US Masters 2025: The Golf Tournament’s Biggest Drama and Controversies

More Augusta drama awaits

It is, without exception, the greatest tournament in golf. Of the four majors, this has the most prestige, glamor, and history.

Of course, I refer to The Masters, which tees off at the Augusta National Golf Course on April 10. The winner will be presented with the famous green jacket in the early evening of April 13.

a tournament that dates back to 1934

It’s known for its beautiful scenery, brilliant golf, and the many legendary golfers who have adorned the famous jacket. But it goes without saying that a tournament that dates back to 1934 has had its fair share of controversies.

Interestingly, it’s a golf club that prides itself on tournament organization that is every bit as pristine and perfect as the greens and fairways, and largely they succeed, so some of the big stories relate to incidents, comments, and actions that occurred off the golf course.   

Let’s start back in the 1950s.

Ben Hogan vs Arnold Palmer (1958)

Back then, Hogan was the golfing legend whose career was starting to fade. It had been five years since he had won a major (the 1953 British Open). Palmer, meanwhile, was the 28-year-old pretender to Hogan’s crown, who had yet to win a Major Championship.

The two were paired together in a pre-tournament practice round and it was tradition that, following the round, those who had practiced together would then each lunch together. But Hogan famously broke with tradition and, probably to deliberately get under the skin of the young pretender, chose to eat lunch at a different table.

If it was an action designed to get a reaction from Palmer, it worked. The young pretender was well aware that this was a break from protocol and made his feelings known.

Hogan’s response is now the stuff of legend: “This Palmer, how did he get in the Masters?”

It was the opening salvo of a frosty relationship that endured. The pair were never destined to be best buddies.

But that week in 1958, it was Palmer who had the last laugh. He went on to beat not just Hogan but everyone else in the field to claim his first-ever major and green jacket.

Arnold Palmer vs Ken Venturi (1958)

But Palmer’s first Augusta victory was far from straightforward. It produced one of the most controversial moments in golfing history.

While his spat with Hogan happened outside of the main four rounds, he crossed swords with Venturi in the white heat of battle during the fourth and deciding round.

The pair were locked at the top of the leaderboard when, on the 12th, Palmer plugged his tee shot in a bunker. He was denied a drop by the officials, so he played the ball out of the bunker and eventually made a double bogey. But he also played a second ball on the same hole and made par.

incident caused him to lose his focus and concentration

While the pair were playing the 13th, the same tournament officials who denied him a drop decided to give Palmer credit for the par he achieved with his second ball. Understandably, it did not land well with Venturi, who claimed that the incident caused him to lose his focus and concentration.

Partly as a result of the controversial par, Palmer went on to claim his first of seven Major Championship titles, while Venturi was left fuming and feeling like he had been cheated out of his first win at Augusta.

Venturi spoke about the incident in his autobiography. “I firmly believe that [Palmer] did wrong, and that he knows that I know he did wrong … that is why, to this day, it has left me with an uncomfortable feeling.”

Jack Whitaker (1966)

TV coverage of The Masters has always been undertaken in the US by CBS, who adhere to the fairly strict and traditional wishes of the PGA and the Augusta National.

The commentators, as a result, tend to stick to facts and rarely offer opinion other than when, as a pundit, they are required to offer them. Even then, they tend to be non-controversial and non-inflammatory. At least they do most of the time.

But during the telecast of The Masters in 1966, famous commentator Jack Whitaker couldn’t help but notice the noisiness and increasing boisterousness of the crowd. So much so, he let slip in his live commentary the phrase “mob scene” when referring to the galleries.

Unsurprisingly, for an event that prides itself on good behavior and good manners, the comment was very badly received. So much so that Whitaker was banned from covering the next five events. He didn’t return to the commentary box until 1972.

Roberto De Vicenzo (1968)

On the fourth day of the 1968 Championship, it looked likely to be heading to a two-way playoff between De Vicenzo and Bob Goalby. That was until, remarkably, De Vicenzo somehow managed to sign an incorrect scorecard because his playing partner, Tommy Aaron, marked him for a par on the 17th instead of a birdie.

greatest faux pas in Masters history

As a result of Aaron’s mistake, the higher score stood, and Goalby went on to win his one and only Major Championship. It was one of the, if not the, greatest faux pas in Masters history.

“What a stupid I am,” was De Vicenzo’s now famous response to the incident.

Ron Townsend (1990)

In September 1990, Townsend became the first African-American to become a member at the Augusta National.

