By Bob Markus

My business is dying. That doesn't make me any different than millions of Americans, except that my business is the newspaper business and I don't own it. I just borrowed it for most of my adult life. The paper I once wrote for, the Chicago Tribune, once a Colossus of the industry, has gone into bankruptcy. I haven't seen it for awhile, but friends tell me it has become a hybrid, a traditional broadsheet for home delivery, but a tabloid at the news stands. The paper I read now, The South Florida Sun-Sentinel, is owned by Tribune Company. It is no better and probably not much worse than most newspapers today. Of course, it's op-ed page, the one with the syndicted columnists, has been cut in half and now offers just two opinion pieces a day. Then, too, like most other newspapers, it has surrendered unconditionally to its eventual murderer, the internet.

I used to scoff at people who told me the internet was going to replace newspapers. The idea of sitting in front of a big box and reading the electronic sports news while sipping my morning coffee seemed preposterous. It still hasn't come to that for me, but apparently for millions more it is becoming a way of life. The day the Oscar nominations came out, the Sun-Sentinel ran a story mentioning some--but not all--of the major nominations. For the complete list, it told me, I should go online. I threw the wretched thing against the wall.

The sports section of the Sun-Sentinel does a good job covering the local teams. But it offers just one sentence on other games and, in the case of hockey, no game summaries. It has some good writers. Columnist Dave Hyde is usually topical and occasionally brilliant. The section's best writer, Charley Bricker, has either died or just faded away and I'll probably never know which, but I do miss his writing on tennis and the National Football League. Oh, well, I never cared much for tennis, anyway, and that's one more thing I don't have to pay attention to, any more.

This morning the Sun-Sentinel sports section almost jolted me out of my chair and onto the floor. Not for anything it had, but for what it didn't have. Not a paragraph, not a line, not a single word about the most anticipated sports story in years--the return of Tiger Woods. True, the world's greatest golfer does not tee it up until tomorrow at the Accenture Match Play championships. But what ever happened to the concept of advancing a big story? And they don't come much bigger than this. With Woods making his first tournament appearance since willing his way on tortured legs to the U.S.Open title last June, this story has the potential of becoming huge.

When Bobby Riggs played Billie Jean King in the Battle of the Sexes back in 1973, I was writing columns out of the two camps for two or three days before the big match. So were writers from New York, Detroit, Los Angeles, and places inbetween. That's the way it was done--and still is done--in most places. Even the Sun- Sentinel writes a week's worth of advances on the Super Bowl.

True, the paper did print a story, I think it was Sunday, announcing Woods' decision to make the match play tournament his comeback venue. That should have sent golf writers everywhere scurrying to make plane reservations for Tucson. In most instances, it probably did. Given the nature of match play it set me to wondering, who will be Tiger's first round opponent and does he have a chance to upset the World's No. 1 ranked player? I found the answers, finally, not in my daily newspaper, but on the internet. So, if you live in South Florida and care even marginally about golf or Tiger Woods, you can Google it on the internet or, since you're already here, read on.

Tiger's first round opponent is Australian Brendan Jones, ranked No. 64 in the world, which doesn't much resemble Tiger's world. Jones, at 33 the same age as Woods, plays most of his tournament golf in Japan. He did spend one full season on the PGA tour and finished 144th. So what chance does he have in tomorrow's first round match, considering that Woods is the defending champion of this tournament and has won 31 of his 37 matches over the last nine years? Well, obviously, Tiger has failed to win this match play event six times in the nine years it has been played. Three times he has been knocked out by Australians and one of them, Peter O'Malley, did it in the first round in 2002 when Woods was ranked No. 1 and O'Malley No.64. Another Aussie, Nick O'Hern, defeated Woods twice--in 2005 and 2007. Asked if he had spoken with either countryman Jones quipped, "No, but I spoke with Stephen Ames and he gave me some advice." Ames is the Canadian golfer who in 2006, prior to a scheduled meeting with Woods, said he thought he had a chance to win because Tiger was having trouble hitting his drives straight. Tiger went out and mugged Ames, 9 and 8, which means he won nine of the 10 holes played. Asked afterwards if he had any reaction to Ames' pre-match remarks, Tiger said, "Yes, 9 and 8."

It's hard to know what to expect from Woods tomorrow, but given his enormous pride it's a good bet that he is physically and mentally prepared for this challenge. There is always the chance, slight though it may be, that Tiger may play only 18 holes--or even less--in this tournament, which would be an interesting story. What most writers will hope for, is that he plays all seven of the matches it will take to win the tournament. That would likely be the most compelling sports story of the year and the biggest in golf since Ben Hogan came back from near fatal injuries suffered in a car crash to force a playoff with Sam Snead in his first tournament back. That was in 1950 and although Hogan lost that playoff, in the mist of time he will always be the winner.

I really don't understand how the editors of the Sun Sentinel failed to grasp the significance of this story. And if they want to tell me to mind my own business, I'll tell them: This is my business!