Golf Digest reader Mike Powers from Georgia is the first one to take exception to Dan Jenkins' account of this year's major winners. I expect he won't be the last, because Jenkins suggests that the "wrong" guys won....

Dear Editor,

While Dan Jenkin's article about a bad roster of major winners might have been tongue in cheek, it is still insulting to pros at any level who take up the challenge week to week. Readers already know there are a variety of talent levels; dominant, cruising, coasting, improving, struggling or just barely hanging on, but no matter what, all +125 earned the chance to step up to the tee any tournament and on Thursday morning everyone is tied for first and tied for last. Just because a high profile player didn't run away with the coveted major trophy doesn't make it any less of an accomplishment. If anything, maybe more so. The less known or admired player overcame challenges and obstacles the world's greatest and best coached ball strikers couldn't overcome. Why diminish their success or accomplishment ? They deserved to win, to imply anything less is in poor taste. Better topics would have been; getting up for majors, following up a major victory, seeking consistency week to week or year to year, believing in winning, what motivates the bottom 50 to compete (besides the money) or just about anything that recognizes and celebrates the competitive spirit in the lessor known players. Said another way, how did that article improve my play of the game, my enjoyment of the game, or my appreciation for the skills required to compete at any level ?

Mike Power

That last question is a great one. How does Dan Jenkins' jaundiced eye improve your view of the sport? I remember when Davis Love's father, the late Davis Love Jr., wrote for Golf Digest and we were doing a story together when Davis read Jenkins' account of Scott Simpson's 1987 U.S. Open victory. I think Jenkins said that it was about as exciting as watching hair grow or paint dry, something like that. It angered Davis, who understood from his own experience and his son's just what an accomplishment Simpson's was, and he let me know. How could Golf Digest demean such a victory?

But was he demeaning it, or just telling a different truth?

I tended to sympathize with Davis back then, but I'm not there now. Why? Because--not telling you anything you don't know here--the heart of any professional sport--golf, baseball, football--is not only the reality, the event, but the story we tell about it--and the story we want to hear. Our dreams, as well as the players' are part of it, a big part. It's wanting C.C. Sabathia to pitch a no-hitter, not a one-hitter, and why you might resent the guy that gets that one hit. It's rooting for your favorite NFL team to break the Miami Dolphins perfect record--or not--but demanding it be dramatic either way. Some stories are...I hesitate to say better, but certainly more lasting...than others. This year we had four such stories and none of them came to be. Kenny Perry, the good-guy, journeyman Southerner trying in vain to overcome age and pressure to win his first major, the one that meant more to him than any of the others; Phil Mickelson, returning to the city--and the galleries--that watched him blow the National Championship (and forgave him), grinding away to give himself and them another chance, only to let it slip away again; David Duval crawling from oblivion to get within two holes of the National Open, then to come up a putt short; Tom Watson, almost 60 but playing half that, leading the Open Championship with a hole to play, only to succumb to an old man's nerves; and finally Tiger, the year he comes back from knee surgery, about to take what's rightfully his, the year's final major, when it's snatched from him.

Forget that we had one of the greatest Latin American players ever winning the first major, a rising PGA Tour star we'll hear from again winning the second, the best player never to win a major finally getting his, and finally the first Asian player in history to win a major--pretty great story that--it just wasn't the same. We knew these players less well. It's not that we didn't like them; they simply weren't our heroes, at least not yet. Our heroes had fallen, the truth be told.

Dan has said that his goal as a sportswriter has always been to "get down to what's true." And with humor and an incredible ear for history (read his Sports Illustrated account of Crenshaw's first Masters victory, not funny, just perfect) he has done it. The great stories, not necessarily the great people, unraveled this year and that unraveling became a story in itself.

When the ballot came by this week to choose player of the year, I chose Yang, so great was his accomplishment for Asia, not to ainst the world's greatest player. But Dan's writing for us, not Asian Times.

