Choi Comes Through

Congrats to KJ Choi for his Chrysler Championship win in Tampa on Sunday. KJ becomes the winningest Asian on the PGA Tour ever, with 4. He also becomes a perfect 4-0 when leading after 54 holes.
I've always liked Choio's game, ever since the 2004 Masters. What was lost in the Mickelson-Els battle was Choi played under par on the final nine Sunday as well, including an eagle 2 on the 11th. He seems to be very calm on the course. While his swing seems to have an abrupt plane change from backswing to downswing, he can obviously get it going. He also seems to like October, having won this tourney 4 years ago, and the Greensboro last year.
Congrats too to all the players who made the top 125, as the Chrysler was the last full field event. The top 150 also has some meaning, as many of those players can qualify for unlimited exemptions. While it's not as good as top 125, it's better than going back to Q-school, wondering if you will have to get a job. To go from earning as high as $500,000 in a season to the workworld must be a real shock.
Now, what to make of Mike Weir? He shot a 73 Sunday, +2 for the day. His final round season average was 72+, meaning he was almost always over par on Sunday. What is going on? Is it conditioning? Does Mike tense up knowing he's one of the shorter hitters on Tour? Or something else entirely? Obviously there's room for improvement. If 2007 is going to be a banner year (and he doesn't seem to have a lot more, as 40 is a few years away), he'll have to start being under par Sunday.

Regards,
Steve

Private Club Woes II

Hello. Just got done playing today in beautiful late October weather. It was my first day of unemployment in 32 years. It was perfect therapy. The past week has been very hectic trying to clean up all the loose ends while having various workers come fix our basement after a hot-water heater broke. This was a day I treated as the first day of the rest of my life, a celebration. It was very calming to go around the course today.
As mentioned earlier, this will be my last year at this private club. I was 100% sure I was going for good after the board decided to make the course an equity club. There was no way I was going to come up with $17,500, even when I was employed. I can use that money on other luxury items, like food.
In the last month the board backed off, and decided to remain non-equity. They got plenty of feedback saying members were going to walk if they had to dump 5 digits this year on a share just to maintain status quo. The fees are going up to make up for the lack of share selling.
Because I'm now not being forced to purchase a share, I modified my departure percentage to 90% going outright, and 10% on taking a leave of absence. I felt I'd put my membership on hold for a year to decide if my new career (whatever it is) would be able to include a private golf membership.
Today after my round I found out a leave of absence is only for people whose jobs are transferring out of town, or who suffer a medical downturn preventing them from playing. Apparently losing a job doesn't qualify.
Is this fair? From the club's point of view, they probably don't want someone hanging around on a list who has no intention of playing there again. However I'd be forking out some money ($300 to $500 a year I believe) to stay on this list, and someone else could be taking my place. If I walk (which is becoming very easy to do), the club gets nothing from me.
Should not clubs be doing everything in their power to retain members? It depends on what the membership demand is. Right now it's very low across the board. Waiting lists are few and far between.
Anyway, it looks like I'm back to 100% leaving. No regrets on my part. Thanks for the memories.

Regards,
Steve

Private Club Woes

Hello. Just read an Ontario Golf magazine article about the struggles private golf clubs are facing getting members. It doesn' surprise me because of what I see at my own course.
The number of members is important. Too many, and no one can get a tee-off time. Too few, and those members have to pay more than someone at a full membership club. Also, there may be a lot of tournaments to offset the members' cost.
Then there are the demographics. What is the average member age? Are many of the members not going to be there because of age in 2016? Are there enough junior and intermediate members? Can they afford to become senior members?
How much does it cost to get in? Is there an initiation fee? Do you have to buy a share? What are the annual fees? Is there something besides golf? Is the clubhouse in good shape?
If just one of the above is not right, a club can suffer. There is so much competition for the golf dollar. Public clubs can offer package deals. Some private clubs offer special couples and super senior discounts.
Things like daycare services are recommended for many clubs. But will they work?
It just seems like # of rounds is the most crucial element. If someone cannot play at a private club for a cost/round less than a good public course, then why belong?
Many people are looking at their situation. I looked at mine too. Since Friday is my last day of employment, I will be resigning. Will there be anyone to take my place? Time will tell.

