Opinion & Analysis
Singh’s lawsuit vs. the PGA Tour is about to turn dirty

There’s a saying lawyers like to use when talking to a client about whether it’s worth litigating a case, and in its various forms it goes something like this:
You should always be careful before you decide to wrestle with a pig. Because only two things are guaranteed to happen: you get dirty and the pig likes it.
Never has that been truer than in the case of Singh v. PGA Tour. A recent ruling by the trial judge has blown the case wide open. The judge has issued an order that documents exchanged by the parties are no longer confidential and no longer have to be redacted. That means all documents filed in court are open record and the media will now have full access, which could be a game changer that will test the PGA Tour’s resolve to continue its defense against Singh.
A couple disclaimers: 1) I haven’t spoken to any of the parties in the case and, most importantly, 2) I’m not aware of the terms of the agreement a PGA Tour player signs to play each year.
Before we get into how we got to the point where this case may actually go to trial, let’s do a brief look back at how we got here.
In early 2013, the PGA Tour suspended Vijay Singh for using deer antler spray as a performance enhancing drug. Singh appealed the suspension and late in the process, the PGA Tour dropped the case after the World Doping Agency said it was not longer worried about the antler spray’s use.
In May of 2013, Singh, not one to lay down, sued the PGA Tour alleging a number of different causes of action including: infliction of emotional distress, breach of the membership agreement and breach of an implied warranty of good faith and fair dealing. The judge threw out the majority of the claims Singh brought, but allowed the claims of breach of good faith and fair dealing to go forward.
In non-legal terms, a breach of good faith and fair dealing means exactly what it sounds like. Basically, Singh is claiming the PGA Tour had a responsibility to treat him fairly and because it didn’t, Singh suffered damages. Last we heard he is alleging around $5 million in damages.
Evidence of such damages would be ridicule and public embarrassment such as the image below.
Singh’s allegations of unfair treatment stem from his contention the deer antler spray didn’t include any banned substances as listed ingredients. He also correctly notes the testing laboratory found no anabolic steroids as active ingredients. His final attack against the PGA Tour is likely his strongest.
When he gave notice of electing his right to appeal the suspension, the PGA Tour told him he would be allowed to play pending his appeal. But any money he earned during the appeal process would be put in an escrow account. So if Singh lost the appeal-he would lose the escrowed money. Singh maintains this constitutes bad faith as no other pro has ever been subjected to the same treatment while appealing.
Making things worse for the PGA Tour is the fact they later dropped the suspension and Singh learned of at least five other golfers who used the spray and were never suspended.
When Singh’s lawyer responded to a question from Golf.com regarding whether Singh was prepared to go to trial, he said, “Absolutely.” Remember the pig analogy above? Well in this case, Singh is the “pig.” That’s not a bad thing, either.
What it means in this case is his lawyers get to go look through document after document the PGA Tour has and turn up any “mud” they can. They will see the PGA Tour’s policies on suspensions and whether any other golfers were received the same treatment. The PGA Tour doesn’t have the same chance against Singh. He already admitted he used the spray, everything else is pretty much irrelevant.
A recent ruling by the trial judge has made the case more precarious for the PGA Tour.
Up until now, documents filed in court had to be heavily redacted due to confidentiality. Now they don’t, meaning all the documents filed in court become public record. You, me and anyone else can go to the courthouse and make copies of any documents filed.
It’s rarely a “win” when the inner workings of a business are made public. Customers get to see, competitors get information and for the most part none of it is good. The PGA Tour now has to choose if they want information made public or if they should try to resolve the case… and how much does that cost?
There is a reason Roger Goodell did not want to testify in the case of deflated footballs against Tom Brady. It had very little to do with a deflated football. It had everything to do with how the NFL makes decisions, because professional sports leagues are just like any other business — they want to keep certain information private.
There is likely a greater than 75 percent chance this case settles before ever getting to trial. Less than 1 precent of cases go to trial and the PGA Tour has very little benefit from making this more public. If winning the case results in unwanted information becoming public, how much of a win is it really?
