Campbell on New Redstone Course

Steve Campbell looks at the new Houston Open design by Rees Jones and David Toms that is debuting this week.

If the Tournament Course lives up to the reputation of its designer, then the SHO should be a breakout hit. Rees Jones has established himself as major-championship course doctor of sorts, the man the United States Golf Association and PGA of America turn to when they want to upgrade a classic layout. The son of renowned course architect Robert Trent Jones, Rees Jones has performed major undertakings at the likes of Congressional, the Country Club, Bethpage Black, Pinehurst, Torrey Pines, Medinah, Hazeltine, Baltusrol, East Lake, Sahalee and Atlanta Athletic Club.

"I've been very fortunate in my life to have done a lot of these championship venues," said Jones, whose body of work includes Redstone collaborations at Shadow Hawk and The Houstonian. "The more I do, the more I understand what you must do to challenge the best."

Nothing like learning on the job!

To that end, Jones designed a course that plays longer from the back tees than any on tour so far this season. The Tournament Course is also 51 yards shorter than the adjacent Peter Jacobsen/Jim Hardy Redstone Member Course, which served as SHO's halfway home the previous three years. Jones describes the Tournament Course as a "neo-classic" design that favors strategy and shot-making over raw power.

Longest on the Tour so far, but it favors strategy and shotmaking over raw power. Makes sense.

One of the distinctly Toms touches was No. 12. The 338-yard par-4 is, depending on the wind, drivable. With the reward of a possible eagle comes the risk of hitting the tee shot in the lateral water hazard right of the green.

"I'm hoping they set up the golf course to let guys use that risk-reward strategy," Toms said. "We don't get that very often. There's always thousands of people around those holes, trying to see what the pros can do, seeing if they can make an eagle or a double (bogey). They're well-received with the spectators, and the pros like them as well."

Wishful thinking based on this year's course setups.

"The golfer has a choice," Jones said. "I think that's great for a championship. We're making them strategize. The winner will be under par. But we're making him manage his game by the green contours and the angles of the greens. He knows the easy route may lead to a three-putt or the harder route could lead to disaster but has a greater reward."

It all sounds so good.

Huggan On Musselburgh

John Huggan offers an update on the Musselburgh Links situation where a public inquiry has been ordered.

And therein lies the crux of the debate: is the links in its present configuration and condition worth preserving? Or has the damage already been done? One of the few areas on which both sides are agreed is that the course is a long way from the one on which those five far-off Open champions learned the game.

So is it too late to save what is left of the Musselburgh links? And is it worth saving? While any number of mistakes have been made over the years - the short fifth, for example, had two nonsensical and wholly inappropriate bunkers added behind the green as recently as the past decade - and the course itself is best described as shabby, it is difficult for any golfer not to hope instinctively for its salvation.

As to what may or may not still happen, both sides are already preparing for the on-going battle.

"I'm still confident the golf course will regain its pride and that the interests of the club will be looked after," says MacGregor, at the same time acknowledging that the public inquiry came as "a bit of a surprise".

On the other hand, Colville is delighted at the latest development. "I'm still not sure of ultimate victory; far from it," he adds. "But I think we have a far better chance of winning in a public forum than we did when it was up to the Executive. We have support across the town from all sorts of people, and that has to count for something."

Toms' Critical Comments?

This AP notes column reports on David Toms' critical comments this week, and this caught my eye:

 Toms had no problem with the golf course, even though he missed the cut after shooting two rounds of 76. Augusta National was longer than ever, and though Toms said he played poorly, he said he could compete when conditions were firm and fast.

"I think they're on the right track," he said.

That's quite a contrast to how he actually sounded early in the week.

OGA Talked About In NZ

The New Zealand Herald's Peter Williams writes about the Ohio Golf Association's competition ball: 

The Ohio Golf Association (OGA) is boldly going where no golf body has gone before. It's ordering competitors in one of its tournaments to use a certain ball - although they haven't actually decided which one.

The OGA, which runs the game in the state where Jack Nicklaus was born and raised, says they are taking a stand against the eroding playability of our old courses due to the length of the modern golf ball.

So, when the OGA hosts the Champions Tournament in August, every player will be required to use a lower-compression ball chosen by the tournament committee.

The impact of the long-distance, modern golf ball is one of the hottest discussion points in American golf.

And...

