Why is the golf industry in trouble?
In the days of yore, there was a comedian named Professor Irwin Corey, who appeared on stage in rather beat up formal attire and a pair of running shoes. One of his routines was to address the question, “Why do I wear running shoes?” Corey would suggest that the question really needed to be addressed in two parts. To the first part, “why”, he answered that it ventured into existential philosophy beyond all human understanding and tested the deepest, most remote parts of his personal psyche. In other words it could not be answered. To the second part, “do I wear running shoes?” the answer is yes!
Over the past couple of weeks, I have been inundated with a multitude of press releases, articles, blogs and columns all asking essentially the same question, “Why is the golf industry in trouble?” Of course they all purport to have the answer to the why part and ready solutions as to how to fix it. However, very few of them even question their opening assumption that the golf industry is in trouble.
Is it really?
There are too many golf courses; not enough golfers; it’s too expensive; too time consuming; too difficult; members are aging; not enough young people are joining; the demographics are against us; society has changed; technology is the way people play today; there are too many rules; and the weather is bad.
On the other hand, there are a lot of golf courses to choose from; they’re not overly crowded; at least that high green fee keeps out the riff raff; the chops won’t be playing this brute; good thing we’re not inundated with a lot of young punks etc etc.
Perspective has a lot to do with whether you think golf is in trouble or not. Mark King, President and CEO of TaylorMade, suggests that golf needs to change the rules to attract more people. In other words, TaylorMade has captured about as much market share as they can so now the only way to sell more clubs is to make the pie bigger.
Some golf course owners think golf is in trouble because their tee sheet isn’t full all the time. Kind of a self centred attitude. Personally I think it’s great that I can get a tee time whenever I want, sometimes at a discount.
The fact of the matter is that some parts of the golf industry are in trouble – some courses, some manufacturers, even some tours. The pendulum swung way too far and now it has to swing back. It happens to national economies and other industries too but they usually figure out a way to survive. It means adapting but not necessarily changing who they are or what they do. Just because Ireland is having a bit of a debt crisis doesn’t mean the Irish people should all become German. Or General Motors should switch to making cell phones. Or we should amend the rules of golf.
Many parts of the golf industry are not in trouble, many are thriving. Good managers figure out a way to win in spite of the circumstances. One byproduct of every market downturn is innovation. Some course owners are moaning about third party tee time sellers and discounters – a realtively new phenomenon (innovation). Traditionalists complain they can’t compete with the discounters. Forward thinkers, however, are using the discounters to their advantage, filling surplus tee times by generating additional traffic at a very low marginal cost.
Could the industry do better? Absolutely! But not until the new thinking takes hold, the paradigm shift works its way through the system. There will be some casualties. The golf industry is adapting to changing circumstances but many of us are resisting the changes. We want it to be like it used to be. Well it’s not, so get over it!
So back to the question, why is the golf industry in trouble? “Why” covers too broad a spectrum to tackle in this limited forum. As to the second part, “is the golf industry in trouble?”
No!
Home rulings let couch potatoes be part of the action too
It’s just Week Three of the TV golf season and already we’ve had two home rulings. Maybe this is the way of the future. Should the Rules Officials be worried about their jobs?
I doubt it. In fact I think you’ll see both the PGA Tour and the European Tour move quickly to make modifications that eliminate these retroactive disqualifications.
Obviously too late for Camilo Villegas or Padraig Harrington. Or countless other players whose cheating ways were picked up by the viewing public.
The first instance of a player getting caught that I can recall goes back twenty-five years to Craig Stadler, who found his ball under a pine tree and had to make his next shot on his knees. Stadler placed a towel on the ground, knelt on it and hit the shot.
There’s no way that Stadler was trying to gain an advantage by building a stance with his towel – he just didn’t want to get his pants dirty, which is pretty ironic since most of the time Stads looked like an unmade bed.
However, some rules vigilante sitting at home noticed Stadler’s egregious breach. Between handfuls of party mix and well into his second glass of merlot, the couch potato managed to call the PGA Tour office and report the cheatin’ bastard. It was after the round, and more importantly, after Stadler had signed his scorecard, so he was disqualified for signing for an incorrect score, having not assessed himself the requisite two stroke penalty for building a stance.
There was no suggestion that Stadler intentionally cheated, he just had an uncharacteristic bout of poofiness. But apparently that’s grounds for disqualification on the PGA Tour.
