Here's the scoop: Playing golf while walking prolongs your life. On the other hand, it messes up your swing. At least that's what two separate studies announced over the past few days suggest.

The first study of Swedish golfers, published in the Scandinavian Journal of Medicine & Science in Sports, found that the death rate among golfers is 40 per cent lower than the rest of the population. In short, those folks live five years longer:

Professor Anders Ahlbom, who has led the study with Bahman Farahmand is not surprised at the result, as he believes that there are several aspects of the game that are proved to be good for the health.

"A round of golf means being outside for four or five hours, walking at a fast pace for six to seven kilometres, something which is known to be good for the health," he says. "People play golf into old age, and there are also positive social and psychological aspects to the game that can be of help."

On the other hand, a second study presented to 55th American College of Sports Medicine (ACSM) meeting in Indianapolis, followed seven American golfers who walk and determined that their swings deteriorate because of the exercise. From the Medical News Today story:

While walking the golf course is an excellent form of physical activity, this study suggests that it may have an impact on a golfer's swing and performance, gradually decreasing club head velocity and shot consistency. This may be particularly noticeable if golfers carry their bags while walking.

The conclusions of researchers Nick R. Higdon and Eric Dugan almost sounded like a promo for Stack & Tilt:

Over the course of the protocol, the golfers were less able to achieve an appropriate weight transfer to the lead leg. This resulted in decreased club head velocity, which affects the distance the ball will travel. Additionally, the study showed the angles of the lead knee and lead ankle at the top the swing are affected by time. These factors typically affect the accuracy of the shot.

The researchers conclude that golfers who want to walk ought to work out more if they don't want their swings to suffer.

"I think many golfers are realizing that their bodies are the most important tool they have in the golf swing, and that improving physical fitness may be more helpful than expensive golf clubs," said Higdon. "The study suggests that golf mechanics change and performance may decline the longer the golfer walks and swings. Getting in better shape may help golfers combat the effects of fatigue while playing golf."

Taken together the two studies suggest that if you want to live five years longer, get in shape.
Check out our "Fit at 50" story of last November for ways to do it.

--Bob Carney

(Illustration by Christian Northeast)

Fred Brattain of Corona, California, has been following the slow-play debate on the tours, reported on by Jaime Diaz earlier this month in Golf World. Having played a three-hour round (walking) myself this morning and then heard from a friend that he'd played a 5-hour-45-minute round (!) at the TPC at Sawgrass, slow play was on my mind, too. I like where Fred is coming from. It's killing us.

Everyone talks about slow play, but no one is willing to do anything about it. The problem stems from the PGA tour's lack of fortitude. The PGA pros are terribly slow, and everyone thinks they should imitate them. The fact is that a twosome playing a championship course for money should NEVER take more than 3.5 hours to complete a round. I have been playing this game for longer than anyone on any tour has been alive, and teaching the game for the last 30 years. As a teenager in the 60's I carried a +2 hdcp. I have never seen ANYONE who played better by slowing down. If the powers that be want to get the 4 hour round back into existence, the solution is simple. Line up the PGA pros and say, "Gentlemen, the first group off this morning will finish in 3.5 hours or less, or everyone in the group will be DQ'd. Thereafter no group will be more than one shot behind the group in front, or everyone in the group will be DQ'd. This is your only warning." Not only would scores go down, but perhaps all the wannabes on all the public and private courses throughout the US would get the message. By the Way, BRAVO to the LPGA for actually enforcing the slow play rule.

--Bob Carney

Not since our ill-fated change of type size has anything riled Golf World readers like Bill Fields' column on Pres. Bush's decision to quit playing golf during the war. (At least you could read this one). His piece--and Geoff Russell's accompanying comment in Front 9--have drawn a mountain of emails and posts here. Unlike the point size issue, however, there are also supporters. Without further ado, a sampling of your views on the Bush issue:

I get a golf magazine to get information about golf. I will cancel my subscription if I see another article by Bill Fields, unless he apologizes. If President Bush wants to quit golf, while Commander in Chief, it is his right. For you to think it is a slap in the face to golf, is quite a stretch. I don't want to see Bush Bashing in my golf magazine. Since you make assumptions, let me make one, you are just another Liberal media person who prints his opinions instead of unbiased facts.

Donald Shafer
San Benito, Texas

I was disappointed when I read Bill Fields' article that brought Golf World into the political arena and took an opportunity to bash our President. The President believes he is doing the right thing and all that came through the article was Bill's partisanship and an opportunity to take a shot at the President. By the way Bill, the approval rating of the Democratic congress is at an all-time low of 14% or less than half that of the President.

Dave Wilde
Washingtonville, NY

?Spot On!? Bill! As a veteran and political aficionado, I took particular offense at our President?s incredibly hypocritical and lame announcement of ?his sacrifice? (stop playing golf) in honor of our fallen heroes and their families. He, and most of the ?neocons,? have never ?served? on active duty, but eagerly sent our gallant men and women into a war in Iraq which has become a FUBAR of biblical proportions. George Bush could learn a lot about ?life skills? from golf and Bobby Jones, by ?playing the ball as it lies!?

Rod Yeager
Midwest Section PGA
(Colonel, USAF, Ret)

I do not purchase your magazine to read the comments for or against the President. If Geoff Russell or Bill Fields want to give us their opionions they should find a different forum, like the New York Times or dailykos.
We play and enjoy golf, keep it there.

Michael Dunford
Cheektowaga NY

I would like to comment on Mr. Bill Fields opinion article in the subject magazine concerning President Bush's failure to play golf because of the perception that the Commander-in-Chief shouldn't be playing golf when our military are suffering casualties during the war on terror. I think Mr. Fields very ably addresses the error of that thinking. I think it would have been most appropriate to recommend to President Bush that he read your other article, "Recovery Shots" to understand how golf is helping the rehabilitation process for our injured troops and further suggest that he join some of them during a round of golf. That makes for a win-win situation for everyone.

Tim LaPlaunt
Colonel, U.S. Marine Corps (retired)
St. Charles, MO

I am in a slow burn concerning Mr. Fields "Opinion" article of May 23, 20008. Citing CBS News as a news source is a joke. CBS has not gotten anything right since Cronkite retired. Maybe that is where he got the information that President Bush "initiated" the war in Iraq. As I remember, Saddam Hussein had broken the 1991 Gulf War Truce and defied 17 United Nations resolutions over a 12 year period. This included Resolution 1441 that was approved by France, China and Russia well as the US Congress. This resolution authorized the use of force to remove Saddam and his two murderous sons from power.
Seems that we can't get away from you liberal S.O.Bs, even in a golf magazine.