Regards,
Steve

Two More Ryder Cup Theories

Hello. I've read a couple of more "why the US collapses in Ryder Cup play" theories this past week.
Lorne Rubenstein, respected Globe and Mail golf columnist, thinks the President Cup is the culprit. Since the US plays every year, and the Euros play every other year, the Euros are more up for the matches. The US players are burnt out according to Lorne as a result. If there were no President's Cup, things would be different.
Brian Hewitt received a reply to his column re Ryder Cup from a lady named Rebekah. Her theory is the US team is like the high school student who can solve math problems in his head, while the Euros are the high school students who have to study hard. When they both get to "Ryder Cup University", the Euros have the study habits to excel, and the US don't.
Readers of this blog can probably guess what I think, but here goes. The President's Cup doesn't hold water in my opinion. In fact, the Euros were winning Ryder Cups before the President's Cup came into being. If anything, the President's Cup should be helping the US squad. Isn't that where the "dream pairs" of Furyk/Woods and DiMarco/Mickelson were discovered? Shouldn't the US be better than either team now that they play way more matches?
I agree with Rebekah 100% and replied back to Brian Hewitt saying so. I was the "no homework required" high school student who found university overwhelming. I still do find things requiring studying and intense effort challenging because I can do things relatively well even when I just start them.
Time to get some study habits, US (and Canada). Otherwise it will be a long time before the Ryder Cup and other world event trophies are back on this continent.

Regards,
Steve

Durant A New Name To The List

Hello. Congrats to Joe Durant for winning the Funai Disney Classic last week. Durant finished at -24 for his first win in 5 years. Durant joins Tim Herron, Jeff Maggert and Davis Love as players who have gone years between PGA Tour victories.
Having played the Magnolia and Palm courses 6 years ago, it amazes me a guy could average 66 for 4 straight days. It also amazes me a guy (Justin Rose) can shoot 60 the first day and not be a factor on Sunday. Obviously they are much better than I am.
Did playing two easy (at least to them) courses impact Tiger Woods' decision to not play, and jeopardize his streak of 6 wins? Maybe. I remember Tiger was in the last group one year and saw Duffy Waldorf (perfect name for a Disney winner, don't you think?) pass him with a 62. Even though he's won the event twice, even Tiger can't say he's going to shoot -24 for 72 holes with any certainty.
Are these courses too easy for these guys? And as a result, when a guy wins, do the others say he was the luckiest? And when a guy comes close but loses, does he just say the winner was luckier, instead of examining why he couldn't close the deal?
I think that's why Tiger likes playing tough tracks. Birdies then have some meaning, instead of occurring once every 3 holes. Also, they reveal a player's true abilities.
Here's hoping Tiger plays East Lake in the Tour Championship. A tough track can bring out the best in Tiger. I hope we can see it a chance at 7 wins in a row and 9 for the season.

Regards,
Steve

Ryder Post-Mortem

Hello. An interesting stat today in a Brian Hewitt column on thegolfchannel.com. Apparently there have been 13 American winners of the Rookie of the Year award since it was created in 1990. Only 2 of those 13 players have ever made a Ryder Cup team - Tiger Woods and Stewart Cink. Meanwhile, Luke Donald, a Euro guy who went to Northwestern, has not only played but starred in the Ryder Cup, and he's still in his 20s.
You could take this further and says only one American Rookie of the Year (Woods) has won a major and been on a Ryder Cup team.
Speaking of which, the youngest US player this year was Vaughn Taylor at 30, a few months younger than Tiger Woods. Meanwhile, Donald, Sergio Garcia and Paul Casey are all in their 20s, and are Ryder Cup veterans.
What conclusions can be drawn from the above? Regrettably Hewitt only asked for opinions instead of offering his own theories. I'm a little bolder though.
My theory is the US college golf system is obsolete. It produces Iron Byron clones instead of golfers.
Want proof? All we have to do is go back to 1994. That year Tiger Woods won the US Amateur at 18 years old, before he went to Stanford. Here was a guy who beat everyone enrolled in a US college program (among others). US college didn't prepare him to win the US Amateur. It apparently didn't prepare anyone else either.
The fact Tiger could assemble a support system independent of college at that young age that made him better prepared to win a US Amateur than any of the colleges is quite an accomplishment. Earl Woods is to be applauded, but the colleges are left holding the bag, wondering what happened. They still are, because 3 of the last 4 US Amateur winners are non-Americans.
It's time to reevaluate what the US colleges are and aren't doing well. Only then will Ryder Cup standings change.

Regards,
Steve

Why Not Disney?