The home ruling is distressful in several ways. Only players in contention are likely to get caught with the home ruling because they’re the only ones who get seen on TV. (Unless you’re Tiger Woods but that’s a different topic). So it’s not a level playing field since some players are more scrutinized than others.
In almost every case the player is unaware that he did anything wrong, so he signs his scorecard in the sincere belief that it is correct. The home ruling usually occurs well afterward, so under the current rules, the only option is disqualification. I think this is where the fastest remedy can occur. Both Tours should institute a rule that permits a retroactive penalty instead of disqualification if it can be shown that there was no intent to cheat.
The final issue I have with these home rulings is they almost always involve niggling obscure rules. OK, let’s take a moment for the purists to gather themselves here. Yes, I know – a rule is a rule is a rule. But let’s get real here. The Rules of Golf didn’t get handed down from Mount Olympus, so we’re not heading into uncharted waters here when we suggest some re-thinking of the rules might be warranted.
For those who saw the video from Abu Dhabi last week, Padraig Harrington’s ball did move – about half a dimple. He thought it oscillated, which is OK. A viewer said it moved, which is not. Did it make a difference to Harrington’s position on the green? Obviously not. But, a rule is a rule, so Padraig had an extra few days off to enjoy the sights and sounds of the United Arab Emirates instead of contending for the title after his opening round 65.
In the NFL, even the on-field officials admit they could probably call holding on every play. Can you imagine if they allowed viewers to phone in infractions? They’d need a call centre in India to handle the flood. The same goes for hooking and holding in hockey or travelling in basketball.
Golf is unique among sports for a lot of reasons. Players are responsible for policing themselves. With relatively few exceptions, they make the right call almost all the time, even when it is to their detriment. Until the Stadler incident, professional golfers had the matter pretty much under control. However, constantly improving technology has made it possible for golf to come under greater scrutiny from home based viewers and this will only increase as the technology gets even better. Home rulings are bound to increase too.
I expect announcements maybe as early as this week from the PGA Tour and the European Tour to amend the disqualification provision for players caught retroactively. It’s likely that a 2-stroke penalty will be added to the player’s score but no disqualification.
Of course that doesn’t address the ongoing issue of home rulings. It’s a very strange situation. In a sport that has always insisted it didn’t need referees or umpires, TV has spawned a whole new game where home viewers are part of the action too.
No tournament is really over until the last viewer has signed off.
The absurdity of it all
Happy New Year!
The PGA Tour kicks off today. I have lost count of how many of the top players made significant changes since the end of last season. Mike Weir, Sean O’Hair, Ernie Els and Camilo Villegas will all have new caddies. Graeme McDowell, Jim Furyk, Trevor Immelman, Tim Clark and Jeff Overton have changed equipment companies. Six of the top ten players in the world are Europeans and three of them – Lee Westwood, Martin Kaymer and Rory McIlroy – have all decided to stay home this year where they can earn big bucks in appearance fees on the Euro Tour.
Lots of changes announced. Lots of reasons given. Why do they always say it’s not about the money?
**********
And while we’re pondering that money issue, is RBC on thin ice with the PGA Tour’s appearance fee regulation? By signing Jim Furyk, Ernie Els and Matt Kuchar as “player ambassadors” to go along with Mike Weir, Anthony Kim, Fred Couples, Luke Donald and Stephen Ames, RBC has essentially secured the services of these top players for the, yup, you guessed it, RBC Canadian Open. I expect the Bank and the PGA Tour worked all this out ahead of time but its looks very similar to the kind of thing that some of the big international liquor companies used to do for Euro players. And were roundly criticized for by the PGA Tour Commissioner.
Of course, after GM did it for Tiger, nobody had much to say about appearance fees anymore.
***********
The LPGA Tour announces its schedule today but word has apparently leaked out that the first North American stop will be a new event in Phoenix that will not have any prize money for the players. It’s billed as a regular Tour stop but all the money will go to charity. Can’t imagine the Ladies are thrilled with this.
**********
My friend Darren says he’s played Pebble Beach over a dozen times.
Note to Darren: Dude, you’ve never even been to California! Playing Pebble Beach on a golf simulator doesn’t count.
Or does it?
The makers of EA Sports are sure trying to sell us on the idea that we’ll never get to play Augusta National for real but the next best thing is their latest course offering that will be released to the public at the end of March. According to the pre-launch hype, this is their best yet and is so real you can practically smell the azaleas.
