A couple of days ago Dave Reinhardt, a Florida club professional, wrote to complain about comments by Sandy Tatum in Ron Whitten's Lido Competition story about "unfortunate" increases distance off the tee. Reader Reindhardt said, in effect, what's the big deal? Athletes get bigger, better and stronger in every sport. He invited response from Ron and Sandy. Here's Ron's response for he and Tatum:

Dear Dave,

Thank you for your e-mail regarding the latest results of the annual Lido Design Competition. You asked for comments regarding your frustration over the statement by Sandy Tatum that it's unfortunate that golf course designer today must deal with the "considerable" number of golfers who drive the ball over 300 yards.

As much as you may disagree with the statement, it's both an opinion held by Mr. Tatum (which is why I chose to include it in the article) and a fact. Nearly every golf course architect practicing finds it frustrating that they must now design courses not only for the average golfer (who probably carries a tee shot no more than 180 to 200 yards in the air), but with a new generation who can carry the ball nearly 300 yards in the air.

(Not many people do that, you say? Well, if just one guy does it at your club, and just one guy does it at every one of the 16,000 course in America, that's 16,000 golfers. That's not an inconsiderable number. But in truth, a lot more than 16,000 golfers hit the ball a long ways off the tee. Go to a college tournament. Go to a high school tournament. Go to a PGA Tour event. (Statistics are based on only two hole per event. Follow any foursome for a number of holes. You'll find guys who hit it "only" 270 are consistently 40 yards behind everybody else. Part of that has to do with roll on perfect fairway, but still, those guys are good and long.)

You are absolutely correct in saying that the next generation of golfers are bigger, stronger, in better shape, have better equipment, etc. It's no crime to hit the ball 300 yards off the tee, but it is frustrating to golf architects that such golfers render grand old courses - like Sandy Tatum's beloved 6,500 yard Cypress Point - into pitch and putts. (When the Walker Cup was held at Cypress Point a few years back, several competitors hit nothing over an 8-iron into any par 4, and a several hit mid-iron second shots onto par 5s.)

To challenge long hitters (and that's part of the architect's job, to challenge) means new back tees (sometimes at absurd lengths, like the 8,200 yard set I had a part in installing at a course in Wisconsin recently), newly positioned bunkers, smaller and more contoured greens.

Mr. Tatum's lament was not a condemnation of golfers who hit it far, it was a comment that architects must now deal with it in new ways, ways that are adding costs to the game (additional land for back tees, additional width - because higher handicappers who can hit the ball a long ways now hit it a long ways sideways) additional hazards, etc.) He calls it unfortunate because he believes classic courses like Cypress Point and Merion are no longer genuine tests of golf. (We shall see in the case of Merion when it hosts the 2013 U.S. Open.)

I do agree with you that there are many hypocrites out there who talk a good old-fashioned game while playing new equipment. I recently played with a PGA Tour pro who complained that the USGA has ruined the game by abdicating its responsibility to limit club and ball technology, even as he teed it up with the latest square-faced prototype driver provided to him by his equipment sponsor. But I don't think Sandy Tatum is being a hypocrite by his observation. The point was that he ultimately chose a design that effectively challenged a long hitter as well as other levels of golfer. If he held his nose doing it, well, I think Mr. Tatum is entitled, based upon his age and career, to do so if he wishes.

Since you concluded that the mere fact I included Tatum's quote in my piece seemed to telegraph my position on the matter, I'll tell you my position. I'm one of the few involved in the field of architecture (as a writer and part-time practitioner) who doesn't feel equipmnent needs to be restricted or the ball rolled back. I'm one of the few that believes that 300 yard drives are inevitable progress. If you look at the history of the game, the same arguments brought up today - manufacturers are ruining the game, grand old courses are becoming obsolete - were used when the Haskell ball was introduced in 1902, when steel shafts replaced hickory shafts, when the sand wedge gained prominence, when graphite shafts were introduced, etc.

Roll back the ball? To what era? I asked Jack Nicklaus that recently, and he said "early 1990s." But if you look back at what Jack was saying in the early 1990s, he was saying (as an architect, not a competitor) they were hitting the ball too far back then, too.

There's a reason why Myopia Hunt Club, host of 4 U.S. Opens a century ago) will never host another major. It's still a grand old course, but it's not a grand old competition golf course anymore. I personally feel the same way about Merion (which is why I think it's a mistake to take a U.S. Open back there again - Merion's reputation will probably suffer.) The greatest golfers in the world eventually get old. Why is it we won't let the greatest competitive golf courses likewise grow old?

