Golf rules expert and author of “999 Questions on the Rules of Golf” Barry Rhodes answers four questions relating to the golf ball and the rules of golf below.

GOLF BALL – RULES OF GOLF QUESTION 1 :

I have a golf question about the Rules. My golf partner on the tee box was just about to make contact with the ball when it fell back off the tee. He was able to still hit the ball into the fairway, but not very far. Does he get to hit again or play it where it lies?

GOLF BALL – RULES OF GOLF ANSWER 1 :

In the circumstances that you describe there is no penalty and the ball must be played from where it came to rest. Rule 11-3 states;

“If a ball, when not in play, falls off a tee or is knocked off a tee by the player in addressing it, it may be re-teed, without penalty. However, if a stroke is made at the ball in these circumstances, whether the ball is moving or not, the stroke counts, but there is no penalty.”

GOLF BALL – RULES OF GOLF QUESTION 2 :

Andy, If a tree is dead and has fallen over – not embedded in the ground – what part of the tree can be removed and is it a breach of the Rules if when trying to remove an offending branch it breaks from the dead tree?

GOLF BALL – RULES OF GOLF ANSWER 2 :

There are three Decisions that provide the answer to your question;

Decision 23-7:
Q. Is a fallen tree a loose impediment?
A. If it is still attached to the stump, no; if it is not attached to the stump, yes.

Decision 23-1/3:
Q. May spectators, caddies, fellow-competitors, etc., assist a player in removing a large loose impediment?
A. Yes.

Decision 23-1/4:
Q. If part of a large branch which has fallen from a tree (and thus is a loose impediment) interferes with a player’s swing, may the player break off the interfering part rather than move the whole branch?
A. Yes.

However, remember that you may not remove any part of the tree from a hazard if your ball lies in the same hazard.

GOLF BALL – RULES OF GOLF QUESTION 3 :

Andy, one of your Q&As says that a player is penalised if he “taps down scuff marks in the vicinity of the hole, but not on his line of putt”. If they were not on his line of putt, then how could it assist the player in his subsequent play of the hole.

GOLF BALL – RULES OF GOLF ANSWER 3 :

Few of us can guarantee that we will always hit our putts along the line that we intend and we might also overshoot the hole by a significant margin; perhaps on the putt back as well! Also, the wind or gravity may move a ball to a different position. Therefore, to avoid incurring a penalty, or an argument, it is strongly recommended that players should not repair any spike marks on the putting green until they have finished play of the hole.

GOLF BALL – RULES OF GOLF QUESTION 4 :

Hi Andy, I have one for you. Red stakes are surrounded by water because of heavy rainfall. The water level of the lake has risen past the markings. My ball lands outside the red stakes but under one foot of water which is now part of the lake. Do I get a free drop?

GOLF BALL – RULES OF GOLF ANSWER 4 :

Yes, in the circumstances that you describe you are entitled to take relief from the casual water without penalty, Rule 25-1b. But not under Rule 26-1, Relief from Water Hazard. Decision 25/2 is relevant;
Q. If a pond (water hazard) has overflowed, is the overflow casual water?
A. Yes. Any overflow of water from a water hazard which is outside the margin of the hazard is casual water.

http://www.BarryRhodes.com – Miscellaneous content on the Rules of Golf. Barry Rhodes is the author of the book ‘999 Questions on the Rules of Golf’

Visit here for more Rules of Golf questions.

Disclaimer: Whilst every attempt has been made to ensure the accuracy and reliability of this information on the Rules of Golf I am human and have been known to be wrong! Neither I, nor anyone connected with GolfSwingSecretsRevealed.com, shall be held responsible for any losses caused by reliance upon the accuracy or reliability of such information. Readers should refer to the full text of the rules and decisions as published in the official publications of the R&A and the USGA, The Rules of Golf 2008-2011 and Decisions on the Rules of Golf 2008-2009.

The 00’s have officially passed us by and with it goes one of the most memorable decades in major championship golf history. The dominance of Tiger Woods was a hallmark of the past ten years and while the great man did produce some of the most impressive golf in major history there were other players on the major stage that who shone brightly as well. That being said, here are my top ten major memories from the last ten years.

1. Tiger Woods – 2000 U.S Open at Pebble Beach- It was by far the most dominating performance in the history of professional golf- there is not even a second place. Only one player in history had ever reached double-digits under-par in the U.S Open before (Gil Morgan ten years earlier at Pebble Beach), and Woods not only reached that number- he stayed there. When he eventually finished his domination for the field he had finished at -12 for the tournament and won by and astonishing 15 shots, relegating runners-up Ernie Els and Miguel Angel Jimenez to merely a trivia question in golf history. Such ruthless dominance may never be seen again.

2. Y.E Yang – 2009 U.S PGA Championship at Hazeltine National- While the decade was defined by the dominance of one man with a part-Asian heritage, the last major of the decade would see the first Asian, a South Korean, ever take down that same champion in dramatic fashion. It may take years to really see the impact of Y.E Yang’s victory at Hazeltine, but when we look back at the landscape of golf over the next ten years, this victory may be the one that changed everything.