Don’t get me wrong. In the dead of winter, when you need a golf fix, golf simulators are a terrific way to keep your game sharp, have some fun with friends and experience some of the classic courses from around the world. The graphics are so good now it really is like being there. Almost.
I expect there will come a time when people can say they’re golfers yet have never set foot on a real course. The next step I suppose is some Vulcan mind-meld that lets you think you experienced something but it’s really just an implanted dream sequence. Kind of like Arnold Schwarzenegger in Total Recall.
To me it all gets a little absurd. Have we evolved or maybe devolved to the point where things are only real if you can see or do them on your computer or smart phone?
*********
And from the “Just when you think you’ve seen it all” department:
Standard practice before a curling game is for the vice skips to flip a coin to see who has last rock in the first end. On Monday night, not a single coin could be found amongst the eight curlers on our sheet and the usual spots where people leave a penny for just such an occasion yielded nothing. However one of the guys on the other team had his Blackberry with him and it had a coin flipping app on it! Who knew?
How can I help?
On Friday I attended a symposium at the Cutten Club, hosted by Tim O’Connor’s first year communications students in the Turfgrass Diploma program at the University of Guelph. The symposium was designed to explore topics of concern in the turfgrass industry and the need for improved communications skills.
Almost everyone in the room was involved in the turfgrass industry – golf course superintendents, pestide and turfcare product suppliers, expert consultants and students – so when it came to weighty discussion topics like pesticide bans, chemical versus organic, brown versus green and so on, the consensus was pretty much a given. As someone noted, it was definitely a case of preaching to the converted.
However, the crux of the symposium wasn’t to debate the pros and cons of pesticides – it was really about developing better communications skills to properly inform the public who are currently being misinformed by a lunatic fringe pushing an agenda for a complete ban on pesticides. This is a tough battle because sensationalism always gets attention and the anti-pesticide groups can really stir the pot in local newspapers, townhall meetings and on the internet.
One of the panelists at the symposium stated that, “as golfers, we had to do a better job of informing the non-golfing public about the safe use of pesticides.” That’s probably true but I’m not sure that even avid golfers are aware of all the facts nor could they convincingly convey that information to a skeptic.
I recall a few years ago playing an early morning round and watching a tractor move up and down an adjacent fairway pulling a sprayer. The driver was all done up in a haz mat suit and breathing through a respirator. Later I caught up to the staff member and asked what he was spraying. He told me the name of the product, assured me it was safe and that I needn’t be concerned. I remember my first reaction was, if it’s so safe, why was he wearing a suit and using a respirator?
I’m not sure I would be such a strong advocate for that product even though science and common sense told me it was OK. The vision of the guy in the haz mat suit still conveys come lingering doubt.
Obviously not all golfers can or will become experts in turfcare maintenance practices, certainly not to the extent that they will be advocates in the ongoing pesticide debate. But some very interesting points were made during the disccussion that all golfers would be advised to keep in mind if confronted by someone advocating the abolition of ‘evil golf courses’ or a worldwide ban on pesticides.
>>>If the same ban on pesticide use that currently applies to homeowners and lawn care specialists were applied to agriculture worldwide, approximately 2 billion people would starve.
>>>The use of organic products that are often advocated as a viable solution may require many times more volume to do the job. The transportation requirements alone increase the overall carbon footprint way beyond the benefits of eliminating synthetic pesticides.
>>>Even the most prolific pesticide users are still an environmemntal plus.
>>>If a pesticide ban were applied to golf courses, it would be Prohibition all over again as owners and their superintendents hoarded or sought banned products to keep up with the course down the road that is still green. (One only has to look at your neighbour down the street who has no dandelions on his lawn to know this would be true. Check the garage or shed to see what he’s been using!)
>>>Water downstream of a golf course is actually cleaner than the water upstream.
I don’t know for sure if those points are all factual but the people who made them are credible and I believe them to be true.
Perhaps the point that hit home the hardest for me was made by John Bladon, a noted author, lecturer and expert on turfcare maintenance who was one of the panelists at the symposium. John suggested that the golf media has to do a better job educating golfers about pesticides so that when confronted with misinformation they can refute it.
I guess that means me. Actually, I know it means me since John mentioned me by name. But it’s great advice!