The R&A and USGA are the only bodies which can legislate against the manufacturers to stop the ball going further. There are already many restrictions on equipment. A ball must be a certain size and weight, driver heads must be no larger than 460cc, while there has to be a certain angle between the club face on an iron and the grooves. So the game's rulers haven't been afraid to put restrictions on equipment, even if they've been sued by manufacturers as a consequence.

Well...

But the major reason elite players hit the ball further is the advance in ball technology. The revolution started in 1996 with Spalding's first high-performance two-piece ball, the Top Flite Strata. Manufacturers followed suit with two-piece technology and since equipment companies like Titleist and Callaway put their R&D efforts into ball technology, there's been no stopping increased performance.

But while the elite can hit the ball up to 100m more - 320m par fours on the PGA Tour are now considered driveable - average club players don't get the same advantage.

Weeks In Review, April 2-15: Masters

Since there was no week in review while the Masters was unfolding, we're playing catch-up here. And instead of going through all of the key stories posted, I'd direct you to the Journal Topics (2006 Masters) or the Monthly Archive for April.

Instead, I wanted to highlight just some of the many great reader comments over the last few weeks. It is interesting to think that just a few years ago, the tangled connection between technology, design and setup was murky at best for most. And now...

When Ron Kroichik looked at the distance issue and the Masters ball concept, reader Kirk Gill wrote, "Tiger says that putting the brakes on the distance a golf ball will travel would hurt the golf ball making industry. Uh, excuse me. All it would do would be to put pressure on the manufacturers to find other ways besides distance to differentiate themselves from their competitors. Like they did for decades. People play golf. People use golf balls. People either lose or beat up their golf balls to the point that they need to get new ones."

M. Kavanaugh said, "My wife and I have been buying new razor blades for years as well as golf balls, do we really care what the latest Schick will do for a clean close shave? Not really, same with golf balls."

On the story of Phil Mickelson and his two drivers, JPB wrote, "If a player chooses to use one of his 14 clubs on an extra driver - fine. Nobody had major problems with 4 wedges...I think a player should be able to use what he wants within the limit...I don't know how much is new technology and how much is fat laziness and not practicing, but it doesn't surprise me he is trying this. I actually think it is a good idea given the importance of the drive. Better to dump a long iron and carry 2 drivers. I sort of admire Phil for trying it actually."

And Smolmania said: "I would hate for someone to tell me that I can't put 5 wedges in my bag as indicative of a lack of skill. In my view, the configuration of a bag is a question of choices. When you miss as many greens as I do, you need options. . . and I choose wedges."

Mike Clayton previewed the Masters, prompting this from RM, "It's the tree plantings that are the most troubling, and really just plain crazy. Changes to Augusta- tees, bunkers, etc.- always blend in perfectly, but these new trees just do not belong. They don't look right and feel out of place, not to mention they just make the holes claustrophobic, contrary to the strategy and charm of the course. They could always just cut them down, but I have a feeling Hootie would never let his pride take such a hit."

Tiger's pre-Masters press conference talked about design and his love of Royal Melbourne, prompting skannberg to write, "it's amazing tiger loves the sandbelt courses so much, even wants to design like em. why then does he constantly refuse to play 'em every year."

After reading Leonard Shapiro's story on the odd USGA-Augusta National relationship, JM noted, "The smugness is what kills me. It's half Oz and all 'we are above the game,' which is exactly the kind of thinking that goes hand-in-hand with developing "brands" and protecting the unhuman concept that has become the Masters, and what ultimately ends up repelling people from golf. Where is the honest, strategy-based golf competition between the best players in the game, against themselves and a masterpiece of a course, where the fans are treated to unpredictable and thrilling golf?  I will be hard-pressed to explain to my son or my colleagues -- who have no interest in golf for these very reasons, despite my protestations -- that the challenges and rewards of the game are physically and psychically worth my obsession -- and, 'no really,' perhaps theirs, as well."

Regarding the wonderful Amen Corner Live and the announce team of Phil Blackmar and Mike Hulbert, Dan G. noted that, "I was feeling pretty guilty about procrastinating with my school work. Then Bobby Clampett came on and I got right back to work."

And hearing David Feherty's course change-cheerleading, Rick Adams said, "Perhaps David's trying to make up to the lords of CBS for his soapbox comment,"Why is Marv Albert working and Ben Wright isn't?"

During the Masters rain delay, we looked back at the surprising article submitted by reader Michael that revealed Perry Maxwell's planned 1937 changes, prompting reader Hux to observe:  "It appears our dearest Maxwell betrayed Dr. Mackenzie before his blood was cold in the ground. As did Jones. Say it ain't so."