Wm Barry Huckabee
Nashville, TN 37210

Love your magazine, hate the politics. Please let Bill Fields know that we don't read your magazine for a dose of his politics. The letters you printed were predictable, the left loved it the right didn't...stick to golf.

Rick Snowden
Scottsdale, AZ

Thank you all for your comments.

--Bob Carney

Terry Smail of Seattle, who has had a little experience in the area, writes about Tiger's knee.

I am very worried?about Tiger's left knee. I've had 10 knee operations?5 'open' procedures including a total knee replacement two years ago and 5 arthroscopy surgeries. Despite all of that, I still play to a nine handicap. Arthroscopic knee surgeries are normally a piece of cake?quick recovery and not too much disruption of the knee capsule. Even with the left knee, which undergoes considerable torque during the golf swing, a player should be able to play golf normally within two to four weeks. The reports of Tiger wearing a brace, and not being able to come back to competition within 6 -8 weeks is indicative of something far more serious than a simple cartilage issue. That does not portend well for his future or for the popularity and the economic health of golf.

Tiger answered a number of questions about the knee and his re-hab in Wednesday's AT&T National press conference, available at tigerwoods.com. Mark Soltau reported Jack Nicklaus's comments about his communication with a Woods camp on whether Tiger would play in the Memorial. Jack said Tiger "went out and tried to play Thursday and couldn't. He said he couldn't put the weight on his knee, couldn't turn it."

Tiger was emphatic about playing in the Open, however: "The rehab is working. It gets really old riding that bike, man. But everything is on schedule. Just trying to get this thing organized for the Open. Right on schedule for that." And when it came up again: "I'm playing."

--Bob Carney

The letters continue to arrive in response Bill Fields' column about President George W. Bush's decision to stop playing golf during the Iraq War, "Golf a casualty when war of words heats up," in the May 23 issue. They also continue, with a few exceptions, to be critical. But as predicted supporters are surfacing.

To start with a one of those, Robert A. Legg of Greensboro, Georgia, writes:

The piece by Bill Fields is perhaps the most political I've read in Golf World in my 49 years as a subscriber. It is also one of the best. I can' t help but wonder about the reaction of Bush 41, who has done so much for the game, to his son's ill-advised pronouncement.

Robert H. Broyles of Oklahoma City had a similar reaction:

Bill Fields is to be congratulated for his courage and style as well as for excellent writing skills so evident in his opinion piece. Mr. Fields is both wise and correct to urge golf and golfers to take the high ground in response to President Bush's ill-advised statement. Although I am not proud of my swing, I am very proud of Mr. Fields and the many men and women of high character who are associated with the sport of golf. I also believe that most of us - from duffers to champions, from foot-soldiers to generals, students to professors - appreciate that golf, like many human endeavors, can provide us with experiences ranging from entertainment to the greatest of moral challenges. Bill, I salute you!

"Salutes", however, were in the minority. More typical, this letter from Bill Schmidt of Tulsa:

I am very disturbed to see you print such an article in your May 23rd issue. Even though it is labeled "Opinion", I was surprised that it was not about PGA issues, but was a typical "Bash Bush" liberal rant, that quoted a very left leaning web site. I enjoy your magazines great stories about the golf tours, but urge you to leave the politics to the New York Times, etc.

Kurt Richeson of Culver, Indiana, echoed that sentiment...

Bill Fields should keep his political opinions to himself and out of this golf magazine. If I want to read political opinions I will read Time. Keep this crap out of your excellent golf publication.

...as did Dick Brandes of Manhattan Beach:

Pleeeze! I subscribe to Golf World to read about golf, not about politics. I get more than enough of that from newspapers and TV. If Fields wants to bash Bush, send him to the New York Times, or tell him to take a hike.

Matthew from Colorado took a slightly longer view:

I don't expect a golf reporter/writer to have a grasp on world or domestic politics, but image seems to be one thing you guys rely on quite heavily. At least President Bush did SOMETHING in the face of a hugely unpopular war to change his lifestyle, including golf, that at first glance looks elitist to everyone else but golf writers.

Halting WWIII would not make sense to you guys. Bush (just the front man) took the heat for this unpopular war that did just that. No news channel, or the public would want to even consider the stakes that this war undertook. Go on consuming your gas guzzling cars (25-35 MPG is NOT good gas mileage, get a clue!!), expensive polyester shirts, carbon fiber shafted drivers with the blessings of 5-10 more years of cheap (by world standards) oil thanks to G.W. Bush and company. After that, some sort of WWIII will result, but at least not now....heck maybe we will even have better alternatives then!!

Political pandering should be WAY below you guys at Golf World, but hey, I guess not, very sad to see.

Thank you all for your comments.

--Bob Carney

Golf Digest Rankings Editor Topsy Siderowf received a letter from Iraq this week reporting on your response to our April appeal to send equipment to the troops there. This letter and Len Shapiro's moving piece in the latest Golf World, "Recovery Shots," about injured Iraq verteran Dan Nevins (below), are worthy subjects for your reading this weekend. Because of men and women like these, we enjoy this Memorial Day.

I've attached some pictures from the golf equipment and supplies that have been donated to the Soldiers of 3-7IN. Several subscribers read the article and have been sending equipment for the past month. The Army is doing a big story on all of the donated equipment. None of this would have been possible without your help in getting the article published. Hope you enjoy the pictures. [They've] decided to build a driving range here because of all the donations. Thanks for all your support!

Best,
LT Matt Setters

Thank you, Matt. (For all of those lucky enough to work in golf, Matt is looking for a job in our industry when he leaves the military....)

Let's end with this from Len's story:

A sergeant in the National Guard deployed in Iraq for 18 months, Nevins was on a pre-dawn patrol riding in a Humvee protected by armor on the sides, but with none underneath. The vehicle was struck by an IED less than a kilometer from the troops' home base; the explosion killed the driver, Nevins' best friend, Sgt. Mike Ottolini, and left Nevins on his back, with both of his badly bleeding legs still trapped in the smoldering wreckage.

Once he had been evacuated to a nearby hospital, there was no choice but to amputate, but doctors initially were able to save his mangled right leg. He had a badly dislocated ankle and scads of shrapnel wounds, but the ankle continued to pain him over the next few years. There were times he wondered if he might actually be better off without it. Last November the ankle developed a bone infection and resulted in what he describes as "an easy decision" to have a second amputation Jan. 23 at Walter Reed.