So I agree with you in part. It's progress. We can't stand in the way of progress. We have to deal with it. It's just that it's frustrating to a lot of golf architects to have to deal with that particular piece of progress, given all the other problems - environmental, governmental, etc. - they must also deal with. Design would be much simpler if only one caliber of golfer played it.

But I disagree with you that not that many people hit the ball a long ways these days. As they say, the woods are full of bombers. But so are the fairways these days, way down the fairway from where I hit it.

Thank for writing. Thanks for listening.

Ron Whitten

From our carmudgeonly Wisconsin correspondent, Dave Riffey, comes this brief but heartfelt note on the new LPGA policy requiring players to speak a modicum of English. I duplicate the all-caps, not the scarlet letters:

LPGA:

DON'T BACK DOWN !!

YOU SHOULD BE CONGRATULATED!

WE SUPPORT YOU 100%

For a more all-encompassing look at the controversey, see Ron Sirak's golfdigest.com column.

--Bob Carney

PGA Professional Dave Reinhardt of Jacksonville, FL, has had it with the hand-wringing over the distance players hit the ball today. Golf World's story on the Lido architectural competition by Ron Whitten, quoting Sandy Tatum, bugged him:

I finally got around to reading the August 8th edition of Golf World and came to the article regarding this year's Lido Competiton. I really enjoy reading about these contests and this year was no exception. Bo Links is a great 1-hole architect.

When I read Sandy Tatum's quote: "One item this hole certainly addresses is the unfortunate fact that a considerable number of people now hit the ball 300 yards off the tee," I became frustrated enough that I wanted to write to your magazine.

To Mr. Tatum and to Mr. Whitten who obviously wanted this quote in the story - Why is hitting a ball 300 yards unfortunate? Where does Mr. Tatum play golf that a considerable number of people hit a ball 300 yards?

Looking at the Driving Distance statistics on PGAtour.com, OUT OF THE 211 PGATOUR PLAYERS THEY ARE MEASURING, ONLY 16 PLAYERS ARE AVERAGING OVER 300 YARDS! 7.6% is NOT a considerable amount of people.

At the country club where I am a golf professional, I would venture to say only one golfer, out of the consistent 200 members who play weekly, average 300-yard drives or even hit a ball 300 yards one out of 10 times. That is not a considerable of amount of people!

I doubt at the various 2008 USGA men's championships there is a "considerable amount" of people who were hitting the ball 300 yards.

Obviously, it is frustrating to read Tatum's quotes, or to hear Jack Nicklaus talking about rolling back the golf ball, or the recent inane ruling the USGA made regarding grooves. If Tatum, or Nicklaus, or the Dick Rugge's of the USGA really would back up there talk, these men would play with pre-1995 golf equipment. Heck, Deane Beman supposedly hates technology too; but when I worked at TPC Sawgrass, he was always first to grab the Pro-V1 practice balls, or have the best TaylorMade driver. The above men are hypocrites when it comes to golf equipment because they are saying one thing, but playing another, better thing!

Today's athlete is bigger, stronger, faster because of healthier lifestyles and the continuing evolution of man. Of course, technology does assist--look at Speedo LZR swimsuit in the Beijing Olympics. But the human being is the one who has to swing the club properly and get it in the hole in the least amount of strokes.

--Bob Carney

It took no time for us to get our first response to the LPGA's new English language policy, which will require that LPGA players speak enough English to conduct interviews. Jennifer Morrow is an English teacher from Indiana:

I was extremely dismayed to have heard of the new policy requiring LPGA members to submit to an oral English exam resulting in possible suspension from play. This to me is the most ridiculous and egotistical policy I have come across in a while. I am an English teacher. I work with immigrants in America who are seeking to learn English better. You would think that I would support such a policy to further promote English. However, nothing could be farther from the truth. My interactions with the immigrant population has been extremely positive. I find them to be polite, respectful, positive and hard-working assets to America. The women on the LPGA Tour also appear to have these same traits.

Instead of celebrating our differences and learning from their attitudes, we have chosen to force American culture on them, whether they want it or not. No wonder much of the world thinks us rude, lazy and selfish. We seem to prove them right with policies like this. I strongly suggest the LPGA repeal this policy and instead embrace the wonderful rainbow of culture present in the sport....

At the very least, LPGA higher-ups should let these women do what earned them a spot on the tour...play golf. Women have worked so hard to overcome stereotypes and glass ceilings. Have we come so far only to judge each other based, not on our actions or extraordinary abilities, but our accents?

Like a lot of things, I believe the impetus for this policy emanates from sponsors, who want LPGA members to be able to represent their tournaments--in English. The LPGA vetted the new policy with the players, who seem to be generally in support.