While this in itself was no controversy – although it should have been given that it took them until 1990 to relax their antiquated ruling – it was directly linked to another.

Earlier in that same year, Shoal Creek Golf Club, which hosted that season’s PGA Championship, caused a huge storm when it became known that it had no black members.

To retain the tournament and prevent the PGA from taking it elsewhere, the club reluctantly permitted a local businessman to join as an honorary member.

The PGA, realizing they should never again find themselves in a similar position, made a rule – effective from the beginning of 1991 – that the PGA Tour, PGA of America, and USGA must not hold any events at clubs with discriminatory membership policies.

While Augusta National claimed the timing of Ron Townsend’s induction was a pure coincidence, it was very clear that it was anything but.

Gary McCord (1995)

Jack Whitaker’s commentary controversy of 1966 was supposed to be the only one of its kind, but the Augusta National officials were forced to act again 29 years later.

During the 1995 tournament, another CBS commentator, Gary McCord, was taken to task when he commented that the 17th green appeared to be so slick it appeared “bikini-waxed.”

Not content with just the one ill-judged line, he doubled down on the crass comments by saying there were “body bags” behind Augusta’s greens for players who mishit their approach shots.

Unsurprisingly, neither comment was well received, and three decades later, he still hasn’t been permitted a place back in the Augusta commentary box.

Fuzzy Zoeller (1997)

Zoeller was a popular champion but was also known to make controversial comments at inappropriate times.

champion gets to host a champions dinner

In 1997, he etched himself a place in Masters infamy with a crass comment following Tiger Woods’ first-ever win in Augusta. The tradition at Augusta is that the champion gets to host a champions dinner, to which Zoeller remarked: “Tell him not to serve fried chicken … or collard greens or whatever the hell they serve.”

It was a comment that stayed with Zoeller and, despite him claiming no malice was intended, it saw him lose two of his main sponsors, K-Mart and Dunlop.

Martha Burk (2003)

Not only was Augusta very slow in allowing non-white members to join, but it also operated under the equally archaic premise that female members were not permitted.

So, upset with this men-only membership policy, Burk decided to take on club chairman Hootie Johnson in a very public and, at times, fiery battle.

During the 2003 tournament, Burk led a protest outside the club’s gates, which, although small in number (there were reportedly only around 40 participants), drew national media attention, specifically through the TV networks.

inducted its first two female members: Condoleezza Rice and Darla Moore

At the time, Johnson refused to budge on his stance, but nine years later, the Augusta National – then under the leadership of a new chairman, Billy Payne – inducted its first two female members: Condoleezza Rice and Darla Moore.

“I thought they were going to try to outlast me,” was Burk’s comment to The Associated Press. “But if we had not done what we did, this would not have happened now.”

And she was probably right.

Ernie Els (2004)

Els – who was known as the Big Easy – was almost at the heart of a huge rules controversy when his tee shot at hole 11 of his third round ended up behind a big pile of tree limbs.

He was denied a drop by two separate rules officials but persisted with his protest. Eventually, tournament director Will Nicholson overruled the two officials, and Els went on to make a bogey that kept him in the hunt for the title.

The South African admitted afterwards that he probably would have re-teed, where he would have made a double bogey at the very best.

So why was this almost a huge controversy but not quite?

Well, because on the final day, Phil Mickelson went on to birdie the 18th and beat Els to the green jacket by a single shot.

Rory McIlroy (2009)

A 19-year-old McIlroy caused something of a storm in his second round of the 2009 tournament following what, at the time, appeared to be a fit of pique.

After landing a shot in a bunker on the 18th, the Ulsterman appeared to lose his temper and kick the sand in anger. He proceeded to send his next shot onto the green, where he then two-putted and signed his card for a double bogey.

The incident was noted by the Augusta officials, and he was called back to the club later that evening to review the tape and discuss his actions.

opted not to award him a two-stroke penalty

Despite the evidence suggesting otherwise, McIlroy claimed he was smoothing out the sand and after a lengthy debate, the officials came to the same conclusion. They opted not to award him a two-stroke penalty, which would have seen him disqualified from the tournament for incorrectly signing a scorecard.

He ended up shooting a 286 and finishing in a credible 20th.

Rickie Fowler ( 2011)

McIlroy wasn’t the only youngster to land himself in hot water in the 21st century. US star Fowler also fell foul of Augusta’s exacting standards when, aged 22, he started a pre-tournament press conference with his hat turned back to front.

interview would be terminated

While it may have all been part of Fowler’s then-unique style, Augusta officials demanded that he wore the hat in the traditional way, or the interview would be terminated.