I remember Stewart Cink at Turnberry graciously saying he knew we were rooting for Watson, that, heck, even he was to a point, and that he knew it wasn't personal.

It wasn't.

--Bob Carney

Money is the root of all golf tours and money lists, the ultimate measure of a player's season, other points calculations notwithstanding. Here's an interesting idea from a Golf World reader on a revision of the present money list calculation.

Dear Editor,

It's too bad the PGA Tour doesn't combine the final money totals for players on multiple tours. For example: If you add the money Tom Watson won on the PGA and Champions tours in 2009 his grand total of $1,531,275 would have placed him in 54th place on the PGA Tour and in 6th place (in final money) on the Champions Tour! I am sure you could also make a case for justifying (the final money) for pros like Ernie Els, Padraig Harrington, Retief Goosen, Paul Casey, Sergio Garcia, Angel Cabrera, Ian Poulter, Camillo Villegas, Anthony Kim, Robert Allenby (and others) playing on both the PGA and European Tours as well!

Dan Lynch
Centerville, OH

Dear Dan,

I'm not sure you'll ever convince the tours, no matter how global their thinking, that it's in their interest to count other-tour earnings (even if the player in question first fulfills the requirement of its tour for active status). That said, the list you're talking about would be an interesting one and one a magazine might create. Total competitive earnings. The problem is, such a list has no impact on a player's eligibility for events around the world. Those are determined by the individual tour lists. Ron Sirak does an earnings list for Golf Digest that includes all tour earnings, but it also includes endorsements. I like your idea. As the men's and women's tours go more global the list will become more relevant. Let us think about this....

--Bob Carney

Dear Editor, I had to laugh about you thinking NASCAR didn’t want to go up against Masters Sunday (Golf World, Bunker News). NASCAR never races on Easter Sunday, which is why there was no NASCAR race on Masters Sunday in 2009. The week after Easter Sunday, NASCAR usually races on Saturday night in Phoenix. In 2010, Easter Sunday is the week before the Masters which means NASCAR will be racing on Saturday night in Phoenix on Masters weekend. Jim Fuchs Costa Mesa, CA

Around Labor Day we talked here about Maj. Dan Rooney's Patriot Golf Day, supported by the PGA of America, which seems to be doing a lot of good things these days. Makes sense around Veteran's Day to report the results of the third annual day, just in. It was all good news.

Forty-four hundred facilities raised more than $1.9 million for Folds of Honor Foundation. Those dollars are earmarked for scholarships to the children of fallen and disabled vets. About 570 scholarships have been awarded over the past two years.

Golf Digest Managing Editor Roger Schiffman, who sits on the Patriot Day scholarship board, says the average scholarship is about $2500, but is often worth much more because the money is invested long before the kids enter college.

Not to get on the soapbox, but it's one more reason why golf should take no shots in these tough economic times. Among all the recreation and pleasure it produces, it also raises on average about $3.5 billion a year for charity. (The PGA Tour accounts for about $125 million of that). Those are astounding (and outstanding) numbers and golfers should wear them proudly. By the way, if you haven't contributed to Patriot's Day, click here.

--Bob Carney

This question of whether Tiger Woods "showboats" more than Jack Nicklaus--the subject of letters here and in the Mail column of Golf World--caused two more readers to weigh in, both in support of Tiger and in opposition to letter writer MacKimmie in the November 9 edition of Golf World.

Dear Editor,
I am surprised Golf World would print a letter in its Mail section that is written as if fact when in reality it is not.

Mr. MacKimmie of Canada states "showboating was not part of Jack's act" as a reference to Tiger Woods actions after his shot at 18 at the Presidents Cup.
Have you forgotten Jack throwing his putter up in the air at The Open on No. 18, or raising his putter and tracking the putt at No. 17 at The Masters in 1986 or his exuberance at No. 16 at Augusta when he sank that long putt? Was Jack showboating? Probably not, but he was excited. Was Tiger showboating? Not anymore than than Jack.

