Latest From
To Get Posts Delivered To Your Inbox Enter Email Address Below:

Powered by FeedBlitz
  • 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
  • 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
  • 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
  • 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
  • The Good Doctor Returns: A Novel
    The Good Doctor Returns: A Novel
    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
  • The Captain: George C. Thomas Jr. and His Golf Architecture
    The Captain: George C. Thomas Jr. and His Golf Architecture
    by Geoff Shackelford
Current Reading
  • Professional Golf 2015: The Complete Media, Fan and Fantasy Guide
    Professional Golf 2015: The Complete Media, Fan and Fantasy Guide
    by Daniel Wexler
  • The Golf Book: Twenty Years of the Players, Shots, and Moments That Changed the Game
    The Golf Book: Twenty Years of the Players, Shots, and Moments That Changed the Game
    by Chris Millard
  • The Forbidden Game: Golf and the Chinese Dream
    The Forbidden Game: Golf and the Chinese Dream
    by Dan Washburn
  • The Early Days of Pinehurst
    The Early Days of Pinehurst
    by Chris Buie
  • Arnie, Seve, and a Fleck of Golf History: Heroes, Underdogs, Courses, and Championships
    Arnie, Seve, and a Fleck of Golf History: Heroes, Underdogs, Courses, and Championships
    by Bill Fields
  • The Magnificent Masters: Jack Nicklaus, Johnny Miller, Tom Weiskopf, and the 1975 Cliffhanger at Augusta
    The Magnificent Masters: Jack Nicklaus, Johnny Miller, Tom Weiskopf, and the 1975 Cliffhanger at Augusta
    by Gil Capps
  • Golf Architecture in America: Its Strategy and Construction
    Golf Architecture in America: Its Strategy and Construction
    by Geo. C. Thomas
  • The Course Beautiful : A Collection of Original Articles and Photographs on Golf Course Design
    The Course Beautiful : A Collection of Original Articles and Photographs on Golf Course Design
    Treewolf Prod
  • Reminiscences Of The Links
    Reminiscences Of The Links
    by Albert Warren Tillinghast, Richard C. Wolffe, Robert S. Trebus, Stuart F. Wolffe
  • Gleanings from the Wayside
    Gleanings from the Wayside
    by Albert Warren Tillinghast
  • Planet Golf USA: The Definitive Reference to Great Golf Courses in America
    Planet Golf USA: The Definitive Reference to Great Golf Courses in America
    by Darius Oliver
  • Planet Golf: The Definitive Reference to Great Golf Courses Outside the United States of America
    Planet Golf: The Definitive Reference to Great Golf Courses Outside the United States of America
    by Darius Oliver
Writing And Videos

Tour pros would rather go through an IRS audit than play in a pro-am. Publicly they say they love meeting interesting people and how great the pro-ams are. In truth, they loathe them. They're out there for six hours, see countless bad shots and hear the same stale jokes. If Tim Finchem announced next Monday that pro-ams were henceforth eliminated, he'd find 200 cases of champagne on his porch Tuesday morning. TOM WEISKOPF




The Annuity: FedEx Cup Killer?

fedexcuplogo.jpgIt's long been rumored that Tiger Woods was strongly opposed to the $10 million annuity that will be given to the FedEx Cup winner. And as the exchange in yesterday's press conference revealed, he still is not a fan.

Naturally, some used this as a chance to suggest Tiger just wanted the cash, but more likely he's coming at this as a  fan and realizes that on Sunday of FedEx Cup weekend, the winner will not be asked how it feels to win $10 million or what he's going to do with the $10 million. Because he's not getting $10 million!

The winner won't see this money until he's 65, so there really isn't much to talk about.

And isn't that the point of the playoffs? To give everyone something to talk about? Even a $5 million or $4 million payday would have generated buzz. Shoot, $2 million would. But an annuity is not the stuff of water cooler conversation.