Initially, Fowler resisted and argued that he wore his hat backward so that people could see his face more easily, but the officials were unmoved. Eventually, the young American relented, and we were spared another “Hatgate.”

Scalped tickets (2012)

Scalped tickets are a problem at almost every sporting event, but 2012 saw it reach a whole new level when the strict rules of the Augusta National and Georgia state law combined to cause a mini-crisis.

During the three practice days alone, 41 people were arrested for selling tickets illegally, which, under state law, amounted to disorderly conduct. The main problem was that local laws dictate that Masters tickets cannot be sold within 2,700 feet of the course’s front gates and, crucially, cannot be re-sold to third parties.

Not only were those selling the tickets in big trouble, but fans who bought them also ended up in jail.

Tiger Woods (2013)

Think US Masters and you think Tiger Woods. For good reasons and bad. In 2013, it was the latter for which he was remembered.

During his second round, he had a stroke of bad luck when his approach shot to the 15th striked the pin and deflected off into the water. But the problem came when Tiger took an incorrect drop – something he admitted in a post-round interview with ESPN – which meant he had signed an incorrect scorecard.

deciding to award a two-stroke penalty

Tournament officials met late on the Friday night and early on the Saturday morning to discuss the issue before deciding to award a two-stroke penalty. They didn’t, however, disqualify Woods from the tournament as they concluded they knew about the possible rule break before Woods left the course but hadn’t challenged him.

As a result, Woods received a mixed reaction from the crowd for the final two rounds but, possibly as a result, was never a contender after shooting a pair of 70s and finishing in joint-fourth.

Tiger Woods (2019)

If 2013 was a tournament to forget for Woods, 2019 was the exact opposite. It was the comeback of comebacks.

After several seasons of controversy in his private life and poor form and injuries in his professional life, all of the above were forgotten in four glorious Augusta days in the spring of 2019.

At 43 years old, few expected Woods to win another major, let alone another Masters, but he surprised the golfing world with a 13-under-par 275 to see off the challenge of Dustin Johnson, Brooks Koepka, and Xander Schauffele, who finished on 276.  

It was Woods’ first Masters win since 2005 and left him just behind the great Jack Nicklaus’ record of six wins at Augusta. Woods’ win came 10 years, nine months, and 29 days after his previous last major win – the 2008 US Open.

The post US Masters 2025: The Golf Tournament’s Biggest Drama and Controversies appeared first on Vegas Slots Online News.

Alan Keating Breaks ‘High Stakes Poker’ Record With $1.4m Pot

This is not an April Fool’s joke. I repeat: this is not an April Fool’s Joke (for starters, it would have to be funny). On Monday’s episode of High Stakes Poker, Alan Keating, known for the massive cash game pots in which he gets involved, scooped a $1,412,500 pot, setting a new record for the popular poker show.

Keating’s unfortunate victim was Peter Wang, though anyone who can afford to be on High Stakes Poker can’t be that unfortunate, am I right? It was a double-straddled pot pre-flop and Keating played it slowly, calling $4,000 with K-K on the button. Wang took it up to $14,000 from the big blind with A-3, Keating three-bet it to $69,000, and Wang finally called to bring on the flop.

That flop was a doozy: 2-J-K, putting Keating firmly in the lead with top set, but Wang still had an Ace plus the nut flush draw. A bunch more money went into the middle, as Keating led with a $70,000 bet, Wang check-raised to $200,000, and Keating called.

Keating couldn’t call fast enough

The A turn might have been Wang’s undoing, as it now gave him an actual made hand in addition to his flush draw. He couldn’t move all-in for $434,000 fast enough and Keating couldn’t call fast enough. Before he revealed his Kings, Keating asked Wang if he wanted to run it twice and Wang agreed.

Wang couldn’t believe it when he saw the damage, though he smiled and chuckled, knowing this was poker and he just stepped in it. Neither river card was any help to Wang – they actually both gave his opponent a better hand – and the $1.4m pot was Keating’s.

The old High Stakes Poker record was owned by Santhosh Suvarna, who won $992,000 in a single hand last year.

The post Alan Keating Breaks ‘High Stakes Poker’ Record With $1.4m Pot appeared first on Vegas Slots Online News.

xQc Goes Crazy After Pulling Skeleton Knife in CS:GO Loot Box With 1/2,500,000 Chance

Popular gambling streamer xQc was opening CS:GO 2 loot boxes on Monday after the spring update released new weapon cases when he managed to hit a yellow mystery box, typically carrying very rare prizes.