Hello. Last year at this time I was at Walt Disney World. The Funai Classic was on then, but I didn't go. This trip was dedicated to my children, especially my 7 year old daughter. My 3 year son was entertained by the Buzz Lightyear ride in Magic Kingdom, going on it 20 times.
This year it seems all the big names are skipping it, including Tiger Woods. Other than being a great place to vacation in October, I have no idea why players wouldn't play there (just kidding). If I could have my family and friends go on that trip FOR FREE, I'd be thrilled.
What gets me are the guys who aren't going. Guys who could play in the Tour Championship. Guys who could keep their cards. Guys who could make their families happy.
What have things come to, when all the incentives in the world won't get them there? In a word, money. Believe it or not, the players are playing for chump change relative to the team sports, and relative to off-course endorsements. Tiger's had a tremendous year, yet hasn't cracked $10 million. Interest on his current assets earns him more. He could play in 4 European Tour events and make more money.
It's time to jack first place money up to $2 million+ on even the small events. Make winning worth way more than anything else. Make purse money more attractive than off-course appearances. Get rid of pro-ams, and replace them with something more player-friendly. Do anything to get quality fields.
If the players aren't willing to go to Disney World FOR FREE, ther are serious problems.

Regards,
Steve

Where Are The Golf Meltdowns?

Hello. Many sports have had a lot of meltdowns recently. Dennis Green of the Arizona Cardinals had one at a press conference after his team blew a 20-point lead to the Chicago Bears. The University of Miami-Florida International University football game brawl. Todd Bertuzzi attacking Steve Moore in hockey. John McEnroe and Jimmy Connors in tennis. Hal McRae and Earl Weaver (and other managers) in baseball. Mike Tyson giving Evander Holyfield an 'earless' in boxing. Dennis Rodman in basketball.
Yet golf has relatively few meltdowns. John Daly of course comes to mind as someone who has had some substance induced ones. I played with a guy in a club championship once who I was very concerned about. He ended up walking off after 4 holes with what is now known as a panic attack.
For all the individual pressure there is in pro golf, it's very rare someone loses it completely and starts irrationally throwing clubs or swearing uncontrollably. Why is that so?
When pondering the answer, I read a Time article today about Clint Eastwood's upcoming movie Flags Of Our Fathers, the story of the 3 survivors who raised the US flag at Iwo Jima. These men suffered from shell shock, which is now called post-traumatic syndrome. They could not function normally after that moment because of survivor guilt and the press attention. To me this sounds familiar to what pro golfers go through especially in the big tourneys. As mentioned here before, Phil Mickelson joins golfing greats Arnold Palmer and Sam Snead as men who should've won a US Open and didn't. In Palmer's and Snead's cases they newer won a US Open again.
Will the same thing happen to Phil Mickelson? Will he become another David Duval? And what of others such as Michelle Wie? Are they suffering from the same thing as the war vets?
Winning big would take care of many of these issues. If nothing else, a win for Wie would shed her of the "Best Female Golfer to Never Win a Tournament" label, similar to Mickelson's claim of "Best Player Never To Win A Major" prior to his first Masters title.
For all golfers who have had a setback, they should seek trauma counselling. While they aren't having meltdowns such as the ones mentioned above, they may have some damage needing repair.

Regards,
Steve

Baker-Finch Another Nice CBS Addition

Hello. Add Ian Baker-Finch to the list of new CBS announcers. Baker-Finch joins Nick Faldo as broadcasters who went from ABC to CBS.
I've always liked Ian's tone and humbleness on a telecast. He's known the best of times, winning the 1991 British Open. And he's known the worst of times, having his game disappear, and being mugged. He was interviewed this year with the Claret Jug, and asked what it meant to him. He could hardly answer because of the tears. I shed a few myself.
CBS has quite a crowd in the booth now. Faldo, Baker-Finch, Jim Nantz, Peter Kostis, Bobby Clampett, Verne Lundquist, Gary McCord, Peter Oosterhuis, Bill Macatee, David Feherty....quite a few people to do the telecasts.
Will someone go? If so, I'm hoping the names McCord and Clampett are no more. While each has PGA experience, they are not announcers I particularly like. Clampett comes across very flat to me, and McCord too much the other way. With Faldo and Feherty providing sufficient laughs, I don't think McCord is needed anymore.
Will Baker-Finch join Faldo on ABC's British Open telecasts? We'll see. If so, it seems to be kind of an identity crisis at ABC. Faldo and Baker-Finch will be fully establlished as CBS personalities by then, so fans may be wondering why they're on ABC, even though they came from there. I'm very surprised ABC decided to hang onto the British Open rights. It wouldn't surprise me if they sold them after 2007.
What really gets me is why NBC hasn't snatched up some more talent. Are they waiting for more CBS fallout? Will they grab someone like Mark O'Meara? OR are they happy with status quo? If so, that may be a mistake, because CBS has added quite a bit more talent to arguably the #1 group of TV announcers.
It should be an interesting 2007.

