|
 |   |
|
EVENTS Fantasy Central Inside Game Multimedia Central Statitudes Your Turn Message Boards Email Newsletters Golf Guide Cities Work in Sports
CNNSI.com GROUP
COMMERCE
|  |
Casey's case PGA Tour on nothing more than a costly witch-hunt
Well, they couldn't fit the Casey Martin lawsuit into one century. Now the case is going to the Supreme Court, which will hear arguments on whether motorized carts should be allowed in competition under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Casey was 2-0 in his first two court cases. On March 6 the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court in San Francisco upheld a lower court's ruling requiring the PGA Tour to permit Martin to use a cart. The Supremes are a whole new game, however. If the PGA Tour's legal eagles (who have been more like sparrows so far) can limit the case to being about a competition needing identical conditions for every competitor, the tour might have a chance. If Martin's lawyers ride the ADA, which specifically mentions golf as a place to accommodate those with medical conditions, and harp on the fact that the PGA Tour has a long history of cart use -- especially in its qualifying tournament, which determines which players get on tour, not to mention the Senior tour, Martin could go 3-0. Striking down Martin in this case would be politically incorrect and could possibly damage the ADA. Let's just hope that in this go-round, we don't see more taped depositions from Jack Nicklaus insisting that carts shouldn't be used. When his hip was hurting, Jack was seen riding a cart on the senior circuit, although he usually doesn't going off the first tee or coming up the 18th. The same goes for Arnold Palmer, who I believe has/or had an endorsement deal with a golf cart company. If you don't walk the walk, you can't talk the talk. Here's one vote for Casey, if for no other reason than the crappy way the PGA Tour has tried to squash him like a bug. The tour's motto used to be,"Anything's possible." Martin is living proof of that and should be a marketing coup for the tour, a symbol of hope and perseverance. The PGA Tour raises a lot of money for charity. Too bad it didn't take all the money it's going to spend on legal fees in this case and give it to a worthwhile charity instead of trying to sue Martin off the tour. If I were a player, I'd be seriously questioning the expense, the motives and the tour's ideology in this whole case. But, of course, the players have absolutely no say in it. If I were a player, I'd be seriously questioning that, too. But enough about me. This week's mail:
Are players other than Tiger too conservative? There is talk about Tiger
being able to execute the miracle shot when he needs to. Tiger didn't develop
that ability overnight, only by trying it in tournaments and living with the
early failures. Did he learn to do it consistently under pressure? No doubt
Tiger has physical gifts that not many others have, but I don't see the other
top pros giving the big shots a try. Thanks for your letter, T.B. I used to get shots to prevent you. Take Tiger's winning shot at the Canadian Open, a 210-yard, six-iron shot from a bunker over a lake. Would you call Paul Goydos too conservative if he didn't try that shot -- or would you call him smart for knowing he couldn't pull it off? Same goes for Chip Beck's famous layup at the Masters. Was Beck chicken, or did he know he couldn't get a three-wood shot over the pond at 15 -- or, if he did, couldn't stop it on the green? I don't think today's players are too conservative. I think they're realistic. They just play by a different set of standards than Mr. Woods.
Gary, you wrote that Steve Williams, Tiger's caddie, is 36 but started
caddying in 1976. Is that right? He started at age 12 in a major tournament like
the New Zealand Open? Hard to believe. You have the eye of an editor, Christopher. Very sharp. However, Williams was, indeed, just a green lad of 13 when the New Zealand Open was held in his hometown of Wellington and he landed nine-time New Zealand Open champion Peter Thomson, who finished third behind Simon Owen. Williams said that event was his first four-round tournament; he didn't know much about caddying but the $150 payday he got from Thomson inspired him to make it a career. You could call him a boy wonder, in a sense, similar to Tiger.
Do you have a recommendation on which book is the best for increasing one's
fitness for golf (my back, in
particular)? The bible of golf fitness used to be Frank W. Jobe's "Exercise Guide to Better Golf." I don't know if you can beat that. For a more comprehensive plan, try "Athletic Forever: The Kerlan Jobe Orthopedic Clinic Plan for Lifetime Fitness."I haven't read it, but Jobe knows his stuff and Amazon.com reviews gave it five stars.
Who are the up-and-comers who will challenge Tiger? The current crop who
should be competing with Tiger -- guys like Ernie Els, Phil Mickelson and Davis
Love -- seem resigned that they will never beat him. It's going to take someone
new, someone we don't know
yet. Maybe it'll be that 11-year-old whom Sports Illustrated profiled a few weeks ago, Peter. I don't see anyone at the moment close to Tiger's level. The top young players usually mentioned are Charles Howell, a long hitter from Oklahoma State, and David Gossett, who left Texas way early to turn pro. While their resumes are impressive, they pale in comparison to Tiger's when he was their age. All players progress at different rates, but I don't see them making a run at Tiger. England's Lee Westwood and Northern Ireland's Darren Clarke could have potential but need to substantially improve their work ethic and fitness levels. Spain's Sergio Garcia is a wunderkind, a legitimate challenger even with a slightly funky swing. He could refine it, much as Tiger did his swing, and become a factor. But he has already shown stretches of shaky putting that I think doesn't bode well for the future. Adam Scott and Aaron Baddeley of Australia may be the best bets among today's kiddie corps. I agree with you that Tiger's challenger hasn't surfaced yet.
How long is Tiger exempt?
Woods is exempt on tour through 2007. He got a 10-year exemption for winning the '97 Masters. Starting in '98, major championships carried only a five-year exemption. Titles are not cumulative. For instance, Tiger doesn't get 15 years because he won three majors this year. If they were, he could give a couple to Casey Martin.
Click here to send your golf question to Gary Van Sickle.
| ||||||||||||||||||||