And to follow it I know I will have to become better educated about this topic myself. For all those reading this blog, please feel free to contact me if you can help. I have a lotta learnin’ to do.
It’s a slow news week
Heading into American Thanksgiving, not much usually happens in the golf world. The major equipment manufacturers know that most Americans shut it down for the week so now’s not a good time to be releasing news about their latest and greatest.
The European Tour will end its season with the Dubai World Championship this week and The Titleist/Footjoy Canadian PGA Club Pro Championship is on in Florida but that’s about it for Tournaments and Tours.
Unless some PGA Tour superstar crashes his SUV into a fire hydrant don’t hold your breath waiting for breaking news this week.
Since I just ate a full meal I can’t comment on Tiger’s latest attempt to rebrand his tarnished image. So instead I leave you with this wee story about the importance of being truthful about your handicap:
A businessman was attending a conference in Africa. He had a free day and wanted to play a round of golf and was directed to a golf course in the nearby jungle. After a short journey, he arrived at the course and asked the pro if he could get on..
“Sure,” said the Pro, “What’s your handicap?”
Not wanting to admit that he had an 18 handicap, he decided to cut it a bit.
“Well, it’s 16,” said the businessman, “But what’s the relevance since I’ll be playing alone?”
“It’s very important for us to know,” said the pro, who then called a caddy.
“Go out with this gentleman,” said the pro, “his handicap is 16.”
The businessman was very surprised at this constant reference to his handicap. The caddy picked up the businessman’ s bag and a large rifle; again the businessman was surprised but decided not to ask any questions.
They arrived on the 1st hole, a par 4. “It’s wise to avoid those trees on the left,” said the caddy.
Needless to say, the businessman duck-hooked his ball into the trees. He found his ball and was about to punch it out when he heard the loud crack of the rifle and a large snake fell dead from a tree above his head. The caddy stood next to him with the rifle smoking in his hand.
“That’s the Black Mamba, the most poisonous snake in all Africa . You’re lucky I was here with you.”
After taking a bogey, they moved to the 2nd hole, a par 5.
“Good to avoid those bushes on the right,” says the caddy.
Of course, the businessman’ s ball went straight into the bushes. As he went to pick up his ball, he heard the loud crack of the caddy’s rifle once more, and a huge lion fell dead at his feet.
“I’ve saved your life again,” said the caddy.
The 3rd hole was a par 3 with a lake in front of the green. The businessman’ s ball came up just short of the green and rolled back to the edge of the water. To take a shot, he had to stand with one foot in the lake. As he was about to swing, a large crocodile emerged from the water and bit off much of his right leg.
As he fell to the ground bleeding and in great pain, he saw the caddy with the rifle propped at his side, looking on unconcernedly.
“Why didn’t you kill it?” asked the man incredulously.
“I’m sorry, sir,” said the caddy. “This is the 17th handicap hole. You don’t get a shot here.”
And that my golfing friends is why you should never lie about your handicap!!
Finchem is caught in a squeeze
In one of the stranger press releases over the weekend it was announced that the PGA Tour Policy Board will probably reject the “Designated Event” plan for 2011. This was Tim Finchem’s solution to get some of the world’s top players into the weaker field events.
Davis Love, a Policy Board member, indicated the new rule had been passed in July but that something of this magnitude actually has to be passed twice and that ratification at the upcoming meeting likely won’t happen. Instead, players will be asked to “help” certain events on a voluntary basis.
As if that’s going to happen. Don’t count on seeing Tiger Woods, Phil Mickelson or Ernie Els at the RBC Canadian Open anytime soon.
Love explained that designating an event castes it in an unfavourable light. He used the McGladrey Classic, of which he is the host, as an example.
“We wouldn’t want to be designated,” Love said. “ ‘Tiger played XYZ, but they made him’ ’’ Love said. “That’s going to look bad, even though that’ll sell tickets.”
That’s Love’s opinion but it’s more likely there are a few tournament directors who would gladly accept the stigma if they could get Woods to show up. Tournaments that have been struggling for years because of a bad date on the schedule aren’t concerned about vanity – they’re looking at survival and this move by the PGA Tour is just another slap in the face.
If you’re wondering why the Policy Board would reject a plan that could stabilize a number of events, you don’t have to look much farther than the World Rankings. As long as Woods, Mickelson, Stricker, Furyk and a handful of other American players dominated the top end of the World Rankings, Finchem and company probably felt pretty comfortable mandating that the players help the Tour by playing a certain number of designated events each year.
