like a Tiger Woods maybe?
With Tiger, I've never looked at how many strokes behind he is. I've always looked at how many players are ahead of him. Anyone think McDowell can match him shot for shot over the next 3 days?
If there is a tournament where someone can overtake Tiger, this is it. One bad swing can result in a big number. However, if he is going to be passed, it had better be Friday or Saturday, because Tiger is 10-0 in majors when leading after 3 rounds.
The field probably said "oh no" (or something stronger) when Tiger eagled the 18th hole. The Woods camp must be ecstatic. We could be seeing a successful defense for the first time since Tom Watson in '82-'83. Hopefully my picks will make it interesting at least.
Good luck to everyone (including Royal Liverpool).

Regards,
Steve

Canadians Could Fare Well?

Hello. Although I haven't had much exposure to Royal Liverpool, by the sounds of it, Mike Weir and Stephen Ames could do well.
The course seems to be relatively short (7,200 par 72). Add to that hot dry conditions, and length may not be as much of a factor as it usually is in the British Open, where wind and rain can increase the yardage.
Then there are slow greens. British Open greens have to be slower because if they cut the greens down to PGA Tour level, the ball could blow off the greens. We saw in the US Open that some players, including Tiger Woods, didn't like slow greens.
What will be the key to victory? Accuracy. Both off the tee and onto the green. Weir and Ames have shown this year they have what it takes to hit the ball accurately. Whether they can do that in this major remains to be seen.
Other predictions? Well, I don't think any of the "Big 5" are going to win. That's a powerful statement I know but between them they only have 3 British Opens (Tiger 2, Els 1). Both of Tiger's wins were at St Andrews. Els hasn't shown me he's recovered from the knee surgery. Goosen says his game is in rough shape. Singh has struggled with the driver and putter at times this year. And Mickelson has struggled with the US Open memory.
I see the following doing battle (in alphabetical order):

Ames
Tim Clarke
Darren Clarke
Furyk
Harrington
Immelman
Weir

All the best to everyone (including Royal Liverpool).

Regards,
Steve

Another Sad Day On The Island

Hello. Well, I'm going to break with tradition and talk about hockey, specifically the New York Islanders, who from 1972 to 1993 were my favourite team of all time.
Why did I start cheering for the Islanders, an expansion team in '72, when there were so many other better teams at the time? One word - organization. With Bill Torrey as GM, and eventually Al Arbour as coach, the Islanders were the model franchise. They built through the draft, and made a tremendous trade in 1980 to acquire Butch Goring (who should be in the Hall of Fame if Bob Pulford and Dick Duff are there, but I digress) that led to 4 straight Stanley Cups and 19 consecutive playoff series wins, a record that may never be broken.
Potvin, Trottier, Gillies, Goring, Bossy, Smith, Nystrom, Howatt, Morrow, Langevin, McEwen, Kallur, Jonsson, Duane and Brent Sutter, Flatley, Lafontaine.....those names will stay with me forever.
It's no secret the last 13 years on the Island have been bad. Today was one more.
Neil Smith, hired last month as GM, was fired. A man who was GM with the Rangers for 10 years, winning a Cup. Within hours, Pat Lafontaine, also hired last month as player personnel director, resigned. Now the club has filled the GM spot with Garth Snow, last year's backup goalie with no GM experience. They have a new coach in Ted Nolan, and Bryan Trottier has come back to the fold.
What is going on with this club? One word - owner. The owners in the glory days left their hands off. This one, Charles Wang did for 10 years with Mike Milbury, who did nothing, then fires someone like Neil Smith after a month? What's going on?
All I can say is, the Islanders do not look like they're moving up the ladder any time soon with what happened today. And until ownership changes its tune, it may be a long time before anything positive happens. Hopefully the franchise is able to survive. While I hear ownership has deep pockets, the fan base may decay even more than it has.
Long live the Islanders!