"I'd actually been making the decision for three years -- should it stay or should it go?" Nevins says. "It was absolutely the right decision. When I woke up from surgery, it was the first time I'd been pain-free in more than three years."

Within three weeks Nevins was fitted for a second prosthesis. Within two months he was back at Olney Golf Park on two prosthetic legs trying to swing a club under [pro] Jim Estes' watchful eye...

--Bob Carney

(Photo of Dan Nevins: Dom Furore)

I think playing golf during a war just sends the wrong signal. President George W. Bush

Whether George W. Bush played golf or not throughout his presidency while his war raged?CBS News says his last round was nearly two months after the round he cited, by the way?doesn't matter. Golf is not the problem. Bill Fields

Bill Fields' column in the May 23 issue of Golf World, "Golf a casualty when war of words heats up", drew a crowd.

Two Michigan readers, already driven to distraction by the Michigan economy and Detroit mayoral scandals apparently, rose with alacrity to the President's defense. Here's Bill Hobson of Millington:

It stunned me to see how badly Bill Fields' anti-Bush sentiments led him to whiff on the entire point of the President's wartime golf embargo. The only thing Fields got right was the assertion that "golf is not the problem." True. The global fight on terrorism is the problem. The security of our nation is the problem. And if the head of our nation chooses to honor the brave soldiers in even the smallest of ways, why must that gesture be attacked?

Mr. Fields - like most of the established press - refuses to ever give credit to the President for anything. Bush didn't hold up his golf sacrifice in hopes of gaining approval points or to encourage others to forsake the game. He simply cited it as a personal change he has made as Commander In Chief during a war.

GolfWorld would do well to direct its editorial content toward golf-related themes. The attack from Fields belongs in the NY Times.

J. Lawrence Benjamin of Saginaw saw it just about the same way:

If Bill Fields accomplished anything with his column on President Bushgiving up golf he proved that golf writers can find themselves in deep bunkers when trying to make points on the geopolitical landscape. While I expect ignorant liberal whining from the network talking heads, I don?t expect this kind of baseless blather in a golf magazine. It?s clear Mr. Fields will never grasp the full complexity of a global war on terror, but he might try and understand that the president?s decision to give up golf was not out of solidarity for the troops but out of respect for those fighting. There is a difference.

It?s an image that simply doesn?t fly with so many liberal cowards out there crying out for an international group hug. Now can we get back to writing about some golf and leave the arm chair
political analysis to Dan Rather and Michael Moore.

Gene Henry of Hilton Head also protested:

I love GW but subscribe for terrific writing and reporting on GOLF! If Geoff Russell and Bill Fields want to get in the political arena send them to CNN. Or you will find me gone! I did not appreciate their uncalled for shots at President Bush at all. Stick to golf where you are consistently the best!

What are we missing? Have a look at the President's swing.

My experience is that Liberals read and write more slowly. If that's the case, we may hear voices in Fields' defense any day now.

--Bob Carney

(Photo: Mark Wilson/Getty Images)

"You're really doing this? He's going to play the Open course? He won't be able to think straight...Tour pros can shoot in the 80s on an Open course. What does that say for a 7-handicap?" Padraig Harrington

Actually, our U.S. Open contest winner, John Atkinson, is an 8.0 Index, probably a 10-handicap on Torrey Pines as laid out for the Open. Reader Mark White was fascinated by Guy Yocom's June Golf Digest article about what it means exactly to be a 10 but had a correction on our description of Slope Rating.

I enjoyed the "What is a 10-Handicapper?" article and am looking forward to seeing how regular golfers do on the 2008 U.S. Open course. If Tiger, with his "plus-9" handicap, has trouble with par then these guys will make for some entertaining viewing (keep the medical staff specializing in wrists on standby). I did question the narrative on slope rating: "Poorer players' scores rise exponentially when playing courses with a high slope rating..." The slope in slope rating refers to the slope of a line and not of a curve and as such scores would rise linearly and not exponentially. The article was very informative and should be required reading for anyone teeing it up in handicap golf matches. It would be interesting to have the USGA determine the course and slope rating for every U.S Open course set up. I would expect them to be above the highest ones in America of 80.0 and 155, except the USGA states that the "The lowest Slope Rating is 55 and the highest is 155".

Mark, the USGA, with the help of the Southern California Golf Association, will rate Torrey Pines under Open conditions. We don't know what the rating will be yet, but your estimate is probably pretty close. Dean Knuth, who developed the Slope System for the USGA, says that an 80/155 ratings is possible, depending on course set-up.

Regarding linear versus exponential increases in Slope ratings, Knuth says: "The USGA Handicap Research Team found that most courses do show linear increase in scores as handicaps increase. However, certain courses at the extreme end do show an increase in scores on a curve, not a straight line. Ko'olau in Hawaii was an example, before the course managers eased back on that course's difficulty."

Padraig Harrington is not the only tour pro who thinks our amateur has no chance to break 100. See "This Could Get Ugly" for more comments. What do you think? Make a prediction on the amateurs' scores--that's Atkinson, Matt Lauer, Justin Timberlake and Tony Romo-- and enter a sweepstakes to win your own trip to Torrey.

--Bob Carney

(Illustration: John Ueland)

For Tim Fulton of Davie, Florida, the U.S. Open Contest, and Guy Yocom's June-issue story in Golf Digest on what constitutes a 10-handicapper, unearthed a great deal of resentment about the USGA Handicap system.

After reading ?What is a 10-handicapper??, I once again wonder if the people running the USGA can compete in the ?Are you smarter than a 5th grader show?? The obvious answer is no.

Tiger?s challenge was simple;? a 10-handicapper couldn?t break 100.? Leave it to the USGA to lamely try and justify their ridiculous handicapping system. A handicap system is quite easy to do, a 10 is a 10, and a 10 is not a 14 as the USGA tries to make us believe. The reason they have to adjust it upward is because of their silly Equitable Stroke Control system. Their claim that a blow-up hole shouldn?t be allowed to ruin a round or elevate your handicap, is wrong. To follow that same misguided logic, a superior hole; a hole in one, an albatross or eagle, should not be allowed to arbitrarily lower your round or handicap. Using their logic a 12 handicap should never get a hole in one, it?s a birdie and for a 20 handicap it?s a par. Silliness to the extreme.

