Each year you write heavily of the 500-mile grind at the brickyard at "Indy." Never does anyone in Indianapolis use the term "Indy."
Now you've done it again! The new minor league football team doesn't have an entry in "Indy." There ain't no such place!
Regarding the article The Big Golf Secret (Sept. 24), one comment, I believe, is worth putting on paper. It concerns only a sudden-death playoff. The paying customer has already seen 72 holes of golf which he paid for. An extra hole is an added climax which he can witness without paying any extra money. Therefore I do not feel consideration of the public reaction is a primary factor.
HARRY L. ROBINSON
Let's get one thing straight: professional golf is not a game, but a business to which a great many men devote their time and energies to earn a livelihood. When two or more players can wind up with exactly the same number of strokes for 72 holes of golf they have won the first-and second-place money, and how they dispose of it is nobody's business but their own. The playoff is solely for the sake of determining who will take the title and carry home whatever pieces of bric-a-brac go with it.
The proof of this is that no playoff is required on ties for third or fourth place or any other position in the tournament. When three players are tied for third place the third-, fourth-and fifth-place money is pooled and divided equally among the three players even though these three players might have just one stroke more than the players tied for first place. I don't hear any screams of anguish or sec any crocodile tears shed over this accepted practice, so why should the splitting of first-and second-place money be any different? Let's be consistent and demand no splitting of prize money and require that all ties be played off even if it is only for 35th position.
So far as the sudden-death playoff is concerned, they might just as well flip a coin or draw cards to determine the winner, because the final outcome is determined by luck—either good or bad.
OLE MISS BARS
I fully realize that special issues of your magazine are set up in advance, so that at the time the Sept. 24 cover was planned you did not know of the trouble that would occur at the University of Mississippi. However, by using a bit of prudence you might have assumed that there would be some trouble when a Negro would try to enroll at some segregated southern college. In the past your magazine has been fair in the handling of news in the sports field. I can only suppose that you selected this cover to make amends for a recent article about Ole Miss in which you criticized the school—and rightly so—for their anti-Negro feeling.
Sports are not above morals or politics, and national publicity should not be given the Confederate flag. Even if you're only showing Mississippi cheerleaders, millions of Americans are offended by the display of Stars and Bars on your Sept. 24 cover.