Twitter: GeoffShac
  • The 1997 Masters: My Story
    The 1997 Masters: My Story
    by Tiger Woods
  • The First Major: The Inside Story of the 2016 Ryder Cup
    The First Major: The Inside Story of the 2016 Ryder Cup
    by John Feinstein
  • Tommy's Honor: The Story of Old Tom Morris and Young Tom Morris, Golf's Founding Father and Son
    Tommy's Honor: The Story of Old Tom Morris and Young Tom Morris, Golf's Founding Father and Son
    by Kevin Cook
  • Playing Through: Modern Golf's Most Iconic Players and Moments
    Playing Through: Modern Golf's Most Iconic Players and Moments
    by Jim Moriarty
  • His Ownself: A Semi-Memoir (Anchor Sports)
    His Ownself: A Semi-Memoir (Anchor Sports)
    by Dan Jenkins
  • The Captain Myth: The Ryder Cup and Sport's Great Leadership Delusion
    The Captain Myth: The Ryder Cup and Sport's Great Leadership Delusion
    by Richard Gillis
  • The Ryder Cup: Golf's Grandest Event – A Complete History
    The Ryder Cup: Golf's Grandest Event – A Complete History
    by Martin Davis
  • Harvey Penick: The Life and Wisdom of the Man Who Wrote the Book on Golf
    Harvey Penick: The Life and Wisdom of the Man Who Wrote the Book on Golf
    by Kevin Robbins
  • Grounds for Golf: The History and Fundamentals of Golf Course Design
    Grounds for Golf: The History and Fundamentals of Golf Course Design
    by Geoff Shackelford
  • The Art of Golf Design
    The Art of Golf Design
    by Michael Miller, Geoff Shackelford
  • The Future of Golf: How Golf Lost Its Way and How to Get It Back
    The Future of Golf: How Golf Lost Its Way and How to Get It Back
    by Geoff Shackelford
  • Lines of Charm: Brilliant and Irreverent Quotes, Notes, and Anecdotes from Golf's Golden Age Architects
    Lines of Charm: Brilliant and Irreverent Quotes, Notes, and Anecdotes from Golf's Golden Age Architects
    Sports Media Group
  • Alister MacKenzie's Cypress Point Club
    Alister MacKenzie's Cypress Point Club
    by Geoff Shackelford
  • The Golden Age of Golf Design
    The Golden Age of Golf Design
    by Geoff Shackelford
  • Masters of the Links: Essays on the Art of Golf and Course Design
    Masters of the Links: Essays on the Art of Golf and Course Design
    Sleeping Bear Press
  • The Good Doctor Returns: A Novel
    The Good Doctor Returns: A Novel
    by Geoff Shackelford
  • The Captain: George C. Thomas Jr. and His Golf Architecture
    The Captain: George C. Thomas Jr. and His Golf Architecture
    by Geoff Shackelford
« Finally! Extensive PGA Show Coverage! | Main | First Images Of Trump National Doral Post Redesign »

Grantland Rightly Under Fire Over Long-Form Golf Story

At over 7700 words and with all sorts of nutty stuff going on in golf, it's been tough to commit to the Grantland story titled "Dr. V's Magical Putter" by Caleb Hannan that many of you sent in last Wednesday (thanks).

By Friday, after early rave reviews, things started unraveling behind the scenes at and parent ESPN as the story of the mysterious inventor who built a "scientifically superior" golf club who committed suicide perhaps in part because she was driven to do so due to the possibility of being outed as transgender.

Here's the story as I read it, in a nutshell: clever 31-year-old wordsmith pitches story of breakthrough putter to website featuring generally great original writing, spends great time with Gary McCord learning about the putter and its inventor "Dr. V," then learns the inventor is a charismatic but unusual character who cooperates as long as her personal life is not written about. Writer decides he is apparently covering national security issues instead of writing about a putter, doggedly pursues the woman's background, finds out she's transgender and maybe not entirely honest about her resume, yet still has an ingenious product he adores. Writer pushes and pushes in a narcissistic pursuit to make the story award-worthy by pushing the boundaries of an agreement not to write about her personal life. Tragically, the woman in question, who the writer knows has been suicidal in the past, is pushed over the brink and kills herself in October. With three months to mull whether to run the story, Grantland still runs it on January 15, 2014.

