Why Did He Pick Woods as Secretary of Inferior?

This is the anniversary of the two words that Tiger Woods did not want to hear: inferior equipment. Yes, those were the good old days of golf controversy, when Phil Mickelson said Tiger had to be good because he proved he still could win despite using “inferior equipment.”

Mickelson made his comment in an interview in a golf magazine that was published one year ago this week, and it had the rare effect of angering just about everyone involved.

Tiger was angry because he was sure Mickelson was wrong.

Mickelson was angry for the opposite reason.

Nike was angry because it made the clubs Mickelson was talking about.

Golf writers were angry because they found it impossible to blow the issue out of proportion.

It didn’t take long for everyone to issue their rebuttals and assume their positions. There was so much spin, Earth could have assumed a new axis. As far as issues go, this one was delicious -- the top two players in the world in a battle of words. What would they do? Stand back to back, walk 10 paces and hurl titanium drivers at each other?

As it turned out, Inferior Equipmentgate was big news for a while, but then it sort of got lost in the shuffle as newer, stranger controversies eclipsed it.

The hot-button issues were Annika Sorenstam at Colonial, Vijay Singh’s reaction to it and Martha Burk’s crusade to force Augusta National to admit a female member, and that’s not even mentioning Tiger’s failing to win a major. The ground shook under the weight of such formidable rumblings.

Now, only 12 months later, it’s clear that Mickelson’s crack about inferior equipment had a far bigger effect than anyone could have expected at the time.

Let’s examine the facts, or at least a reasonable facsimile of them.

Tiger went on to win five tournaments last year. Woods did ditch his driver and went back to his old Titleist model before finally sticking a new Nike Ignite in his bag. He says he does not feel inferior and that he is very happy with it. All this was huge news in 2003.

As for Mickelson, he had an inferior year, his first winless season in four years. This news wasn’t as huge, but close. His equipment hasn’t changed much since 2003, but because he won the Hope, his luck certainly has changed.

Mickelson is still using a Titleist 983K driver, although it’s weighted a little differently from the one he played last year. He also has switched golf balls, from the Pro V1-x to the Pro V1.

Mickelson spent all last year trying to figure out what’s wrong, and this year he’s on top of the world. Woods was the player of the year for the fifth consecutive year, whatever equipment he used. Chances are he could pull into any golf course, borrow some hacker’s sticks and still shoot lights out.

And how did we start the new year at Kapalua? Why, with a new machine to test drivers that might be illegal, or too hot. Thus the pendulum device identifies equipment that is too superior.

No one is willing to say it on the record, but the reason that test is around is because Woods made noises last summer that some players were using illegal drivers. It’s possible that Mickelson’s “inferior equipment” line prompted Woods to take a closer look at everybody’s drivers to check for excessive heat, as well as why they were hitting the ball straighter than he was.

The solution was a pendulum test, voluntary, of course, because the players run their tour and decide the rules themselves.

If they decide to go another direction, they could ask Mickelson for a critique. That worked out so well last time.

As far as fallout goes, “inferior equipment” has shown great durability. Look what it caused: Woods had another standout year, Mickelson was in the dumps but is pulling himself out and “inferior equipment” everywhere is getting tested like no place else.

So, happy anniversary to one of the most infamous offhand comments that golf has heard. For his comments, someone should thank Mickelson too, because it sure would have been a lot duller without them.