IS MICHELLE WIE BAD FOR WOMEN'S GOLF?

SULLIVAN: The answer here would have to be a resounding Yes. Now that might seem insane given Wie's undeniable appeal. But give me a chance. I agree that Wie is an unbelievable athlete. The long drink of water is amazing as she-at all of 16 years old-is driving balls over 300 yards. At 6 feet 1 inch, she is the new coming of the elite, female athlete. That is all well and good. But here is a fact: Michelle Wie has yet to win one LPGA tournament. And before she wins one Major she is already looking to bolt the LPGA and play on the Men's tour.

How about winning one or two LPGA Majors and build women's golf up a little? Then she can go run with the big dogs on the PGA tour. Take a page out of Annika Sorenstam's book. Sorenstam-no matter what Wie supporters say-is still the benchmark for female golfers. The Sweet Swede has won 9 Majors-Tiger Woods has won 10-and 67 LPGA tournaments. She made the LPGA viable and then went on to play the men.

Wie is all about Wie. But the sport is bigger than one golfer. Women's golf could use the cache of a phenom like Wie but she is already looking past what she hasn't even won and wants to blaze a new trail. Wie needs to chop some wood and carry some water on the LPGA tour before she leaves to play the men. This month she didn't even make the cut for the Men's U.S. Open. That she's 16 is moot. Women athletes peek years before men do, so these next few years will be the prime of Wie's golf life. Don't believe me? Take a look at the tennis playing Williams' sisters to see when women athletes reach their peak.

HOLLANDER: The very fact that we are writing this article serves as strong evidence that Michelle Wie is good for women's golf-very good. She gets more attention than all the women on the LPGA tour combined. (Unless of course you count reviews of the Natalie Gulbis calendar or the incessant double-entendre jokes using Paula Creamer's last name. (But that's not exactly the kind of attention we're looking for now is it, C.J.?) Wie's audacity to play men's tournaments-win or lose, qualify or not-elevates the profile of women in golf for all female golfers. More importantly, Wie shows little girls that they can compete with either men or women when they grow up and nobody should tell them differently.

Who cares that she hasn't won an LPGA tournament? Her talent is unquestioned. What Wie does is shine a light on the vanishing point where the worst male professional golfer is no longer better than the best female professional golfer. Like auto racing, billiards and other areas of professional competition, golf is a game where gender matters less and less. Wie still plays in the LPGA, which is no weaker or stronger because of her. I don't see television coverage swarming LPGA tournaments with Wie in them. But when she plays the PGA the media sees something important happening, and so does every girl in America.

She should forgo the PGA because you or I say so? Would you let someone proscriptively limit your potential opportunities? Here's what enlightened feminists decry: Telling a woman how to be a woman. Let's not do that to Michelle Wie.

SULLIVAN: Who cares that Michelle Wie hasn't won an LPGA tournament? She is like the A-Rod of golf-unquestionably talented but not a winner-at least not yet. And since when are you an enlightened feminist? No one is telling women how to be women. All I am asking is that she wins a tournament on the LPGA. She can play with the men as long as she wants but it would be nice to see her win something before we crown her the Queen of female golf. The sports world took note of Sorenstam when she went on her LPGA Major tear. That is a fact. So if Wie won an LPGA Major and then went on to qualify in a PGA tour-like Annika Sorenstam-well then we would have a nice story line.

Yes, Dave, Wie has brought a buzz to golf, but it is a bit of a self-contained buzz. It would be nice to see her star carry the sport to a higher level. Tiger did that for the PGA. Wie going on a LPGA romp would bring more excitement to golf, both men's and woman's golf.

HOLLANDER: It would be helpful if you stuck to the topic. I'm not calling Michelle Wie the "Queen of female golf." What we're asking here is whether she is good for women's golf. History is full of analogous questions. Do you think Billie Jean King was good for women's tennis when she crushed Bobby Riggs? Was Janet Guthrie and is Danica Patrick good for women in auto racing? When Kelly Kulick of Union, N.J., earned her way onto the Pro Bowlers Association tour last week (the first woman ever to do so), was that good for women who bowl? For chrissakes, this stuff goes back to Annie Oakley! (Not to mention the great Babe Didrikson Zaharias.) Every time a woman has tried to break the sex barrier there has always been a man, like you, insisting that she "play with her own." Look, I know the iron in your putter has softened over the years, but why are you so threatened by Wie playing against men? Whenever Michelle Wie plays a PGA tournament, who do think the rank and file female-golf fan or not-is rooting for: Wie or the men? By dissolving professional golf's meaningless sex barrier, Wie also shatters the old-think, gender-separated idea of "women's golf." That's good for both women and golf.

The mistake you make is thinking that the LPGA is "women's golf." These days, you'll find girls playing golf everywhere at every age with boys and other girls. There is no "women's golf" or "men's golf." There's just golf, played by everybody. If you really need to reframe the issue, the more cogent question is this: "Is the LPGA good for women's golf."