Ed Sherman broke down the early praise for the story and the subsequent fallout, as did Richard Deitsch at, and so did Ryan Glasspiegel at The Big Lead. All three have linked, analyzed and documented the fallout from this complicated, and ultimately heart-wrenching debacle.

As I read "Dr. V's Magical Putter" tonight with little knowledge of the depth of the criticisms leveled against it, the story immediately made me sick as the writer presented information making the case against himself. And as someone who loves our profession and respects what Simmons was doing with his site, I'm horrified that so many people had such poor judgement.

Simmons went off radar since Friday according to The Big Lead's Ty Duffy, all while his beloved Patriots were in the AFC Championship game, finally surfacing Monday night with an apology. Before we get to Simmons' Point Misser Hall of Fame apology column, Duffy explains in a nutshell why this story was a calamity of insensitivity that will haunt all involved.

With Hannan’s piece, it meant ensuring the life of a relatively private human being was treated with appropriate empathy and decency. That didn’t happen.

What Hannan wrote and did was deplorable. But the crucial question is how and why his piece was vetted by Grantland, published and promoted uncritically. Not just uncritically. The site’s editorial director claimed he was “incredibly proud” of it. Was the ignorance about transgender issues that pervasive while chasing a racy premise? Or, was it a breakdown with Grantland’s editing when confronted with matters more weighty than sports stats and pop culture minutiae?

The Simmons apology (posted around 7 pm ET Monday, January 20th) unfortunately makes matters worse instead of making things better.

Simmons repeatedly says the editors "failed" Hannan but I'm not sure I entirely buy that based on what is presented.

 To be clear, Caleb only interacted with her a handful of times. He never, at any time, threatened to out her on Grantland. He was reporting a story and verifying discrepancy issues with her background. That’s it. Just finding out facts and asking questions. This is what reporters do. She had been selling a “magical” putter by touting credentials that didn’t exist. Just about everything she had told Caleb, at every point of his reporting process, turned out not to be true. There was no hounding. There was no badgering. It just didn’t happen that way.

The story reads as if he's badgering. To the point of absurdity. This is a golf putter he was writing about, not an NSA leak story! The subject spoke on the condition that her personal life not be probed.

Caleb’s biggest mistake? Outing Dr. V to one of her investors while she was still alive. I don’t think he understood the moral consequences of that decision, and frankly, neither did anyone working for Grantland. That misstep never occurred to me until I discussed it with Christina Kahrl yesterday. But that speaks to our collective ignorance about the issues facing the transgender community in general, as well as our biggest mistake: not educating ourselves on that front before seriously considering whether to run the piece.

This is not a transgender issue, this is human decency issue. Especially when the story is the source of the key piece of information that is so horrifying: the subject did not want her personal life discussed, scrutinized or asked about, and she put that in writing. The writer ignored this. The editors published anyway.

More point-missing from Simmons:

When anyone criticizes the Dr. V feature for lacking empathy in the final few paragraphs, they’re right. Had we pushed Caleb to include a deeper perspective about his own feelings, and his own fears of culpability, that would have softened those criticisms. Then again, Caleb had spent the piece presenting himself as a curious reporter, nothing more.

I disagree. He came off as having suffered a narcissistic blow for buying into Dr. V's story, then finding she wasn't entirely what he'd hoped she would be, and was encouraged (or forced?) to doggedly pursue her story for his own self-aggrandizement with prodding from his editors to get to the bottom of this story about...a putter! A putter.

This next part does not bode well for Team Grantland's sensibilities..

Before we officially decided to post Caleb’s piece, we tried to stick as many trained eyeballs on it as possible. Somewhere between 13 and 15 people read the piece in all, including every senior editor but one, our two lead copy desk editors, our publisher and even’s editor-in-chief. All of them were blown away by the piece. Everyone thought we should run it. Ultimately, it was my call. So if you want to rip anyone involved in this process, please, direct your anger and your invective at me.

How did none of these people think to say, my gosh, we might have driven this woman to take her life, we need to preface this story by suggesting our sheer horror at the slightest possibility this is how things played out and if we played any role, we're so, so sorry? Oh no, they were "blown away." Fifteen to 20 people edited this and not one thought, what do we gain by pursuing the story and three months after her suicide, what do we gain by running it?