If the case gets to trial, there is a very real chance it turns ugly. Singh’s lawyer will put Tim Finchem on the stand and grill him over the PGA Tour’s policies and why they treated Singh differently. Finchem will have to respond and will have to tell the truth. It’s very possible there is testimony regarding other players suspensions and why they were treated differently than Singh.
And if you don’t think Finchem is sweating the case, he walked out of his deposition with Singh’s lawyer and refused to return — something I have never seen in my years of practice.
Singh doesn’t have those issues. The PGA Tour already aired his dirty laundry. The question now is, how much are they about to pay for it?
Opinion & Analysis
The 2 primary challenges golf equipment companies face

As the editor-in-chief of this website and an observer of the GolfWRX forums and other online golf equipment discourse for over a decade, I’m pretty well attuned to the grunts and grumbles of a significant portion of the golf equipment purchasing spectrum. And before you accuse me of lording above all in some digital ivory tower, I’d like to offer that I worked at golf courses (public and private) for years prior to picking up my pen, so I’m well-versed in the non-degenerate golf equipment consumers out there. I touched (green)grass (retail)!
Complaints about the ills of and related to the OEMs usually follow some version of: Product cycles are too short for real innovation, tour equipment isn’t the same as retail (which is largely not true, by the way), too much is invested in marketing and not enough in R&D, top staffer X hasn’t even put the new driver in play, so it’s obviously not superior to the previous generation, prices are too high, and on and on.
Without digging into the merits of any of these claims, which I believe are mostly red herrings, I’d like to bring into view of our rangefinder what I believe to be the two primary difficulties golf equipment companies face.
One: As Terry Koehler, back when he was the CEO of Ben Hogan, told me at the time of the Ft Worth irons launch, if you can’t regularly hit the golf ball in a coin-sized area in the middle of the face, there’s not a ton that iron technology can do for you. Now, this is less true now with respect to irons than when he said it, and is less and less true by degrees as the clubs get larger (utilities, fairways, hybrids, drivers), but there remains a great deal of golf equipment truth in that statement. Think about it — which is to say, in TL;DR fashion, get lessons from a qualified instructor who will teach you about the fundamentals of repeatable impact and how the golf swing works, not just offer band-aid fixes. If you can’t repeatably deliver the golf club to the golf ball in something resembling the manner it was designed for, how can you expect to be getting the most out of the club — put another way, the maximum value from your investment?
Similarly, game improvement equipment can only improve your game if you game it. In other words, get fit for the clubs you ought to be playing rather than filling the bag with the ones you wish you could hit or used to be able to hit. Of course, don’t do this if you don’t care about performance and just want to hit a forged blade while playing off an 18 handicap. That’s absolutely fine. There were plenty of members in clubs back in the day playing Hogan Apex or Mizuno MP-32 irons who had no business doing so from a ballstriking standpoint, but they enjoyed their look, feel, and complementary qualities to their Gatsby hats and cashmere sweaters. Do what brings you a measure of joy in this maddening game.
Now, the second issue. This is not a plea for non-conforming equipment; rather, it is a statement of fact. USGA/R&A limits on every facet of golf equipment are detrimental to golf equipment manufacturers. Sure, you know this, but do you think about it as it applies to almost every element of equipment? A 500cc driver would be inherently more forgiving than a 460cc, as one with a COR measurement in excess of 0.83. 50-inch shafts. Box grooves. And on and on.
Would fewer regulations be objectively bad for the game? Would this erode its soul? Fortunately, that’s beside the point of this exercise, which is merely to point out the facts. The fact, in this case, is that equipment restrictions and regulations are the slaughterbench of an abundance of innovation in the golf equipment space. Is this for the best? Well, now I’ve asked the question twice and might as well give a partial response, I guess my answer to that would be, “It depends on what type of golf you’re playing and who you’re playing it with.”
For my part, I don’t mind embarrassing myself with vintage blades and persimmons chasing after the quasi-spiritual elevation of a well-struck shot, but that’s just me. Plenty of folks don’t give a damn if their grooves are conforming. Plenty of folks think the folks in Liberty Corner ought to add a prison to the museum for such offences. And those are just a few of the considerations for the amateur game — which doesn’t get inside the gallery ropes of the pro game…
Different strokes in the game of golf, in my humble opinion.
