Given the burgeoning Chinese interest in golf, Scottish authorities have begun an effort to attract the Chi-Coms to the home of golf.

In the article, Scottish First Minister Jack McConnell said

he admired China’s growing love of golf, but said “a golfer who never plays in Scotland is a golfer unfulfilled”.

Chinese tourism could be worth about £70m to Scotland over the next four years, it has been estimated. Restrictions on Chinese tourists travelling to the UK were removed last year.

The interest of the Chinese in golf only goes as far as the evil old men who run that totalitarian police state have an interest. They have, in recent years, sponsored several high stakes tournaments and are building numerous luxury resort courses. Given that the majority of the country lives in grinding poverty, it seems that they must have better things to do with their money. I find it even more ironic that in the “people’s paradise”, they have decided to take up the sport of the Captains and the Kings.

In 1949, Mao Tse-tung took time out from murdering his own people to order that all of the country’s golf courses be razed to “banish the millionaire’s game.” The bloodthirsty old tyrant is probably spinning in his grave right now.

Even more interesting: the Chinese sports ministry recently announced that it was starting a drive to catapult Chinese athletes into the top of the golfing world. It’ll surely be an effort like they’ve put forth to get to the top of the Olympic games. The government will identify talent early, take them away from their parents and put them up in government dormitories where they will live, breathe and eat golf.

Hmm. It actually doesn’t sound all that bad.

Of course, they may just be trying to find a place to dump all of those counterfeit clubs that they have been producing. I’ve also read that they have exported millons of fake top-of-the-line golf balls, too. (How can you tell if you have a Chinese Communist knock off ball? It goes left.)

However, given that the Chinese claim to have invented golf themselves, perhaps it is they that should be trying to attact the Scots.

I had an impacted wisdom tooth removed this afternoon and I’ve been in and out of a drug induced haze. I’m not thinking straight, so I’m going to put off any more posts until tomorrow.

A recent article in the San Jose Mercury News says what I’ve been saying for some time: that the way to make courses is not to make them longer, but to make them tougher.

In reviewing last week’s Pebble Beach Pro-Am, Erik Pinkela notes that:

The big hitters weren’t rewarded at the Pro-Am, even though the tournament was played on some of the shortest courses on the tour. Pebble Beach (6,737 yards) is the only course under 7,000 yards to host a final round so far this year.

Oberholser won the tournament despite a driving average of 259.3 yards—64th among the field. Mike Weir, who finished second, was 63rd. For the season, Oberholser ranks 131st (281.6 yards) and Weir is 155th (276.2).

Atop the rankings are two guys—Bubba Watson (320.5 yards) and Camilo Villegas (305.6)—who failed to make the cut at Pebble Beach.

Why couldn’t the big hitters overpower the short courses? Simple. All three courses (especially Spyglass Hill) demand accuracy, solid iron play, a great short game and patience with the bumpy greens. By Sunday, the warm weather had made the greens fast and firm, meaning that players had trouble attacking the pins and scoring.

That’s the secret. Narrow the fairways and grow the rough. Make the players make tactical decisions. Reward good play with all the clubs, not just the driver and pitching wedge.

Making the courses longer only plays into Tiger’s hands. If the PGA really wants to see some competition, they’ve got to level the playing field.

Of course, Tiger will win under those conditions, too.

If golf were scored like Olympic Figure Skating ...

Jim Nantz: So it’s come down to this: the seventy second hole of The Masters, with Tiger Woods and Jim Furyk tied for the lead. Lets see what the players are planning for us ...

David Feherty: (in an almost incomprehensible Irish accent) For his final hole, Tiger has chosen to play “Pampas.” Its a 365 yard par 4—not the most difficult hole on the course.

Nantz: Its obvious that Tiger knows that he’s the judges’ favorite and has decided to take the conservative route. Right now, it’s his Masters to lose and he knows that.

Feherty: Tiger’s using a 4 iron off the tee. Again, not a very challenging choice, but I can see what his strategy is.

[Tiger slices the four iron down the right side of the fairway and it rolls into the second cut]

Feherty: The ball’s landing zone wasn’t quite where he had choreographed it, but you have to think that in the end, the judges will subtract a stroke for that follow through. In many judges minds, I’m sure he’ll be sitting 0 on the next shot. There isn’t anyone in golf who can hold a pose like that.

Nantz: And over on Pink Dogwood, we find Furyk preparing to play the 575 yard par 5.

The exclusive Elkridge Country Club in Maryland now is courting its first black members.

The club gave up its Maryland tax breaks in 1977 rather than give its membership list to the state.

Elkridge was forced into the limelight after Maryland Governor Robert Erlich held a fundraiser there in June. The Governor came under fire for appearing at a club that apparently endorses racial discrimination and later urged the club to reconsider its policies.

Elkridge now apparently has admitted its first black members, Baltimore developer Theo Rodgers and his wife Blanche.

In another case, the city of Atlanta apparently has dropped its efforts to force the Druid Hills Golf Club to treat the significant others of its gay members the same way it treats the spouses of heterosexual members.

In find these types of cases (including the ongoing males only issue at Augusta) fascinating because of the constitutional issues they raise. On the one hand, the first Amendment grants us freedom of association (actually, it doesn’t say that, but the courts have extended it). And on the other, we all are guaranteed due process and equal protection.

If the clubs in question were public facilities, or were receiving government breaks, they very clearly couldn’t discriminate. But as private clubs ... I really don’t’ know what to say about that.

It’s the kind of discussion that goes on for days in the political science classes I teach. When two constitutional rights are in conflict, which one takes precedent?

I just know that I wouldn’t want to belong to a club that discriminates. My home club is relatively diverse, and that makes it a lot more fun.