Simmons then goes into seven points about the transgender community and using the wrong pronouns, having not consulted GLAAD's style guide, and feeling bad about not better understanding transgender people. The Point-Miss Express eventually winds down and he writes:

To our dismay, a few outlets pushed some version of the Grantland writer bullies someone into committing suicide! narrative, either because they wanted to sensationalize the story, or they simply didn’t read the piece carefully. It’s a false conclusion that doubles as being recklessly unfair.

The entire episode seems recklessly unfair to one person, Essay Anne Vanderbilt, aka Dr. V.

PrintView Printer Friendly Version

EmailEmail Article to Friend

Reader Comments (59)

I read the piece and thought it was a great story. To be quite honest I hadn't thought about the consequences about the writer's actions until this post.

If the seller of a golf club claims they are a physicist who has built stealth bombers, then I don't really see why you can't question that if you're going to write an article about it. The writer did cross the line when he shared that Dr. V was transgendered with a current investor (I had not thought about it while reading it).

The writer could have gone a thousand different directions with the story, but as a writer they wanted to go for the mysterious character that was the inventor of the club. And Gary McCord and others only hyped up Dr. V even more.

As for him threatening to essentially expose her? Yes, he crossed the line. For that he should have consequences which I'm sure he already is getting.
01.20.2014 | Unregistered CommenterChicago John
I read the story last week, and I thought it was odd that Hannan violated the subject's clearly articulated condition, namely, that Hannan write only about the putter and not the person. Simmons' apology seems genuine, but in a sophomoric way that's typical of him. Regularly he talks of his stupidity in violating his own rules and instincts -- for gambling -- with all the Mickelsonian sophistication of "I am such an idiot."

For people who care to get to the bottom of the GLBTQ issues behind the story, Christina Kahrl's piece (referenced by Simmons) is superb.
01.20.2014 | Unregistered Commenter3foot1
I thought it was a long, drawn out, clumsy piece, but forwarded it to Geoff last week given the golf content and unusual elements.
The author certainly got seduced with solving mysteries. The resume stuff and then the gender stuff.

(I'm a slow typer; nice post 3foot1!)

Unequivocally, I do not think it's cool to out people...but I didn't take away the impression that was what lead her to suicide. There had been tons of of erratic behaviour and previous attempt, no?
01.20.2014 | Unregistered Commenterdbh
I tend to agree with Chicago John that it was an interesting story and relevant because Tour players and analysts like Badds and McCord were using the putter, and in McCord's case essentially passing on Dr. V's lies about how it was invented to the public. V also lined up investors under fraudulent pretenses, which potentially is newsworthy for a reporter to do some digging around.

However, having a journalism degree, I believe the story never should have run. There were a few things that bothered me about the piece: 1) Obviously the transgender outing 2) The callous way the piece addressed the suicide, and 3) The fact that V offered to show proof of her credentials, but the reporter wouldn't agree to her terms in presenting them to him. That's fine if he didn't want to agree to her terms, but to go ahead and assume she was lying about her credentials and publish the story anyway without any real conclusive facts indicating fraud feels like a corner cut to me.

My college newspaper news director would have sat on or spiked the story based on just one of those three problems, let alone all three. It is breathtaking to me that 13-15 editors and lawyers, all under the ESPN umbrella, allowed the story to run.

But to me, the reaction of the primary investor is the biggest reason the story should not have been published. He seems not to care a bit that Dr. V was a transgender individual, and didn't even seem particularly upset that the stories she told about its development were bunk. For the investor, the disappointment in her was as a business partner and her marketing strategy. He still thought it was a good putter, and at the end of the day, that's why he invested. Basically, the reporter seemed more upset about being scammed than the guy who put up $60K as an investment. So if I'm the editor, I'm asking: what is the story here?