Anyway, I believe equipment company engineers are genuinely trying to build better equipment year over year. The marketing departments are trying to find ways to make this equipment appeal to the broadest segment of the golf market possible. All of this against (1) the backdrop of — at least for now — firm product cycles. And golfers who, with their ~15 average handicap (men), for the most part, are not striping the golf ball like Tiger in his prime and seem to have less and less time year over year to practice and improve. (2) Regulations that massively restrict what they’re able to do…
That’s the landscape as I see it and the real headwinds for golf equipment companies. No doubt, there’s more I haven’t considered, but I think the previous is a better — and better faith — point of departure when formulating any serious commentary on the golf equipment world than some of the more cynical and conspiratorial takes I hear.
Agree? Disagree? Think I’m worthy of an Adam Hadwin-esque security guard tackle? Let me know in the comments.
@golfoncbs The infamous Adam Hadwin tackle ? #golf #fyp #canada #pgatour #adamhadwin ? Ghibli-style nostalgic waltz – MaSssuguMusic
Podcasts
Fore Love of Golf: Introducing a new club concept

Episode #16 brings us Cliff McKinney. Cliff is the founder of Old Charlie Golf Club, a new club, and concept, to be built in the Florida panhandle. The model is quite interesting and aims to make great, private golf more affordable. We hope you enjoy the show!
Opinion & Analysis
On Scottie Scheffler wondering ‘What’s the point of winning?’

Last week, I came across a reel from BBC Sport on Instagram featuring Scottie Scheffler speaking to the media ahead of The Open at Royal Portrush. In it, he shared that he often wonders what the point is of wanting to win tournaments so badly — especially when he knows, deep down, that it doesn’t lead to a truly fulfilling life.
View this post on Instagram
“Is it great to be able to win tournaments and to accomplish the things I have in the game of golf? Yeah, it brings tears to my eyes just to think about it because I’ve literally worked my entire life to be good at this sport,” Scheffler said. “To have that kind of sense of accomplishment, I think, is a pretty cool feeling. To get to live out your dreams is very special, but at the end of the day, I’m not out here to inspire the next generation of golfers. I’m not out here to inspire someone to be the best player in the world, because what’s the point?”
Ironically — or perhaps perfectly — he went on to win the claret jug.
That question — what’s the point of winning? — cuts straight to the heart of the human journey.
As someone who’s spent over two decades in the trenches of professional golf, and in deep study of the mental, emotional, and spiritual dimensions of the game, I see Scottie’s inner conflict as a sign of soul evolution in motion.
I came to golf late. I wasn’t a junior standout or college All-American. At 27, I left a steady corporate job to see if I could be on the PGA Tour starting as a 14-handicap, average-length hitter. Over the years, my journey has been defined less by trophies and more by the relentless effort to navigate the deeply inequitable and gated system of professional golf — an effort that ultimately turned inward and helped me evolve as both a golfer and a person.
One perspective that helped me make sense of this inner dissonance around competition and our culture’s tendency to overvalue winning is the idea of soul evolution.
The University of Virginia’s Division of Perceptual Studies has done extensive research on reincarnation, and Netflix’s Surviving Death (Episode 6) explores the topic, too. Whether you take it literally or metaphorically, the idea that we’re on a long arc of growth — from beginner to sage elder — offers a profound perspective.
If you accept the premise literally, then terms like “young soul” and “old soul” start to hold meaning. However, even if we set the word “soul” aside, it’s easy to see that different levels of life experience produce different worldviews.
Newer souls — or people in earlier stages of their development — may be curious and kind but still lack discernment or depth. There is a naivety, and they don’t yet question as deeply, tending to see things in black and white, partly because certainty feels safer than confronting the unknown.
As we gain more experience, we begin to experiment. We test limits. We chase extreme external goals — sometimes at the expense of health, relationships, or inner peace — still operating from hunger, ambition, and the fragility of the ego.
It’s a necessary stage, but often a turbulent and unfulfilling one.