I recently went out and shot a 45 with 19 putts on the front and came back in 36 with 9 putts; should I throw the 45 out? Of course not, that?s golf, that?s what the USGA doesn?t get. If there is a problem with a sandbagger, every club knows who they are and most chose not to address the problem. Relying on the USGA to formulate a solution is like asking Congress to be responsible, the USGA has no clue.

The USGA bases its whole system on ?defining the golfer?s potential?. They assume, wrongly, that potential can only mean good. By definition, potential is the capability of developing into actuality. There is nothing about good or bad, so it is either. That is the true essence of golf, the potential to do good or bad. To throw out the bad through ESC is merely creating ?vanity handicaps?. If you are throwing out 10 or 20 rounds, a bad round is not going to affect your true handicap.

When I spoke with the USGA about the ESC system and how dumb it was, I got the classic response,?that?s the way it?s always been?. Which of course doesn?t mean its right; it?s just the way it?s always been.

When you look at the challenge going on at Torrey Pines next month, I wish the participants the best, but there is not a true 10 handicapper amongst them, so the Tiger challenge won?t be answered and will still stand. Shame on the USGA.

Thanks, Tim. After listening to the former head of handicapping, Dean Knuth, talk at length about this, I'd say the USGA's position is that once you've demonstrated your potential, it's up to you to reach it. You get no points for not reaching it, unless you mess up more than 10 times out of 20, in which case your handicap rises. But I feel your pain, having played in a stroke play event recently where I made a 9 and had to record only a 7, which, I thought, diminished that 9, quite a feat in itself.

John Atkinson, our contest winner, will be at least a 10 when his course handicap is calculated. (His index is 8.0). And if you listen to the tour pros we've interviewed, he's got no chance. Unless, of course, he plays to that potential.

--Bob Carney

When the Golf Digest U.S. Open Challenge is played at Torrey Pines on the eve of the U.S. Open, we'll see a test that is perfect in scale. A 10-handicapper trying to break 100 at Torrey, in front of a gallery, national TV audience and three celebrities playing alongside him, would experience a challenge in any case. But with the course in murderously difficult condition, it will be the golf equivalent of climbing Mount Everest without oxygen. Guy Yocom

Steve Stuthard of Kingman, AZ, writes with a question about Guy Yocom's "What is a 10 Handicapper?" story done in conjunction with the U.S. Open Contest.

Terrific article, but I must admit it made me question my golf-manhood. Mr. Yocom states that "The national handicap index for men is 14.7". I vary between a 14 and 17 depending upon the season and conditions.

I have often read in your magazine and others that the average recreational male golfer shoots between 95 and 100 which certainly does not equate to a 14.7. My own experience also tells me most of the people I play with (or get paired with) are significantly higher than a 14.

How did Mr. Yocom get his numbers? I'm thinking I and all the people I have played with might be better suited for Tennis!

Steve, there are a lot of us better suited to tennis (or pinochle, for that matter.) But to answer your questions: The numbers Guy relied on come from the USGA's handicap guru, Kevin O'Connor. Golf Digest's consulatant on handicapping, Dean Knuth, has this comment:

I think that Steve is comparing apples and oranges. Yes, the average USGA Handicap Index in America is around 15.0, but golfers with USGA Handicap Indexes represent a minority of all golfers, because the majority don't have an official handicap. The average score of golfers without USGA Handicaps is over 100. The 15.0 on average would translate to a 17 Course Handicap, the average USGA Course Rating being about 70. Golfers average three strokes over their handicaps, so the average score of such golfers is 90 (17 plus 70 plus 3). But again, if we're talking about all golfers--those with handicaps and those without--the average score would be more than 100.

--Bob Carney

This letter gives me the chills. It's from Gary Myers of Seymour, Indiana, about slow play on the Tour and I know he can't be right. Can he?:

In response to the article by Jamie Diaz in the May 9th Golf World, titled ?Confronting the PGA Tour?s slow-play addiction,? I would offer one additional reason for slow play??.advertising.  Most tour players have lucrative contracts with companies that basically turn them into walking billboards.  The trend is now extending to the caddie wearing clothing with logos.  I have a degree in marketing and it is logical that corporate executives would ?encourage? players in the last few groups of a televised event to slow down when they know they are playing the televised holes so the corporate logos get more exposure on TV.  There are companies that monitor how much TV exposure logos and products get and calculate the value to the company for such exposure.   Most of us still remember the chip shot of Tiger?s on the 16th hole at Augusta that trickled toward the hole and paused for that precious moment while the Nike swoosh was visible to the TV millions before falling in the hole.  That chip had a significant economic value to Nike for sure.  I feel it would be naïve to think that players are not ?pacing themselves? when it is their turn to play to get the most exposure for the companies they are paid to represent.

Gary, you're cynicism surpasses that of old reporters I know. The idea of slowing down to get more television time? Say it ain't so!

--Bob Carney

"Men's pro golf is dead. Not literally and certainly not economically, but as a competitive organism, 2008 has shown few signs of life in terms of creating drama or energizing the big-picture landscape." John Hawkins

Marty Walker of Roswell, Georgia, read John Hawkins' Angry Golfer column in Golf World's May 2 issue, "Where has all the excitement gone?" and wrote an essay of his own--a thoughtful, well-argued counterpoint that I quote from here. Click below to read the entire piece.

Sure, the job of the media is to present opinions and perspective as much as factual recording of events. In the modern sports era however, we all know the former has replaced the latter, and for many of us that's a shame. Maybe it's old school, but today we feel the non-sport side of sports has more often overshadowed the actions on the field, and I seriously doubt many would say that's been an improvement in sports. Truth be told, it's no more than a reflection of the expansion of coverage, from ESPN to all the network sports to yes, even the Golf Channel. It used to be about the games, the tournaments, the players actions; wins and losses, champions and up and comers. Today, it's about their attitude, their lifestyle, their failures (professional or personal), their sound bites; whatever it takes to fill an overload of too much space and time....

Walker acknowledges that "Golf is different. It's slow", but argues fervently against Hawkins position that "A bunch of players have the skill--only one has the attitude."

The idea that Tiger is the only one with a winning attitude shows ignorance, plain and simple. More so, probably underscores people who, as in many other sports, have never played at any level where true competition is experienced. These are the world's best players; players who have beaten the crap out of others all their lives, until they ran into this guy. Yes, some have folded, or at least displayed it, questioning their drive or attitude to be the best they can....But what about Garcia, Kim, Sabatini; they make natural competitive comments and put themselves on the block as a result. We should love those attitudes; welcome them, but instead we get our lame media blasting them when they fall short.