Regards,
Steve

Senden Keeps Both Trends Going

Hello. Congrats to John Senden for winning the John Deere Classic. He made a wonderful bunker shot on the 72nd hole to ensure a victory.
Senden becomes another first-time winner, following a long line of players this year. He also becomes the 7th Australian to win on the PGA Tour this year (and that doesn't include past winners like Adam Scott or Robert Allenby).
Senden also receives a trip to the British Open, because he was the highest player who had not already qualified. Will he have a chance to do well? If my theory is correct, he will because he's a non-American. Playing on a strange course will help all the newcomers.
What a week, huh? A great time to play well. For John Senden, the John Deere will always have some meaning.
For most of the golf public however, the John Deere will be remembered for Michelle Wie not only missing another cut, but for also not finishing. And it will be remembered for Jeff Gove saying Wie doesn't walk fast enough to play on the PGA Tour.
First, Hawaii, believe it or not, never has weather like Wie faced at the John Deere. She's not used to high humidity, or temperatures over 100 degrees Fahrenheit (35 Celcius). Really are any of us? It doesn't surprise me that she would be affected. It's part of the learning curve. I'm only surprised more players weren't dropping.
Second, Mr Gove points out something most TV fans aren't aware of - PGA Tour players walk fast so they can have more time to study their shots. Since this is Wie's 5th tournament, she's just getting used to pace of play. Again, part of the learning curve.
Will Wie succeed now that she's heading to the Evian Masters and the Women's British Open? Let's hope so. And let's also hope she's well.

Regards,
Steve

Are Wie At The End?

Hello. For those that don't know, Michelle Wie is playing again at the John Deere Classic. Last year she was almost a lock to make the cut. However, a 3 over par finish on the last 4 holes left her 2 shots away from the weekend.
On the Grey Goose 19th Hole on The Golf Channel, Charles Davis said Wie would finish top 30 this week. David Stein, sitting in for Steve Duemig (not a big Wie fan) said he was a big Wie fan, then said she wouldn't make the cut. Then he asked how long it was going to be before people in general and Wie in particular lost interest in Wie trying to make a PGA Tour cut.
My answer is, it won't be any time soon.
The John Deere Classic organizers said they made an additional $1 million dollars last year because of Michelle Wie. Their galleries and media are up significantly. Since the big names don't seem to care about this event (either by playing in Scotland or taking the week off), Wie is the only big draw this tourney has.
Michelle herself must feel her game is improving, because she's done very well this year in the LPGA majors. I'm sure she's not going to give up the PGA dream anytime soon.
Besides, aren't we more interested in Wie, Natalie Gulbis and Danica Patrick (and before that, Anna Kournikova) because we keep hoping they will break through? If they had already won a race or golf tournament, or made a PGA Tour cut, would we be less interested? The answer is yes. That's when we'll lose interest.
All the best Michelle! Because you'll be finished early Friday (weather permitting) we'll know if you have a chance to make the cut sooner than last year. I hope you do.

Regards,
Steve

Major Burnout?

Hello. For years, I've wondered what scheduling methods the Tours use to plan their major events. In the past, the LPGA had the Kraft Nabisco the same week as the PGA's Players Championship, which almost erased it from the golf map. Fortunately this year the Kraft Nabisco was opposite the Bell Southern, and it got exposure.
Then I was often puzzled as to why the LPGA Championship and the US Women's Open were separated by only one event. Fortunately this too was rectified in 2006 by having two events in between.
Now in 2006 I have to question two scheduling choices, one LPGA, one Champions Tour.
The US Women's Open was followed by the HSBC Women's World Match Play event. Some would argue this is ok because only the top 64 were invited. And it was a short trip to New Jersey from Rhode Island. However, the Match Play is a 5 day event, and the US Women's Open ended on a Monday with 2 of the top 64, Annika and Pat Hurst, in an 18 hole playoff. So two of your best, hottest players are now trying to recover from a draining experience, especially when they had to play 36 holes on Sunday. Do you think they wanted to take the week off?
This week the Champions Tour are playing the Ford Senior Players Championship directly after playing the US Senior Open. Then a week off for the whole tour before playing the Senior British Open. If some of these players are also playing in the British Open, it means they could be playing in a major 4 weeks in a row! Unbelievable.
All tours should take a page from the World Cup of Soccer. Less is more. Reducing the demands on the golfers will make them play better. Do something to make their lives easier. Fewer events, less rounds, less travel, etc would go a long way to making the golf more interesting and of higher caliber.

