[adsexpist]

Another thought, since you mention his internet savyness:

Twittering athletes -- a good or bad development? On the one hand, you have people like Christina Kim, whose running online commentary seems to endear her to more and more potential viewers; on the other, you have Jane Park, whose brutally honest and somewhat lowbrow "tweets" were amusing, no doubt, but most would agree not nearly PC enough for a general audience (and some might say invited the nasty comments she received from the peanut gallery that ultimately led her to abandon the twittersphere for good).


And more importantly, since I submitted the most questions, can I be the next guest picker on The 19th Hole?

P.s. I still think the Paddy-clocking is worthy of discussion. I'd be interested in what he thinks about the complaints I've heard from some that the particular Euro Tour official who made the ruling is problematic and has engendered significant controversy from taking aggressive positions before. Also wonder if he thinks Tiger should have been fined for his comments about the ruling, even though Tiger claims it did not happen.

P.p.s. Sorry, this is the first thing I thought of, and then I completely forgot about it once I sat down at my computer to write. IMG represents numerous professional golfers, and now hosts a tournament on the LPGA. Does that represent a dangerous precedent in your mind? Does it create a conflict, or at least an appearance issue? I honestly do not know enough about the ways tournament sponsorship can be used to influence other things, so perhaps there is nothing here; or maybe there is. What do you think?