--Bob Carney

With Tiger Woods acknowledging yesterday that his recovery from knee surgery has been frustrating, adding that he hopes to be hitting balls by the beginning of the year, this letter from Texas physical therapist Randy Nutt is somewhat sobering. Nutt was reacting to the Jaime Diaz August-issue story on Woods' operation:

I liked the fact that that Hank Haney and others in the Woods camp are so positive about his eventual return to form...but truth be told, Tiger's in for a lot of work. Being a physical therapist that has rehabbed literally thousands of ACL reconstructed knees and have seen dozens of surgeries for reference, Tiger's future will be hard work--and lots of it. I'm sure he is aware of that fact and his mental attitude is legendary and he'll have the best of the best around him encouraging him for return, but coming back to full form frm that surgery is tenuous at best. Ernie Els has not been the same since his ACL reconstruction and I haven't even heard from Brad Faxon since his. The absolute truth is that this injury and repair is body altering and I pray that 'ole Tiger will be the odds (as he's proven he can do on dozens of venues) and return to form. But the odds are not in his favor and no sugarcoating from the Woods camp will change the fact that this injury has ended many a professional athlete and ended the dreams of those in the "could have been" category, of which I've seen hundreds!

Good luck, Tiger. If anyone can oversome and return to full force, it will be you.

Good luck, indeed. As one of my colleagues says, when Tiger has a knee problem, all of golf has a knee problem.

--Bob Carney

(Illustration by Bryan Christie)

We gets lots of letters complaining about Sergio Garcia's inability to win--or inability to lose graciously. (Although we thought he did much better at the latter yesterday). But we also occasionally, only occasionally, get letters like this one from Austin reader Lenny Lehnertz:

Sergio lost the PGA [and the Barclay's]. So what? Sergio Garcia is by far my favorite golfer. He is also extremely popular with all my friends. Why? I'm 26. My friends and I are Sergio Garcia. We swing hard, we yell at the ball, and we enjoy golf. The thing that we can all relate to with Sergio is that there is a little bit of Sergio in every amateur. We wear our emotions on our sleeves, we play driver when we should use irons, and when we fire on all cylinders; look out. Writers will bring him down, but who cares. He plays the way he wants. Same with us. We don't want some 80 year old asking us why we didn't hit a 7 wood on a par 5 from the tee. Golf is fun. Seeing someone like Sergio, one of the few golfers that actually shows emotion, lets us all know that we aren't the only ones. Good shots are what keep us playing, and are what keep us buying all the products advertised in your magazine. He'll win one.

Both Sergios will be appearing soon at the Ryder Cup.

--Bob Carney

(Illustration by Eddie Guy)

With the emphasis these past two weeks on China, George Kiefer of Tucson, who just returned, writes in reaction to John Barton's China feature in the August issue of Golf Digest.

Upon returning from teaching in China just last week I found my Golf Digest and became engrossed with the article by John Barton, "Golf in the Year of the Rat". How true in every respect and right on with the very detailed and accurate account. Mr. Barton said that golf will attract many new courses and players in the next ten years. Having just completed my sixth summer teaching at Huazhong University, Wuhan, China, I would like to add my main reason/obstacle for the lack of golfers within China: Education. It's all about education. Currently that is the most competitive thing that young Chinese people are most interested in. During my many travels around China, I find the same concern for studying, learning english and excelling at the highest degree of education to attain at least a Masters degree if not a Ph.D. You have to admire these students for the effort they put forth, but again they have little to no social life. Until the Chinese ease this mindset I don't foresee an immediate rush for new players.

I have taken some students to the local driving range to introduce them to the game, but unless the government puts forth some effort, these students won't follow through. Not only is it very costly to play a round of golf, but very expensive to practice at the driving range, too. I do see the day when Chinese will be ranked in the top 50 in the world and as stated in the article, win a major or two. Truly a great article and I will take with me next year to share with my fellow teachers and certainly the students.

Thanks, George. There are those who'd argue the Chinese have their priorities straight, and that we ought to adjust ours. But I suspect, having watched them perform in every conceivable sport over the past two weeks, that they'll get good at this golf thing, too, especially if it becomes an Olympic sport. (Ron Sirak suggests as much in his piece for Golf World.) Interesting article in the Times about the attitude of Chinese Americans toward sport. Many, like the Chinese he describes in his letter, see sports as a distraction from a more important endeavor: school.

--Bob Carney

Maybe it's all that Olympic judging, but Golf World readers took the opportunity this week to grade our PGA Championship coverage. Not sure we medaled.