3. Phil Mickelson – 2004 Masters- It took a while. Actually, it seemed like it took half a lifetime. Phil Mickelson’s first major win was followed by a collective sigh of relief from the golfing world and finally made a major champion out of “Lefty“. For Mickelson, it was akin to getting not just a monkey, not even a gorilla, but King Kong off his back.

4. Tiger Woods – 2001 Masters- It had never been done before and it may never be done again. It was not achieved by Hogan, or Snead, or Nelson. Not by Palmer or, Watson, or Player. Not even by Nicklaus. By winning the 2001 Masters Woods became the first man to hold all four major championships at once and stamped his place among the greats of all time.

5. Geoff Ogilvy – 2006 U.S Open at Winged Foot GC- Despite Ogilvy chipping-in on the 71st hole, the 2006 U.S Open will always be remembered for “the massacre” that followed. First, Padraig Harrington topped his approach into the 72nd hole, dropping himself from contention.  Then Colin Montgomery made double-bogey from the middle of the fairway and Jim Furyk missed from five-feet, both on the 72nd hole. Finally, Phil Mickelson puts the icing on the cyanide-cake by hitting the wildest drive ever hit on the final hole of the U.S Open, ultimately taking double bogey. Ogilvy, it turned out, was the last man standing.

6. Padraig Harrington – 2008 Open Championship at Royal Birkdale-  The next two majors make my list not because of the winner, but because who almost won. Ten years since he last made a serious run at a major Greg Norman almost became the oldest part-time golfer to ever win a major.  Ultimately he was trumped by the spectacular eagle Harrington made on 71st hole, one of the greatest clutch shots of the decade and the only reason I have placed this tournament ahead of the next one.

7. Stewart Cink – 2009 Open Championship at Turnberry- Like the previous entry, this Open Championship may have been the story of the decade if it had turned out a little different. Sexagenarian Tom Watson captured our hearts for four straight days at Turnberry, but eventually he ran out of steam, or mojo, or pars- which ever way you want to look at it, and succumbed to Stewart Cink in a playoff. With 99.9% of golf fans pulling against him Cink went ahead and accepted the Claret Jug, and his gracious response to the victory and to Watson himself should not be understated- a more deserving major champion may not exist.

8. Shaun Micheel -  2003 PGA Championship at Oak Hill CC- Micheel’s win was the second consecutive come-from-nowhere victory in the majors following Ben Curtis at the 2003 Open Championship. Micheel’s win trumps Curtis and makes the list because of the dramatic way in which he won. Clinging to a one-shot lead and with the entire golfing world watching Micheel drew a 7-iron and hit the ball so close to the hole a beginner could have made the putt for birdie and not sweated it. It was simply jaw-dropping.

9. Tiger Woods – 2000 PGA Championship at Valhalla GC- There were some great duels down the stretch over the past decade but none can match the one where a journeyman pro took on the greatest player of recent times- and almost won. Over the stretch of six hours that Sunday Bob May gave Tiger Woods all he could handle. That Woods came out on top was not a surprise- that May never once blinked was.

10.  Padaig Harrington – 2007 Open Championship at Carnoustie GL- It was supposed to be Sergio Garcia’s Open Championship. He led after all three rounds and looked to have the tournament locked up before he was caught by Steve Stricker, then by Andres Romero, and finally by Harrington. All four players tried valiantly to lose the tournament and at one stage it looked like nobody wanted to take the Claret Jug home with them. Despite two trips to the burn on the 18th hole Harrington prevailed in a playoff and somewhere the ghost of Jean Van de Velde smiled just a little bit.

Here are a couple of recent golf rule questions I received in the past week. Thankfully golf rules expert and author of “999 Questions on the Rules of Golf” Barry Rhodes was on hand to give an accurate answer to each one.

GOLF BALL – RULES OF GOLF QUESTION:

Hi Andy,

Thank you for all your informative support, it has helped immensely in my game. I have a question, if I start of the ball with a ball marked no 1, do I have to play the whole game with the same ball or can I change the balls during the various tee offs.

My point is that at hole no 1 the distance is 124 m and I use a ball marked no 1 because I read that it is used for short distances (0 and 1 marked soft). The next tee off is 331m and I want to use say a ball marked 2 or 3 because the trajectory is much greater and the ball will go further.

Please could you advice and guide me accordingly.

Thanks and Kind Regards

Steven

GOLF BALL – RULES OF GOLF ANSWER:

“There is nothing in the Rules to stop players changing the type of ball that they are playing with between holes or even during the play of a hole if their original ball is lost, or may be substituted within the Rules. The commonly held belief that this is not so is due to the fact that the Pro Tour events impose a Condition of Competition, known as the ‘one ball Rule’ (in the Rules book, it is in Appendix 1, Part C, c), which restricts the player to use the same brand and model of golf ball throughout the stipulated round.