The Canadian native celebrated wildy when it opened to reveal a sapphire doppler StatTrak Skeleton Knife:

The chances of getting this item are 1/2,500,000, so it’s quite a rare feat for the 29-year-old. These in-game items sell for real money through online marketplaces, with fans speculating that xQc could get a pretty penny if he were to sell.

The post xQc Goes Crazy After Pulling Skeleton Knife in CS:GO Loot Box With 1/2,500,000 Chance appeared first on Vegas Slots Online News.

William Hill Prices Donald Trump at +500 to Upend US Constitution With Third Term

The action

US presidents can’t serve more than two terms in office, but the current man in office Donald Trump has repeatedly said he wants to change the rules and become the first person to do so. Such a shift would require a potential overhaul of the Constitution.

overall favorite for the 2028 presidency is current Vice President JD Vance

Nontheless, leading UK sportsbook operator William Hill clearly thinks it is feasible given that it is now offering odds on Trump returning for a third stint, providing +500 on this outcome. The overall favorite for the 2028 presidency is current Vice President JD Vance at +250, with Donald Trump Jr. and Gavin Newsom at +900.

Despite being born in South Africa and, as a result, unable to run for the presidency, Elon Musk is still available to bet on at William Hill at +3300 for the next election.

Possible loophole

To amend the 22nd Amendment of the US Constitution, a change in the two-term cap would require two-thirds approval in the House, Senate, and state governments.

While the Republican Party holds a majority in the two chambers, it doesn’t have the necessary support. On the state level, Democrats control 18 of the 50 states, which is another major stumbling block.

winning the election with Trump as his vice president before resigning

However, Trump supporters say that nothing is stopping JD Vance from running and winning the election with Trump as his vice president before resigning. This would permit the current president to step into the role for a third time.

A common offering

Betting on political markets has become increasingly popular in the UK recently. Some politicians have even gotten into the action and fallen in trouble for it. Ahead of the UK election in July 2024, several political figures bet on the outcome, leading to investigations into their behavior.

Most sportsbooks now offer these markets, alongside prediction sites like Polymarket and Kalshi, which exploded in popularity during the most recent US election.

The post William Hill Prices Donald Trump at +500 to Upend US Constitution With Third Term appeared first on Vegas Slots Online News.

Regulatory Expert: “UKGC Bonus Wagering Restriction Is a Gift to the Black Market”

The UKGC has just announced new promotional restrictions for licensees, capping bonus wagering requirements at 10xbonus.

Duncan Garvie, gaming regulation expert and Head of ADR for Casino Reviews, believes this is “catastrophically bad policy.” He provided his detailed opinion on the changes to VegasSlotsOnline News.

Duncan Garvie, Head of ADR for Casino Reviews:

This catatrophically bad policy hobbles the regulated industry’s ability to compete with the black market. It is everything that I’ve spoken against in the last few years. Regulation that sounds good, but has not considered the deeper consequences of the policies. History has already shown us what will happen when this restriction comes into place.

On the surface of the conversation, limiting wagering requirements obviously sounds like something that’s good for consumers. Everybody likes free money. The lower you push down wagering requirements the more like free money gambling bonuses become.

But this fails to take into consideration that the reasons that wagering requirements increased in the first place.

How Wagering Requirements Have Changed

In the early 2000s, when I first started playing, bonus wagering requirements routinely used to be 10xbonus. In the late 90s they were even lower than that. The industry didn’t start out wanting larger wagering requirements. They prioritised making the bonus terms attractive to players.

with low wagering requirements it was actually the player that had the advantage

Wagering requirements started to increase, in parallel with the introduction of other bonus restrictions like game limitations, because smart players became aware that with low wagering requirements it was actually the player that had the advantage any time that they were given a bonus. And with the rise of the internet, that information soon became widely available.

“Bonus abuse” as the industry likes to call it, became widespread, and with the rise of fraudulent practices like multi-accounting, bonuses started to represent a significant threat to the profitability of the sector. Like it or not, gambling is a business. For operators to remain profitable, they have to be able to sustain an advantage over players. Offering the chance to win to the individual, but knowing that across all players they will profit.

The industry’s response to the growing number of players who had a mathematical edge over the house due to bonuses was to add bonus restrictions that reduced their exposure. Some games started to be excluded from bonus play. Maximum bet caps were introduced. And wagering requirements rose.