So two questions: Is this a deal killer for you as a fan? And to the financial gurus out there, approximately how much does the PGA Tour have to deposit annually to get that annuity up to $10 million by the time the player reaches 65? 


“This is why NASCAR sells. Apparently we need altercation in the game. We need people slugging it out on the golf course to boost ratings.”

Jeff Rude looks at the bizarre caddy-player spat between Jay Williamson and Mike Mollet that apparently is the subject of much conjecture:
What they disagree on is what ignited the explosion. Williamson said Mollet lost his cool first and embarrassed him with too much emotional talk and Williamson reacted. Mollet said Williamson lost his cool first and embarrassed him with too much emotional talk and Mollet reacted.

Williamson said the caddie kept yelling at him loudly, calling him a “whiner” among other personal insults, and used the F-word. Mollet said he got riled because Williamson directed the F-word and A-word toward him after the bad chip and while disagreeiing about the wind direction. Williamson said he can’t recall swearing.

Jim Rome, the radio mouth, mistakenly called this spat over wind direction the golf story of the year. He apparently didn’t watch the British Open or Big Break VII. But behind the Tour scenes, on ranges and putting greens and in locker rooms, this may have the legs of a caterpillar. It has become enough of a humorous talking point that Camp Ponte Vedra has tried to put a gag order on both combatants because it feels the incident is detracting from this week’s tournaments.

Maybe the Tour is wrongheaded about this. Think stock car battles and hockey fights. Williamson has.

“I can’t believe how this story keeps going,” Williamson, playoff runner-up at the recent Travelers Championship, said on Wednesday. “This is why NASCAR sells. Apparently we need altercation in the game. We need people slugging it out on the golf course to boost ratings.”


Mr. Galyean gets to have it both ways, it would seem.

As much as I enjoyed Gary Galyean's shredding of the USGA's arrogant leadership, I should have known based on his past blatherings and by the unusually hostile tone that it really wasn't worth the paper it was printed on.

Reader Geoff C urged us all to check out the free January download of Galyean's $88 travel newsletter, which, according to its host site: not for everyone. Seventy-two per cent of our subscribers are the leaders of their respective firms, play 69 rounds per yearoff a handicap of 9.7, and have a net worth of $4.2 million.

Oy vey.

In the first item from the January 2007 leaflet, Galyean absolutely trashes the character of former Executive Director Frank Hannigan for one of his commentaries posted on this website. Galyean does not say where the column appeared but still lifts lengthy excerpts from it. And as a lawyer and rules official, he calls himself a stickler for the rules. Of course this was back when he was drinking the USGA Kool-Aid and wouldn't dare hint that he reads this website!

So here's what he says about Hannigan's criticism of the USGA's Lexus and American Express corporate sponsorship deals:

It is not that we always disagree with Frank Hannigan; it is rather than his point of view has become so tiresomely, predictably anti-USGA. It is as if his absence from the seat of power, 28 years at the USGA, six of those as executive director, effervesces at regular intervals with a need to be contrary.

Effervesces! Tell me you read that without laughing out loud.

He has written various columns in the interim of our commenting on his comments, but we rise again to the bait after reading his thoughts on the recent arrangement between the USGA and American Express. In his argument, which has its moments, he generally argues that such a deal sells the soul of the organization and that it's not worth the price. Perhaps, but which way does he want it? Professionals or amateurs? Professional rules officials and amateur officers running the association without professional/commercial liaisons; or some other inconsistent variation? When Mr. Hannigan gets on his not very high horse, the gait seems to be that his against something that the USGA is doing.

Huh, now didn't Mr. Galyean just get on his very high horse and rather inconsistently blast the same thing that Hannigan was criticizing?

It would be too much to characterize Mr. Hannigan's remarks as perfidious. He does seem to have the best intentions for the golf association. It would be inaccurate to describe these predictable tirades as enigmatic. Betrayal of the class interest that produced the invitation to the podium he speaks from seems to be the compelling motivation. He reveres the USGA not despite its fallacies but because of them, and because they can and he can't...not like he used to anyway.

