Ames in spotlight, downgrades Masters

It seems that Stephen Ames has made yet another controversial statement--this time, about the Masters.  Ames told The Calgary Herald:

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.

In response, Jim Byers of The Toronto Star writes:

Perhaps, but you'd have to think a golfer would be a tad more nervous standing over a 10-footer to win the Masters than he would with a Players Championship title on the line.

More interesting than that is Ames' comment about "old guys" and "past champions, who shouldn't be playing golf."

Yes, some of the guys outside the top 50 who are former champs almost certainly have no chance at winning; folks like Fuzzy Zoeller. But to say they have no business playing golf is going to be seen as quite an insult to people like Tom Watson, not to mention 1994 and 1999 champion Jose Maria Olazabal, who is not quite ready for a walker last time we checked.

And what about Fred Couples? He's in the field as a former champion, and he could win another green jacket if his supply of Robaxacet holds out.

We know what Tiger Woods did to Ames at the match play tourney a couple years back after Ames suggested Woods' wasn't at the top of his game. We wonder if Boom-Boom, as Couples is known, will have a word with Mr. Ames at Augusta next week or simply let his clubs do the talking.

Agreed, and the point goes to Byers.