Now, however, Americans only hold eight of the Top 20 spots and the international players are not as beholden to the PGA Tour. In fact, Lee Westwood (#1) and Rory McIlroy (#10) have already indicated they will not take up PGA Tour membership in 2011, opting to focus on the European Tour and the majors.
More recently, Ian Poulter (#14), who has been a PGA Tour member since 2005, has pondered publicly that he too may move back home now that the European Tour has increased the mandatory number of events from 12 to 13. He wants to play both Tours but it is increasingly difficult given the mandatory requirements. (The PGA Tour requires its members to play in a minimum of 15 events to retain membership).
For people with real jobs, playing golf 18-20 weeks a year doesn’t seem like much of a hardship but the tournament schedule is just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to time management. Apart from travel, there are sponsor issues, home country considerations and of course, family obligations that have to be factored into a touring professional’s planning.
A few years back, Ernie Els tried to play both the PGA Tour and the European Tour, maintaining a house in Florida, another in London and one in his native South Africa. Even with a private jet , Els acknowledged that the travel nearly killed him and it took too heavy a toll on his family.
Another consideration for European players is the Ryder Cup. It would be foolish to suggest that Americans don’t take the Ryder Cup seriously, but they’re not as passionate as their opponents. A change in selection criteria for the Euro team is likely before the 2012 confrontation but for most players the best way to get on the team is by supporting the European Tour.
With more of the world’s top players opting not to play full time in America, the last thing the PGA Tour can do is place more mandatory requirements on its members. Perhaps it should look to reduce the minimum number of required events so that we don’t have a repeat of the Seve issue. Old timers will recall that Ballesteros refused to comply with the PGA Tour’s membership requirements and North American fans were deprived of the Spaniard’s presence for all but the majors each year.
Commissioner Finchem is caught in a squeeze. Publicly he needs to offer all the support he can to the weaker field tournaments but his independent contractor players aren’t quite so beholden to him anymore. More restrictions will further alienate those with options on both sides of the pond.
Westwood and McIlroy have already decided to stay in Europe. It will be unfortunate if Martin Kaymer, Paul Casey, Ian Poulter and others do the same. A golf season without many of the world’s top ranked players won’t make life any easier for the suits in Ponte Vedra.
Flawed stats lead to flawed conclusions
There’s an old saying that suggests that there are three sides to every story: your version, my version and the truth. Along the way some math geek added a fourth version – statistics, with the suggestion that they represent the indisputably correct conclusion. As we all know, stats lie.
An infamous press release a couple of years ago relied on stats to make a point about golf participation in Canada. The Ipsos Read poll found that approximately 94 million rounds of golf were being played in this country annually. Starting with a relatively low number of consumers and extrapolating the anecdotal findings lead to this astronomical number. If it were true, course owners would be pretty happy people and employers would be chaining people to desks.
More recently, Golf Canada used a statistical report to determine how large the market might be for their membership drive. Finding that there are nearly six million golfers in Canada and only 360,000 of them are current Golf Canada members, the future looked pretty bright for their marketing campaign.
With just 10,000 new members added to the Golf Canada roster in the past year, the results certainly can’t be put in the success category. And the departure of Peter Beresford as COO and the recent exit by Steve Carroll as a regional Membership Director can’t be just written off as personal career changes either. They are symptoms of a much larger problem.
Beresford came to Golf Canada after a long career at McDonalds. Some will argue that marketing is the same, it’s just the product that’s different. Well, marketing hamburgers and golf memberships is not the same. People eat at McDonalds because it’s cheap, consistent and convenient. The bottom line is people have to eat and if you’re in a hurry, Mickey D’s is a realistic choice.
Nobody really needs a Golf Canada membership, at least certainly not in the same way we need to eat. For competitive amateur golfers, they do need a handicap but for the bulk of golfers there is precious little that Golf Canada can offer them that they need. Beresford and company decided to tart up the Golf Canada membership with perceived benefits such as lower insurance premiums, travel discounts and discounted golf rounds.
Most people see these kinds of promotions daily. There isn’t a credit card company, travel company, insurance company, phone company or bank that isn’t bombarding us incessantly about how we can save and get special benefits by joining their latest program. Much of it is annoying, most of it is bogus and none of it really benefits you.
