In 1984, as the winner of eight major championships, including five British Opens, Tom Watson was at the peak of his earning power. And with commercial attachments bringing in $1.5 million per year, he was the undisputed first serious earner in American golf.

Yet Watson never chased money. Indeed he turned down numerous, lucrative offers because he hadn't sufficient respect for the product, or the people involved. A million dollars was put into tax-exempt bonds, before he dabbled in anything more venturesome. His accountant at the time, Arnold Brown, said: "Tom has managed himself so well that when he quits playing golf, he can sit in his living room and look out the window for the rest of his life, if he wants to."

At the end of last year, Watson was 24th in the world career money list, his tournament earnings of $11,376,904 being almost half those of the biggest earner, Greg Norman ($20,975,766). Fred Couples was the leading American in third place on $17,912,228, Mark O'Meara was 13th on $13,453,641 and the world's greatest player, Jack Nicklaus, was 33rd on $10,293,691.

Last year, Tiger Woods headed the world's tournament earnings with $2,927,946; David Duval was second on $2,855,489 and O'Meara was fifth on $2,677,788. Lee Westwood was the leading European with $2,814,153 for fourth place.

Why all the figures? Well, I thought they might provide an interesting backdrop to the controversy in the US whereby current, leading players believe they should be paid for the Ryder Cup. It is part of a money culture which seems to be dominating American sport. And it is clearly unhealthy as far as golf is concerned.

It seems richly ironic that the most sense talked on the subject this week came from the product of an emerging golfing nation. Denmark's Thomas Bjorn, who gained the distinction of a halved singles with Justin Leonard at Valderrama two years ago, said of the Americans: "Over there, the game is mostly about money, whereas here it is a little different.

"It is only us and the Aussies who still feel respect for the game. Respect is not something you can take to the bank, but it is priceless."

Last December, an American team travelled to Melbourne apparently in the belief that the President's Cup matches against the International team would be something of a paid holiday. But the opposition spoiled the fun by competing well enough to win by 20 1/2 to 11 1/2.

Two weeks ago we had several of the same Americans complaining bitterly about the way Carnoustie was set up for the British Open. And again, they failed to respond to what they perceived as an unfair challenge. Now, after losing the last two stagings of the Ryder Cup, they want to think of it as no more than an exhibition.

An inevitable conclusion from all of this is that American players would somehow rediscover their competitive instincts, if sufficient money were made available: that pride in one's country or tour is secondary to financial rewards. In such a scenario, it is clearly not possible to serve golf and mammon.

"I'm mad I didn't go. I screwed up. I wish I had gone. I owed it to myself." - An extremely contrite Tommy Armour III, on not trying to qualify for the British Open at Carnoustie, where his grandfather won the title in 1931.

When I had a lengthy chat with David Feherty at Harbour Town 15 months ago, he claimed everything he had done in golf was by way of leading him to his current position behind a microphone with CBS. For a short time earlier this week, he might have had some doubts on the matter. Then destiny took a hand.

Last Monday and Tuesday, Feherty competed in the 36-hole Fred Couples Invitational at Newcastle in Washington State - and shared the first round lead with Scott McCarron after a splendid 66. But before being beset by wild thoughts of attempting to regain a player's card, the Bangor man started his second round with three bogeys and a double-bogey to run up a dispiriting 77.

"I'm glad this was only two days," he said, in reference to his progressive score. "I don't think I could have handled an 88." For the record, victory and a top prize of $130,000 went to Nolan Henke after a four-hole playoff with McCarron.

Meriel Tufnell, Britain's first woman champion jockey, recently displayed remarkable endurance on the golf course. And in the process, the sportswoman who was born with dislocated hips and has had to cope with chronic asthma, raised £3,500 for a children's charity.

It involved no fewer than seven rounds of matchplay in one day, at the Sandford Springs club in Hampshire. Accompanied by her dog Tickle, Tufnell set off at 4.38 a.m. against the local professional Gary Edmunds and finished 14 hours and 125 holes later, with a victory by 17 and 15. In the course of the marathon, Tufnell carded no fewer than 47 birdies and 47 pars.

This day in golf history: On July 31st, 1983, Jan Stephenson won the US Women's Open at the Cedar Ridge CC in Tulsa, Oklahoma. The then 31-year-old from Sydney, Australia, edged out Americans JoAnne Carner and Patty Sheehan by one stroke, with a six-over-par aggregate of 290.

It was to be a highly successful season for one of the most glamorous players on the LPGA Tour. Stephenson also won the Tucson Conquistadores PGA, the Lady Keystone and then partnered Fred Couples to success in the J C Penney Classic, bringing her tournament earnings for the year to $193,364.

In Brief: Last Monday at Royal Dublin, the Links Society helped the Special Olympics through the staging of the Des Smyth/Mitsubishi Motors Classic. Now, as chairperson of the organisation, Cyril Freaney informs me that the Special Olympics are running their own Golf Classic at Powerscourt next Friday, August 6th. Further information from (01) 872 0300 . . . In a recent piece about Carlow GC, I erroneously attributed the research and writing of their centenary book to Bill Gibson. It was in fact researched and written by Joe McDonald, the club historian. Gibson was the editor.

Teaser: In a match, A incurred a penalty stroke under Rule 12-2 for lifting his ball for identification without announcing his intention to B, his opponent. A did not penalise himself and B did not make a claim because neither A nor B was aware a penalty had been incurred. Should the committee disqualify A and B under Rule 1-3 for agreeing to waive a penalty?

Answer: No. Since the players were not aware a penalty had been incurred, there could have been no agreement between them to waive the penalty.