More on the Masters

[SirMilton]

I whole-heartedly agree that the PGA would never have anyone "throw" a tournament and also agree that every professional should be regarded as honorable and honest until proven otherwise.

However, courses are designed and redesigned everyday to favor one type of play over another. Tees are moved, forced carries can be shortened or lenghtened, trees are planted, bunkers are moved or added, OB lines are moved, greens are reworked, rough is cut differently, etc. A course can be set up to favor fades vs. draws, long vs. short, accurate vs. inaccurate. And regardless of how any course is set up, it will favor some players' games over others.

Every should know there are some tournaments held on courses where Tiger Woods has not done well historically and he usually drops those from his schedule, except his ego won't let him drop a Major. I think this is a wise move on Tiger's part; you can only play so many and still have a life, so why not drop the courses that do not fit your game well?

I am certain that the PGA could identify the courses which Tiger avoids because he does not score well on them, and then the PGA could set up a Major tournament course using some of the same characteristics which bother Tiger.

Could they? Of Course!

Would they?

Even if they did, its still the same course for everyone, so what's the big deal?

Consider that the main source of the PGA's revenues are TV and TV depends on audience share. Golf coverage depends upon getting a lot of non-golfers to watch golf coverage and you need competition to get interest and viewers. If Tiger won every time out, even golfers would stop watching golf on TV.

My personal opinion is that if the PGA isn't already influencing the set up of courses to make them as competitive as possible, they will do whatever it takes to keep their TV revenues. Those high-priced guys at the PGA will definitely not take a pay cut voluntarily.

Major League Football fields and Major League Baseball fields are ALWAYS set up to favor the home team's game. Why should golf be different?

[iacas]

However, courses are designed and redesigned everyday to favor one type of play over another. Tees are moved, forced carries can be shortened or lenghtened, trees are planted, bunkers are moved or added, OB lines are moved, greens are reworked, rough is cut differently, etc. A course can be set up to favor fades vs. draws, long vs. short, accurate vs. inaccurate. And regardless of how any course is set up, it will favor some players' games over others.

While that may be true to some extent, it doesn't hold a lot of water. You can't guarantee a winner from the top 10% of the Driving Distance category. Tim Clark was in contention for several years at Augusta. Chris DiMarco before him. Zach Johnson... not long hitters, and DiMarco plays primarily a fade.

The ability to tailor a course to suit a segment of the players is over-blown. Outside of going to the extremes, it's really not possible. The guy who hits greens and putts best will probably win that week.

Every should know there are some tournaments held on courses where Tiger Woods has not done well historically and he usually drops those from his schedule, except his ego won't let him drop a Major.

Name them. He's dropped a few tournaments like the John Deere because, quite frankly, they're not suitable for a guy of his stature in the world of golf. The B.C. Open was a glorified Nationwide Tour event. He got stuck in traffic for a few hours at the LA Open AND has taken to playing in Dubai the week beforehand, so he's axed that tournament - but he played in it for ten years, so it's not like he decided on a whim to cut that one. He doesn't play the FBR, but that may have something to do with a dude carrying a gun around while following him. He doesn't do the celebrity thing, so that rules out Pebble Beach and the Bob Hope.

Tiger fits his schedule to the majors. Since they come fairly frequently over the summer in particular, he generally plays one, a tournament in the middle, and then the next major. He needs only to play 15 tournaments, and so long as four of them are the majors, I don't think he even cares if he plays eight or 15. Tiger plays well everywhere. On days when he has to be accurate, he hits 3W/5W/2I from the tee. On days when he has to bomb it, he can do that too. You're assuming a lot of things to be true that I'm simply not willing to grant you...

Could they? Of Course!

No.

Would they?

WHY would they? Even if they could (they can't), WHY would they? Why would they want to?

If Tiger won every time out, even golfers would stop watching golf on TV.

I wouldn't. Plus, Tiger doesn't play every week.

My personal opinion is that if the PGA isn't already influencing the set up of courses to make them as competitive as possible, they will do whatever it takes to keep their TV revenues. Those high-priced guys at the PGA will definitely not take a pay cut voluntarily.

Look, it's tough to take the opinions of a guy seriously when he doesn't seem to understand the difference between PGA, PGA Tour, USGA, etc. Additionally, the four majors are put on by Augusta National, the PGA, the USGA, and the R&A;, none of which are the PGA Tour.

Major League Football fields and Major League Baseball fields are ALWAYS set up to favor the home team's game. Why should golf be different?

It is - at the Ryder and Presidents Cups, and even then it's not entirely possible because the "teams" don't all have the same characteristics, generally. Both teams have bombers, both have good putters, good bunker players, accurate players, etc.

In a golf tournament, what one player is the home team and why are the other 90 to 150 players the "away" teams?