Regarding the final round, there were plenty of opinions. Ned Ludd:  "Wouldn't it be something if they could spend their billions on cloning Alister MacKenzie so HE could make the changes, if any, to the course...or in the alternative, lay down the law regarding equipment. To here Nantz et al. talk about MacKenzie in such prayerful tones when all the bunkers scream Alabama Golf Trail is sad."

Dan G. wrote, "I found Kostis holding up Clark as proof that short-knockers have a chance pretty annoying. But in the interview it seemed to me like Clark felt he was at quite a disadvantage once it rained."

DAW had a different take: "The players hit some good shots that could have led to heroics but they couldn't follow them up with putts. If Couples and Tiger made their eagles, would people be talking about how there was no buzz on the back nine? I think that the field just didn't get it done on Sunday and it's convenient but not accurate to blame it on the course."

And reader Brett:  "It was as boring as a U.S. Open. Guys puking all over themselves. Tons of greens missed. Shoes that needed some real spikes, Rocco Mediate. A 66 on Sunday by Olazabal, the low score of the week. Bangers having a 5 club advantage. Steve is right, on the weekend I went and played golf instead of watching the Masters, no excitement. None."

RM attends the Masters annually and wrote: "I must admit that there was a different feel to it this year. The players definitely had a look of serious concern on their faces at all times. At one point after lunch on Thursday there were only 2 players under par, and only -1. If it weren't for Rocco and Vijay getting hot, it would have been a rough start and the changes would have been the story rather than the golf. Although I think the changes played out better than we thought, they probably got a little lucky, and it might not be long until we get a real US Open type Masters where some undeserving player hangs on for dear life and snags a green jacket with an over par score. And at that point we will really begin to realize just what we're missing.

In the course verdict watch department, Etienne wrote:  "Had the club lengthened the course step by step over the last few years to find the correct balance in combating technology and the design integrity of Jones and Mackenzie, this second cut stuff would not have been necessary. Jones' philosophy of golf (and Augusta) being a second shot game would have held true."

On Kevin Mitchell's blistering column about the role of manufacturers in the game today, J.P. wrote: "Mitchell is saying that golf's history is like the baby being thrown out with the bath water, because the USGA has been over ruled by the manufacturers. For the manufacturers, its been like taking candy from a baby."

The USGA's Distance Myth's talking points were released at Augusta and Oldschool says that the "USGA for whatever reason is now implementing a cover up. Keep trying Walter, but the stats do not support your (myths) opinions."

Reader Michael noted, "Hogan called the tee shot the most important shot in golf...To see what has happened with driving accuracy succumbing to driving distance as being the majority deciding factor in the game today is shameful. All of this for what? To hear the USGA saying that their main mission is the preservation of the game, and in maintaining its history and integrity is heresy."

RGM said: "The USGA is in full cover up mode. Their test was set up for 109 miles per hour, Walter Driver claims the average swing speed is 112, why did they up it to 120? Was it because at 109 the real technological evidence was revealing itself. Ut...Oh! Yes, that's why they did it. It was too evident at 109 with whats happened in the past 4 years. The USGA also changed its testing for COR, another red flag. These changes haven't produced clearer results, but to the contrary have created a clouded, cloaked situation from which the USGA is testing."

And Tour Rep offered this:  "Everything described on this post is 95% accurate. The other 5% I can not verify with certainty but it lends itself to practicality. Knowing what I do, from the week in, week out drill, the ball and driver has certainly ruined golf on the professional level. It's easy for me to say this after 25 plus years in the industry and dealing with the latest equipment yearly. The sport is now dependent on bombing, we build 4 times as many drivers each week in the trailer as compared to sets of irons. Each driver we build consists of every conceivable shaft weight, flex profile, frequency, torque, butt and tip stiffness profile, and believe it or not color. These guys know that distance today means everything, and that's all they think about. Ten years ago the emphasis was on irons, wedges, and putters. I see the difference, which is sad for golf."

On the rumor that Merion is looking good for the 2013 U.S. Open, Smolmania wrote, "Why are we going to have an Open at a course where Tiger, Phil, and the big hitters won't even be able to think about pulling driver out of the bag? Sorry to say, but until something is done about the ball, there's no reason to try to hold our national championship at Merion."

And finally, on the news that Rees Jones had restored Medinah with MacKenzie/Tilly bunkers, DK said, "So Medinah has MacKenzie and Tillinghast bunkers. Does it also have Maxwell greens, Jones Sr. tee boxes, Colt and Alison hollows, Emmet cross bunkers, and Travis chocolate drops? You know just like Bendelow designed it."