Regards,

Barry

BUNKER PLAY – RULES OF GOLF QUESTION:

Hi Andy

On the 5th hole, I was told by my playing partner that I infringed a rule. This is what happened.

I put my approach into the bunker to the right of the green. I promptly picked up a rake and put it down near where my ball lay, played my shot and then raked the bunker. My playing partner told me that I had incurred a one shot penalty for testing the playing surface.

What is the ruling?

With Best Regards

David

BUNKER PLAY – RULES OF GOLF ANSWER:

David,

I am pleased to tell you that your playing partner was wrong. You can point him to Decision 13-4/0.5 which includes these words;

“Examples of actions that would not constitute testing the condition of the hazard include the following:

……placing an object, such as clubs or a rake, in the hazard”

Incidentally, had he been right because your action was intended to test the condition of the bunker it would have been two strokes penalty, not a one stroke penalty!

Regards,

Barry

http://www.BarryRhodes.com – Miscellaneous content on the Rules of Golf.

Visit here for more Rules of Golf questions.

Disclaimer: Whilst every attempt has been made to ensure the accuracy and reliability of this information on the Rules of Golf I am human and have been known to be wrong! Neither I, nor anyone connected with GolfSwingSecretsRevealed.com, shall be held responsible for any losses caused by reliance upon the accuracy or reliability of such information. Readers should refer to the full text of the rules and decisions as published in the official publications of the R&A and the USGA, The Rules of Golf 2008-2011 and Decisions on the Rules of Golf 2008-2009.

The obituaries were being penned the minute Tiger let go of his club in disgust. Cutting a forlorn figure at Turnberry Tiger Woods huffed, puffed and ultimately slumped to a missed cut.

Suddenly the press were circling like sharks. The subtext is clearly that great sections of the golfing media feel excluded from Tiger’s inner circle. Chastened by off guard remarks in the past he raises a shield in press conferences and those that don’t have privileged access resent it.

The chance that they one day might be granted the patronage of the king of golf means that they resist the urge to criticise when he is in the ascendancy. But when he shows the weakness of a mere mortal the pens are sharpened like knives.

Not all of this is simply down to his personality and jealously guarded public persona. For all that the media is now a modernised global business the press corps continues to be a haven for the contrary and the misanthropic. They might not publicly state that they want him to lose but they know, in their hearts, that after 12 golden years of charting his genius it might not be that bad for them professionally to spend a couple of year chronicling his decline.

It is, after all, about nothing more than the quality of the copy and for that you need good stories. Narratives wouldn’t come much better than a struggling Tiger failing to reach Jack Nicklaus’ 18 major haul.

Some of the journalists would privately admit to a hero worship of the Golden Bear in their youth that leads them to resent Tiger’s assault on his preeminence. They forget, however, how long the media and the golfing public took to warm to the apparently brash Nicklaus when he first began to tear down the fortress built by the old king, Arnold Palmer.

For those of us slightly removed from the heat of the action the truth about Turnberry seemed less dramatic. Tiger struggled certainly but had he not been the prophet of his own travails when he announced that the Ailsa course was no place to fake it? The journalists that say he gives nothing away missed the point: faking it was what his form had demanded and what he had been doing for a couple of tournaments in America.

As the columnists continued to chart the course of his downfall Tiger did what he always does. He went away, kept a low profile and then came back and won the Buick.

He may be surly, he may be guarded but he’s also immensely resilient. He knows that golf is about slings and arrows and he knows that setbacks must make you stronger. That’s what defines him as not just arguably the greatest golfer of all time but also as one the most remarkable sportsmen of his or any other generation.

The Buick might not mark the return of the Tiger to his pre-injury brilliance in the majors but it might just mark a watershed in golf.

For all the spine tingling wonder of those four days in Ayrshire golf must concede that it got lucky. Lucky that medical science has made replacing hips such a straightforward procedure. Lucky that Tom Watson’s genius has survived almost intact down the years, perhaps lying dormant but always lurking to take the opportunity of being centre stage once again.<

Because come Sunday evening the Open had a worthy and dedicated champion in the amiable form of Stewart Cink. But we must concede that it was Tom Watson not the champion who made the week. Just as both the Masters and the US Open had their own moments before producing champions who, with the greatest of respect, caused very few ripples of excitement amongst the sporting public at large.

And Tiger’s sixth Buick last Sunday will be his last. The company has withdrawn its sponsorship on the PGA Tour meaning the future of two big events are in doubt. The chill wind of recession is blowing and golf is catching a heavy cold.

Which means that now, more than ever before, golf needs Tiger Woods as surely as fire needs oxygen.

The golfing story of every journalist’s life will not be a couple of years of Tiger in decline before he walks away from the game. Golf needs him to get to Jack’s 18 major titles or the professional game will be in serious trouble.

