Every week of the 2010 PGA Tour season, the editorial staff of the SI Golf Group will conduct an e-mail roundtable. Check in on Mondays for the unfiltered opinions of our writers and editors and join the conversation in the comments section below.
Cameron Morfit, senior writer, Golf Magazine: Greetings, all: Lots to get to in this week's Confidential, so we won't have time to touch on Boise State's horrific loss to Nevada. Martin Kaymer became Europe's new No. 1 by finishing 13th in Dubai. First, though, Robert Karlsson won the Euro tour's season-ender on the second extra hole when Ian Poulter lost control of his golf ball, which landed on his ball mark, causing said ball mark to flip over on the green. For this, Poulter was assessed a one-stroke penalty. Karlsson might have won anyway, having set himself up with a three-foot birdie putt, but now Poulter didn't even have a chance. After a season of bunker/not bunker (Dustin Johnson, PGA Championship), plus other fiascos, do golf's rules need rewriting?
Mark Godich, senior editor, Sports Illustrated: Some rules need to be revisited, but is it asking too much to ask a guy to hold onto his golf ball?
Jim Gorant, senior editor, Sports Illustrated: There are a few head-scratchers, but overall the rules seem to work. This year has seen more than its share of odd situations and tough rulings.
David Dusek, deputy editor, Golf.com: The rules are the rules, so the penalties are what they are. At the same time, the spirit of the rules is the most important thing, and for that reason I think some rules could be re-examined.
Rick Lipsey, writer-reporter, Sports Illustrated: The rules have and will always stand the test of time. Some things always need revising, and that's why the rules are periodically reviewed and revised.
Farrell Evans, writer-reporter, Sports Illustrated: Poulter was sloppy. And so was Dustin Johnson at the PGA. Leave the Rules of Golf alone.
Gary Van Sickle, senior writer, Sports Illustrated: Some golf rules could use a rewrite, but probably not this one. By accidentally moving his marker, Poulter effectively moved his ball. That's a correctable error on a green, so maybe the punishment doesn't fit the crime. Elsewhere on the course, however, you can't exactly re-create the ball's lie, so it's a necessary rule. As for D.J.'s episode, golf has been played forever without grounding a club in the bunker. I wouldn't change that one, either. The O.B. rule? Wind moving a ball on the green at address? I'd change those, for starters.
Mike Walker, senior editor, Golf Magazine: Yes! O.B. is the best place to start. While the arcane and mysterious Rules of Golf have a Hogwarts-like charm, they could use some streamlining.
Gorant: Yeah, the oscillating ball on the green thing seems unnecessarily punitive.
Jim Herre, managing editor, SI Golf Group: Some of the penalties, like the one Poulter called on himself, seem silly. I know there is logic behind all the rules, but how about no harm, no foul?
Dusek: That's my point Jim. The spirit of the rules was not broken, and in this case it would be easy to place the ball in exactly the spot where the marker had been. I get it, but I hate to see championships decided on technicalities instead of good play.
Lipsey: It wasn't decided on a technicality. Everybody knew the rule, including Poulter. He broke the rule. Whether the rule should exist is another story.
Michael Bamberger, senior writer, Sports Illustrated: Nothing about D.J.'s situation, or Poulter's, makes me think the rules need rewriting. But I'm with Gary and Walker: O.B. should be stroke, not distance. Just play it where it goes out.
Lipsey: How many of us could pass the USGA rules official exam? It's easy to criticize from the outside looking in.
Van Sickle: Who said anything about passing a rules exam? But we all know a bad rule when we see it/experience it/get hosed by it.
John Garrity, contributing writer, Sports Illustrated: I attended a USGA Rules Workshop for a story in GOLF magazine, and I couldn't pass the exam if you let Johnny Miller and Nick Faldo help me. The rules are truly mind-bending.
Alan Shipnuck, senior writer, Sports Illustrated: I think it's a cool little rule — you're penalized for being clumsy!
Van Sickle: Good thing it's not a penalty if your ball falls off the tee and you have to re-tee. Hey, what an idea!
THE RISE OF KAYMER
Morfit: Let's talk about Kaymer. He didn't play great, but he did what he needed to do and wound up winning the money title in Europe with just under $6 million. He's the second German to be crowned European No. 1 after Bernhard Langer, and the youngest since Ronan Rafferty in 1989. Will Kaymer eclipse Langer's two majors and nearly 60 other victories worldwide, or nearly 75 if you count the Champions tour? And what's the over/under on how long it takes this kid to hit No. 1 in the world?
Gorant: He's only 25, right? He's got a shot, but you have to be great for a long time to catch Bernie. Dude has definite game though — long, short and he can putt. He is the real deal.
Van Sickle: Kaymer is already halfway to two majors. I like him to best Langer in that category. Sixty wins? That's all about longevity, health and desire. Not sure he'll get that. As I wrote in my SI Sportsman of the Year nomination, this guy is for real. I wouldn't be surprised to see him barrel into No. 1 early in '11, pull away and stay there for a couple of years.
Garrity: I think Kaymer will have a hard time overtaking Langer for career wins, but he could match his majors total almost before I'm done typing this. K should win several majors in the next decade.
Van Sickle: Impressive that Garrity used K to describe someone other than his personal hero, Robert Karlsson, who in fact rose from obscurity to win the tourney this weekend.
Garrity: Is it a crime to like tall, intelligent golfers? Actually, after picking Karlsson to win the past 10 or 12 majors, I'd sort of cooled on him. At 41, this win might be his swan song.
Shipnuck: Kaymer's golf will be as spectacular as anything Langer produced — it already is. But Bernie may never be matched for consistency and sustained excellence. Kaymer enjoys earthly pursuits way more than Langer, which is fine, but it means he may not be grinding so hard when he's 40.
Lipsey: At 25, Ernie Els looked as good or better than Kaymer does now, and Ernie's got, what, three majors? It's the very, very rare player who can become a major and enduring star.
Dusek: Ernie and a host of other players were born in the wrong era. Kaymer won't have to deal with a dominant player the way they did.
Godich: True, but you have to be good AND a little lucky to win majors these days. Kaymer at Whistling Straits is proof of that. I would argue that winning three or four majors would be quite the career for any player in this era.
Van Sickle: Maybe Kaymer is the dominant player everyone else will have to deal with.
Dusek: That's certainly possible.
PGA Tour Confidential: Hong Kong OpenKC's Espinoza reflects on his World Cup experience