Portrush, England

From Bernie McGuire in the Telegraph:

Darren Clarke's goal of playing all four rounds of the Verizon Heritage Classic was not going to plan long before he was introduced on to the last green as "From Portrush, England. Darren Clarke."

Hey if Portrush was in England, we'd actually get to see a British Open played there.

MacDuff's Post Masters Fed Ex Cup Points

My apologies for posting this late, but here's MacDuff's latest take on the FedEx Cup points standings through the Masters. Shockingly, Phil has moved to the top. And it occurs to me that the Tour will want to create some sort of mid-season incentive (like the LPGA) to make fans actually pay attention to this uh, chase.

MacDuff...you didn't mention if you added extra points for the Masters? Please enlighten us.

_{^{1    Mickelson    15346.87        9
2    Singh    13234.37        9
3    C.Campbell    12000        10
4    Toms    11871.87        7
5    Sabbatini    11741.66        8
6    Petersson    11283.33        10
7    Olazabal    10875        7
8    Furyk    10762.5        8
9    Gf. Ogilvy    10737.5        7
10    T.Woods    10659.37        6
11    Donald    10289.37        7
12    Glover    9854.16        7
13    Weir    9809.37        7
14    Oberholser    9550        8
15    Verplank    9537.5        7
16    Pernice    9437.5        7
17    Goosen    9162.5        6
18    Van Pelt    9127.5        9
19    Mayfair    8604.16        8
20    Z.Johnson    8475        8
21    Lehman    8350        7
22    Villegas    8025        7
23    Ames    7975        6
24    Appleby    7925        7
25    T.Clark    7872.5        8
26    Bohn    7770.83        8
27    Rollins    7675        7
28    Cink    7633.83        7
29    Parnevik    7567.5        8
30    D.Wilson    7425        8
31    Chopra    7424.5        8
32    Love III    7212.5        7
33    Garcia    7175        6
34    Pampling    7142.5        6
35    Warren    7112.5        7
36    Gay    6925        8
37    Couples    6825        7
38    Franco    6800        7
39    JB Holmes    6695.83        6
40    Imada    6692.5        7
41    G. Owen    6662.5        6
42    Barlow    6657.5        7
43    Bertsch    6550        7
44    Choi    6400        6
45    Funk    6337.5        7
46    Jobe    6330        6
47    D. Howell    6262.5        5
48    Pat Perez    6262.5        7
49    Els    6250        6
50    Allenby    6187.5        6
51    Palmer    6166.66        6
52    Fischer    6150        8
53    F.Jacobson    6050        5
54    Purdy    5975        6
55    Rose    5966.66        5
56    JJ Henry    5875        5
57    M.Wilson    5852.5        5
58    A.Scott    5850        5
59    J.Ogilvie    5845        6
60    Baird    5680        6
61    Leonard    5670.83        6
62    Bjornstad    5655        6
63    Harrington    5537.5        5
64    J.Byrd    5500        4
65    Vn Taylor    5362.5        5
66    Langer    5354.16        6
67    Hoffman    5332.5        5
68    Jerry Kelly    5325        4
69    Beem    5318.75        7
70    N.Green    5262.5        6
71    Westwood    5187.5        5
72    Calc    5150        7
73    Olin Browne    5137.5        7
74    Cabrera    5100        5
75    Bub Watson    5075        5
76    Hart    4987.5        5
77    DiMarco    4984.37        4
78    Branshaw    4937.5        5
79    D.Clarke    4900        4
80    RS Johnson    4875        4
81    Bryant    4862.5        5
82    Triplett    4750        4
83    Watney    4737.5        6
84    Senden    4625        4
85    Curtis    4650        6
86    Matteson    4600        6
87    J.Smith    4512.5        5
88    Herron    4507.5        5
89    Gore    4387.5        4
90    Crane    4345        4
91    Atwal    4312.5        4
92    Howell III    4300        8
93    Sluman    4287.5        8
94    Flesch    4255        6
95    Frazar    4187.5        6
96    Br.Davis    4162.5        6
97    Waldorf    4037.5        5
98    Cook    4000        4
99    Dickerson    3975        7
T100    Veazey    3962.5        4
T100    Kenny Perry    3962.5        4
102    Barron    3943.75        4
103    S.Jones    3912.5        5
104    Faxon    3787.5        5
105    Estes    3775        3
106    Gove    3750        4
107    Slocum    3725        6
108    Lonard    3662.5        5
109    Immelman    3650        4
110    Maggert    3625        6
111    Kaye    3550        4
112    Kent Jones    3537.5        4
113    Micheel    3500        4
114    Lowery    3462.5        5
115    Jimenez    3387.5        3
116    Geiberger    3287.5        4
117    Sean O'Hair    3287.5        6
118    Stankowski    3265.5        5
119    Katayama    3171.87        4
T120    Azinger    3112.5        4
T120    Petrovic    3112.5        4
122    Gronberg    3062.5        3
123    H.Stenson    3012.5        3
124    S. Maruyama    3000        5
125    Lickliter II    2912.5        3
126    Ridings    2912.5        4
127    Gamez    2887.5        4
128    Garrigus    2880        4
129    Kevin Na    2875        3
130    Poulter    2875        4
131    WMacKenzie    2837.5        3
132    JL Lewis    2800        5
133    Huston    2762.5        3
134    B. Quigley    2750        3
135    Points    2737.5        3
136    Brehaut    2712.5        6
137    Mahan    2662.5        5
138    Levet    2662.5        6
139    Celka    2645        6
140    Dawson    2500        4}}