I'm a fan of Grantland and Bill Simmons, and with edgier journalism sometimes you get burned. But Simmons never was a journalist or editor who had to wrestle with these decisions in a newsroom, and his apology missed the mark. And the reporter has not apologized yet either. ESPN may have to put some more adults in the room at Grantland to make sure this doesn't happen again.
01.20.2014 | Unregistered CommenterMcCord's putter
Good post Geoff...One thing bothers me - why have none of the executive editors/editors who perpetrated this horror story resigned? Clearly, they don't hold themselves to the same "standards" of personal morality they seek to impose on others.
01.20.2014 | Unregistered Commenterlawrence Donegan
They bullied her. Disappointing as a reader who admires Grantland. Tragic for her loved ones.
01.20.2014 | Unregistered CommenterOB
So Dr. V only agrees to an interview if she can pitch her ridiculous insurgent-mad-scientist-fighting-the-big-guys story and the inquiring reporter agrees not to ask any good questions. What? If I'm Hannon's editor, and I'm not in the business of churning out journalistic marketing under the guise of real reporting, then I really have to make sure he asks those good questions. Anything else would be an <i>actual</i> ethical failure, especially when people stood to lose some serious money they'd invested into her product. I mean, what was her plan in the case that this over-the-top story ever came unraveled? Was she going to leave each of her investors a nice piece of jewelry? When you stumble on a lead like this you can't just capitulate to a pathological liar's request for privacy at the expense others.

And let's drop this weepy story of Dr. V being bullied into her ziplock helmet by a big bad writer. I'm no clinical psychologist, but Dr. V seemed to be suffering a classic case of being Nuckin Futs. She'd had several failed marriages, undergone a sex-change, went into bankruptcy, changed her identity and tried to kill herself previously. It's heartbreaking how it turned out, but the woman seemed to be in the population you might describe as "at risk," don't you think?

It's just too bad she never hooked up with her perfect business partner: Jeff Cochran.
01.20.2014 | Unregistered CommenterDr. Z
I admit I didn't read it until tonight, it was open on my browser for three days. But then Sergio did his green tap, Rory took a bad drop and I got busy with this. Until I saw Ed Sherman's item today, I just had no idea what an awful story it was but even then I just assumed it was mildly controversial. Then I read it this evening. I'd like to think that the first time I read it I would have had the very same reaction I had tonight, which was one of sheer sickness at the thought so many people thought this was a worthy story to pursue to no end and then, even after a tragic event, publish.

And you are right, Grantland is offering plenty of clarity on their thinking. Unfortunately, the more they share, the more it reflects on some pretty bizarre thinking by surprisingly large number of people.

Finally, none of the outrage is the result of information uncovered by others. It's all in the story. How they couldn't let this person's past go, how Dr. V agreed to talk without scrutiny of her personal life, etc... They held nothing back, which is a both a positive and ultimately, the tragedy of this episode.
01.20.2014 | Registered CommenterGeoff
Hypocrisy abounds in all writing in golf it seems.
01.21.2014 | Unregistered Commenterontheotherhand
Clearly Caleb forgot that he was supposed to be writing a story about golf.
01.21.2014 | Unregistered CommenterChris Campbell
As I've watched The Boston Sports Guy became Bill Simmons became Grantland, Simmons' self importance has flown off the charts. Hard hitting stories like "How this years NBA regular season is like Beverly Hills 90210" became an accepted form of editor-in-chief training for ESPN so this type of miss should not be surprising.
01.21.2014 | Unregistered CommenterWJ
The part I don't buy is Simmons claiming that Hannen never threatened to expose Dr. V as being a transgender individual. Hannen writes about it in the story in his last conversation. Jordan says (I'm paraphrasing) 'you mean to tell me that the MOI matrix was created by a lesbian automechanic?' and 'you should print this in the national enquirer next to the martians' and 'well, I guess you're going to print what you're going to print.'

Let's call a spade a spade on this one. He told Jordan and Dr. V that he was going to print this story and expose Dr. V's sexual orientation. That's why Jordan said those things in their last conversation.

The problem with Simmons' reply is that he's trying to stick up for Hannen, thinking that Simmons can take the heat since he's more well known and respected journalist that has a very loyal fanbase. But in the end he's just uncovering more problems over there. It's becoming more obvious that Hannen threatened to publish the story and Simmons and ESPN encouraged him to do so.

