Question:
It’s not a money thing, it’s a customer service thing. Most golfers prefer to ride. Am I saying that’s "right"? No, I’m not passing judgment. But I don’t expect the situation with cartgolf to change dramatically. I could imagine caddying making a comeback, but only slowly given the number of unwalkable courses. -joseph MONEY is why golf courses is requiring carts. A golf course will net 90% of every cart they rent.
– Author, Effective Perl Programming . . . . . http://www.effectiveperl.com Perl Training . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . http://www.perltraining.com Omniscient trash / Mr. Con Antithesis / In shortest, manic!
Response:
Appearance money is not allowed on the PGA, however, it is quite common in other areas of the world, however, only the top players receive any kind of appearance fees. That is why events such as the Dubai Classic are able to attract a competitive field of players. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I could be wrong about this, but it was my understanding that in most PGA Tour events there are no appearance fees (at least not official ones) and that you had to make the cut to make any money. Is this wrong? Do players that do not make the cut get compensated? In my heart, I agree with you. What this controversy points out, however, is the extent to which the PGA Tour is a business, providing employment opportunities to its "members". It is no longer a voluntary association of individuals who compete purely for prize money, based on their skill and their luck, but rather "employment" for expense money, appearance money, benefits (I presume), etc.. Once the Tour established a "floor" beneath its "members’" feet, it became an employer paying a base wage with bonus opportunities. I may be ignorant of the facts in this regard, but it seems to me that the USGA and the R&A are distinctly different from the Tour. Their events are objective competitions, with no compensation guaranteed whatsoever, as far as I know. As such, they are not "employers" and would not be subject to the ADA. That being the case, I don’t see the barbarians knocking at golf’s door. Professional sports are just that: sports that have become a profession for their participants. Did Tiger give up his amateur status for the prestige alone or did the money have something to do with it? Did he decide to go to work and make some money, rather than just voluntarily participate? For good or for ill, thats employment and the Tour cannot be heard to complain. Let’s assume Casey achieves great things, sets records, wins money, etc.. Won’t he always go down in the books with an asterisk? I’m hardly envious of that dubious distinction. If his motive in all this is glory and honor, I see those as eternally tarnished by the asterisk. Truth be known, his motive in all this is probably just to earn a living for his family, like everyone else in the workplace, which, in the final analysis, is where he is. They call the Majors in baseball "the Show" and all professional sports (today and always) are just that. Lastly, is this really a case of Casey, with his "unfair advantage", taking bread out of the mouth of some more-deserving young pro? Maybe the difference will be between low-cal and rich cake, but it will still be cake, not bread. I appreciate your point of view and the chance to be heard in reply. He who laughs last thinks slowest!
Response:
If golf is a walking sport, why are so many of the courses requiring you to ride.
stymie MONEY is why golf courses is requiring carts. A golf course will net 90% of every cart they rent. http://www.golflink.net/courses/mont1.htm Dana E Burns W&M Gof Ltd. PO Box 618 Blue Ridge Summit, PA 17214 717 794-2809 Fax 717 794-0105
Response:
If golf is a walking sport, why are so many of the courses requiring you to ride.
The STATED reason is SPEED. The REAL reason is MONEY, MONEY, MONEY. As that noted philosopher and GREAT American, DEEP THROAT, said many years ago, "To find the answers, FOLLOW THE MONEY!"
Response:
I could be wrong about this, but it was my understanding that in most PGA Tour events there are no appearance fees (at least not official ones) and that you had to make the cut to make any money. Is this wrong? Do players that do not make the cut get compensated? – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – In my heart, I agree with you. What this controversy points out, however, is the extent to which the PGA Tour is a business, providing employment opportunities to its "members". It is no longer a voluntary association of individuals who compete purely for prize money, based on their skill and their luck, but rather "employment" for expense money, appearance money, benefits (I presume), etc.. Once the Tour established a "floor" beneath its "members’" feet, it became an employer paying a base wage with bonus opportunities. I may be ignorant of the facts in this regard, but it seems to me that the USGA and the R&A are distinctly different from the Tour. Their events are objective competitions, with no compensation guaranteed whatsoever, as far as I know. As such, they are not "employers" and would not be subject to the ADA. That being the case, I don’t see the barbarians knocking at golf’s door. Professional sports are just that: sports that have become a profession for their participants. Did Tiger give up his amateur status for the prestige alone or did the money have something to do with it? Did he decide to go to work and make some money, rather than just voluntarily participate? For good or for ill, thats employment and the Tour cannot be heard to complain. Let’s assume Casey achieves great things, sets records, wins money, etc.. Won’t he always go down in the books with an asterisk? I’m hardly envious of that dubious distinction. If his motive in all this is glory and honor, I see those as eternally tarnished by the asterisk. Truth be known, his motive in all this is probably just to earn a living for his family, like everyone else in the workplace, which, in the final analysis, is where he is. They call the Majors in baseball "the Show" and all professional sports (today and always) are just that. Lastly, is this really a case of Casey, with his "unfair advantage", taking bread out of the mouth of some more-deserving young pro? Maybe the difference will be between low-cal and rich cake, but it will still be cake, not bread. I appreciate your point of view and the chance to be heard in reply.