Regards,
Steve

Ochoa's Win A "Changing Of The Guard"?

Hello. Congrats to Lorena Ochoa for winning the Samsung World Championships Sunday over the top 20 lady field. Her 7-under 65 overcame a 3 shot deficit she faced against Annika Sorenstam of all people. How many other LPGA players could've done what Ochoa did? Considering no one really has in the last 5 years, I would say not many. Sorenstam is a member of Bighorn, where the event was played. She was trying to win this tournament for a record 6 times, and was the 2-time defending champion.
What Ochoa did was arguably a major win. She will be getting Annika-like respect from her peers. When you add that to 4 other wins, and 5 seconds in the year, it was definitely a breakout year. Unless Karrie Webb or Sorenstam win the final 2 events of the year, Ochoa will be the leading money winner and Player of the Year. And she's only 24 years old.
But is this a changing of the guard? Is Ochoa the next #1 player? I would right now say only "maybe".
Why maybe when she has been touted by others (including me) as the real thing? Well, there's the fact Ochoa has now only won 8 career LPGA titles, and zero majors. While it is impressive, we have to look no further than David Duval for someone who started their career this way, only to end up as a has-been. Of course, Duval's career is exceptional in its riches-to-rags freefall.
How about another "can't-miss" star named Michelle Wie? Can she already be called a has-been at a just-turned 17 years old? This week she was 17th out of the 20 competitors, one of her worst LPGA results ever. Has the excitement of her debut now been all but completely lost? Will anyone care as much about her in 2007 on either the PGA or LPGA tours? Here's saying she's going to have to get some results by a year from now, or else her sponsors will be looking elsewhere in 2010.
And what of Paula Creamer, Morgan Pressel, Christina Kim and Natalie Gulbis, all winless in 2006 (and for some even longer)? They were probably all deemed "can't miss" by their sponsors, I'm sure.
What if anything separates Ochoa from the ladies mentioned above? When I've seen her interviewed, I've noticed an incredible focus. I think Ochoa will stop at nothing to be #1, something I question from almost all other Tour players when looking up to Tiger and Annika. Ochoa feels she can do it. And I agree with her.
All the best Lorena! And congrats on a nice 2006!

Regards,
Steve

Tilghman Deserves To Be First

Hello. Congratulations to Kelly Tilghman for landing the lead announcer job at The Golf Channel for the 2007 PGA season. Kelly is arguably the most popular golf broadcaster on The Golf Channel. She has to be to make me forget Jennifer Mills, who I saw at the 2000 Bay Hill. The fact I haven't asked where Mills is prior to today means Tilghman is great!
Kelly was a player who became a great broadcaster. She's paid her dues with 10 years of many different positions. The result is a lead announcer who has played the game at a professional level, an obvious advantage over even Jim Nantz, who roomed with Fred Couples at the University of Houston.
Will this transistion be easy for Tilghman? Not necessarily. She is going to be overshadowed by Nick Faldo for sure. And she doesn't have play-by-play experience on the PGA Tour like some of the other announcers. Mark Rolfing, an excellent on-course announcer, seems to struggle every time I hear him call Champions Tour action from the booth.
Being the first full-time play-by-play woman announcer may also be a distraction. Will there be added media scrutiny? Hopefully if there is, it passes quickly. If so, it will mean Tilghman is doing an excellent job.
Will this lead to other women getting full-time booth status? I hope so. If I were NBC, I'd give Dottie Pepper Johnny Miller's job when he retires. Pepper is knowledgable and opinionated.
Mary Carillo of the tennis world is arguably the best woman announcer out there right now. With her and Tilghman in the limelight, it will hopefully be a short time before we get a serious announcer in one of the pro team sports.
For now, we can be content with Tilghman, Carillo and Joan McCusker and Linda Moore of curling fame. Bring it on ladies!