Myth Reprint Series Continues

Mark Lamport-Stokes of Reuters writes about the USGA Distance Myths. Well, he reprints them.

Adam Van Brimmer of Morris News Service remains the only writer to have offered counterpoints to the myths.

USGA Distance Myths, Vol. 4

USGA Distance Myth #3:

Driving distance on Tour is increasing rapidly

False.  While average PGA Tour driving distance significantly increased over the past 10 years, it has leveled off during the past three.  The average increase since the level of 2003 to the current level in 2006 is only about 1 yard per year.

What is conveniently missing here tells a far different story.

In May 2002 the USGA and R&A issued a "Joint Statement of Principles," a year that USGA Executive Director David Fay described as the "benchmark" year for gauging distance increases.

The 2002 PGA Tour Driving Distance average was 279.8 yards. In 2005 it was 288.9 yards, and in 2006 it is currently at 288.3 (8 yards ahead of the average last year at this time when Golf World's E. Michael Johnson mocked "distance ranting killjoys").

So while distance myth memo author Dick Rugge accurately cites small increases since 2003 (admittedly ignoring a mention of last year's 18-rain delayed PGA Tour events), why wouldn't he include the "benchmark" year for their distance study?

Perhaps because that would have revealed a significant increase?

Which brings us to the dreaded significant word. The Joint Statement says:

The R&A and the USGA believe, however, that any further significant increases in hitting distances at the highest level are undesirable. Whether these increases in distance emanate from advancing equipment technology, greater athleticism of players, improved player coaching, golf course conditioning or a combination of these or other factors, they will have the impact of seriously reducing the challenge of the game. The consequential lengthening or toughening of courses would be costly or impossible and would have a negative effect on increasingly important environmental and ecological issues. Pace of play would be slowed and playing costs would increase.

For a breakdown of some significant increases, you can refer back to this post, where the climb among the top 50 in driving distance is really significant.

And also keep in mind how vital the 2002 Joint Statement is. Here is what the PGA Tour said about it on May 9, 2002:

The TOUR is pleased that the principles stress that the general philosophy governing rulemaking is that skill rather than technology shall be the most critical element in performance by a golfer and that golf balls, when hit by highly skilled golfers, should not fly significantly further than they do today as a result of technological advances. Further, the TOUR also fully supports the USGA and R&A's plan to modernize its equipment testing methods.

The TOUR has previously discussed with both the USGA and R&A its opinion that the distance high performance golf balls travel when struck at swing speeds of today's most elite players, using today's most advanced equipment, should be the maximum distance allowable. Given the USGA and R&A's agreement on maximum allowable COR and their commitment to modernized testing procedures, the TOUR is hopeful that the USGA and R&A will be successful in capping allowable golf ball distance at current levels.

USGA Distance Myths, Vol. 3

Myth #2:

Golf ball distance is not currently limited.

False.  Golf ball distance has been regulated since 1976 and golf ball rebound characteristics have been regulated since the 1940s.  In 2004, the USGA updated its testing methodology to more closely reflect the athleticism and clubs of today's Tour pros. All golf balls played on Tour and the vast majority of golf balls sold have passed the USGA’s distance limit test.