He who laughs last thinks slowest!
Response:
If golf is a walking sport, why are so many of the courses requiring you to ride. Your analogies are not even close to the Casey Martin case. This young man comes pre-fatigued and in worse shape than all of his competitors could even imagine. This case had nothing to do with sympathy. It had to do with fairness. He can make the shots even on one leg. To even the field, why don’t we just cripple the other guys and then let them ride. Hell, let them all ride even without crippling them. Casey just wants a chance. Riding from shot to shot seems at the very least fair. Strange, he’s handicapped and wants to ride and I am in good health and want to walk. Now he can ride but I still have to ride because of greed. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – While it is natural to be sympathetic with any physical limitation – from accident, disease, from birth, it is not (or should not be) a requirement that a sport allow the use of mechanical aids or special assistance in order for a disadvantaged person to compete. How about letting a baseball player with bad knees use a cart to run the bases? How about letting a quarterback with poor mobility use one to avoid blitzing linebackers? Perhaps that real slow college player who is a deadly shot from three point range should have a cart so he can play in the NBA??? Whether Ben Hogan would have used a cart after his near fatal car wreck is unknown, but the fact is he didn’t and that made those victories and his play all the more meaningful. As the USGA says, "Golf is a walking sport." BDW
Response:
In my heart, I agree with you. What this controversy points out, however, is the extent to which the PGA Tour is a business, providing employment opportunities to its "members". It is no longer a voluntary association of individuals who compete purely for prize money, based on their skill and their luck, but rather "employment" for expense money, appearance money, benefits (I presume), etc.. Once the Tour established a "floor" beneath its "members’" feet, it became an employer paying a base wage with bonus opportunities. I may be ignorant of the facts in this regard, but it seems to me that the USGA and the R&A are distinctly different from the Tour. Their events are objective competitions, with no compensation guaranteed whatsoever, as far as I know. As such, they are not "employers" and would not be subject to the ADA. That being the case, I don’t see the barbarians knocking at golf’s door. Professional sports are just that: sports that have become a profession for their participants. Did Tiger give up his amateur status for the prestige alone or did the money have something to do with it? Did he decide to go to work and make some money, rather than just voluntarily participate? For good or for ill, thats employment and the Tour cannot be heard to complain. Let’s assume Casey achieves great things, sets records, wins money, etc.. Won’t he always go down in the books with an asterisk? I’m hardly envious of that dubious distinction. If his motive in all this is glory and honor, I see those as eternally tarnished by the asterisk. Truth be known, his motive in all this is probably just to earn a living for his family, like everyone else in the workplace, which, in the final analysis, is where he is. They call the Majors in baseball "the Show" and all professional sports (today and always) are just that. Lastly, is this really a case of Casey, with his "unfair advantage", taking bread out of the mouth of some more-deserving young pro? Maybe the difference will be between low-cal and rich cake, but it will still be cake, not bread. I appreciate your point of view and the chance to be heard in reply.
Response:
While it is natural to be sympathetic with any physical limitation – from accident, disease, from birth, it is not (or should not be) a requirement that a sport allow the use of mechanical aids or special assistance in order for a disadvantaged person to compete. How about letting a baseball player with bad knees use a cart to run the bases? How about letting a quarterback with poor mobility use one to avoid blitzing linebackers? Perhaps that real slow college player who is a deadly shot from three point range should have a cart so he can play in the NBA??? Whether Ben Hogan would have used a cart after his near fatal car wreck is unknown, but the fact is he didn’t and that made those victories and his play all the more meaningful. As the USGA says, "Golf is a walking sport." BDW