Where are the challengers to Tiger? Nicklaus’ major winning career spanned Lee Trevino, Gary Player, Tom Watson, Tony Jacklin and others all winning multiple major titles. The drama was provided by the seemingly never ending stream of young princes coming through and challenging for Jack’s crown.

The reign of Tiger has seen “the next Tiger” proclaimed at least every other season. Tiger’s not had to fight them off because none of them have delivered on their potential. The tension between Tiger and Phil Mickelson can provide drama as we saw for a few glorious, if ultimately meaningless, holes at Augusta. But the stats don’t lie: Tiger’s 14 majors knock Phil’s into insignificance.

Golf’s crucial narrative, the story it needs to keep sponsors, television and the armchair fan hooked, is the battle between Tiger and Jack.

Padraig Harrington winning back to back majors. Tom Watson turning back the clock and making us all feel young again. They are wonderful stories that warm the heart. But they are mere distractions. Tiger is the only show in town.

The FedEx Cup has failed to grab the imagination. Few but the golfing anoraks of Europe could begin to explain the Race to Dubai far less the appeal it is supposed to bring to the European Tour.

Other sponsors will drift away. Audiences will continue to seep towards other sports that demand less of a commitment.

Tiger can stop all this. Few can turn down the chance to see a talent that comes along maybe once in a century in full flow. Corporate bosses will salivate at the chance of seeing Tiger in front of their company livery on a Sunday afternoon.

Surly, rude and lacking the deportment of a champion. He might be all these things and more. But his is a rare talent that can singlehandedly guide golf through the lean times.

I might be wrong. Perhaps Turnberry was the start of a decline that will prove irreversible. Perhaps, perhaps not.

But those writers that seemed to revel in the possibility struck me as being like so many turkeys voting for Christmas. Tiger is their box office. What he’s realised, and what they resent, is that they, and golf, need him a whole lot more than he needs them.

Following on from the success of these factsheets:

2007 Open Championship Factsheet
2008 US Masters Factsheet
2008 US Open Factsheet
2008 Open Champioinship

I have produce this 2008 US PGA Championship Factsheet

This 2008 US PGA Championship Factsheet is perfect for bringing you right up to speed for the event starting on Thursday 7th August.

Print it out and read it in the bath, on the train or have it just by the remote as a handy guide whilst watching on TV.

Tap here to get your factsheet …

Enjoy the US PGA Championship.

Cheers

Andy

I’m not a sports psychologist. So, I suppose, my opinion on this isn’t worth a damn. But here goes.

I would argue that Tiger’s enforced absence (the rehabilitation of the knee has begun – could the superman of world sport return quicker than we expected?) represents an opportunity for the rest of the field. An opportunity to win a devalued major? Possibly, but hey, I’d take a major if the rest of the field were playing with one leg, one arm and a blindfold. Bet a lot of us would.

A glance down the top tens at The Masters and The US Open throws up three unlikely names as the form players in this years majors (after Woods is removed from the equation): Miguel Angel Jiminez, Robert Karlsson and Brandt Snedeker.

Those three have posted two top ten finishes each in this years majors. They’ve shown consistency in the toughest arenas. Theoretically the next two majors are golden opportunities for that disparate triumvirate.

But my guess is they won’t be hogging the limelight in the run up to Birkdale this year. And this is where my cod psychology thesis comes in: step forward Philip Alfred Mickelson. The world number two is a whole lot of ranking points and a whole lot of majors behind Tiger.

But with no Tiger what can we expect from Phil? I would argue that this is Phil’s great opportunity, his last opportunity, to put a dent in Tiger’s armour.

Let’s imagine this summer: an inspired Mickleson takes his first Open and his second USPGA. He’s now won five majors. At the Ryder Cup, free from his nemesis, he becomes the talisman of a victorious US team that reignites the event as a contest.

Then Tiger returns, ring rusty and missing the home comforts that he has become used to. Mickleson, still revelling in the momentum of his Tiger free winning spree, is free of the inferiority complex that has damaged his challenge. He squares up to the Tiger. He beats him. It’s game on and Tiger no longer has everything his own way.

Suddenly Mickleson would be a real challenger to Tiger’s greatness. Tiger would have to raise his game. The two greatest golfers in the world, sparking off each other, feeding off each other’s exploits. Woods as golf’s Roger Federer. Mickelson, reinvigorated, as the Rafael Nadal of the links. Woods with the competition his genius deserves, Mickelson with the claim to greatness he craves, golf with the top level rivalry it longs for.

Can it happen? It could. Much was made in the run up to the US Open that Torrey Pines was Mickelson’s home course. It must, then, have hurt him to see Tiger “Hopalong” Woods claim the title, the glory and the status of Superman.

What better way to show that he’s got over it than to come out fighting and take his first Open. And that might be all it takes. The rest of this year will see Barack Obama and John McCain fight it out to gain momentum. Momentum is as crucial in politics (“the big mo” I believe they call it) as it in sport. For Phil an Open victory might be the spark that presidential hopefuls spend millions trying to find.