I suppose this is a misconception not a myth. Though I don't know of anyone who thinks that players are using non-conforming balls.

Does anyone out there actually subscribe to this "myth?"  

Please Forgive Me...

Tiger issues an apology through his agent does and a definition of spastic. Seriously.

And thanks to reader David for this entertaining BBC online take on the whole non-issue. 

Network Shakeups

Stu Schneider reports in Golf World's Bunker on Mark Loomis' departure at ABC, and the battle between CBS and NBC to get the British Open. Try not to laugh at Dick Ebersol's claim that he and Johnny Miller were talking to Peter Dawson about golf in the Olympics!

Page 2 features Schneider's TV Rewind on the Masters. I thought about waiting to read it when it comes in the mail, but since I'm still waiting on the Golf World Masters Preview, I went with the online read. 

Course Changes Verdict Watch, Vol. 7

The boys SI heaped plenty of praise on Hootie Johnson for his course changes.  It occurs to me that in all of the post event praise (and from the Golf World headline on Jaime Diaz's story, the cheerleading buzz is contagious), no one is considering the ramifications of Augusta's narrowing efforts both for the home of the Masters, or for the game in general.

The overall theme seems to be, "see, it's okay to change the courses to deal with distance increases and some people's determination to not let the players actually progress in the scoring department." 

Anyway, Gary Van Sickle, who will be forgiven for this transgression because he caused a wonderful stir at the Golf Writer's meeting and normally is spot on, writes:

The par-4 7th, 410 yards before the alterations, used to give players a breather. They could lay up off the tee and hit a wedge in. Now it runs 450 yards with trees on both sides of the fairway, so the players are forced to hit driver and hit it straight. Seven's a terrific hole now.

Super...loved the photo in SI. Can't wait to see it when the trees grow up and there is actually no fairway! Oh, and what's wrong with a breather hole after 4, 5 and 6?

Well, he gets bonus points for mentioning this:

Only at the storied 11th was there a questionable change. While the 11th remains the National's hardest-won par -- one player jokingly called the 505-yard par-4 the easiest par-5 on the course -- the more than 50 pines planted to the right of the fairway also make it Augusta's most unsightly hole. Were that many trees really necessary? "Instead of having U.S. Open rough, you have a forest," says Phil Mickelson. "You don't have the ability to hit a shot from there. You can only try to get the ball back in play."

A handful of smartly planted trees, instead of the forest, might have accomplished the same goal and tempted players into trying heroic -- and dangerous -- recoveries. The sideways chip-out, the least exciting shot in golf, has never been a Masters staple, but it's now an everyday play at 11.

Update on 2006-04-14 05:21 by Geoff

Ah, a different take in SI's "Big Play," where teacher T.J. Tomasi writes, "The course changes sucked the excitement out of the Masters. The tournament looked like the U.S. Open, with guys playing scared."

Warren Wind and Augusta

Jim McCabe writes about Ben Crenshaw's decision to observe a moment of silence for Herbert Warren Wind at last week's Champions Dinner, and recalls Wind's ties to Augusta National.

GolfMediaCatfight.com

Thanks to reader Greg for noticing that the Hawkins-Shipnuck catfight is heating up after a response on SI.com to last week's jabs taken over at GolfDigest.com.

Proving that some of you are in way too deep when it comes to golf media, I received some e-mail about a curious item that appeared on golfdigest.com during Masters week. John Heffington of Omaha, Neb. writes,"What are your thoughts about John Hawkins of Golf World talking trash about you in his blog (April 6 entry)? He talked about how you could not get an interview with (Greg)Norman about the 1996 Masters and then proceeded to call you 'Shipwreck.' "

Yeah, Hawkins' little valentine was random, but as I told him at Augusta, if you dish it out you gotta be able to take it, too, so no hard feelings. One thing worth noting relating to his post: Norman called me twice in the last week to explain why he was out of touch when I was writing my piece -- he says he was in the Middle East and then Australia and not in good contact with his office. He also claims to be so bummed to have missed my calls he is in the process of overhauling how his media people deal with interview requests in the future.

As for Hawkins, I loved his dig about needing to hire a detective firm to find LPGA fans. Actually, all he needs to do is leave his insular little world a little more often. The guy has been covering pro golf for GW more than a decade but only a year or two ago wrote a condescending column about the strange experience of reporting on his first LPGA event. As for calling me Shipwreck, they were doing that back at University Park elementary school. That's a pretty good reflection of Hawkins' mentality.

Can't we all just not get along for the sake...hits!