Here's Rick Barnes of Downey, California:

TV Rewind stated the PGA was the best theater of the year in a major. While I agree it was great theater in no way did it out shine the drama of Tiger’s US Open comeback in regulation to force a playoff nor his comeback Monday nor Rocco’s fabulous play both days. I know most of your magazine staff dislikes the 18 hole playoff format but I feel it’s still the fairest way to determine a major champion and maintains the tradition of the US Open.

Tom Ierubino of Somerset, N.J.:

I enjoyed Jim Moriarty's excellent article on the PGA Championship . However, his statement in the second paragraph on page 32 that Padraig Harrington is "the only European golfer to win back-to-back major championships" is incorrect.

Harrington is the only European golfer to win win back-to-back major championships since the inception of the Masters in 1934, but prior to that two Scottish born golfers won consecutive majors. Jock Hutchinson won the 1920 PGA, the last major that year, then won the first major of 1921, the British Open (held in June while the U.S. Open was held in July). Tommy Armour won the 1930 PGA, the last major that year, then won the first major of 1931, the British Open (held in June while the U.S. Open was held in July).

Also, re Brett Avery's "Cool Stat of the Week" in the foldout section, Nick Faldo did not win three times in a span of six or few majors. He won three times in a span of seven majors from his victory in the 1989 Masters through his win at the 1990 British Open. He finished T18th in the '89 U.S. Open, T11th in the '89 British, T9th in the '89 PGA, won the '90 Masters and was T3rd in the '90 U.S. Open.

I once had a teacher like you! What does it take for Padraig Harrington to be graded an A+ ? Has there been an A + performance this year? Maybe Rocco at the Open? You graded Tiger and A; do you need to play on two legs to get that elusive plus?

So here's an A - to the best golf publication there is!

Thanks, Bob. You'll likely get agreement of the Angry Golfer, John Hawkins, who can't believe Harrington isn't ranked No. 2 in the world.

--Bob Carney

We talk a lot in the magazine and on this blog about bringing new players into the game--and the obstacles to keeping them. But we don't hear often from those new golfers themselves. Here's Clinton Hotchkiss of Yonkers, New York:

My name is Clinton and I just recently started golfing. So needless to say I am a +infinity handicap. Despite my obvious lack of ability however I have fallen hopelessly in love with this game. After playing only 2 holes and then being rained out I immediately went out and bought all of the necessary and unnecessary equipment.

Recently and most unfortunately, however, I have discovered that I simply cannot afford this game. I work in construction and having to pay 40$+ for greens fees is something that I simply cannot do every weekend. (And trust me I know that 40$+ is on the super low end.) Sure I can play twilight and pay only 25$ to walk, but only if it is to dark to see the ball!!! I know that a lot of money is required to maintain the course, but does it really have to be so expensive? I tried to play this past winter and some people still wanted me to pay 50$+ to walk IN THE FREEZING COLD!!!!!!! I realize that most unfortunately this is something that will never change, so I guess the love affair will have to continue through saved change and skipped lunches. I don't mean to whine, I'm just trying to understand.

I also wanted to let you know that your magazine has been the single greatest help to my golf game! Your instruction has even corrected my slice, something I never thought possible. So thank you very very much and keep up the excellent work.

Thanks, Clinton. Stay with it. And check out the Places to Play course finder on the home page of our web site for courses that might be even more affordable--or have earlier twilight hours.

--Bob Carney

The Ryder Cup sniping has begun. The problem is, it's not all trans-Atlantic. Mike McAlpine of Lousiana, an American state, finds serious fault with U.S. Captain Paul Azinger's comments in our September issue.

Sure hope I'm the only one, but I thought Azinger came across as a complete jerk in your September issue. Bitterness and jealousy colored every remark. And his complaint about Faldo at the Open was positively girlish. This runner-up has his feelings hurt because the winner didn't comfort him enough? Maybe he expected a hug and note? Good God, the man's self-absorption is unlimited.

Golf may be a gentleman's game but clearly not all who play it are gentlemen. I'm rooting for the American side, of course. But Faldo's a winner already and "Zinger" is a loser.

Mike, are you a Longshoreman? I want you in my fox hole.

I, too, was surprised at the Muirfield remark about Faldo: "I had led the entire week and I confess that it hurt a little that he wasn't more consoling." I would think Zinger had forgotten by now who he'd lost to, so he could focus on why he didn't hit his drive at 17 on Sunday into the merchandise tent instead of the into bunker that did him in. (Could have used Seve's caddy there). Remember, too, that up until that point Faldo was known as Foldo in the tabloids, and probably carried that chip on his shoulder down 18.

On the other hand, in the gentlemanly department, Faldo needs no hugs or kisses, either. Er, that may have come out right...

--Bob Carney