Regards,
Steve

Love Breaks The Season Trend

Hello. Throughout the year PGA Tour events have been won by one of three types of players:

1. The Elite - Woods, Furyk and Mickelson headline this list. Geoff Ogilvy is included now that he's won the US Open.
2. The struggling veteran - Ben Curtis, Jeff Maggart, Tim Herron, Corey Pavin
3. The newcomers - Eric Axley, JJ Henry, DJ Trahan, Dean Wilson, Chris Couch

Now Davis Love has won in Greensboro, adding a fourth category

4. Guys who should be winning more often than they are given their world rankings.

Love had every chance to make the Ryder Cup team, and failed. It says a lot about how weak the US team was that people thought Love should be a shoe-in. He hadn't won a PGA event in over 3 years. Prior to the PGA, he hadn't done anything in 2006 to show any signs of a breakout. And now he's a Tour winner heading for Hawaii.

Will anyone care that his only win was in a 'lesser' event? Probably not. Yet this win could reignite Love's career. Just one more reason players in category 4. above should be trying to play in as many of these events from now until the end of the year. Get your games back. Get a win. Finish the season on a high note.

Regards.

Steve

Should Phil Have Been Allowed To Skip Ryder Cup?

Hello. Phil Mickelson announced he was through for 2006. Personally I say great for him. As someone who will be out of a job soon, I'm looking forward to spending more time with my children. The fact Phil can do it without financial worries is even better than my situation. I admire his "family first" values.
Of course, Phil's sponsors and tournament directors may not share that view. Obviously they want Phil to play. Then again, maybe Phil gets more media attention by not playing. And maybe it's easier to stay at #2 in the world rankings without playing.
My question is, if Phil's personal season ends with the PGA Championship, then why was he 'forced' to go to the Ryder Cup? Wouldn't it be great for him if he could've opted out of it (assuming he wanted out)? Wouldn't it be better for the US Team?
For all those Captain Tom Lehman fans who thought he did a great job leading the US Team to a tie for their worst defeat ever, I'll submit that Saturday afternoon's decision to sit Chris DiMarco and play Mickelson showed he was not in touch with the situation.
DiMarco symbolizes the Ryder Cup - an ordinarily talented player reaching extraordinary heights through guts, determination and spirit. Mickelson this year ran out of spirit after the US Open. He was not in it at all any time I saw him.
Should the players who will qualify no matter what criteria is used have to play if they don't want to? Or should it be like the World Cup, where two guys who want to go end up going? I favour the latter. And once the tourney starts, I think the fans do too. Especially at tourneys that are used to not seeing the big guns.
Give Phil an out for the President's Cup in 2007. I say this even though it will be played in Montreal. Let's have someone there who wants to be there.

Regards,
Steve

Charitable Choi Back To Defend

Hello. Just found out KJ Choi, last year's Greensboro champion, gave 10% of his $900,000 cheque to an area church. What a great gesture! And word has it he'll do the same thing if he wins this year. Since he shot 67 today, and is still in contention, here's hoping Choi will come through.
Lee Trevino said in an interview the main reason young Americans weren't winning on the PGA Tour was the top 125 being exempt for next year. Because of this, the new young players don't get as much opportunity to play on the big stage, meaning they don't get experience, meaning they have less chance to win and less chance to retain their cards. This sentiment was echoed by Johnny Miller in his book "I Call The Shots". Both Miller and Trevino suggested lowering the number to the 90-100 range. I assume they would also like to do away with the "Top 50 Career Money List" exemption that Mark O'Meara and others have used in the past.
While I'm in favour of these changes, I don't think it will cure the winless problem. Eric Axley and DJ Trahan have won the last two tournaments. Meanwhile, Charles Howell III, Adam Scott, Sergio Garcia and others have won lots of money, but no tournaments in 2006.
What I would do to get more winners is make winning more important. Maybe double the winner's purses, and cut the other cheques in half. In that way, the winless guys mentioned above wouldn't be as content as they are money-wise from earnings. Of course, anyone with any kind of name on the PGA Tour gets way more money in endorsements. If I were corporations, I'd cut this severely in the wake of what Tiger has done. Why pay someone that kind of money if they're so far from the top?
These guys are good. The question is, do they even want to be great?