Without these terms, bonuses become a massive liability for the sector. One that jeopardises the business model upon which the industry remains profitable.

Historic Parallels – How a New Jersey Lawsuit Made Blackjack Worse for All Players

History has shown us what happens when we restrict the industry’s ability to protect itself from winning players. In 1979, legendary card counting pioneer Ken Uston was barred from New Jersey casinos. This wasn’t a new experience for him. He’d been barred from casinos all over the world because he was a skilled, winning player. But this time he didn’t let the matter lie. Mr Uston took the casino to court, contesting that they were discriminating against winning players.

In the end the New Jersey Supreme Courts ruled that casinos could not backoff card counters.

How did the industry respond to this? They couldn’t allow players to consistently beat them, as that undermined their ability to sustain a profitable business. And now they weren’t allowed back off winning players, meaning they couldn’t target the players that were causing the problems. So they did the only thing they could do. They made the games worse for all players. They added more decks to their games and they shuffled more often. This increased the house edge over all players and detracted from the gaming experience for everyone. All so that Ken Uston couldn’t get backed-off.

every player that has sat down at a blackjack table in the state since has faced a more detrimental ruleset

I have a great deal of respect for Ken Uston as a pioneer in the field of advantage gambling, but his lawsuit in New Jersey handcuffed the industry, preventing them protecting their games. And in doing so, every player that has sat down at a blackjack table in the state since has faced a more detrimental ruleset.

History Repeats and Consumers Lose

What we’re seeing with the UKGC’s incoming restriction on wager requirements will have exactly the same consequence. 10xWR are unsustainable for gambling operators. And there are two responses to this that the industry will have to take:

i) Bonus offers will become far less attractive;

ii) Game RTP settings will be reduced to provide the house a greater edge over players.

Gambling will end up costing consumers more due to these regulations that are intended to improve the ecosystem for players.

Public Consultations Don’t Result in Effective Regulation

This move highlights the core limitations with basing policies on public consultation. Public consultations ask a question in a vacuum. Consumers are presented with a choice, without understanding the wider context or consequences of their decision. Respondents make a surface-level assessment of what is in their best interests, and all too often it ends up backfiring.

Public consultations are relied upon to give decision makers plausible deniability for the decisions that they reach. Rather than reaching informed decisions, based on evidence and knowledge of the likely outcomes, regulation morphs to the outcome of public consultation, regardless of whether or not this actually achieves what it was intended to achieve.

And the Black Market Wins!

Sitting behind all of this is the black market. And illegal gambling operators win big with the introduction of this type of restriction on the legal market.

The legal market is already struggling to compete with the black market, which can offer bigger and better bonuses due to lower overheads. With the introduction of this wagering requirement cap, the headline bonus offers that the legal market will be able to provide will degrade again, which will result in players migrating to the black market.

How to Make Bonuses Better

The Gambling Commission appears to have two core justifications for the introduction of this restriction:

i) That wagering requirements are confusing to players (“Such high wagering requirements could confuse consumers”)

and

ii) That high wagering requirements cause harm by leading players to play for longer than they ordinarily would (“lead them to gamble for longer, and faster, than they are used to”)With complete candor, I do not see how it can be argued that this policy reduces confusion for consumers at all. Is multiplying by one number a significantly different process to multiplying by a different number?

the more effective road is to make the wagering requirements clearer in promotional advertising

The only plausible grounds that I can see to claim that the cap makes wagering requirements less confusing would be that player’s don’t expect wagering requirements to be higher than 10x. If that is the argument that is being made, the more effective road is to make the wagering requirements clearer in promotional advertising.The second grounds for these policies, that of wagering requirements encouraging players to over play, is addressed simply by placing restrictions on bonus expiry dates. It’s not the wagering requirement itself that leads players to gamble for longer than they ordinarily would, it’s the fact that the promotion has a ticking clock built into it, meaning that if you don’t complete the wagering requirement within the state period, the bonus expires and you lose everything. If the desired result is to prevent players being forced into overplaying, then removing the expiry data and let players complete the wagering requirements at their leisure.

The Road to Hell…

The Gambling Commission is clearly well intentioned with its approach to this policy, but the likely outcome is bad for consumers, bad for the licensed market, and a win for illegal gambling. I sincerely hope the Gambling Commission will re-evaluate this policy before it comes into force.

The post Regulatory Expert: “UKGC Bonus Wagering Restriction Is a Gift to the Black Market” appeared first on Vegas Slots Online News.