Wow, powerful stuff for those who actually know what the hell that means!

Now the windbag is really wound up...

We have grown tired...

Yes, the entire newsletter is written as "we." That's how Rees Jones knows that more than one person likes his courses. Anyway, you were saying, we have grown tired...

of the duplicity in his deriding the power and wealth of the association that ordained him with those same rewards. Whether blabbering or pontificating from the booth or the blog, his comments are always validated early on with the identification of his USGA service. Mr Hannigan gets to have it both ways, it would seem.

Duplicity? Blabbering and pontificating you say? Right, that's when we were part of the Groupthink? Probably should have penned that a tad differently on the off chance you lost your committee assignments and decided to get all cranky about it, eh?

Occasionally, sir, give us something positive from the heart so that when the call comes, "Have you seen what Hannigan wrote about fill-in-the-blank?" we might be more welcoming and less suspicious of your predictable point of view. Cynic to cynic, that is.

Note: The writer serves as a volunteer on the USGA Communications Committee, the Mid-Amateur Championship Committee, and as an amateur Rules official.

Uh, not a rules official anymore. And I wonder if his recent "retirement" might have tainted his views just a tad?

Apologizing to the gentleman from Saugerties, New York would be too much to ask. After all, if he doesn't have the integrity to even cite his sources in a newsletter, an apology to Frank Hannigan would force Galyean to look within. And those who pen such hypocritical musings don't like to do that.


Choi Vows To Give FedEx Cup Grand Prize To Charity If Anyone Can Explain The Point Permutations

Actually, Doug Ferguson reports, Choi just wants to win and give the $10 million annuity to charity. Pretty nice. Except, it doesn't work that way. Tiger Woods explains, and it doesn't sound like he's a big fan of the setup:

Q. Yesterday K.J. Choi said if he won the FedExCup he would donate the entire $10 million to charity. Just wondering if you had a reaction.
TIGER WOODS: Well, you don't get the $10 million. You know that, right (laughter)?

Q. You don't?
TIGER WOODS: No, it goes right into your retirement account, so he may want to donate but he can't until he actually retires.

Q. So when he's 65?
TIGER WOODS: Then he can donate it, yes.

Q. How much do you think that takes away from the prize, if you will?
TIGER WOODS: I think it does a little bit, because you're actually not really playing for the $10 million. I may be dead by the time my retirement fund comes around for me to be able to utilize it.

Q. Did you have any input on that?
TIGER WOODS: Yeah, I think we all did, but it just didn't turn out that way. 

You know, the first question with a $10 million prize would be, "what are you going to do with the money?" But they really won't be able to ask that of the champion will they?  


“Wait, No. 17 is a par 5?”

old_17b.jpgThis popped up a few months ago but Golfweek's Beth Ann Baldry brings up the sore subject of the absurd and insulting decision to play the Road Hole as a par-5 for the Women's Open Championship. 

Susan Simpson, director of championships for the Ladies Golf Union, said the powers that be bantered around a bit on making the decision. Moving to a forward tee was not an option since they wanted to preserve the unique feature of driving over a building attached to the Old Course Hotel (optimum aiming target is the letter of your choice on the “Old Course Hotel” sign).

In the end, Simpson said the decision to bump it up to a par 5 was made because officials were more concerned about the degree of skill required for the second shot rather than the distance.

In other words, the women can’t handle it.

Suzann Pettersen disagrees.

“Why wouldn’t we be able to play it as a par 4?” she asks. “We’re good enough.”

Pettersen hit 4-iron into the green Wednesday but hit wedge into it downwind the day before. Even Mi Hyun Kim, one of the shortest players on tour, hit 7-wood to the back of the green.

Kim dropped a few balls on the road and experimented hitting different shots. Her caddie said the locals suggest using a hybrid or a putter. Kim tried to metal wood but preferred her wedge.