.

Walker says there is nothing wrong with this season; Hawkins' melancholy is misplaced.

Personally, I like the atmosphere of this year. There are clear signs that there are young guns poised to make a mark and take on Tiger. Does that mean they will dethrone Tiger? Hell no; this man is special; he's history in the making, and we should relish being in the moment. Just like MJ, he will not be matched for a long time, if ever. That doesn't mean the game has lost excitement, unless you don't know much past the obvious. There's the challenge; will we have a sport's media that can get past the star-struck status and start appreciating the progress made in the sport's new generation Tiger has birthed? I certainly hope so.

Well said.

--Bob Carney

For Marty's entire essay.....

We continue to get interesting comment on the U.S. Open Contest, which will conclude on June 6th when Tony Romo, Matt Lauer and Justin Timberlake join contest winner John Atkinson at Torrey Pines. Most of the comments focus on the playing level of the amateur finalists.

Here's TJ Keegan of Parrish, Florida:

I've been following your US Open experiment with some amusement. First, you ask for average golfers and then pick guys that are less than 10 handicappers. You need to get out into the real golf world. If this is your idea of an average golfer then you are writing for the wrong group of people. Plus, average golfers don't spend over $100 playing golf - our game isn't good enough.

An average golfer is more likely to be at least an 18 handicapper playing from no more than 6400 yards. He is not competing for the club championship if he even belongs to a club. He might carry 210 yards on his drive - on a good day. The only way he is going to break 120 on the US Open course is to hit a wedge to the ladies tee and then play safe from there; not very exciting golf but workable.

TJ, you're absolutely right about who is an average golfer. But we were trying to play off Tiger's comment that a 10-handicap could not break 100 on an Open course. That challenge is intriguing; and we, like you, concluded that any handicap much higher than 10 had no chance. Watching an 18 play Torrey Pines in Open condition would not only not be exciting; it would be downright painful.

Hank Haney, in his comments to our semi-finalists, made the point that even a 10 was going to have to play great golf to succeed and Haney was quite sure that, under the gun, he wouldn't. Gary Smith of Bethesda found Haney's "tough love", as recounted in Jerry Tarde's June Editor's Letter, to be just plain mean. But there are plenty of tour pros who think he's right on. Smith also wishes contest winner John Atkinson were playing by himself.

My gosh, Timberlake, Romo and Lauer are joining the foursome? I feel badly for the winner as these three guys -- who undoubtedly come equipped with super-large egos -- will be arm-wrestling for the spotlight. Couldn't the contest winner have had his day in the sun alone?

Gary, this may be a case of misery getting some company. Give these stars some credit for putting their games on display. The spotlight they receive in San Diego may not be the one their accustomed to; it could be harsh indeed.

--Bob Carney

Jaime Diaz's column on the Tour's slow play brought several letters, including that of Steven Roby of Glendale, Arizona:

I wanted to compliment Jaime Diaz on his fine back page piece in Golf World about slow-play! I realize his article was about the professionals, however, he failed to point out the single biggest problem for slow-play at the weekend municipals for us amateurs -- playing from the back tee markers when your absolutely shouldn't be.

When Joe 20-handicap-amateur steps up to the 225 yard par 3, he doesn't have a chance of hitting that green. It just bogs down everything while he struggles to make his double. The regular men's tee yardage of 178 yards is plenty challenging enough, don't you think?

Please people, if you are not a certifiable 10-handicapper or less, don't play from the "pro" tees. If we all moved up a set of markers, I'll promise you two things: 1) The pace of play will be much faster and 2) we will all enjoy our round so much better.

Luzviminda G. Veloso of Ridgewood, New York, had a similar reaction:

I want to thank Mr. Jaime Diaz for finally addressing "Slow Play" at the PGA. I believe I sent an e-mail to Mr. Hawkins about the same subject. He is dead on when he mentioned the LPGA. I watch their plays, too, and the ladies do not spend too much time practicing their strokes. They are more efficient in terms of positioning themselves and hitting their balls. Trevor Immelman made me fill like shouting during the Masters. I don't blame Rory Sabatini when he seemed to act rudely when he played with Ben Crane.

Ms. Veloso, I can't believe you said that.

We're right to push the pros--for the record, the Players final round took four hours, forty minutes in twosomes--but the pro game need not affect our own, and yet we let it. When Peter Kostis praises a player for looking at a putt from all angles, we wince, because we know we'll see a 20-handicap circling his 40-footer the next time we play on the weekend. It was refreshing to watch Brandt Snedeker, whose model is Tom Watson, play so crisply at the Masters. He's a guy we ought to emulate.

--Bob Carney

Was it the movie Rashomon that reminded us that witnesses to an event each see it very differently? Perhaps The Players is the Tour's Rashomon. Consider this sampling of early letters on this weekend's "Fifth Major":

Reader Steve Wiel:

What a terrible way to decide the Players Championship , on a gimmick par 3. I think it is terrible to decide the so called fifth major championship on a golf hole that should be on a miniature golf course. Do you think that any other major championship would start a playoff on a wedge par three? This is one of the many reasons why most people don't include this tournament as a major championship. For Paul Goydos to lose this championship because of a gust of wind knocked his shot down is terrible. This is no way to be rewarded for a great week of golf.

Gene Martineau of Roseville, California:

The reason the Players will never achieve major status: Instead of a three- or four-hole playoff to decide the champion, they start the playoff on the 17th hole which is akin to conducting the playoff on a minature golf course. All that was missing was the windmill.

ES Young, St. Simons Island, Georgia:

It was wonderful to see Sergio finally win an important event, but knowing he would be featured on TV a lot wouldn't it have been nice if he had shaved? With these men earning so much and being examples for the younger golfers I think the PGA should have some rules about grooming.

Tony Ciulla, Fallbrook, California:

You probably will not publish this letter since it is not a very complimentary one, but here goes anyway...Nothing I have ever seen in a golf tournament in person or on television has made me ashamed to profess my love for the game and the professionals that play it, EXCEPT on that tournament day that Sergio Garcia, after putting out and picking his ball out of the cup, spit in the cup....If he never wins another tour event it will please me just fine. I'm sorry he won the Player's Championship, and like him, I will never change.

