Golf for the Sake of Honor?

By Chris Carpenter & Jesse Carey

Everyone enjoys a good debate, right?  Well, Jesse Carey and I have been kicking this topic around for the better part of a week.  We are curious to hear what you think.  So, rather than the two of us continually jabbing each other with our polarizing views, listen to what we have to say and then give us your feedback.  We are quite interested to hear what think. 

Chris’s Viewpoint:

University of St. Francis golfer Grant Whybark became the centerpiece of a national sports debate last week when he decided to intentionally lose his conference’s individual tournament so that his opponent could advance to the NAIA national finals.

I should mention that Whybark had already qualified for the national finals a week before when his team won the Chicagoland Collegiate Athletic Conference tournament.  Thus, with a victory in the individual tournament he would have qualified twice for the national finals.

So, in an act of what I believe to be true sportsmanship, Whybark intentionally double-bogeyed a playoff hole to allow Seth Doran of Olivet University to qualify for the nationals for the first time.

I ask what is wrong with this?  Whybark had already qualified for the tournament and was only trying to extend an opportunity to a player who in his four years of collegiate golf had never had that chance.

Said Whybark to ESPN Radio, "I talked with my team about it. The whole goal of the conference tournament is to advance to nationals. As soon as I had done that, not a whole lot else made a difference to me. And the kid has earned his spot, as everyone else did in the tournament. That's my position on it."

Sometimes the game of golf comes down to a series of near misses – a putt that comes up an inch short of falling in the cup, a tremendous approach shot that lands in a divot, a sudden gust of wind that causes a drive to go 20 yards too far.  The end result is a lost stroke here or there that can keep a player from winning or losing.  Perhaps Seth Doran was in the same spot for reasons I have mentioned above.  Why deny someone when you have the resources to help?  To his credit, Whybark demonstrated an ample amount of grace by giving Doran a second chance.

From my vantage point Whybark was simply trying to help someone he had grown to admire and respect over several seasons of competition.  His gesture shows a tremendous sense of self-sacrifice and courage to extend such an opportunity to another.  What honorable qualities for a young man to have!

For me, it is always refreshing to see one athlete trying to help another even when the sports world seems to be revolving around sex scandals, steroids, and scathing comments between former teammates.

Finally, doesn’t Grant’s last name say it all – Why-bark?

Jesse's Viewpoint:

While Grant Whybark’s actions were no doubt a show of generosity that helped a friend out, I don’t think he was helping out the game of golf.

There are times when sports serve as a larger allegory for life. I think that, to an extent, this is why so many people love following their favorite teams. Life, like sports, is full of struggles and conflicts, difficult match ups and rewards for hard work. We relate to our favorite athletes and local teams. But unlike life, success in sports is only measured by one thing—winning.

In our modern day culture, too often political correctness trumps hard lessons about losing and learning how to fail. Today in some little league games and on the pee-wee field, “everyone is a winner” and there is no score. When the game is over, no feels like they lost. No one feels like they failed.

And that is the problem.

Anyone can feel great after winning. It’s easy being a winner—we all like feeling good about ourselves. No one has to be taught to be a winner. Losing, on the other hand, is tough. Learning how to lose—and how to do it with grace and class—builds character.

Would not getting a spot in the national tournament be hard for Doran to deal with it? Maybe. But, that’s the point of playing a sport—you have to learn to lose, if you ever want to know what it’s like to win. Maybe he should have practiced a little harder. Maybe he should have played a little different. Maybe, he just wasn’t good enough. Losing lets you examine yourself—and lets you recognize what can make you better.

The great thing about keeping score is that numbers are objective. In sports, winning and losing are black and white. And that’s my problem with what Whybark did. When you intentionally manipulate the outcome of a game and the score doesn’t truly reflect how the game was played, you’re not just compromising the integrity of the game; you’re compromising the idea of winning. And, maybe more importantly, you’re compromising the idea of losing.

Whybark may have given Doran a free spot in the tournament, but he took from him an opportunity to better himself.