Plenty of players will be looking to find the front right portion of the green, clear of any danger and hope for a two-putt. Others will try and go long left – anything past the pot bunker – if the pin is toward that side of the green (which it will be on several days).

Why mess with over the green like Tom Watson in 1984, who hit 2-iron and and landed against the stone wall? (Former LPGA commissioner Ty Votaw hit one off the wall in today’s pro-am round and nearly made it on the green.) Why risk dumping it into to the Road Hole bunker like David Duval in 2000 and walking off with an eight?

Lorena Ochoa plans to play it safe, hitting 3-wood off the tee and then aiming front right. Her caddie, Dave Brooker, feels the hole loses some of its drama as a par 5. He joked with Ochoa that every time she makes a five on the 17th she’s really making bogey. Count him as a traditionalist.

Annika Sorenstam’s caddie, Terry McNamara, feels the same way.

“I think par 73 doesn’t sound right,” McNamara said. “Let it be 72 and whatever you get (on No. 17) you get.”


"When everything's said and done we'll lose $3 million. It's a concern."

John Strege files a fascinating (and sad) Canadian Open game story in this week's Golf World, though I could swear only part of it made it online and I read some other interesting stuff in the print version about the slugs who used the chartered flight provided by the tournament, but skipped out on playing. Anyway:
Two of the preeminent stars in golf gave the top of the leaderboard a sheen that belied the troubles lurking beneath the surface. For the second straight year, the Canadian Open was played without a title sponsor. "When everything's said and done," tournament director Bill Paul said, "we'll lose $3 million. It's a concern."

This, too, was the first year of a six-year contract for the tournament to be played in this dubious place in the schedule. It will dramatically hinder its ability to secure a field worthy of a national championship that began in 1904 and counts among its winners Walter Hagen, Sam Snead, Byron Nelson, Arnold Palmer, Lee Trevino and Tiger Woods, an event Furyk said once "probably had a feeling about it that it was the fifth major." Tournament management even chartered a plane to ferry players from Scotland to Canada, as an inducement to British Open participants who might have been balking at playing the Canadian Open because of the logistics. Among the 18 players who accepted the offer was Furyk, who was coming anyway.

Mickelson Committed To Not Answering Anymore Questions About Playing All Four Playoff Events

Sam Weinman reports that Phil has signed up to play at Westchester, making it possible he'll play all four playoff events and more importantly, to stop the inkslingers from those repeated questions about his FedEx Cup playoff plans.

Tiger has taken the same wise route, noting his "intent" to play all four events.

Women's Open Championshp Photo Caption Fun, Vol. 1

Let's keep these G rated. Well, okay, PG-13 maybe. From the Golf For Women blog, Paula Creamer at St. Andrews:



That's St. Andrews?

Reader Jordan found this golf homepage photo a big confusing. The caption says its St. Andrews, but unless they painted the Old Course Hotel white and moved it, I think it looks an awful lot like Carnoustie

(click image to enlarge)



"Their deplorable arrogance and stunning lack of judgment has left most...pondering how in the world the USGA got into such a situation."

Golf Digest's Local Knowledge blog did a little follow up on Golf World's Chris Millard authored cover story on USGA President Walter Driver, with this major chink in the groupthink armor:

Attorney and journalist Gary Galyean, as a longtime USGA volunteer on the rules committee (he officiates at most USGA championships), possesses  an insider's perspective on the workings of the USGA and its volunteer network. He also authors "Gary Galyean's Golf Letter," a bi-monthly newsletter about the golf industry, and in the July/August issue, he penned a no-holds-barred assessment of the present state of USGA affairs:

Media Center
Anyone who has spent time around the press, particularly when they are concentrated in one media center covering one event, knows that they are a tough crowd. That's their job. Attempting to control what they write or broadcast always backfires. GolfWorld's June 8th cover story -- Can the USGA survive Walter Driver? The tumultuous reign of the association's controversial president -- set the early tone in the U.S. Open Media Center. There was blood in the water. No matter how it was spun, Mr. Driver's standing with the press was built by him and his performance on and off stage during his years as vice president and president. Post-championship columns continue to reflect an assessment that refuses to be spun by glad-handing or verbal dexterity.