And, for Mickelson, 2008 is different. If he can start the momentum at Birkdale there is no Tiger shaped obstacle in the way. The tiny snowball can be a bloody great boulder by the time Tiger returns. Woods on the backfoot, Mickelson driving forward. It’s a mouthwatering prospect.

And if Phil misses the boat this time? Then that’s it I’m afraid. Maybe a couple more big wins here and there. Warm applause and rueful shakes of the head. Appreciation of what he’s achieved, sorrow over what he’s failed to do. And then someone else will come along and Mickelson won’t be number two anymore. And Tiger will pretty much have the history books to himself.

With so much talk about Tiger Woods – whether we love him or hate him, whether or not swearing on the fairways is okay because athletes in other sports do it, whether or not he will win the Grand Slam in 2008 – it’s good to sometimes sit back, collect our thoughts and consider why Woods is being talked about.

Woods’ pursuit of records would never be of any interest if there were no records to pursue in the first place. And for this, we thank Jack Nicklaus, for whom the contrast “or hate him” never applies nor the controversy “swearing on the fairways”.

Nicklaus was the epitome of role models, someone who never went out of his way to be a role model but become one anyway through his temperament, attitude and achievements.

So, it was fitting that in the month of the Masters, it was announced that Nicklaus, who still owns the record for major wins at 18, would be receivng a PGA Tour Lifetime Achievement Award.

He will receive the award during The Players Championship at Ponte Vendra Beach, Florida, which he won three times in the 70s.

Jack will be the eighth recipient of the award, which has been handed out since 1996 and created to recognise outstanding contribution to the PGA Tour over an extended period of time, both on and off the golf course.

Other winners are Gene Sarazen, Byron Nelson, Arnold Palmer, Sam Snead, Jack Burke Jnr, Pete Dye and Deane Beman. Nicklaus said on the PGA Tour website:

“Since first picking up a club at age 10, I have loved the game of golf. And whether it is being fortunate to serve as captain of The Presidents Cup, or being active in golf course design in emerging markets all over the world, or lending a hand to the growth of The First Tee and other junior golf programs, I enjoy staying connected to the game. More importantly, I enjoy finding ways to give back to the game that has given my family and me so much.”

Nicklaus has 73 PGA Tour victories under his belt, which is among 118 he has won around the world. He is second behind Sam Snead’s record of 82. He has won a record six Masters titles, four US Opens, three Open titles and five PGA Championships.

While picking up major titles, he completed the Grand Slam cycle three times. One statistic that is rarely mentioned is that Jack finished second in majors 19 times.

That means, throughout his career, he was in contention to win 37 majors, 18 of which he won. That is simply mind-boggling. How many pros would like to be in with a chance of winning just one major?

He didn’t stop winning as a senior either, completing the Grand Slam of major titles on the Seniors Tour as well.

Now 68, Nicklaus is also known for his humility and sportsmanship, with many sporting historians counting his act of goodwill at the 1969 Ryder Cup as one of the great examples of sports sportsmanship.

With the contest neck and neck, Nicklaus conceded a two-foot putt to Tony Jacklin on the 18th. That meant the match finished as a tie, the first in history, though the US retained the Cup as defending champion.

It is reported that the US captain, Snead, and some of Nicklaus’ teammates were not happy. But when someone queried Jack as to what Snead thought of his act, dubbed “The Concession”, he replied: “I don’t know. I never asked him.”

Tiger Woods may go on to break Nicklaus’ record and will deservedly take his place in golfing folklore, if he hasn’t already.

But the fact that Tiger has a record to chase is thanks to Jack, the Golden Bear of golf.

Recently, several readers commented on Tiger Woods’ mental approach to his game. They wrote about how his mental strength, more than his physical skills, is what separates him from the other players.

If that is the case, then Woods’ recent comments makes his performances on a weekly basis even more amazing.

According to a Reuters article out of Miami, Woods said the majors are more important than other tournaments. The US Masters, US Open, British Open and US PGA Championship are what matters more than the five straight PGA Tour titles he recently won.

What Woods says is hardly earth-shattering. Pro golfers have been saying that for decades even before Tiger arrived on the scene.

What makes it significant is that, despite placing more emphasis on the majors, Woods can still consistently win at “lesser” tournaments. It must require a powerful mental effort to focus on events that, in essence, don’t matter that much.

It is all about establishing a Tiger Woods legacy, as he said in the article while taking part in the World Golf Championships-CA Championship in Miami, Florida.

“You can win every tournament for the entire year but if you go 0 for 4 in the entire year in the major championships then, well it’s just that you don’t really get remembered for the number of wins in a career. It is the number of wins in major championships. Those are the biggest events. If you win one major a year, it turns a good year into a great year.”

It just makes you think how many other pros would consider five regular titles in a single year, even without a major victory, as a great year.

Tiger has 13 major titles to his name and is hoping to become the first player to win the Grand Slam of golf – all four majors in one calendar year.