P.S. In full disclosure I am a Jack and Tiger fan.

Ed Pearson
Brunswick, GA

Dear Editor,
W. MacKimmie claims that the cover photo of Tiger's reaction at the President's Cup represents showboating, "not part of Jack's act". The most iconic photograph of Nicklaus is of him raising the putter over his head after sinking a putt at the 1986 Masters. I fail to see the difference in the two reactions.

Bill White
Watch Hill, RI

A third reader pointed to Tiger as a model of style in another sense.

Dear Editor,
When is somebody going to take Phil Mickelson and Ryan Moore to the Tiger Woods School of How to Dress on the Golf Course?

Joe Pratt

On course decorum, both on Tour and at our local clubs and courses, is a subject you never tire of discussing. It's a big deal, a fact that the tour players (and your weekend partners) ought to be aware of. You care.

--Bob Carney

Alas, another letter reminding us aging editors, that we're dinosaurs, believing, as the old coach said, that athletes ought to act "as if they've been there before." How about you? In reader Wickersham's list below, do you prefer column A or column B?

Dear Editor,
In answer to W. MacKimmie's letter "Missing the Boat" in the November 9 edition, which bemoaned his impression that Tiger Woods lacked the style and professionalism of Jack Nicklaus, consider the following comparisons: Chad Ochocinco and Raymond Berry,
Usain Bolt and Jesse Owens, Serena Williams and Althea Gibson, Manny Ramirez and Ted Musial, Kobe Bryant and Oscar Robertson, even Jack Nicklaus and Arnold Palmer. The newcomer always has to overcome the aura of those who came before him. With press coverage and unforgiving fans dogging them 24-7, living up to the reputations of
those of a different era becomes impossible. For all we know, those stars from the past may not have been so revered had all their personal habits been made public.

B. Wickersham
Richmond, KY

--Bob Carney

You’ve stopped writing. Practically. Your letters are a trickle of what they were back in the summer when Ryan Moore drove you crazy with his painter’s hat and Stevie kept taking off that bib and you had all those suggestions for the FedEx scoring. You adored Tiger. You resented him. You cheered for Yang and loved the fact that a guy called Duck could bounce it off a tree and win a green jacket. You mourned for Kenny. You were saddened for Phil and Amy. You railed against slow play, spitting, Johnny Miller—when you weren’t lauding him—stubble, swearing and Kelly Tilghman. You were there for Watson. You hurrahed for the red, white and bleu in the Presidents Cup. And then you stopped. Poof. It hit me yesterday as I rummaged through 4,012 emails from Kenyan ministers telling me I’d won the lottery and found nothing but one note from you about split infinitives.

I think I know what you're saying by not saying it: "Golf’s over, bud. Give me a break. Take a rest. Go for a hike. Are you ready for some football?"

There must be a season, you’re saying. It’s as simple as that. To everything, even that thing that we love more than our own well being, even golf. How else do you keep track of it, measure it, remember it, compare it, anticipate it, endure it? How else do you know when to get ready? How else to make your predictions, organize your pools, pick your major winners, re-grip your clubs. Even golf must have a start and a stop.

Now, it’s great that there is a World Golf Championship in China. Great that there is an Asian Amateur that will send a player to the Masters. They will expand the game and make it better (see World Series, Hideki Matsui). They will make a season over there. But don’t expect us to live for every shot. It’s over, over here; that’s what you’re saying. David Owen wrote once that for the first golf game of the season to be as thrilling as it can be, there must be a last game of the season. After that, amid the football games and family get-togethers, there’s time for taking stock, naming Newsmakers, stocking the Hall of Fame, drawing it all to a close, dreaming of Augusta.

We have endured a period of great excess in our game. Too many fancy courses, too many overwrought clubhouses, obscene club initiation fees, extravagant purses, exotic equipment prices, and, well, a season that never ends. Enough. That’s what you’re saying.

--Bob Carney