David Duval fell off the map after reaching World No. 1. Bubba Watson had his own “Is this it?” moment with his caddie, Ted Scott, after winning the Masters.
In Aaron Rodgers: Enigma, reflecting on his 2011 Super Bowl win, Rodgers said:
“Now I’ve accomplished the only thing that I really, really wanted to do in my life. Now what? I was like, ‘Did I aim at the wrong thing? Did I spend too much time thinking about stuff that ultimately doesn’t give you true happiness?’”
Jim Carrey once said, “I think everybody should get rich and famous and do everything they ever dreamed of so they can see that it’s not the answer.”
Eventually, though, something shifts.
We begin to see in shades of gray. Winning, dominating, accumulating—these pursuits lose their shine. The rewards feel more fleeting. Living in a constant state of fight-or-flight makes us feel alive, yes, but not happy and joyful.
Compassion begins to replace ambition. Love, presence, and gratitude become more fulfilling than status, profits, or trophies. We crave balance over burnout. Collaboration over competition. Meaning over metrics.
Interestingly, if we zoom out, we can apply this same model to nations and cultures. Countries, like people, have a collective “soul stage” made up of the individuals within them.
Take the United States, for example. I’d place it as a mid-level soul: highly competitive and deeply driven, but still learning emotional maturity. Still uncomfortable with nuance. Still believing that more is always better. Despite its global wins, the U.S. currently ranks just 23rd in happiness (as of 2025). You might liken it to a gifted teenager—bold, eager, and ambitious, but angsty and still figuring out how to live well and in balance. As much as a parent wants to protect their child, sometimes the child has to make their own mistakes to truly grow.
So when Scottie Scheffler wonders what the point of winning is, I don’t see someone losing strength.
I see someone evolving.
He’s beginning to look beyond the leaderboard. Beyond metrics of success that carry a lower vibration. And yet, in a poetic twist, Scheffler did go on to win The Open. But that only reinforces the point: even at the pinnacle, the question remains. And if more of us in the golf and sports world — and in U.S. culture at large — started asking similar questions, we might discover that the more meaningful trophy isn’t about accumulating or beating others at all costs.
It’s about awakening and evolving to something more than winning could ever promise.
Stan Fletcher
Oct 8, 2016 at 4:27 pm
The tour screwed up by failing to be consistent. No reason to penalize VJ and not others who were equally guilty. The case will most likely be settled, but if pursued by VJ it will not paint a pretty picture either of him or the PGA Tour.
Boobsy McKiss
Sep 15, 2016 at 8:06 pm
Would love to see all the policies and numbers of the PGA come to public view. First time I’ve ever rooted for Vijay. Stick it to the man Vij!
Adam
Sep 15, 2016 at 2:54 pm
It seems strange that none of the other big golf websites (golf.com, golfdigest.com, golfchannel.com) have posted anything about this lately. I’m not a conspiracy guy, but I can’t help but wonder if they don’t want to upset the PGA Tour.
Chuck
Sep 14, 2016 at 8:42 pm
I have seen (rarely) lawyers terminate depositions and walk out. Even rarer would be a litigant walking out, but it has happened. I think Trump did it once in one of his libel cases.
Usually, unless there is a very good reason, the trial judge will sanction the party who walked out. A party could potentially be defaulted, depending on circumstances.
Tim Finchem is a lawyer himself; and the sanctions for his walkout would, I expect, be very serious unless he had a tremendously good reason that is demonstrated on the transcript.
Pingback: Golf Dispute Resolution · Pigs And Trials: Vijay Singh v. PGA Tour
Justin
Sep 14, 2016 at 1:20 pm
I’m not particularly fond of Vijay, but I think he is right in this case. The PGA tour and other sports federations need to be exposed for the “good ol’ boys clubs” that they are.
Michael
Sep 15, 2016 at 3:25 pm
I’m not sure why you felt it was relevant to tell us you are “not particularly fond of Vijay”, but you think he is right in this case. There is an inference in your comment that under your version of normal circumstances you would not extend/support Vijay’s exercise of his rights and legal remedies, but this time you will make an exception. Is that how you feel about people you “are not particularly fond of”?