He has already been in possession of all four major trophies at the same time, but those four straight victories straddled two years.

Those who watched the Shark Shootout presented by Merrill Lynch this weekend were treated with a rare glimpse of Greg Norman. A blast from the past if you will – or a return to competition of one of the game’s all-time dynamic figures. Granted, The Shark Shootout is a team event with a format that would never be mistaken for the Ryder Cup – but don’t kid yourself — Norman was grinding to win. And it was fun to watch. Sadly however, in an all too familiar classic Greg Norman scenario, a lesser pro (Woody Austin) made a great shot on the last hole to nip him by one. Make no mistake, I take nothing away from Woody Austin. He’s a great player — but in historical terms — he’s no Greg Norman. But wasn’t that always the way with Greg?

I got into an argument a few months back with a friend and fellow golf professional about Greg Norman. His contention was Greg was always overrated and never won enough. My contention was Greg was underrated and never won enough. I also said Greg Norman should go down in history as one of the all-time best players. Of course, this made my friend chuckle — but allow me to make Greg’s case.

First, think of one memorable tournament during Greg Norman’s prime that he did not play a factor. I think you would be hard pressed to come up with one — let alone many. Simply, he was always in contention in big events — and always had a chance to win. Basically, from 1984 – 1996, if there was a major tournament — Norman had a chance to win.

First, let’s talk about the Masters.

Norman had 8 top-five finishes and no victories. In 1986, he bogeyed the 18th hole to miss a playoff by one. In 1987, in a playoff, Larry Mize made a miraculous chip to beat him by one. In 1988 and 89, he again had chances to win on the back nine, only to finish 5th and 3rd. And of course who could forget the collapse of 1996 where Norman’s back-nine meltdown opened the door for Nick Faldo’s 3rd Green Jacket.

Next, let’s talk about the U.S. Open.

Norman had 5 top-ten finishes and no victories. In 1984, he lost a playoff to Fuzzy Zoeller. In 1995, he again played poorly on the back nine, which allowed Corey Pavin to win his first major.

Next, the British Open.

Norman had 9 top-ten finishes and 2 victories (1986 and 1993). Although clearly his best “major results”, he could have and should have won again in 1989. He lost a playoff to Mark Calcavecchia and never hit one bad shot. He birdied the first two playoff holes. Made a bogey on the 3rd playoff hole with a shot that flew right over the flag and a chip that lipped out. And made an “X” on the last playoff hole by driving the ball straight down the middle 345 yards into a small pot bunker. This of course after shooting 64 to get into the playoff.

Next, the PGA Championship.

Norman had 5 top-five finishes and no victories. He lost in 1986 to Bob Tway’s miraculous holed bunker shot on the 72nd hole. In 1993, he lost in a playoff to Paul Azinger after “lipping” out putt after putt in overtime. He should have won both of these events as he was clearly the better player and did nothing to lose either.

If you’re keeping track — this is a playoff loss in each major championship. For the record, Greg Norman is the only person to ever lose all four major championships in a playoff.

So, Norman has two major victories, which for most players would be wonderful — but for Greg, it is a complete and utter disappointment. Here is my concern as it relates to Greg Norman. I’m worried that in 50 years, as people are looking at the golf record books — they will see this guy named Greg Norman with 20 PGA Tour wins, 14 European wins and 2 Majors. They’ll think — here was a pretty good player. Yet, they’ll have no idea how close he was to being known as the greatest player ever. So — here is my argument for that outlandish statement.

If you give Greg Norman two shots a year from 1984 — 1996 to use anyway he wants — and let him use them as a mulligan or take them away from one of his competitors — his record would be unbelievable. I know, I know — that’s not golf. We can make that argument with a lot of people. It’s the day of the event that matters. But — Greg Norman is such a special case — I believe he deserves special examination.

So, back to my argument. Give Greg two shots a year and what happens?

Well, he wins 2 Masters, 2 U.S. Opens, 3 British Opens, 3 PGA Championships and a plethora of other PGA Tour events. Important PGA Tour events. Remember Robert Gamez at Bay Hill? Or David Frost in New Orleans? Or how about Mark McCumber in San Francisco? These are just a few of the guys who holed out improbable shots on 18 to beat Greg Norman.

Okay, so now, if you give Greg the two shot a year — you’ve got a player with 10 majors, 30 PGA Tour wins, 20 European Tour wins, 33 Australian wins and 22 other world-wide victories. And a player with this record during the booming “television” age — may just be considered one of, if not the best player ever. Definitely in the top 3 all-time. Of course realistically, the argument of the best player ever is going to be a moot point by the time Tiger Woods is done being — well Tiger Woods.