Eleanor Law, West Palm Beach, Florida:

Hooray for the opinion by Jaime Diaz in the May 9 issue about slow play. As a devoted golf watcher, I have almost given up and transferred my watching to NASCAR because of slow play by the PGA golfers. My feelings were reinforced this weekend at the Players, by Sergio's slowness in what he should do and Furyk's habit of always backing off. The LPGA has found a solution, now let's see the same effort from the PGA!

Tom Brickley:

I am a senior citizen and while watching the NBC broadcast of the TPC yesterday, it was difficult to read the plus and minus signs at the bottom of the screen as they were posting all player's scores. It woud be so nice if the networks could use the color red for those under par and black and white for those over or even par. In this period of super electronic advances, it shouldn't be too difficult to do. I am sending this to you because I would have no idea who to contact at NBC, CBS, ESPN or the Golf Channel. By the way, keep up the good work. I like your Golf World, as it does not have too many instructions on how to improve my game with so called gimmicks or instruction from pros or teachers. My game is as good as it is going to get......

For the record, this observer loves the 17th hole, likes the fact that Sergio won and that Paul Goydos gave him such a fight, hates slow play, objects to the scruffy look, thinks The Players is a major and can't read a darn thing on the TV leaderboards. For a more professional view, check out Jim Moriarty's tournament report and Bill Fields thoughts on Sawgrass. Thank you all for your comments.

--Bob Carney

(Poster: www.buffalo.edu)

Speaking of best players not to win a major or a Players, Robert V. Ippolito of Atlanta sees a bit of intrigue in a recent "What's in My Bag?" with Rory Sabbatini, who finished T-27, plus-5 at the Players.

I just finished reading about what's in Rory Sabbatini's bag. Do you think that the change to Adams from Nike equipment in January of this year was coincidence? Or is it more likely that Tiger had some influence over the powers to be at Nike and had Rory fired after Rory's early withdrawal from Tiger's Target World Challenge? We all know of Rory's on-course antics (Ben Crane, Nick Faldo, wife Amy's tee shirts, etc.) but those of us who have had the "opportunity" to spend some off the course time with Rory know that he can be described as arrogant at best and deserved to lose his high paying equipment contract. It's time to grow up, Rory!

Golf World's Equipment Editor Mike Johnson replies:

Here?s the deal: Tiger had absolutely nothing to do with Sabbatini leaving Nike and going to Adams. For starters, Sabbatini was not ?fired? from Nike. His contract was up at the end of 2007 and he was free to sign with whomever he wanted. Second, Sabbatini had started putting out feelers to other companies as early as mid year 2007, well prior to the spat with Tiger at the Target World Challenge. He had been talking with Adams for quite some time--it is a common occurrence for players whose contracts are expiring to talk with companies throughout the final year of their existing pacts--and they were able to agree on a deal when the Nike contract expired. In short, it was a typical PGA Tour player equipment endorsement deal.

The kind of deal that say, Paul Goydos, is considering today. Thanks, Mike. Thanks, Robert.

--Bob Carney

Just when I was thinking how well Nick Faldo is handling the Players commentary comes this letter from Jack Bird of Laguna Hills, California. Jack has a different point of view:

How to Improve Nick Faldo's Commentating

Require him to:

1. Speak in intelligible sentences.

2. Demonstrate he has prepared for the broadcast.

3. Attend the Johnny Miller School of Broadcasting in order to acquire insight and
wisdom.

4. Complete a course in the art of developing a sense of humor.

Pay off his contract and admit a mistake was made.

Get rid of Kelly, so he has to deal with the real world.

Give the viewers a warning when he is about to speak, so they have the option of using their mute button.

Encourage him to play the European Senior Tour.

Send him to the Nick Faldo School of Golf so he can learn how to have fun.

Send him to England permanently.

Don't allow him to:

1. Talk about himself.

2. Tell the viewers what players are thinking or feeling.

3. Comment on swing mechanics.

4. Make predications.

--Bob Carney

Anthony Kim's comments this week at the Players about playing other sports as a kid recalled Jack Nicklaus last November at the World Golf Hall of Fame:

Q. A lot of people throw the names of 20-something golfers with all this potential in the world out there left and right, but what do you think makes you different? What do you think might put you over the top?

ANTHONY KIM: I think playing other sports growing up. Winning was pretty big to me, and doing anything to win just when you're down 15 points in a basketball game or when things are going bad, I feel like I'm going to just keep fighting and fighting, and I know a lot of the guys, most of the guys are going to do that out there and not quit and I think if you don't quit, you're going to have a good opportunity to succeed out here.

Q. I was just curious, when you talk about your childhood and your background and being very well rounded and the different sports you played and whatnot, how has that served you through your career, and do you worry at all about what seems to be golfing landscape now where kids are doing golf and nothing but golf from an early age all the way through?

JACK NICKLAUS: You know, I can't do much with it. I think it's a different day. Everything is a different day. I hate to see kids specialize. Just like even the little school where my kids go to school, my grandkids are going to the same school that my kids did, and my kids got to have the opportunity to play all sports; they played football, basketball or baseball or golf or whatever they played, and they played that all through school. Now that silly school is now specializing in sports. I said, that's why you go to a small school, so you can be able to do all those things, have the opportunity to do it. Basically you have to do that. You have to almost specialize to be able to play.

You see kids specialize in golf. I think that is idiotic. It's crazy. I mean, you've got -- here you've got all these great things -- I don't know any of my grandkids play golf. They play, but they don't play golf. I can't imagine any of them if they really want to put a score on the board are going to break 90, but they're all quite capable of breaking 80, but they just don't play. And that's fine...

To play all the sports is great. I played everything. My dad played everything. When I finally ended up, golf to me was just another sport until I was about 19. When I won the National Amateur at 19, I finally said, hmm, I must be a little better than I think I am. It was just a game, still is a game. But it didn't make any difference to me. I mean, I was not -- I went right back -- I was in school at Ohio State, and I went right back and put my golf clubs away and played intramural football and basketball and volleyball and I didn't touch a golf club for three or four months, six months, whatever it was. It didn't make any difference. I knew I was going to play golf next year.

But I think kids today, they don't get their bodies well-rounded.... Eventually if you want to specialize in something, that's fine, but go out and enjoy and be happy to be able to play other things and do them. The opportunity to do that is there for you if you want to. That's what my dad did to me. He just gave me the opportunity. He introduced me to everything. I couldn't get enough of any one of them I played. I thought that was just great.

