Playboy not kind of exposure LPGA needs

The Constitution gives all Americans the inalienable right to pose naked for national magazines.

It’s in the same amendment that gives us the right to make fools of ourselves in public by revealing our most intimate secrets on daytime TV talk shows.

So if one of the women on the LPGA Tour has the urge to take up an offer to strip for Playboy, she certainly has every right to do it.

No one should be under the illusion, though, that flaunting flesh will be wonderful for the sport, that it would either boost TV ratings or lure more fans.

The LPGA Tour, which has conservative sponsors, isn’t wild about the idea and surely isn’t pushing it. But if a player wants to bare all for money and, uh, exposure, the tour’s commissioner won’t stand in her way. Buried in the shadow of Tigermania, the women’s tour can use all the publicity it can get.

For decades, the LPGA has kicked around the issue of whether success depends on sex appeal. Would more people watch if the women paid greater attention to their makeup and hairstyles and wore sexier clothes on the courses? Would ratings jump if a few of the women modeled bikinis or showed off their birthday suits?

It’s a hot topic again because TV ratings are soft even with strong fields and a leader with a dynamic game like Annika Sorenstam.

Carin Koch, the player whom Playboy readers most wanted to see pose nude, declined. Jill McGill, who finished second in the poll, is pondering posing.

“I would encourage her to ask as many intelligent questions as she could and make up her own mind about that, which is her right,” commissioner Ty Votaw said.

Votaw held a three-day summit in Phoenix recently on how to boost the LPGA’s popularity. He didn’t focus on sex appeal as much as he did on being fan friendly, and he came up with “Five Points of Celebrity performance, passion, relevance, appearance and approachability.”

“They all intersect,” Votaw said. “I’m not talking about being drop-dead gorgeous, but people and sponsors are drawn to those who look and act professional. And when you show more joy and relevance, that only makes you more attractive.”

The LPGA has always dealt with perceived image problems. A decade ago it was perceptions about how many lesbians were on the tour and whether that mattered or not. That seemed to go away when there was a baby boom among some of the married players.

Did it make a difference in ratings how the women were viewed? Very little. Gay golfers had, and still have, a following, as do single straight women of all shapes and sizes, and moms with or without their babies in tow.

Avid fans who play golf and want to learn how to play it better, or who just like to watch great players hit the ball, don’t care much how the women look or what they do off the course. Similarly, people who don’t care for golf aren’t going to be drawn to it in great numbers because of the players’ sex appeal.

Tiger Woods boosted PGA Tour ratings and purses because he came on with the whole irresistible package. He was young and fresh with a winning smile and a fiercely competitive nature. He was a blend of ethnic races in a traditionally white game, a lean athlete among paunchy smokers. Most of all, he hit the heck out of the ball, blew fields away with ridiculous ease and made history, it seemed, every time he played. You had to watch him whether you played golf or not.

A naked LPGA player might sell magazines and get a little richer. But if she thinks she’ll sell the sport, she’s mistaken. What the LPGA needs is a great player with genuine charisma. Stripping won’t do it.