Olympic Club, site of this week’s U.S. Women’s Open, will pose a stern defense of par, reader contends in opposing viewpoint
It’s disappointing and sad that reader Gregory Tatoian is mostly clueless and probably sexist about his presumptions for female golfers (“From the Morning Read inbox,” June 3). Sure, they might not be as popular nor as well-known, but they are as talented and, in most cases, just as enjoyable to watch as the men.
His statements about course setups are yet another fallacy, especially about USGA-event layouts. I doubt that Tatoian ever has seen a Curtis Cup at Quaker Ridge, a U.S. Women’s Amateur at Pasatiempo, or even will tune in this week in to watch a cool-temperature, foggy, thickly-roughed, stern test at the U.S. Women’s Open at Olympic Club. If anyone wants a fair apples-to-apples comparison, just compare Paula Creamer’s near wire-to-wire 3-under victory at a the ever-difficult Oakmont Country Club vs. Dustin Johnson's near same feat at 4 under on the same, only longer, course in 2016.
Finally, Taotian illustrates his benightedness by stating about the U.S. Women’s Open at Olympic Club: “Many scores will be under par, holes will be short, greens slow and fairways wide.” Anyone who has played the Lake Course will tell you that nothing could be further from the truth. Just ask Angela Stanford, one of the best U.S. Women’s Open players during two-plus decades. She called this week’s Open site “a beast” that could be the most difficult she’s ever seen. She even joked that she told the USGA guys “that somebody lost the key to the lawnmower.” Add in the narrowly-mowed, reverse-canted fairways and tiny greens and you have an absolute recipe for defending par.
It’s about time we all do a little homework before we make such wrongful proclamations. Maybe watching women’s golf isn’t for everyone, yet a little bit of awareness will go a long way in understanding the real, factual differences.
Far Hills, N.J.
(Lapper is a co-owner of Fox Hollow Golf Club in Branchburg, N.J.)
Reader takes issue with Van Sickle's comment
Among the musings by Gary Van Sickle in Thursday’s Morning Read (“There’s a definite buzz at Memorial this week,” June 3), he mentioned that Justin Thomas had given a check to a fellow pro, Mike “Big Mike” Visacki, a player whose pay grade is barely a sniff, if that, of J.T.'s. The gesture by Thomas appeared to be on an impulse of appreciation to a guy on a low-budget grind to making tournament cuts.
Rather than an “attaboy” to Thomas for showing his generosity and encouragement to Visacki to continue his hopeful grind to the big-time, Van Sickle implied that Thomas should be showing appreciation for the grinders, Van Sickle’s kinfolk, in the media room by throwing some Franklins at them.
Van Sickle, you turned a silk purse into a pig's ear.
Setting record straight regarding Europeans in Ryder Cup
Alex Miceli writes the stat that pleases Americans, no doubt, namely the total score in the Ryder Cup (26-14-2) but implies that it is the U.S.-vs.-Europe score (“Tom Watson stirs up a few Ryder Cup ghosts,” June 3).
Not so, Alex. That score is 11-8-1, in favor of Europe. Earlier, unsurprisingly, the best 12 from the far smaller pool of largely part-time Great Britain and Ireland players were rarely the equal of the U.S. team.
Later, Miceli concedes that “Sometimes, the other side is just better.” Clearly true, but he then follows up with "or one team simply is flat after a long and grueling season.”
Now which team does he hope to suggest that is? Don't tell me Miceli is trying to get his excuses in this early!
Morning Read invites reader comment. Write to editor Steve Harmon at email@example.com. Please provide your name and city of residence. If your comment is selected for publication, Morning Read will contact you to verify the authenticity of the email and confirm your identity. We will not publish your email address. We reserve the right to edit for clarity and brevity.
Sign up to receive the Morning Read newsletter, along with Where To Golf Next and The Equipment Insider.