Unlike McDonalds, where you could always offer a trinket to get the kids to bully their parents into the store, there is no magic hook to make people buy a Golf Canada membership. There are just three reasons people have one: they get one whether they want it or not because they are members of a private club; they need a handicap to compete in provincial or national amateur competitions; or they want to support the good things that the RCGA does.
So now it comes back to stats. Currently there are 360,000 Golf Canada members. Using the estimate of six million golfers in the country, that’s only 6%. Seems like a lot of room to grow.
However, that six million figure is made up of occasional golfers, core golfers and avid golfers. Occasional golfers are those people who play 1-3 rounds per year. They make up almost 55% of the total. Unless they want to help Golf Canada out of the goodness of their heart, they don’t need a membership.
Core golfers, depending on whose studies you believe, play anywhere from 8-20 rounds per year. That works out to something less than one round per week over our short golf season. No need for a Golf Canada membership amongst these folks either although more of them may be sympathetic to Golf Canada’s objectives. The core golfers make up another 35% of the total.
That leaves just 10% for the avid golfers – those of us who play in excess of 20 rounds per year. For private and semi-private club members and addicts, that number likely exceeds 50 rounds.
So, out of six million golfers in Canada, the number of people who can most benefit from having a Golf Canada membership is down to 600,000. Sixty percent already have one. Of the remainder, one could argue that a lot of them play many rounds of golf but don’t ever play competitively where they might need an official handicap. They don’t need a new insurer or travel discounts either but I think we’ve already covered that.
Sixty percent of any market sounds pretty good but getting any significant part of that other forty percent will be very tough. There is no compelling reason to make them join. One answer lies in turning more occasional and core golfers into avid golfers, another very tough proposition.
Perhaps the best solution is a long term one that can start now. The Golf in Schools program is one of the most successful ever at introducing new people to golf. The kids aren’t big spenders yet but if they develop a love for the game early, they will be the avid golfers of the future.
Golf Canada needs to give every kid who goes through the Golf in Schools program a membership card. Don’t charge them anything for it but attach some real benefits to it – benefits that will get them out to a golf course and something they can get excited about. If the kids get excited their parents will get involved too. It works for McDonalds.
The kid’s card should definitely have an online aspect to it that ensures they’re part of a community. That seems to work for Facebook, gaming sites and others.
By the time these kids reach adulthood, having a Golf Canada membership will be an accepted part of playing the game and something they want to have rather than something they may or may not need.
By expanding the statistical base to include a new market, Golf Canada can target a whole new segment that will have both short and long term results. Besides if they give away a quarter million cards to kids, their stats will look better too.
Watch out for Woods
Quite a weekend for a lot of Canadian golfers. Congratulations to Rod Spittle who finally won on the Champions Tour after Monday qualifying for the past six seasons. That means fully exempt status for him next year.
Also kudos to David Hearn who finished inside the Top 25 on the Nationwide Tour which guarantees him a return to the PGA Tour in 2011.
Over the past two weeks, fourteen Canadian golfers made it through the first stage of Q school in their quest to earn playing status for 2011. Among the notables who didn’t make it were Nick Taylor and Matt Hill, ranked No. 1 and No. 2 amateurs in the world last year. Just goes to show that there’s a world of difference between the amateur and pro levels.
This Monday morning wouldn’t be complete without a comment on the latest World Golf Rankings. Lee Westwood is the new number one! Didn’t even play on the weekend. That’s part of the weirdness of the rankings.
Over the past season when perennial No. 1 Tiger Woods didn’t play well, five players had a chance to overtake him by winning – Phil Mickelson, Steve Stricker, Lee Westwood, Ernie Els and Martin Kaymer. None of them got the job done at the time it counted most. Both Westwood and Mickelson had multiple chances to move past Woods just by nabbing a top finish but even that couldn’t be had.
Tiger always says winning is the only thing that counts and the rest just follows. All of the top players will be teeing it up in China this week and I don’t look for Westwood to be No. 1 for long. Mickelson is the defending champion but Woods has a habit of putting things right when he puts his mind to it.
The rankings themselves are just a snapshot. They could change week to week or maybe someone else could start a long reign atop the list. If you were picking one guy to hang on to top spot for a while, who would it be?
For my money, I wouldn’t bet against Woods.
Tiger’s not talking. So what else is new?
