Ames Really Went Off the Deep End

Vis a vis other blogs, I saw this interview with Stephen Ames (whose only real accomplishment is winning the Players Championship) in the Calgary Herald. He really goes off the deep end here.

I guess media...try to make it the better of the four events, only because the history and the nostalgia of the event that has made it what it is. But when you compare it to the other major events, it is the weakest field technically. There are only 90 players; the top 50 players in the world are guaranteed; of those 90, there are 20 old guys still playing, past champions, who shouldn't be playing golf. So, technically, it's a field of 70. Hey," he added, quickly, "I'm just quoting facts. The Players Championship is a stronger field than that one."

Everyone knows that the Masters has the smallest field. It is not necessarily the weakest. That distinction could actually belong to either of the Opens depending on how qualifying goes. But, what is funnier to note here is the last line about the Players. Of course, Ames is implying that he won a tournament with a field that is better than the Masters. Therefore, he should be discussed in the company of major champions. That's not happening.

A nice reply from Jim Byers' of the Toronto Star was posted on this blog. It basically says the same as the above paragraph, but it's good to see it in a newspaper.