in 2010, the Netherlands will open a 43-bay, 15,000 square foot indoor golf facility. 

Somewhere between the endless fawning over Tiger and the hopelessly insipid Big Break, the Golf Channel has scheduled an interesting-sounding event called ”The Ultimate Game.” Inspired by the Big Stakes Match Play Championship of a couple of years ago, the Ultimate Game features 64 two man match play teams playing for $2.4 million. It’s going to be a semi-pro event. Players can’t currently be members of any of the Tours, or a past winner of a professional event. On the other hand, that leaves it open for former Tour players.

If the Golf Channel will hire some professional producers and camera operators (instead of the amateurs they use for every other show), it could turn out to be a good time.

I’ve got this nagging feeling, however, that there’s been some controversy over this event from a couple of years ago. Something about financing, or sponsorships or somesuch. But I can’t put my finger on it. And I can’t find a past post about it on the blog. Maybe a reader can remind me.

From the event’s press release, here’s the background on the event:

The concept for what is now The Ultimate Game at The PGA West Stadium Course was born more than 10 years ago. All-Pro NFL quarterback Steve Bartkowski and friends were watching a PGA TOUR event in which one of the pros appeared pressured to sink a six-foot putt: “That’s not pressure. If he finishes second, who cares? His money isn’t on the line. Pressure is when you have to sink a six-footer to win a $100 Nassau, and it’s your $100,” Bartkowski’s friend said. From there, the concept of golfers playing for their own money was born.

The Canadian Open—which begins Thursday at the Angus Glen Golf Club in Markham, Ont.—has been sadly reduced to second class status.

Squeezed into perhaps the worst spot on the golf schedule—between the British Open and the Bridgestone; and opposite the Reno-Tahoe—the second oldest non-major has attracted only two of the world’s top players: Jim Furyk, the defending Champion, and the everpresent and seemingly inexhaustable Vijay Singh. The two deserve kudos for making the effort to play.

Other top American players are understandably recuperating after a pair of flights over the pond, while the Europeans are involved with the Deutsche Bank Players Championship. All told, only 17 of the world’s top 100 are in the tournament.

Even Davis Love, whose firm recently redesigned Angus Glen, won’t show up.

Not exactly a ringing endorsement.

The biggest names are stars on the decline such as John Daly, Lee Janzen and Steve Elkington. Bob Tway also will appear.

With a nod to history, I think the Canadian Open deserves better. It’s the second oldest non-major, following the Western Open (now the BMW, but don’t get me started on that one.). And when you consider that the Western could rightly have been considered a Major until the Masters, the Canadian only rises in status. Some have written that as a national championship, it followed only the US Open and Open Championship in stature.

The list of past champions is impressive: Woods, Singh, Norman (Greg, not Moe), Price, Strange, Trevino, Casper, Palmer, Nelson, Snead, Hagen, Armour. Interestingly, it was never won my Nickaus. It may well be the most prestigious tournament not won by the Golden Bear.
The tournament has in the past been held in September, but the Royal Canadian Golf Association had lobbied for a summer date. Tournaments in the fall—and especially with the new FedEx Cup schedule suffer from a lack of starpower. Once the majors are over, the big guns go into hibernation. The RCGA’s thinking was that a summer date would improve the situation.

It won’t, for in the current slot it will never attract a big name (was that intentional on the Tour’s part?).

The bad scheduling and lack of stars also may have had an impact on the Canadian Open’s bottom line. The championship has no title sponsor and the RCGA is dipping into its rainy day fund to offer the purse.

Rick Desrochers, the RCGA’s CEO has said that the Presidents Cup, which is a PGA Tour-sponsored event held this year in Canada, drained about $1 million in sponsorship money away from the Canadian Open.

“But (Tour commissioner) Tim Finchem is well aware of that,” he said.

Unfavorable scheduling by the PGA Tour has resulted in the death of at least one tournament (the International). It would be awful to see the Canadian Open go the same way.

Given its history and its standing as the other North American national championship (ok, Mexico has one, but its not the same), there’s no reason that the PGA Tour could not have worked with the Canadians to find a better slot.

The 100th Canadian Open will be played in 2009. It would be great if the PGA Tour could maneuver things to give the Canadian Open a better chance.

A study by Weatherbill, Inc says that, thanks to global warming, the number of good days for golf may be increasing.

Strangely, it turns out that Mars also is experiencing global warming. Wonder how the golf season is shaping up there.

I have been watching the Match Play Championships today on The Golf Channel, and just saw an ad for the Big Break. And at that moment, it occurred to me that the fix for that insipid show is right under TGC’s nose.

The problem for me has always been that the interpersonal drama that the producers of The Big Break so desperately want is completely absent in the current format.  Because elimination is determined by individual skill challenges, there is no reason for any of the golfers to even talk TO each other, let alone talk about each other. They can love each other or hate each other, and it has no effect on the outcome.  That’s why, to me, the entire production seems so contrived.

What they need to do is to restructure the Big Break as a series of team events—sort of like a mini Ryder Cup each week. They could base it all on nine holes, if they wanted to speed it up and keep production costs down. The golfers would (as with Survivor) be initially divided into two squads. And each week, the losing team would be forced to vote out one of its members. Presumably, the team would vote out its weakest link. But they might also vote out someone who simply irritates the others, regardless of skill.

And that’s where, finally, the interpersonal drama would have some meaning.

If the teams were uneven because of attrition, the larger team would have someone sit out. The same person couldn’t sit out twice.

The show would be made more interesting as the show highlighted the various types of golf games available: match, twosomes, scramble. They could even come up with some original ones.

Each week would begin, however, with a skills challenge. The winner would get a “mulligan” (immunity), regardless of whether he ultimately on the winning or losing team. That would create some additional interpersonal conflict. If a player already has the mulligan, and doesn’t play up to the team’s expectations, she’d be under a lot of fire from the others. Imagine the comments: “We would have won, but she already had a mulligan and didn’t earn her share of the points. She’s a quitter and I hate her.”

At some point, the teams would be small enough that they’d be merged. Then, the players would be reassigned in different (random) pairs each week. The winning pair would get immunity. The others would be on the chopping block.

Of course, every other week, there wold be an uneven number of players. In that case, the player with the Skills Challenge mulligan would sit out. She would be immune from expulsion anyway.

When down to the last three, it would become a straight match play event.