Oh that was just a little warm-up graph. Now the fun begins. 
USGA Volunteers
The volunteer base serving in various capacities at the Open were nearly universal in their dissatisfaction with the direction the USGA has taken under the presidencies of Fred S. Ridley and Walter W. Driver Jr. Corporate jets, corporate partnering, an arrogance of power, an attempt to stifle open discussion, packing the Executive Committee, and the general turning away from the association's traditional values were topics continually at the center of whispered discussions during the Open.

 You mean, everyone wasn't talking about what a tall, handsome, well constructed man Walter Driver is?

A fractured fissure grew wider between those who have served for years in order to extend and improve golf in America and those who are either new to the USGA culture, or, like the current and immediate past president, simply don't get it.

Ouch. Now here's a very important point:

As distasteful as the past three and a half years have been, of greater concern is the impact both Mr. Ridley and Mr. Driver will have as rising, successive chairmen of the Nominating Committee. Mr. Ridley will serve two years as vice chairman (2008, '09) and two years as chairman (2010, '11). Mr. Driver will vice chair Mr. Ridley's chairmanship and follow with two years in the chair (2012, '13). For six years they will influence the selection of those offered positions as USGA officers, Executive Committee members and Nominating Committee members.

Oh I don't know, you don't think 15 vulture capitalists with MBA's or law degrees from Stanford can right this ship?

Their deplorable arrogance and stunning lack of judgment has left most of the senior volunteer base disappointed, disoriented, weighing the future donation of their time and expertise, and pondering how in the world the USGA got into such a situation.

Following the Nominating Committee debacle of 2004, the past presidents were blamed for exerting too much influence often without explanation or accountability. Executive Committee members with proven, effective records were sometimes dismissed without explanation, while weaker substitutes were elevated for, once again, unexplained reasons. For outsiders, it was like forecasting the political landscape of the Soviet Union based on who was sitting where at the annual Politburo banquet.

Oh boy, insinuating communist activities. That ought make for some good water cooler conversation at Goldman Sachs.

The public and press outcry in 2004 to what appeared to be yet another arbitrary and unwarrantable change to the Executive Committee precipitated a monumental change in the nominating procedure. The emotional goal was to eliminate vagarious, capricious, out-of-touch control by the powerful past presidents. The effect, however, in reality lessened the influence of those who, regardless of sometimes fickle or unexplained political maneuvering, understood the culture of the USGA.

The lessening of the influence of those who "get it" created a political vacuum into which strutted those who don't. And their influence will be felt until 2014 unless the nominating system is amended again.

Very truly yours,

Gary A. Galyean

Whoa. It's about time somebody from the inner circle speak out.  


We Love You Natalie! We Really, Really Love You!

gw20070803cover_sm.jpgWow, I had no idea how desperately the golf publications were clamoring for a chance to milk a Natalie Gulbis win!  Golf World buried a PGA Championship preview for an action shot of Gulbis and all 6 feet of her legs. 

Meanwhile at's homepage you can't miss the soft core porn shots.

And I, being a total hit whore as much as the next blogger, am only posting this so that I can join in and exploit her smooth, tan, toned legs after this site welcomed 6000 new unique visitors in a three hour stretch yesterday thanks to Deadspin.

But just to show you I have standards, first, here is a teleconference call transcript helmed by Brian Robin. And second, to remind you what a first class operation this is, note that I did not not type the words "Natalie Gulbis nude photos" to attract hits from the inevitable 1000 daily unique Google searchers who truly have nothing to do at the office. Nope, I have standards. 



“It’s just so amazing. It’s just breathtaking."