Regards,
Steve

Different PGA Rules? Not Needed

Hello. I read Gary Van Sickle's si.com column Friday about what he would do if he were PGA commissioner for a day. Of his 10 items, not all of them were related to the PGA Tour, which was surprising. I will address his first item, which is making the PGA guys use woods made out of (surprise) wood! His analogy is Major League Baseball makes their hitters use wood bats, whereas the grassroots leagues use aluminum. While interesting, I think he misses a few points.
First, club manufacturers will never go for it. The clubs the PGA players use now are what we are going to find on the shelves in 1-2 years. The PGA Tour is the manufacturer's testing ground.
Secondly, it would mean the end of club endorsements as we know it. None of us would be urged to buy Taylor Made, for example, because Mike Weir uses wood Taylor Made drivers customized for him. Sure they may work for him, but that wouldn't mean the medal Taylor Made woods would work for me.
Also, the courses would then have to be shortened to adjust to the new clubs. Can you imagine how courses would feel about that? The very back tees would never get used then.
Again, the course setup can overcome all these issues people have about low scores on the PGA Tour. Set up courses like Winged Foot and TPC Sawgrass, and you'll have no problem lowering the scores.
Is the PGA Tour going to do this? Probably not, because they think (mistakenly) that people want to see -20 win all the time. Immelman's win last week was a good one, at -13 on Cog Hill. Tiger, was -1 the first round, then finished 2nd. That's what I want to see - the ability of a player to rebound. If -20 or less wins all the time, then players have to average 67 just to be in contention. One bad round, and you've got no chance.
Toughen the courses PGA Tour. Read my previous articles if you want to know how.

Regards,
Steve

Western Good Bad and Ugly

Hello. I'm off this weekend, and watching a wonderful thunderstorm this morning. We really need the rain. I had my best round of the year on Friday, so life is good. Looking forward to a week with the kids.
The Cialis Western Open was played this week. Here's the good, bad and ugly from that tourney:

The Good

1. Trevor Immelman. Congrats on breaking through into the winner's circle. Everyone could see this coming, after many top finishes this year. South Africa and Australia are now at the point where they can put their own President's Cup team in against the US.
2. Tiger Woods. After being +1 after the first round, I thought Tiger was on his way to another missed cut and being crucified by the media. Instead he finished in 2nd place at -11. Well done! Will anyone be surprised if he's a factor at the British?
3. Stephen Ames. Another good Western finish. Obviously you like this course, and your best year ever continues. Watch out for Ames in the next two majors. If you do well, maybe Canadians will start to claim you more often.

The Bad

1. Mike Weir. Sorry for doing this Mike as a fellow Canadian. However, you were not a factor in this event, which is surprising because you have done well in the Western in the past.
2. Phil Mickelson. After a great first round, it was tank city. Obviously something has to be done on the mental part of the game to get you back.
3. Vijay Singh. For 3 rounds it looked like you were the man, only to shoot even par for 17 holes, and then dunk a ball in the water on 18 for a double. This is not the man that won 9 times in 2004. Will he bounce back?

The Ugly

1. The end of the Western as we know it. This tournament falls into the "it ain't broke but we'll fix it anyway" category. The tournament course is one of the best I've ever played. It's hard to believe it's an affordable public course. The Chicago fans are great. The players love the tourney. Now it's going to be in Chicago only in odd years, with it going to St Louis and Indy and who knows where else in even years. BMW is obviously a top sponsor, and the Chick Evans Scholarship program is going to still benefit from the tournament. By why change this event, when the Booz Allen Classic is going to disappear in 2007 completely? Wouldn't have made more sense to play the Booz Allen at Congressional while the TPC Avenel was getting repaired, have BMW take over sponsorship if necessary, and leave the Western Open alone? I don't understand it, and I can't see why loyal sponsors are being cast aside for new bigger ones. Someday this loyalty could come back to haunt the PGA.