--Bob Carney

(Photo: Richard Heathcote, Getty Images)

Ohioan Tom Howenstine has had it with five-hour rounds and he blames the pros. I'm sure he had a fit yesterday watching Phil Mickelson take two and a half minutes to pull the trigger on one of the Stadium's par 3s:

Slow play by the pros have done more to ruin the game than anything else. Of course it provides the networks with really cheap air time at no added expense. Think about it. Imagine yourself playing in a twosome with two caddies and galleries to find any errant ball, and it takes 5 hours to play a round. Put a time limit from when a player starts and when he can finish. Penalize him a stroke for every 10 minutes over his time limit. A time limit would also add another dimension to the sport that it needs. These measures would speed up play not only at the pro level but also for us amateurs. Everyone says people won?t play golf now because of the time involved. Now a round of golf on a weekend ruins the whole day due to slow play, where it should take no longer than half a day.

Thanks, Tom. Good item on slow play and player Matthew Goggin's comments about it on Geoff Shackelford's blog.

Your comment on people leaving the game because of the time reminds me of something a friend who belongs to a nine-hole family club in Connecticut told me the other day. He said that having only nine holes used to be a disadvantage in recruiting new members. "Now it's an advantage," he says.

--Bob Carney

Hooray for Pete Dye! And three cheers for the World Golf Hall of Fame for inducting him while he can enjoy it. Pete has done more for the ascendance of golf course architects than Bob Toski did for teachers or Tiger Woods still does for his fellow pros. If the truth be told, Dye's also responsible for adding cost, difficulty and probably time to our average golf round, but most of us welcomed and even wallowed in the abuse. What's more, he's trying to reverse some of that with his calls for a ball rollback, and his recent comments on ways to reduce the cost of the game.

To honor him, I suggest you play one Pete Dye course a month until his induction in November. My May course is the Dye track at PGA Golf Club in Port St. Lucie. It's been refurbished, is in fabulous shape, and seems even better and stronger than it was when it was built ten years ago. I played on the occasion of our most recent Golf Digest panelist summit, and the experience reminded me of a point architect Brian Silva made beautifully at an early panelist conference: namely, that Dye is a master of lines and angles. He's built a reputation on being penal, but there can't be a better example of strategic design than his PGA course. Take the right line along the correct angle and you are rewarded with an approach shot that's both shorter and easily accessible to the flag. Take the conservative line off the tee and you'll have your hands full on that second, probably having to negotiate a hazard. Absolutely fair. Immensely enjoyable.

--Bob Carney

(Photo of sixth at Dye Course courtesy of PGA Golf Club)

John Hawkins' Angry Golfer column is creating, well, angry golfers.

Bill Gallagher of Raleigh finds inconsistency (a first?) in Hawkins' column on Geoff Ogilvy:

John Hawkins seems shocked that Geoff Ogilvy would accuse the media of saying that most players are not trying. Never happened, says Hawkins. But just a few paragraphs further, he implies that the majority of the field is so enamored with the huge payoffs that winning isn't all that big a deal. That sounds very much like he is saying that they aren't trying. John Hawkins wants it both ways. And no, Tiger does not have a monopoly on the ability to produce in the clutch. Young Immelman did just fine at Augusta, as did Zack Johnson in 2007.

And, via email, gkibler2 takes issue with Hawkins comments about the John Daly shirtless, shoeless video making news on television and YouTube (nearly 200,000 viewings; 4.5 star rating).

I like Hawkins little angry golfer act. He should however not be pontificating about John Daly on the Golf Channel. We love John because he is not a typical stepford golfer. We all know Tiger and Phil are your perfect little corporate boys. I live in Vegas and have asked every golfer I know what they thought of Daly's shirtless video. Everybody loves it. We love him because he dosn't kiss the corporate ass like you guys do.

G, were you by any chance at the Players this week? Golf World's John Antonini, in the Local Knowledge blog, reports that patrons here miss Daly more than Tiger. As far as the kissing goes, I'm betting that soon John will not be faced with the awful dilemma of whether to kiss the corporate tush or live free. His shirt, when he wears one, will lack any reference to a corporation.

--Bob Carney

Tennessean Bryan Tinsley takes issue with Golf Digest's 50 Best 19th Holes list.

First thought, the article is very interesting and romantic. It was very enjoyable to read the article and imagine having a bourbon at Pine Valley post a 12 penalty-stroke, 41-putt 105. However, the article should be about 19th holes that the average reader could potentially have a drink in. Even if I were a very rich man, I would never have a chance to see all the private clubhouses in America. Most of your readers, at best, will only have the chance to see one or two of the locations described. A follow-up article on great public 19th holes would be a terrific read. Just a thought...

  Ron Kaspriske, who compiled the list, replies:

Bryan, Thanks for writing. In response to your letter, thought you should know that 20 of the 50 bars listed in our March issue are open to the public and we have since featured two of them in our April (Pinehurst) and June (Atlantic City C.C.) issues. Our July issue will feature another 19th hole open to the public.

But I understand your concerns. I'm a public golfer. I do not have a private club membership. I'm one of you.

I promise you, in 18 months when we revisit the list, we will have an even stronger commitment to public watering holes.Feel free to nominate one in your area!

Bottoms up,
Ron

--Bob Carney

It may be that liberals are slower readers, but, after some strident letters of protest, we've now received several supportive letters on John Barton's "How Green is Golf?" package. A couple of recent ones, the first from Ron Rubin of Atlanta:

John Barton's article on Green Golf in the May 2008 issue was phenomenal. What a great piece of investigative journalism! A welcome change from the plethora of "how to" pieces. I learned one whole lot and will never be able to look at a course the same way again. Keep up the good work!

Dr. Karen Shragg of Bloomington, Minnesota, was also pleased with the piece:

I want to take a moment to congratulate John Barton and the publishers of Golf Digest for his well written, important and thorough article entitled, ?How Green is Golf? in your May issue. As a long time naturalist and environmental advocate I shunned the game of golf until I was asked to help a nearby course get certified as a cooperative sanctuary through Audubon International. I am now a convert to the potential golf has to be a partner in the conservation movement. I have been a volunteer steward with Audubon International for five years now and have helped to certify and recertify over a dozen courses in Minnesota. I am impressed with the way that golf course superintendents and managers have put themselves and their courses through the often intense scrutiny of an environmental evaluation. Golf needs to become greener for the environment, for the survival of the game and it will bring in new environmentalist golfers who need not feel guilty for love of the game. I wholeheartedly agree that the environmental future of golf now lies in the gloved hands of the golfers themselves who I believe are ready to get on board with a new way of looking at greens from a greener perspective. I?ve even taken up the sport and after such a great article need to become a Golf Digest subscriber.

