Annika Sorenstam has been under par in 44 of 52 rounds this year. Jonathan Ferrey/Getty Images

Every year at this time, as the focus goes to the enormous sums of money that the PGA Tour players have made this season, the very real and legitimate question concerning the disproportionate prize money and press coverage that the LPGA women receive in comparison to the men arises.

There is a solid argument that Annika Sorenstam has put up as good a record as Tiger Woods over the past six years, and certainly has had at least two seasons every bit as brilliant as Vijay Singh's 2004. And yet her total prize money pales in comparison, and most of her press coverage is buried deep in the dark recesses of the sports pages.

For years now, there have been movements and pressure from various groups to bring some monetary parity to all professional arenas. They have tried to exert political correctness, threatened sexual bias, and even tried to extort sponsors with product boycotts. And nothing seems to have any effect.

What lies behind this seemingly inequitable situation? I don't think you have to go any further than the word "professional." The only difference between amateurs and pros is money. And ticket sales, along with TV revenue, drive the prize money distribution. Make an actual head count at an LPGA event, check their TV ratings, and compare the sales of golf products for men to those for women and the answer is simply a business one, not a personal or sexual one.

Professional women athletes are extraordinary performers and are just as gifted as their male counterparts. But quite simply they don't have the ability to generate the big bucks. And when the special interest groups try to leverage these wonderful players to further some athletic agenda, I think the paying public is turned off even more. Your thoughts?

Why all the wailing and gnashing of teeth over the Ryder Cup results? What was supposed to be a friendly competition has turned into a huge money-making enterprise for the PGA and European Tours, and the players are supposed to be the lackeys who make the money for their masters. Tiger's right. Who cares?
--Mark Smolens, Chicago

	MAILBAG Frank Beard will answer your golf questions every Tuesday. To e-mail Frank, use the form below. Your name: Your e-mail address: Your home town: Enter your question:

Mark, you might take some time to find out where the profits from these matches go to. Charities across the U.S. are the real winners.

Tiger Woods has said that Americans are at a disadvantage in the Ryder Cup because they also have to play the President's Cup also. Is it unfair that Americans have to play two tournaments, or are they looking for excuses, beyond the fact that the Europeans play as a real team and not as 12 individuals.
--Gerrit Jan Stobbe, Leeuwarden, Netherlands

Turn your question around and make a statement out of it and you have your answer. Some of our professional golfers are very spoiled, and I'm sorry it is so apparent to someone so far away.

I want to know why all the wives/girlfriends parade about as if they are part of the Ryder Cup team? What other international sport includes the wives in all the publicity? Perhaps if the men spent less time trying to outdo each other in the best-kept female companion contest, they would bond better with their playing partners on the golf course.
--Sara Nichols, Downpatrick, Northern Ireland

The presence of the wives, the attention given to their outfits, and their melodramatics inside the ropes are a bit much, and this is another indication that the original team concept of the Cup has been lost to a new-age personal agenda.

Do you think that style of play had anything to do with the Ryder Cup mess? It seemed to me that U.S. players would rather hit driver as far as they could, regardless of accuracy. Except for Fred Funk, those guys were all over the place. The Euros managed the course better. Also, the next Ryder Cup captain should be Corey Pavin.
--Eric Gass, Milwaukee

A good team can adjust to any style of play, but the players must be able to put their egos aside and change their individual games to the best interest of the team. The U.S. Ryder Cup squad failed to grasp this critical concept.

Pavin would be a good choice.

I have concluded that the U.S. plays to conservative. They play not to lose, instead of playing to win. Each succeeding lose fortifies this attitude. What say you?
--Larry Abraham, Gig Harbor, Wash.

I especially noticed the very tentative play on the greens. There is a pretty deep hole for the U.S. to play out of now, and 2006 looks pretty bleak.

How are the Ryder Cup matches set? For instance, does the "away" captain set the order for his team and the "home" captain counters with the matchups he wants, vice versa, or is there some other procedure?
--Tom Kyle, Boonton, New Jersey

Each captain selects his team in secret and both are revealed at the same time. The matches fall into place as the opposing teams are put side by side.

Why do pros, after hitting their approach shot, prefer to walk up to the green with their putter in hand, rather than pull the putter out of the bag once they reach the green? Also, why do caddies always hold onto the flag, rather than put it down on the ground off the green? Is it illegal to put the flag down?
--Jim Black, Toronto

Carrying your putter to the green may be a validation that you have just hit a pretty good shot -- I know this is how it worked for me. Besides, as a player goes to mark his ball, the caddy takes the bag in a completely different direction -- taking the putter saves an extra step. This probably doesn't make sense to you, but it's just a feel-good tradition with pros. To answer your other question, the caddy holds the pin so he doesn't have to bend over to pick up something he can hold.