And two things get lost in this:

1. Hannen also outed Jordan (who is still alive) as being a lesbian.

2. Simmons and Co. have not investigated the entire story to see if Hannen's article was valid. It's obvious he had a vendetta against Dr. V all over a putter from a tiny putter company. Perhaps Hannen's article is 100% valid. But, there was certainly a conflict of interest that could have clouded his judgment given all of the things he did.
01.21.2014 | Unregistered CommenterRichie Hunt
Seriously, If I'm a 6 foot plus dude mechanic one day and the next I'm wearing women's clothes and professing to be a super scientist trying to sell products to the public, am I really a victim if people call bs??? Not to be to cold, but with all the nutty stuff going on before grant land showed up to write, I can't see how one draws a straight line between the authors activities and the suicide.
01.21.2014 | Unregistered CommenterJd
somebody's head better roll for this one
01.21.2014 | Unregistered Commenterchicago pt
I guess I missed the memo that said if somebody wants to change their identity, whether it be name or gender, that they were then entitled to make that change permanent and binding on the general public, in particular when they decide to sell products to that same public. The credentials and particulars of any entrepreneur is often critical to the success of any product or service that they try to create and sell. It was well documented in the story that he used the false educational and professional credentials as a way of suckering in McCord, and McCord's involvement was crucial to the putter going anywhere. Dr. V agreed to talk with the reporter to sell more putters or to get more investors, or both. To think that he could control the process post that decision, given the number of lies previously told was wishful thinking at best. A sad story nonetheless.

The story and Grantland overall is now running afoul of the Transgender community, and their desire to create a right for themselves to make their decisions to change gender binding and permanent, not only on themselves, but on society in general. Anyone who doesn't fall into line is labelled as an "outer" or other malfactor.
01.21.2014 | Unregistered CommenterBrianS
I am somewhere in the middle here. When Dr. V attempted to sell her putter design, she was using her scientific credentials to establish credibility. That makes investigation of those credentials completely legitimate, and if wasn't investigated that would be at best lazy reporting. (And is how you get Teo's fake gf stories). On the other hand Dr. V's gender was immaterial to the story and hence prob didn't need to be included. Suicide is a complicated matter and blaming it entirely on the story is far to simplistic.

I think Grantlands failure to realize that they should not publish that part of the story was due in part to the fact that we seem to have now accepted that juicy personal details should be reported as news. That we have stopped making a distinction about privacy that should be investigated bc it's part of a person's job, a resume for instance, vs privacy that has nothing to do with their public responsibilities, such as sexual orientation of an athlete. I am sure though we will all forget this next time we are eagerly discussing some golfers relationship status.
01.21.2014 | Unregistered Commenterelf
Has anyone tried the putter? Is it legit? Or a scam?
01.21.2014 | Unregistered CommenterDTF
Elf -

It doesn't sound like you're in the middle at all. I don't think anyone criticizing the story had a problem with Dr V's credentials being questioned. The criticism is about privacy issues as well as a general ignorance of transgender issues (like the ignorance trumpeted by Dr Z and Jd).
I don't try to assign malicious intent to Hannan's piece, but there was significant failure that contributed to this tragedy.
01.21.2014 | Unregistered CommenterScrambler
It is illegal to present yourself as a lawyer when you are not. It is illegal to present yourself as a doctor when you are not. It is illegal to misrepresent a product to consumers and investors. Dr. V was a law breaker. The author had a responsibilty to explain to the reader why there was no record of a Dr. V prior to 2001 (because she was a male auto-mechanic living in Seattle at the time). The transgender community wants equal rights but they insist it is not fair to treat them equally. Is it fair to the Aerospace Engineering profession to let people impersonate them? Dr V chose the cowards way out of a hole she herself dug herself into. Nobody is to blame for that but her.
01.21.2014 | Unregistered CommenterRichR
1) What ABOUT the putter? Is it really great? G McCord is not the best spokesperson IMHO.

2)Why was exposing a persons private life EVER needed?

3)I am also a journalism major, and if this person had lived, would they EVER grant (NPI) another interview?

4) Suicide is complex, I have known 5 people whi killed themselves, and one was a spur of the moment fit of anger- a''I'll show you'' The most recent was a year ago, and I am very sad now, as I think of her, unable to stand the pain of an autistic child and a juvenile delinquent, I suppose. She was full of life. I will pray for her anf for Dr. V today.
01.21.2014 | Unregistered Commenterdigsouth
The main issue in this dust-up is a cultural one. I think that that the author viewed the entire story through the lens of misrepresentation, and saw Dr. V's presenting herself as a female as evidence of that.

