|
Singh apologizes to Sorenstam
After hearing some very poorly thought out arguments in favor of Sorenstam playing ("Let's see if she can beat Tiger!"), I'm starting to think that allowing her to play in the PGA, while perhaps very good for her individually and "fair" in some absolute sense, would have some very deleterious unintended side effects for all other women golfers, and perhaps for women's sports in general.
If she's allowed to play because she's "good enough" to play with the boys, it will reduce the LPGA to a bush league for all the women golfers who aren't "good enough." Those who stay in LPGA-only play will then be thought of as playing Powder Puff Golf, and only women who choose to cross over to PGA play will get any attention, ever. Whether Sorenstam loses miserably or beats the shit out of Tiger, from now on all women golfers will be divided into two categories --- those who played LPGA, and those who were "tested" against men. That's a quite unfortunate development.
LPGA champs will then have an asterisk in the almanacs: "and "Greatest woman golfer --- open division" and "Greatest woman golfer --- LPGA only." This is a little more serious than a King v. Riggs one-off publicity stunt.
I agree it's fair in an absolute sense to allow Sorenstam to play. I don't think there are any checks in place to protect the LPGA from inevitably diminished status, which will only serve to discourage women from golfing professionally.
|