You have to give Michelle Wie points for this one liner, talking about the Old Course, as quoted by Alistair Tait at

“It’s the most interesting golf course I’ve ever played,” Wie said. “You actually aim to hit another fairway. This year I’ve been doing that by accident – now I’ve been doing it on purpose.
And of course, you know I'm swooning reading this. Big points:
“It’s just so amazing. It’s just breathtaking. It’s quickly become one of my favorite golf courses.”


Wow, you’re a lot shorter than you look on TV."

AP's Scott Sonner scribbled this down from 5'1" Tadd Fujikawa, who is making his pro debut at the Reno-Tahoe Open:

“Maybe I will grow. If I stay short, that’s OK,” he said. “A lot of people say, ‘Wow, you’re a lot shorter than you look on TV. That’s the main thing, as long as I look taller on TV.”


"Would anybody watch a Grand Slam of Golf without Tiger?"

That's what the Naples News's Tom Patri asks.

I would ask, did anybody watch a Grand Slam of Golf with Tiger?


"One more time, it's not technology that makes golf courses obsolete. It's a lack of imagination on the part of the architect."

Blooper and Gaffe over at apparently had nothing better to do so one of them put together a "Ryder Cup-like" team of short hitters to compete with the other one's team of semi-bombers to prove that, uh, apparently a Ryder Cup squad can include any nationality!

Oh, and it's a completely useless opportunity for their bi-weekly subliminal message that distance isn't harming the game, we don't need to regulate the ball because our friends in the equipment industry must be free to create more products to boost third quarter earnings.

Of course, it's fascinating to read B&G they break out their pom-poms for the new USGA groove regulation, which is being forced on the golfing public because the USGA claims there is no correlation between success and driving accuracy on the PGA Tour (remember that when you buy a new conforming wedge in 16 months).

Even more fun is this post about how it's all the architects fault that courses are becoming obsolete, not the equipment.

The model that architects should be following to allow grown men to continue to shop unfettered by common sense regulation?

Brown Deer Park! Where they say some Parks and Rec dude had the vision to see it all coming and designed a bunch of holes that take driver out of your hand.

One more time, it's not technology that makes golf courses obsolete. It's a lack of imagination on the part of the architect. You don't need 7,400 yards to test the best. Last week, 6,759 proved more than enough.

Yes, legions of viewers will tune in to watch the Brown Deer Parks of the world. That'll really lift the PGA Tour ratings to new heights!

Oh, and Tiger doesn't play the Brown Deer Parks of the world boys. So give it up.


Another Castle Stuart Video From YouTube...


Blogging The Women's Open Championship

hofl01_ochoa0731007.jpgThanks to The Golf Chick for catching John Huggan's post from St. Andrews on the Golf For Women blog, which has really become a lively and interesting spot in the blogosphere since the last time I looked. (And a very readable look too.)

Ron Sirak is also filing posts on the Local Knowledge blog and he has some early reaction from players who are in awe of the place. No Scott Hoch's in this bunch.


I Wonder If The Green Bay Packers Could Have Skipped A Playoff Game If They Wanted To?

Yes, I'm that taken with Ric Clarson's metaphor.

Especially since Chris Lewis notes that Phil Mickelson's online schedule does not list this year's first playoff event, the Barclay's at Westchester. And Tiger never has listed the Barclay's on his web site.

Of course Tiger also doesn't list the Western BMW or The Tour Championship TOUR CHAMPIONSHIP (maybe he didn't want to look to presumptuous about his expected FedEx point tally!).

Are these playoffs if they are not mandatory?


"No Jeans, training pants or hot pants."

Reader Steve was checking up on the Russian Open, this week's European Tour event, and stumbled on this spectator's etiquette guide. Some of the more intriguing recommendations:

Turn your camera flash off. If you can't, refrain from taking any photographs while a player is taking a shot. Also, if your camera automatically rewinds at the end of the film, be aware of how many shots you have left before you snap away.
It's great to hear digital cameras still haven't made it somewhere on the planet. And what a shame Stevie's not there with Tiger. 
Golf promotes a specific Dress Code. Please dress appropriately when attending the golf tournament. The Dress Code is as follows:

No high heels are allowed, flat soled shoes only. To avoid damage to the course and for your safety.