If you have no exposure to transgender people and are not familiar with things like the GLAAD style guide (thanks to Simmons' apology, now I am), it is easy to see a transgender person as a fake -- like someone wearing a costume. Through this lens, Dr. V's living life as a woman is merely corroborative evidence of fraud in other areas of her life.

Those who criticize the story seem to say that a person's transgender identification: (a) must be the person's true gender for purposes of any discussion about them; or (b) is so potentially misunderstood that it is wrong to "out" the person's sex at birth without the person's permission.

I'm still not sure how I come down on this story. There is clear evidence that Dr. V was a huckster who used nonexistent credentials to sell a product. Fraud in multimillion dollar commerce is inherently newsworthy.

The idea that Dr. V could shield her gender orientation from the article turns on whether you think that being transgender is form of misrepresentation. Our culture is a long way from coming to agreement on that one.
01.21.2014 | Unregistered CommenterHennie Bogan

If I were trying to practice law without a degree, why wouldn't it just be enough to say "Scrambler does not appear to be registered with the NYS Bar?" Would it matter to report that "Scrambler dropped out of school because of (insert any detail that has nothing to do with your ability to practice law)"?

The fact that you're even implicitly equating transgender identification with deception about professional qualifications shows that you're missing the point. Your comment about "equal treatment" makes it seem like you feel the transgender community views itself as having an exemption from having their professional backgrounds reviewed. The equal treatment requested is the same privacy that is afforded to all regarding gender identification / sexuality.
01.21.2014 | Unregistered CommenterScrambler
No way in the world was her status as a transgender person germane to the design of the putter and her qualifications to design it.

This article clearly crossed the lines of decency. Its irresponsible at best. Ironically, The writer made great mention of Dr. V's questionable lawsuits in the past. Unfortunatelly, it now appears that her estate may have one with merit.
01.21.2014 | Unregistered CommenterWill
The people upset by this article are prone to logical leaps: Dr V killed herself because her transgender idenity might be exposed not because has her business partner said in the article the company she built on a foundation of fraud would be destroyed... not because she might be having problems with her lover which apparently triggered the first suicide attempt. There been no causal link made.

They also assume Dr V should be accorded some special treatment because she was transgender... If someone changes their identity that is part of the story. Consider the case of Robert Dunst who murdered some people and then changed his identity while in hiding. Should he never have been exposed just because he was transgender? Ridiculous. It is part of the story and must be told. If a transgender person doesn't want to be exposed as transgender then they should no commit acts that could lead to their eventual exposure. Sexuality has nothing to do with the fraud that was being exposed in the article.
01.21.2014 | Unregistered CommenterRichR
I think Hennie's take is fairly even. It isn't a simple matter in many ways.

I note that the overall response on twitter was positive, and it turned a few days later. Canadian writer Bruce Arthur, who is a bit of a bellweather for moral outrage, first recommended the story and then turned with the crowd.
01.21.2014 | Unregistered CommenterTighthead
Rich, the Durst case isn't analgous to this. Durst was cross-dressing as a means to remain a fugitive. That doesn't mean he was transgender. The fact that he disguised himself in that way was relevant to the story of his eventual capture.

In this case the writer seems to suggest that becoming transgender was merely one lie in a series of other misrepresentations about the qualifications and credentials of the designer.

As far as a causal link, I'd think it would be easy to show that this person committed suicide when she knew that not only her misrepresentations were to be disclosed but she'd also be outed as a transgender person (against her clear requests and wishes)

Again, I have a hard time seeing the connection between her sexual identity and her qualifications, or lack thereof, to design and market a putter.
01.21.2014 | Unregistered CommenterWill
(from Christina Kahrl's editorial)

'Like gays or lesbians — or anyone else, for that matter — trans folk get to determine for themselves what they’re willing to divulge about their sexuality and gender identity. As in, it’s not your business unless or until the person tells you it is, and if it’s not germane to your story, you can safely forgo using it."

