Thanks to Geoff Shackelford for the tip to John Huggan's Sunday piece that wraps up a variety of the week's news.  He properly nails Jack Nicklaus for his Neiman Marcus fiasco and - in my opinion - Billy Payne for announcing all of 10 yards in changes to Augusta National's Masters tees.

But, he also gets into a discussion of how the US golf media is talking trash about the Race to Dubai.

OVER the last few weeks much has been written about the European Tour's new-fangled and big-bucked 'Race to Dubai.' The often insular US press, as you'd expect, has been generally scornful, sniffily reminding their readers that Europe's circuit is rife with appearance fees and, Anthony Kim apart, bereft of Americans willing to leave the comfort zone that is the PGA Tour.

Of course, this isn't directed at me, but there are not many other writers aside from myself considering the topic and its real impact on golf.  I have to approach this from that angle - what I've said to date.

The best part of the above quoted paragraph is that it is all true.  There are appearance fees and Anthony Kim is the biggest American name to join the circuit (though Lefty is inevitable).  Also, don't forget to add that the Euro and the British Pound are floundering by the day against the US Dollar.  At least we can all say that we're making some serious gains on the Russian Ruple.

The reality, though, is that the Race to Dubai isn't as great as European Tour Commissioner George O'Grady made it sound when he announced the 2008-2009 schedule just a few short weeks ago. 

O'Grady and David Spencer, CEO of Dubai-based Leisurecorp and the Tour's new best friend, both spoke of how wise they were to avoid financial companies in much of their backing.  Simultaneously, they announced a schedule with 11 TBDs. 

Also, they jointly kickstarted a venture backed by a massive, state-backed real estate development company.  If you think Bobby Ginn is in deep right now, Leisurecorp is positioned with ten times the portfolio.  Provided that the Euro Zone is in recession, Russia and China are fading quickly, and entrepreneurs may have to horde their own money to be able to keep their businesses afloat, it would seem an irony risk to make their boastful claim.

That said, though, Huggan does have a point when he says that the Race to Dubai is a work in progress.  It is progress.  Though the Leisurecorp investment comes with serious risks - too much non-golf influence, global real estate collapse, dependence upon single source funding - it is a huge gain for the European Tour.  In order to grow the circuit, bring Euro-born stars home more often, and unify an expanding Tour map, O'Grady had almost no choice.  He did the right thing.

It's good for golf, too.  The Euro Tour host courses are set up with a more appealing style than the numbing consistency of the PGA Tour.  Euro Tour growth may cause the PGA Tour to reconsider how it approaches course set up and selection.  The combination of competition and, perhaps temporary, some liberty thanks to USGA regulations will do wonders for the kind of golf that works Stateside.

The Race to Dubai may also inspire a professional golf rendition of Risk with the European Tour, PGA Tour, Asian Tour, and the yet-to-be-formed OneAsia Tour as players.  The golf influence map may now be in flux in a way never seen in the game.  Two relatively unclaimed continents - South America and Africa - are in the mix.  The folks in Ponte Vedra may consider taking the Tour through more parts of the Americas.  The other three contestants may take on each other to claim three other continents.  The game will evolve, though, as a result and that is good.

So, yes, the Race to Dubai is a good thing.  Unlike Stephen Colbert's line of questioning, though, you cannot tell me that the European Tour is a great tour or the greatest tour.  Rather, it's now a good tour striving for greatness.  Given the state of financial affairs here in the United States, that may be better than being in the position of the PGA Tour - a great tour facing a downgrade.