Big Western Battle? Spare Me

Hello. Well today is the first time Tiger and Phil have played since the US Open. And it will probably be the last time either plays on the PGA Tour before the British Open in two weeks. This is a big story right?
No. Not now.
It's Thursday. This is a great field. Last year's winner was Jim Furyk, who's pretty good too.
Golf is not like Wimbledon, where an anticipated Federer-Nadal matchup has every chance of happening. Golf is unpredictable. How many people thought Tiger would win the US Open, and he didn't make the cut? How many thought Phil was going to win the US Open, and he doubled the last hole to finish 2nd?
What the media should be doing when an event like the Western comes up is see who's playing the best coming in, and profile them. Trevor Immelman would be good. Villegas would be another. Both played last week in Hartford, and finished top-20. Both are fighting for the top-30 spot that gets a Tour Championship spot. Both are playing the PGA Tour regularly for the first time. Villegas even made People magazine!
Why can we hear more about these guys? Or the guys fighting to make the Ryder Cup team? As Brian Hewitt said on thegolfchannel.com, it's best to have 12 guys who want to be there that the 12 best players who don't want to be there.
Let's report on these "no-names" so they aren't no-names anymore, rather than theorize on a possible Sunday matchup.

Regards,
Steve

Best Private Club Setup?

Hello. What is the best way to set up a private golf club? Is it member owned (one share per member)? Or one owner? Or like Clublink, one corporation that owns many golf courses?
Should a player just pay an initiation fee to join, or do they purchase a share, or both? What are the prices of these different things? What are the annual dues?
These are questions the private club I belong to is going through. There are many options at this time. One is to keep it member owned, non-equity. Another is to sell to a developer. Clublink owned is another. An equity membership could be in our future.
There are a lot of people looking for answers, and wondering what to do if an option they don't like is chosen.
Personally, I'm not a big equity fan. Equity vs non-equity is the same to me as buying a car vs leasing one. If you buy, you have to have someone ready to sell it to when you want to, for the price you want. Otherwise you're going to be stuck with it and all the expenses. Same with an equity club membership. I know some where there's a waiting list to get out! Meanwhile they are paying annual fees.
I hope our club stays as it is, but it now seems unlikely. If it changes, I'll have to see where I can go to play regularly. Do I join another club? Or do I become a public course player, something I've never done before? While there is a lot of great public golf in the GTA, it's not cheap. Playing once a week is going to cost as much as a membership possibly.
Anyway, there's no sense worrying about it. What happens will happen. I submitted my thoughts to a director, so I've done my best. Now we'll see where it goes.

Regards,
Steve

The PGA Class System

Hello. Congrats to JJ Henry on winning his first tourney, the Buick Championship. For Henry it was especially memorable, because he grew up an hour away from the Hartford, CT course. He used to go there to watch the PGA's best. Now he can say he's one of them. While the US Women's Open took up my interest this past weekend, Henry's story and Gary Van Sickle's article on si.com re the Fedex Cup gave me a new perspective on the PGA "class system".
There are basically 4 categories of golfers on the PGA Tour. Here they are in reverse order:

1. The player struggling to get in the top 125. This player has minimal endorsements, and as such relies on purse money to survive. If he doesn't get $600,000+ in earnings, it's back to Q-school. Beginning next year, he will be playing "The Quest For The Card" events from September to November hoping to avoid Q-school. Needles to say, there's a big difference in lifestyle between $600,000 and working at a pro shop or driving range. Forced to play whenever he can.
2. The 31st to 125th money list player who hasn't won recently. He is secure in getting his card, with usually $700,000+ in earnings by season's end. Good endorsement contracts, and asked to make appearances for relatively modest fees. Can pick and choose when to play.
3. The 2005-2006 tournament winner. Exempt for 2 years on the PGA. Gets invited to many special events, and qualifies for Mercedes Championship. Endorsement deals usually go through the roof, because he'll be mentioned for the rest of the season and next season as a champ/defending champ. Off course appearances skyrocket. Can pick and choose when to play.
4. The major winner. Exempt for 5 years on Tour, gets more money than he can ever spend, known for life as a major winner. Can pick and choose when to play.

As Van Sickle points out, the Fedex Cup, with its $10 million first prize, could transfer someone in groups 1 or 2 into group 3. This is great for the player, but it means there is one less player in group 1. This group is the only group compelled to play any of the lesser tournaments. As a result, these tournaments suffer.