But my point remains the same. Greg Norman’s legacy should not just be the record books. It should be all he did to lift the game to unprecedented worldwide heights right after a definite lull in the sport. It should be his then unprecedented run as the number one ranked player in the world. It should be the way he played the game — never out of a tournament — no matter where he began on Sunday. I used to love — pre-Internet age — to turn on the television Sunday to see highlights of Norman shooting 30 on the front 9 to get back in the tournament. To me, Tiger has yet to be as exciting as Greg Norman was. Yes, he’s better — much better when it comes to winning — but not more exciting. Plus, Norman’s skills should go down with the all-time best.

Norman was probably the best driver of the golf ball ever. He is among the top-five long iron and fairway wood players ever. I would put his overall short game among the top-five ever. He was a great pressure putter. Simply, there was nothing he couldn’t do. Norman had only two problems. One, he had a flaw in his iron swing that caused a “way right” miss under pressure. Two, he had a mind that wouldn’t let him admit this flaw to himself. He would only try to hit great shots under pressure — and never played it safe. If he didn’t have the second problem — there is no telling how many times he would have won.

Yes, this was a Greg Norman rant. But – after watching him on television today, I realized something significant. I missed him. I miss watching and wondering what was going to happen. Today, as lucky as we are to watch Tiger Woods — we know what’s going to happen. If Tiger’s leading — Tiger’s winning. With Greg, he could birdie holes 10-17 to tie the lead and then make a double on 18. It’s exciting when the best player in the world plays this way. I suppose that’s why so many people love to watch Phil Mickelson today – or Arnold Palmer in his prime.

Anyway, if you’re ever on the course or a pub somewhere and someone starts bad mouthing Greg Norman — stick up for him. They probably have no idea how close he was to being one of the best ever.

And so the major season ends for another year. 2007’s big four will be remembered for a variety of reasons. Zach Johnson, Angel Cabrera and Padraig Harrington clinched their first major wins. If they are to be breakthrough wins only time will tell.

But at the USPGA it was a return to form. Tiger was the story and he duly collected the 13th trinket in his march towards the Golden Bear’s crown.

Some have said that Tiger winning is dull. But let’s be honest, some people just don’t like success. If you become so myopic to his achievements that you can sit stubbornly po-faced during an exhibition of golf like Tiger’s 63 last Friday then you are following the wrong sport.

Watching Tiger in that form is surely to appreciate that you have the privilege of watching a once in a lifetime force of nature. George Best in his pomp at Old Trafford, Mohammad Ali stinging like a bee. Two of sport’s greatest that I was too young to have ever seen. But we have read the legends – just as future generations will read the legend of Tiger Woods long after he has surpassed his great hero and left the world stage.

So carp not at Tiger, instead relish the beauty of a sport that can have a superstar that is so far ahead of the rest of the field but whose dominance of the big ones extended to only one out of four in 2007. Golf defies dominance in a way that other sports do not: Tiger’s ‘real’ Grand Slam remains, for now, a pipe dream.

Golf, however, in some of its more untouched corners remains a sport much enjoyed by doomsayers and stubborn drones. So if they need a moan, how about this? The Majors that we get so worked up about every year are a fallacy.

The Open. Fair enough: the biggest tournament in the country that gave the world the game deserves its status. The US Open. Same: the national open of the country that drove the game to where it is today is, undoubtedly, a biggie. The Masters. OK: the smaller, closed field makes the case harder to argue, but sport needs romance and mystique and Augusta brings them to the table in spades.

Which leaves us with the weakest link. Because the USPGA ain’t a major. Never was, never should have been but somehow is. Step forward the great Arnold Palmer.

Because it was Arnie who invented the modern major season. Back in the 1960’s when Arnie’s Army carried Palmer to the heights of golfing that stardom that few people had dreamt possible, he sat down with a journalist called Bob Drum and created a challenge that he could chase to feed the imagination of his fans and sponsors.

Enter the concept of the Grand Slam. The great Opens on either side of the Atlantic got the nod straight away. The Masters (“too pretty to ignore”) was allowed. Which left a space. Arnold eventually settled on the PGA and used Drum to whip up support for the notion.

Which is fine in a way I suppose. Everything has to start somewhere. And ideas have come from far less auspicious places than an Arnie Palmer cocktail session.

But it seems a shame that Tiger chases a record Jack set that includes the most minor of majors. Played at the wrong time of the year on courses that don’t always set the heart beating the PGA is the one you want on your CV as an after thought.

There are better tournaments in America. And the global game of golf could surely find another great stage in another continent. Because it seems a shame that each year the great spectacle of the majors should finish with a tournament that, even when Tiger lights it up, is an anti-climax.

Perhaps now is the time for Tiger to hold up his hands and say “you know what, the real Grand Slam shouldn’t include the PGA Championship.” It wouldn’t be too much different to what Palmer did all those years ago after all.

For years, the golf world has been waiting for Justin Rose’s follow up to his thrilling debut at the 1998 British Open. The then 17 year old amateur made his splash with a solid 4th place finish – but more memorably, with a remarkable holed birdie pitch on the 72nd hole. “The shot” wasn’t enough to catch eventual champion Mark O’meara, but it was however, enough to make him the top story of an eventful tournament. Would he be England’s next great champion was a question asked many times that week.