Mitch Young
Sep 14, 2016 at 1:10 pm
Good on Vijay. we can be pretty sure this isn’t about the money, but something that stems from his upbringing that he felt he was treated unfairly by the tour he has supported for all these years. Since he has the means to pursue this to the fullest extent, the pga tour will no doubt try to sweep this under the carpet and settle out of court.
Dave r
Sep 14, 2016 at 12:03 pm
Good for you V.j. Give it them
ooffa
Sep 14, 2016 at 10:26 am
Oh Deer!!!!!!
Flip
Sep 14, 2016 at 8:40 am
Sand groid
Jack Nash
Sep 14, 2016 at 8:32 am
Looks like there could be some “Character” issues with the PGA. That being the case maybe the PGA will do the same with Singh. Like was he in or out of “Character” when he was found cheating on the Euro Tour many years ago. Character actions are a two way street. If at the time( and it’s obvious) Singh figured that the Spray would help, because he’d heard it would that would give him an unfair advantage over other players, he used it. At the time WADA had that spray on its banned list. The PGA is not a testing org. so they went with Wada’s regs. and sat Singh out, until it was found that the spray was ok to use. I think that the lawsuit is more about Singh being caught and embarrassed that he was found out again that he figured he needed to sue.
Chris
Sep 14, 2016 at 12:09 pm
Yup. Would be interesting to watch all of them throw the other under the bus…..
Joey
Sep 14, 2016 at 3:29 pm
Singh wasn’t the only player found to be using it, but oddly enough he was the only player benched by the Tour. Then, when reativated, he was the only player not allowed to keep his earnings. The PGA couldn’t be more wrong and that is what he is going to prove. Why was one of the only minority players on the Tour treated differently than the white players who were found using the same substance? That is going to be the $5,000,000 question that the Tour doesn’t want to answer.
I personally don’t think he was using it as a performance enhancer. In Eastern Medicine, which I know he is a believer, it is prescribed, meaning the physician provides it for you, for different types of injury healing. I’ve Benin prescribed it before and used it, don’t know if it was the only reason I healed well though. Regardless, being Vijay is the only unfair advantage he needs because no one out works that guy. I hope he takes it all the way and the Tour regrets ever picking this fight with him. The Tour bullies players into doing their bidding all the time. I’m glad someone finally stood up to the Tour.
Tim
Sep 14, 2016 at 6:17 pm
Actually it wasn’t banned when he was suspended and I don’t think it was banned when he took it. Unfortunately the PGA Tour didn’t pay enough attention to the WADA memos and missed that they had removed the spray from the banned list a number of years ago. That’s another big reason why the PGA Tour is screwed. Essentially they treated a player differently, suspended him and made him look like he was cheating, when he didn’t actually break any rules.
Michael
Sep 15, 2016 at 3:40 pm
Then tell us why it seems Vijay was treated differently than other players. The primary premise of his action seems to rest on “breach of an implied warranty of good faith and fair dealing.” I would guess you skipped over that. Do you understand what that cause of action actually means or did you decide to simply go for your admitted dislike for Vijay despite that little qualifier designed to make it look like you were a reasonable guy and would overlook the fact you can’t stand him?
Your line of thought really doesn’t hold much water and is based on a bit of character assassination that goes back to an incident from many years ago. That incident itself, seems to have a lot of different interpretations as to what really happened. It would be understandable that because of that, Vijay felt it was even more necessary for him to mount an aggressive defense.
You make quite a few assumptions regarding what Vijay thought and why he has handled this as he has. All of them are unsupported by facts or evidence. They aren’t even hearsay.
Just wondering … How do you feel about Tiger Woods and what were you saying when his personal life spilled out into the public arena?
Sing
Sep 14, 2016 at 8:24 am
I hope he pursues this to the fullest. He does not seem like a person only after money, so I bet he will continue to push the envelope.
Roy Hobbs
Sep 14, 2016 at 6:21 pm
Vijay is all about the money.
And I think the number will end up considerably higher than $5mil.
M Schnitzel
Sep 14, 2016 at 7:43 am
Good for Vijay! Stick it to the man!