Shirts with collars only must be worn at all times (no bikinis/swimsuits).

No Jeans, training pants or hot pants.

No hot pants? What does Ian Poulter do?


"I wonder if the members of the Green Bay Packers when they won the very first Super Bowl in 1967.."

The bigwigs gathered to plug the upcoming Deutsche Bank event at TPC Boston, and they even included my pal Gil Hanse to talk about the course architecture. Even though you and I know we'll be watching to see those exciting FedEx Cup point permutations unfold.

RIC CLARSON: I wonder if the members of the Green Bay Packers when they won the very first Super Bowl in 1967, which wasn't even called the Super Bowl then, realized their place in history. The fact of the matter is they knew it was a big game and an important game, but they didn't realize that the way that New England's fans realized it when the Patriots won the Super Bowl. Thus we embark on a new era in golf called the FedExCup.
Wow Ric, how long did you spend sculpting that gem? 
Adam Scott, the very first winner of the Deutsche Bank Championship, you never get a second chance to be first, and we're delighted on behalf of the PGA TOUR after 24 years to actually have a season now that is structured like other sports where our athletes have the chance to not only perform over a 33-week regular season but a four-week Playoffs.

Some of the greatest moments in sports come from Playoffs. Some of the greatest moments in golf have happened right here at the Deutsche Bank, and when you combine those two ingredients, we think we're in for a great new era in golf.

Some of the greatest moments in golf have happened at the Deutsche Bank? And you say you don't learn things coming to this website?

BRAD FAXON: I just want to say here, I've been part of the TPC since day one when we broke ground here. It's been six or seven years ago we broke ground. We always needed a facility like this, and I'm proud to say that the TPC of Boston is the best TPC in the country, especially now with what's been done, with everybody partnering now to make this tournament, the Deutsche Bank tournament, Seth, the TPC, the PGA TOUR, to go ahead and let us make changes to make this tournament-worthy golf course.

Easy Brad, let's break 'em in slow!

Like Seth said, everybody knows Deutsche Bank is on Labor Day. We're going to have an unbelievable field, and I'm pretty excited to see the reaction of all the players when they come here and see a course that was maybe liked but not super-well-liked, and hopefully the changes that you're going to get to see now, you're going to say, wow, this is different, this is a New England-style golf course, this looks old, it looks like it's been here. The bad lies and the bad shots that you get today are going to be Gil's fault (laughter).

And from Gil:

As Brad mentioned, what we were really hopeful of doing was trying to create a golf course that looked and felt a little bit more like New England. So I think the touches that you'll see out there will really be reflective of we borrowed literally and liberally from The Country Club, places that are close to our hearts, great old New England golf courses, drop mounds, some blind shots, fescue edged bunkers, fescue out in the rough areas. So hopefully the golf course will feel and look a little bit more rustic and a little bit more like New England.

From a playability standpoint, these guys are so good that I'm skeptical that there's anything we can do from a physical standpoint to limit or restrict what they do. You can always make bunkers so deep, you can only grow rough so thick and tall and you can only have greens so fast.
But what we really tried to concentrate on is the place where I think is the most vulnerable is the mental aspect, trying to make them have to think significantly of different options and different ways to play golf holes, making them feel uncomfortable over shots because they can't quite see the bottom of the flagstick or they might have been in a bunker or on an island and they don't quite have a perfect lie. I think these are the things that architects are going to have to rely more and more on as we go forward with technology and as good athletes as these gentlemen are and the way they play the game.

So hopefully you'll find more strategy, more areas -- I think Pete Dye has a phrase, "Once you get these guys thinking, they're in trouble." I think that's what we're hoping for is we can make them think a little bit more as they go around the golf course and explore different options and opportunities.

Tiger then joined in at this point and he artfully sidestepped questions about the course changes he hasn't seen yet.