They billed it as a news release but it really falls more under the category of “DUH!”
Tiger Woods agent Mark Steinberg released a statement that his client would no longer answer any questions about the past – meaning the past twelve months or the past twelve mistresses or something. Perhaps I missed the moment but at what point in the past twelve years did he ever answer anything.
Woods is a master at talking a lot but saying absolutely nothing – he has perfected the art of the non-answer. This is not just a celebrity athlete protecting his privacy. This has gone way beyond that.
Some athletes fall back on sports cliches to eliminate the need to think: “I try to show up at the rink every night. I’m giving it 110%.” Woods doesn’t need the cliche. He has more elaborate options that he can dial up as the occasion requires such as:
Patronizing banter – use the reporter’s nickname and reference some little incident that nobody else in the room has any clue about. Makes the reporter feel special. Leaves everybody else scratching their head and reaching for a barf bag. Note: if the reporter doesn’t have a nickname, make one up.
The icy stare – use for insensitive questions, meaning almost all questions. Follow icy stare with “Next question!”
The diversion – when asked a really tough question such as, “Tiger can you tell us about the skanks you were with in Vegas and what really happened in the parking lot at Perkins?” Respond with, “the greens here are running about 12 1/2. I had trouble finding my rhythm.”
The comeback – only to be used with really obnoxious reporters. (Meaning most of them). “Weren’t you the one who asked me that question at the British Open? Next question!”
The refusal – “I’m not going to talk about that. It’s personal.” Covers almost everything not related to the specific golf event this week including how things are going with his course design business; what’s upcoming on his playing schedule; and does that porn star really have video?
The denial – to be used both in media conferences and with the Florida Highway Patrol. No explanation required.
And finally, there is the textbook answer. This is sometimes known as the prepared text. It was perfected by Phil Mickelson in his early days on Tour when everything he uttered sounded like it was coming from his PR agency. Woods has taken it to a new level, given that he can deliver the statement with a sarcastic grin on his face so that you know he doesn’t believe a word of the b.s. he’s saying and worse, he knows you know. Maybe more appropriately this could be labelled under the category, “I’m Tiger. You’re not. Deal with it.”
So, Mr. Steinberg, pls explain how this latest announcement will mean anything different from past media scrums with Tiger. Or can I call you Steinie?
On the road again
Up at 3 this morning and out the door at 4 to catch a plane to Charlotte for a whirlwind tour of some South Carolina courses I’ve not seen before. Those early morning flights are difficult enough but flying so soon after a full Thanksgiving dinner ought to come with some sort of warning label.
Played TPC of Myrtle Beach this afternoon with Head Pro Casey Cook. This is a Tom Fazio design and rated 5 stars by Golf Digest. Deservedly so. Might be the best course I’ve seen on the Grand Strand yet. Exceptional routing with lots of elevation changes, contours and intriguing green sites. (I’ll have a complete review of the course later with pictures).
Dined at Greg Norman’s Australian Grille. The wine (Norman’s) was excellent, the service was slow and the steak was barely edible – overcooked, no flavour and vastly over-priced. Too bad because this place was highly recommended.
On Tuesday we play 18 in the morning on the Dye Club at Barefoot Resort, then a second round in the afternoon on the Heathlands Course at the Legends Resort. (More on both in a follow-up Travel piece).
There are eight golf writers on this trip and we’re being chauffered around in Merle Haggard’s old tour bus. Lots of leather and chrome, five flat screen TV’s and more remote controls than we can figure. There’s even one for some sort of Hollywood (Nashville?) lighting system that triggers twinkling lights in the ceiling of the bus. I don’t know a lot about Merle and really don’t want to know what he was up to with the mood lights.
One of my fellow scribes showed up this morning but his luggage didn’t, courtesy of Continental airlines. Despite repeated calls all day to the airline nobody seemd too sure of where the luggage was. It struck me that FedEx can send millions of packages all over the world every day and tell you the exact location of every one of them at any time during their transit. Surely the same technology is available to the airlines.
Even if you have to play with rented clubs and borrowed underwear, it would be somewhat reassuring to know that the airline knows where your missing luggage is and is confident of returning it – even if it’s half way around the world.
Peter Mumford is the Editor and Publisher of Fairways Magazine in Toronto. Fairways is intended for avid golfers and this blog site is an extension of that same philosophy - we don't dumb it down for the uninformed!