Justin Rose turned pro the day after the British Open in 1998, at just 17 years old. Some said he was too young. He needed more experience before he could withstand the rigors of life on the tour, said others. Still, many golf fans welcomed his decision, as they saw him as Britain’s next great chance for a Major title. The next Nick Faldo if you will.

The first few years proved difficult, with a string of missed cuts after missed cuts. And with each failure came a loss of a little more confidence. That same confidence that impressed so many at Royal Birkdale. But true to the player most thought he could be – he rebounded. He worked hard and overcame the death of his father and part-time coach in 2002. His game was solid enough to win 4 times in 2002 – on 3 different continents. He looked ready to deliver on the huge potential he showed at Birkdale.

However, the next few years, his game showed many of the same inconsistencies of the late 90′s. He would have a good week here or a good week there – but then miss a number of cuts in a row. At times, he showed flashes of brilliance, such as leading the 2004 U.S. Masters after 36 holes, but then followed it up with a 3rd round 81. As good as his game appeared at times, he often looked to be searching for his place on tour. Was he really going to be one of the best – or would he end up being a journeyman pro?

Now, in 2007, Justin Rose looks comfortable – finally. He again had the lead at the U.S. Masters, but this time he did not go away with high scores on the weekend. Instead, he stayed in the fight – twice battling back from tough starts on the weekend and finished with another top 5 in a Major. It’s funny – in his first major – he finished 4th. And now, in his last major – he finished 5th. And all the tournaments and tough lessons between the two don’t seem to matter as much as they once did. He is again on the tip of golf fan’s tongues. Could he be the next Nick Faldo? His coach, Nick Bradley, seems to think so. In fact, he thinks Justin can top Nick’s impressive record of 6 Major Championships. What do you think – can Justin overtake Nick in major wins?

Read More on Justin and Bradley’s comments.

It has always been the USGA’s mission to protect par in all its championships. To that end, they set up golf courses to play extremely difficult – so difficult in fact, that only once (Tiger Woods in 2000) in its long history, has a player finished a Men’s U.S. Open at -10 or lower. In walking the grounds at Augusta National this week and watching the best players in the world struggle – I have to ask; Is the Masters Committee also trying to protect par?

Granted, the weather conditions on Saturday could best be described as brutal. And scoring in that kind of cold and wind is always going to be tough – but for only one player (Retief Goosen – 70) to break par speaks more to the difficulty of the golf course than the weather conditions. Tom Fazio, who was in charge of the redesign/lenghtening in 2001, said the golf course is finally playing the way it was intended – hard and fast. The problem, in my opinon, with that kind of speed, it’s almost impossible to get irons close to the hole. And there is not a tougher second shot golf course in the world than Augusta National. As a player, you have to not just hit greens – you have to sections of greens. And as that same player, if you’re not able to spin the ball enough to hold these firm/fast sections – making birdies become next to impossible. Plus, the players now have the added disadvantage of a light cut of rough, which makes it especially difficult to spin the ball enough to hold firm greens. Augusta National never had rough before the redesign. There are also a number of added pine trees, which puts a premium on accuracy.

Now, all of this is fine if that is the kind of tournament you want to have. If par is your goal and you’re trying to protect the integrity of the golf course with the advent of modern equipment. However, in my opinion, this somewhat takes away from what made the Masters the world’s most exciting tournament. Experts used to say, the Masters didn’t start until the back-nine of Sunday. They said this because of all the possibilities. The possibilities of eagles, birdies, pars, bogeys, double bogeys, or even higher. Guys who were 5 back on the 10th tee weren’t out of it – as they could shoot 30 or 31 if they played great. However, with the golf course set-up this year, it’s almost impossible to shoot 3 or 4 under par in the back-nine. If a player is going to come back from 4 or 5 back with 9 to play, it will have to be that the leaders are coming back to the field. And, in my opinion, that is too bad.

I for one, loved the 86 Masters. Who could forget Jack Nicklaus going birdie, birdie, bogey, birdie, par, eagle, birdie, birdie, par on the last nine holes – to steal the tournament from Tom Kite, Greg Norman and Seve Ballesteros? Or Gary Player shooting 64 in 1978 to win? Or Nick Faldo, 5 down on the 11th tee in 1990, coming back to win his second green jacket in a row? To me, this is the Masters. To me, this is what separates it from the rest of the major championships.

The four majors have always had their distinct personalities. The Masters was about excitement. The U.S. Open was about grinding out pars. The British Open was about weather and controlling trajectory. And the PGA was about a fair set up. Lets hope the Masters gets back to its true identity and finds some excitement. Past champion Fuzzy Zoeller said it was like a morgue out there today – because there was nothing to cheer about. There is nothing like an eagle roar coming out of those beautiful pine trees on Sunday. So, if I had a vote – I would say soften the greens just slightly and lets get back to birdies and eagles.

For more on the Masters and its difficult playing conditions