For more views, pro, con and otherwise, see the golfdigest.com forum on the environment, as well as previous posts and responses here. See also John Paul Newport's piece in the Wall Street Journal over the weekend.

--Bob Carney

Nothing seems to roil our readership like environmental stories. Not only has John Barton's "How Green is Golf?" piece drawn fire (and support). Several readers took exception to Mike Stachura's piece on potential coastal flooding that warmer climates may bring .

And Mike takes exception to their letters. Here's the exchange.

First, Ohioan Ron Strah:

I'm disappointed that Golf Digest would give a platform to the alarmist predictions of Mike Stachura in his global warming feature. His dire predictions of everything south of Miami being underwater in 100 years is pure speculation if not a flat out lie. There is no "consensus" as the activists would like us to believe. Hundreds of scientists now disagree on this issue. It's nice to see that your magazine is concerned about the environmental effects of our sport, but apocalypse type scare tactics have no place in this debate, anymore than consulting astrology charts. Golfers can rest easy that Doral's Blue Monster will continue to have alligators in the lakes...instead of sharks.

And Jay Gajda of Westland, MI:

This is regarding the article "Global Warming:Our Coast Is Under Attack" by Mr. Stachura. I did not know that Golf Digest, starting with the May, 2008 issue, is now publishing articles of science fiction. It is more than enough to have to read articles like this based on junk science in regular magazines and now have to be subjected to it in our fine golf magazines. Will the author next month be nutty Al gore?

Mike replies:

Junk science? While the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change predicts a sea level rise of .6 meters by the turn of the century, this estimate does not reflect what would happen to particularly low-lying areas. Indeed, the most recent IPCC Synthesis Report includes a projection of 30 percent loss of coastal wetlands. That report also includes an analysis of what likely will happen if the Greenland ice shelf disappears, a likely scenario: "Contraction of the Greenland ice sheet is projected to continue to contribute to sea level rise after 2100. Current models suggest virtually complete elimination of the Greenland ice sheet and a resulting contribution to sea level rise of about 7m if global average warming were sustained..." How about this language from a 2007 NASA study: "Recent observations of Greenland and the West Antarctic Ice Sheet raise concerns for the future. Satellites detect a thinning of parts of the Greenland Ice Sheet at lower elevations, and glaciers are disgorging ice into the ocean more rapidly, adding 0.23 to 0.57 mm/yr to the sea within the last decade. The West Antarctic Ice Sheet is also showing some signs of thinning. Either ice sheet, if melted completely, contains enough ice to raise sea level by 5-7 m. A global temperature rise of 2-5°C might destabilize Greenland irreversibly. Such a temperature rise lies within the range of several future climate projections for the 21st century." Do we really believe that sea levels are going to rise 7 meters in the next 100 years? No, of course not. But current trends clearly predict a rise and the intensity of that rise will depend on location. Low-lying areas (precisely those where we find golf courses) are more vulnerable to the surge that will naturally accompany any kind of sea level rise brought about by climate change. Consider this language from a report of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Association's National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science: " In the U.S., the Southeast and Gulf coasts are particularly vulnerable.Sea-level rise and climate change issues in the coastal zone include:

* higher and more frequent flooding of wetlands and adjacent shores
* expanded flooding during severe storms and high tides
* increased wave energy in the near-shore area
* upward and land-ward migration of beaches
* accelerated coastal retreat and erosion
* intrusion into coastal freshwater aquifers
* damage to coastal infrastructure
* broad impacts on the coastal economy"

NASA, NOAA, and a Nobel Prize winning organization of the leading experts on climate change in the world all agree. I think I'll go with their scenario, not yours.

--Bob Carney

(Illustration: Christoph Niemann)

Texan Bob Spensley might have been reading my mind but he was definitely reading John Hawkins' rant about the cost of the game.

I just finished reading the April 25 issue and was really impressed with what the Angry Golfer had to say. John was right on the money, no pun intended, when he expressed distain for the ridiculous fees that are being charged for people to play golf these days. I notice that lots of the courses in Dallas are empty most of the time because of a couple of reasons. One is that they all think that they are the premiere course in the Metroplex and therefore can be private and exclusive and the other reason is that the one?s that allow daytime play for non-members are either too expensive or not well maintained. Golf, which used to be the sport of the elite few, has tried to become the new sport of the masses with such extensive coverage on television and the multitude of magazines. Thanks to the success of people like Tiger Woods, Phil Michelson, Ernie Els, and the ever favorite John Daly, the sport has begun to thrive and even the youth, both male and female, are expressing an interest. The greed of the course owners is the only thing that could stifle the growth of the sport and the continued interest. If that happens, then Pebble Beach and the other courses will eventually be apartment complexes.

Great points, Bob. We just held a conference for our course-rating panelists in Port St. Lucie, FL, at PGA Golf Club. Much of the break-time conversation concerned the state--and the cost--of the game. One panelist, a Midwestern course owner, made the point that in his area and in most of the country there is a 15 per cent over supply of golf courses. Too many of them are high-end daily fee. Many are driven by housing projects and/or ridiculously expensive clubhouses (he wishes he'd built smaller) that force them to keep prices up. And so when golfers like yourself begin to balk at paying those prices, owners panic, cut maintenance so they can reduce prices. An evil spiral ensues. (Forget Pebble or Whistling Straits. There will always be golfers to pay premium prices at those places and the most we can hope for is that they provide special access or pricing to juniors. Mercy pricing for we golfers-on-a-budget is out of the question.)

The most creative owners and managers, however, understand your plight. Bob Baldassari, who manages PGA Golf Village, with two Tom Fazio and one Pete Dye course, is a font of ideas on keeping busy, budget-minded families in the game. Baldassari says at PGA Village they've begun "situational" pricing. Want to play nine with your son or daughter on a Saturday morning? Fine, he'll put you out on the back nine for a special fee. Want to play five holes with your wife and have dinner? No problem, that's a different, lower price. Baldassari, like his PGA Professional father before him, believes in growing the game--any form of the game. He's also realistic. "Every ten minutes that goes by with that tee empty," he says, "is an opportunity lost that will never come back." The wise ones are listening, Bob.

--Bob Carney

(Illustration: Leigh Haeger)