If the Fedex Cup winner is in groups 3 or 4, they already have a boatload of money to live on. They won't have to ever pick up a club again even before this tourney. In effect, this money is meaningless to them. Again, the lesser tournaments suffer.

Van Sickle concludes, and I agree, the Fedex Cup does nothing to help the lesser tournaments. And since the players in groups 2, 3 and 4 do not really need the money, they will not be intense as they are during a major, especially having to play 4 events in a row. That's why I think Tiger in particular will not play in this event past 2007.

And it's also why tournaments in general and the Canadian Open in particular (which STILL doesn't have a title sponsor 2 months before the event) should set their expectations correctly when determining the benefits of the Fedex Cup. Otherwise, they could be in for a big disappointment.

Regards,

Steve

The Good, Bad and Ugly of the US Women's Open

Hello. Here are some quick thoughts from a wonderful US Open:

The Good

1. Annika Sorenstam. She is Tiger Woods' equal on the LPGA. Some "slump" she was in, huh? Now she's won 2 tournaments this year, and arguably the toughest major. She could be Player of the Year again. Congratulations!
2. Pat Hurst. Great to see someone who is a "part time" golfer, who puts family first, go toe-to-toe with Annika for the last 54 holes, and not be intimidated. Pat could've won the LPGA Championship last month if she would've putted half as well as she did this week.
3. Juli Inkster. Same as Pat Hurst, except she didn't play with Annika, and didn't make the playoff. Hard to believe she's 46. She hit the ball long, and came very close.
4. Michelle Wie. If anyone doubted her short game, they won't now. Could wait another 3 years to win a major, and still be the youngest ever, ahead of arguably Canada's great golfer, Sandra Post, who was 20 when she beat Kathy Whitworth in the LPGA Championship. Again, could've won the LPGA Championship if she putted like she did this week. Look out at the Women's British Open.
5. Se Ri Pak. Proved the LPGA Championship was no fluke. Only hit one bad full shot on 15 that I saw on Sunday. Unfortunately it cost her. Still shot 69, which was tied only by Hurst for low round by a contender.
6. Stacy Prammanasudh. How do you hit 5 greens on Sunday and end up 2 back? What a great performance. Did for 18 holes what Phil Mickelson did for 17.
7. Newport Coujntry Club, Rhode Island. Good job getting the course ready after difficult weather. Proved to be a proper major site. Maybe more tourneys in the future?

The Bad

1. Slow Play. Apparently the rounds took 5+ hours to play each day, making Sunday's 36 hole marathon. Speed up ladies! It will make you better players. Trust me.
2. Lorena Ochoa. Sorry this is harsh, but Ochoa had a chance here to get Player of the Year locked up. This course favoured long hitters, but Ochoa didn't come through.

The Ugly

1. Jeong Jang's ruling. Jang apparently hit the ball twice with one swing on her 54th hole of the tourney. I can give her the benefit of the doubt as to why she didn't think she hit it twice - the heavy grass probably didn't allow her to feel the ball the first or second time. While I've commented on hating to use "Judge TV", two things come to mind. First set of questions - why did it take until Jang's 59th hole before she was told what the ruling was? Why wasn't she automatically disqualified for signing a wrong scorecard, like the rule said? Why didn't her playing partners say anything? Second question - if Roberto De Vicenzo had done his "what a stupid I am" 1968 Masters mistake now, would the video replay overturn the mistake? If it can't work both ways, if "Judge TV" can only make a player's score worse, then it should be scrapped.
2. 18 hole Monday playoffs. Go to 3 or 4 hole playoffs, like the British Open and PGA Championships have done. As E.M.Swift of si.com and Mercer Baggs of thegolfchannel.com both said today, it's an idea whose time has come and gone. It would make everyone's lives better. That's why I don't think it will happen soon. Besides, the US Amateur and other titles decided by match play are sudden death.
3. TV Coverage - NBC airs a Wimbledon highlight package at 2pm Sunday instead of the late 3rd round/early 4th round action. Would they have done the same with the men's US Open? No, when Tiger won in 2000 at Pebble Beach we saw every shot. And TSN did not show early Sunday play or any of the Monday playoff. One more reason for not having an 18-hole playoff.

Regards,

Steve