Regards,
Steve

Faldo Will Be Busy

Hello. With the PGA season winding down, and tournaments being won by either Tiger Woods or a relative unknown (congrats to DJ Trahan for winning the Southern Farm), the booth is a great place to focus attention.
Nick Faldo has just become arguably the busiest man in golf. After signing a deal to be on The Golf Channel every Thursday and Friday, it was announced by CBS Faldo will be the lead colour man/analyst, replacing Lanny Wadkins. Plus he will also be the colour man on ABC during the 2007 British Open, the only golf property ABC still has. Plus he still wants to carry on his career on the PGA Tour, which at age 49 is coming to an end. Plus he will be Europe's 2008 Ryder Cup captain. Anyone want to have his frequent flyer points?
Is this a great move for CBS? You bet! Wadkins was always a distant 3rd in the lead colour man argument. Faldo is the only guy on TV who can be mentioned with Johnny Miller in the same sentence.
I've been a big fan of Lanny Wadkins the player. He plays fast, and was a great front runner. And he was fiery on the course. Unfortunately Lanny the announcer could not be the same way on TV. If you are going to controversial on TV, you have to be calm, a la Miller. And Lanny cannot be anywhere near as comical as Faldo. Plus Lanny's credentials cannot compare to either Miller's or Faldo's, because both men had more majors and more tournament victories.
Is this a slight against Wadkins? Not really. I personally detested Jack Nicklaus the analyst. Wadkins and Curtis Strange were way better than the great man. Tom Weiskopf and Ben Crenshaw didn't do anything for me either on past Masters telecasts. But with two lead analyst's positions open, you have to go with Faldo and Miller, because no one else is in their class.
All the best Nick! Good luck getting through a busy 2007.

Regards,
Steve

To Tee Or Not To Tee, That Is the Question

Hello. Interesting point made by the ABC crew on Sunday. They mentioned most of the golf tees in the US are made from birch trees (bamboo trees may take over), with over 100,000 trees used a year. The idea was raised as to whether or not it's time for the PGA Tour to stop using golf tees altogether. Make every tee shot be hit from the grass.
The speculation was not only would it save trees, but also cut down on the professional's driving distances. The current drivers would have to probably be replaced with more lofted drivers (like 2-woods, or "brassies" used to be"). And more skill would probably be required to hit these shots.
I like this idea in theory, but unfortunately I see one issue with it. The walking traffic a tee gets is quite extreme in a PGA Tour event. Players later in the day would have a tough time finding a lie that didn't have a shoe print or divot. And if it rained, the teeing area would obviously be very soft, making it even tougher to find a spot.
Would the compromise solution be to have a piece of artificial turf for the players to place their ball on? Just enough for the ball only, not the feet? Would players be able to share it? Would it cut down on the driving averages?
An interesting avenue to take on reducing driving distances, because the solutions are simple and inexpensive. I'll have to ponder this further. Please share your thoughts.

Regards,
Steve

Tiger's Amex Has No Limits

Hello. Congrats yet again to Tiger Woods for winning. This time he defended his WGC American Express championship. He did it in convincing style too, defeating a start-studded field by 8 shots. While it didn't have the drama of last year's playoff win over John Daly, it was still something to behold.
His streak is now at 6 wins, although he says it isn't because of losing in the first round of the World Match Play, a non-PGA Tour event with only 16 entrants, 2 weeks ago. Still, whether it's a streak or not, 8 wins for the year with 2 majors is a career for most players. Heck, John Daly has created a cult with 5 career wins and 2 majors!
And as dominate as Woods has been in majors his career, he's even more dominate in WGC events. He's now 12 wins in 22 starts! Incredible considering the field strengths.
Amazing how in early June we (and I'll include myself) wondered if Woods would ever be the same after losing his father to cancer. Many thought Phil Mickelson would catch or succeed Woods as the new dominate force.
Now Tiger appears to be better than ever. And Phil is at home, done for 2006. There appears to be no long term rival for Tiger now. Hopefully if nothing else we'll get some one tournament rivalries such as Bob May taking Tiger to the limit in the 2000 PGA or Grant Waite making Tiger sweat in the 2000 Canadian Open.
What can the rest of the PGA Tour do to catch up? In a word, patience. Learn how to win the Chrysler Classic of Greensboro, which starts Thursday. Then learn how to contend in a major. Get to play with Tiger on the weekend, and learn how to shut out the crowd distraction. Let your confidence build. Say you're starting today with a clean slate. Get your whole camp on board with the #1 player in the world goal. If any of the entourage doubt you, cut them loose.
And most of all, have fun. Imagine what excitement they'd be if you did get into major contention. And enjoy it.
Will it be enough? Hopefully we'll get a chance to find out.

Regards,
Steve