Obviously that's a false statement. If the transgender community believe that set of parameters has any merit with today's media denizens they are deluding themselves. Unrealistic expectations almost always lead to disappointment.

Separate from that, my neighborhood probably has more 6'-tall former male auto mechanics walking around in dress than any other place in the world -- and you can spot them a block away. I'd be pretty surprised anyone in regular personal contact with E.A.V. hadn't already figured it out. (maybe the "investor" had never met her in person?)
01.21.2014 | Unregistered CommenterDTF
Will, The Durst analogy does apply. He was transgender not merely 'hiding'. But you make a point... what if Dr V was merely hiding as a transgender person? Regardless of Dr V's sexuality... should the story have been dropped just because it would like lead to business failure and possible litigation? Absolutely not! Fraud is fraud and should be exposed even if its done by a small putter company. So then how do you tell the story without exposing that she was a he auto mechanic at the time he was supposedly designing bombers. You can't do it. The transgender pc police are out of control and on the wrong side of this one. Again Dr. V and only Dr. V is responsible for her actions. Nobody forced to commit fraud.
01.21.2014 | Unregistered CommenterRichR
@ Hennie - thank you for your post - I think very well put. Those that automatically claim that we should accept a person's stated sexual orientation as a given are clearly not yet in the mainstream. Sports, including golf, require a sexual identification - one that possibly may be changed (but that is not at all established in all sports) through surgery, hormone therapy, and so forth - but not at all by the simple choice of the person at hand.
01.21.2014 | Unregistered CommenterBrianS
No one with a degree would ever say zero MOI. The term is nonsense if the putter has mass and a face to strike the ball. And if one wanted a minimal rotational MOI for a given mass of the putter, that design surely is not it.

So the claims are false. But golf being what it is, it still might be decent putter.
01.21.2014 | Unregistered CommenterJJ
JJ, they actually say "near zero MOI"....and smidge of CYA there.

Here's part two of the McCord/Elk discussion if anyone wants to watch it.
01.21.2014 | Unregistered CommenterDTF
Rich, aside from divulging her status as a transgender person to an investor I think the easiest way to write that she was a mechanic instead of a brilliant engineer is, well, like that.
01.21.2014 | Unregistered CommenterWill
The interesting part is McCord's role. He clearly bought the story, spent a lot of time with Dr. V and vetted her with 4 star generals plus Dan Quayle, now he doesn't want to talk about the subject. Some enterprising golf writer needs to be talking to Gary.
01.21.2014 | Unregistered CommenterNo Longer
@Will - Many investors would consider the supposed transgender choice to be a red flag in and of itself. And they are perfectly entitled to feel that way.
01.21.2014 | Unregistered CommenterBrianS
"Many investors would consider the supposed transgender choice to be a red flag..."

01.21.2014 | Unregistered CommenterDTF
"Some enterprising golf writer needs to be talking to Gary."

NL, that breed is extinct!
01.21.2014 | Unregistered CommenterDTF
I haven't read the story yet-- can I still comment on it?
01.21.2014 | Unregistered CommenterSarah Palin
Gary already said no more comment on this through CBS so that's curious more than just a little.

I am not LGBT so I can't publicly comment on that aspect of this sad ending story but it does seem Caleb took this one a little too personal but then again if I was on to a hot story I think I could become just as wrapped up in the twisted tale. The fact that he is a lousy putter doesn't help here either. But nonetheless Dr. V wasn't a Dr. and she shouldn't expect to keep her secrets when working with reporters who are paid to report the truth. That's what ultimately this is all about and the truth unfortunately sometimes hurts. I hope Gerri Jordan can keep the putter going for Dr.V's sake.
01.21.2014 | Unregistered CommenterAmen Coroner
DTF, Thanks for the second link. You'd think McCord would be able to hear the difference between "ellipse" and "ellipsis."
01.21.2014 | Unregistered Commenter3foot1
I'm hard pressed to see how anyone could lie so often about so much (basically e-v-e-r-y-t-h-i-n-g), get snarky and insulting when asked about it...

...and then have any expectations whatsoever about being "protected"?
01.21.2014 | Unregistered CommenterDTF

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.

My response is on my own website »
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
All HTML will be escaped. Hyperlinks will be created for URLs automatically.