you'd think, being a pseudo-writer and all, that Gouge might know that questions are usually followed with question marks. even rhetorical ones. really? yes, son, really.

Guys, it looks like we're going to have to pass the hat to spring our fearless leader from Cyber Jail. We don't want him whittling away behind West LA's finest VPN firewall with his keystrokes being captured by CSI: Far Hills. If things get testy in the Riviera parking lot, remember the cops prefer to swing persimmon Billy clubs. The titanium versions kept sending perps from the sidewalk into backyards.

Ok, but he sort of has a point, Geoff.

Courses HAVE been lengthened for senior pga events as recommended by senior pga officials.

The courses do need lengthening.

Added 4 new tees going from 7000 to 7082 for the seniors. A proposed fifth tee has not yet been completed.

who cares?

If nobody cares about the uneccessary money and effort spent on the courses just so you do not have to regulate the B&I, I guess that about says it all.

Would like to see aluminum bats in the majors, I will admit that I like to watch the homers in college ball.

These are the guys Wally is paying 6-figures to?

Ha..ha.ha.ha.ha......ha..ha.ha..ha.. tears in my coffee this morning.

I really have no sympathy for Bomb and Gouge - I believe they are incredibly arrogant with their opinions, and desrve to be called on comments such as the ones about letting Augusta and the Old Course just fade away as relics.

That said, I think we'd all do better to amp things down a bit. No need to get personal - the facts speak for themselves.

Knox:

You said, "If nobody cares about the uneccessary money and effort spent on the courses just so you do not have to regulate the B&I, I guess that about says it all."

We spend so much time talking about our differences...can we agree on some things?

1. Is it agreed that golf and golf courses are not static, and that the former changes as all sports do, and that the latter do require updating from time to time? Even if the equipment doesn't change a lick, there is a need to redo greens and tees every so many years--maybe every 25-30, say--because of erosion, etc., settling of the ground, the need to change trees and redo drainage, etc. But even before graphite, titanium, and multilayer, people were gradually getting longer, and courses were updated and lengthened from time to time. For all of these reasons, having the expense of redoing greens and tees is absolutely fundamental to the life of a great golf course, whether we are playing with titanium or coke bottles, whether we are a $15 muny or Winged Foot.

If you disagree with this, then I guess I have nothing more I can say to you, but I think you could look back into history and find literally hundreds of examples where golf courses have been lengthened and toughened to keep up with the times. What has people so upset _this time_ is that pace of change has been rapid, and that in our media-saturated culture we are hearing about it from all angles.

And honestly, I ask you, what do we do if they do what you all want, and throttle distances back 20%? Think seriously about it for a minute. Most of the massive lengthening of courses, moving of bunkers, etc., has already occurred on the high profile courses we see on TV. Honestly, if the longest hitters lose 20%, that is 60 yards off their drives. Iron shots will also fly shorter, so we will end up with a situation where half the field will be hitting lumber into par 4s on most of the modern courses everyone is up in arms about. All of the bunkers that have been moved to the 300 yard range will be out of range for all hitters. The damage, if you choose to look at it that way, has already been done.

And please, someone, explain to me how you can be so sanctimonious in your criticism of wealthy folks at the USGA and the equipment corporations, and then turn around and weep for the "money and expense" of lengthening golf courses! I don't think the membership at these courses has much to worry about financially, both personally and considering many make oodles hosting USGA championships and PGA Tour events. The USGA probably pays for the work on most of the open venues, so in a way the USGA is "donating" to these clubs. And if a course is lengthened 500 yards, does that _really_ increase the maintenance budget that much? Remember we're talking about the most exclusive, wealthiest clubs in the US, and they can afford the few extra gallons of water and the extra lawn mower, can't they?


2. Do we really think that it has only been since 2003 that golfers have overpowered golf courses? To hear Jack Nicklaus talk today, you'd think he never reached a par 4 with anything less than a 6 iron in his prime. Does anyone know how many 380 yard par 4s Jack gobbled up in his youth, and how many times he hit 3 wood over trees and hit short irons into par 5s? Hasn't power always been important in golf? And even if it is more important today, are you really sure it's become so much more important that the game is threatened? Where is the evidence of this? Short hitting, accurate players win ALL THE TIME on the PGA tour. Think about it critically, for yourself, not just because Geoff Shackelford or Jack Nicklaus or someone else says it. Don't you think the TV people exaggerate things a little? Oh no, they never do that. And to be honest, the only "bombers" winning regularly are the ones who have great short games and can putt. Same as it ever was.

The thing I hear repeated here over and over is "isn't it easier to just regulate one thing, the ball, rather than have every course in the US change?" Unfortunately, I still have to say "no." The money and expense everyone is talking about--which has already been spent--amounts to a teaspoon in the ocean of golf courses in the world, and the expense is being borne by people who are willing and more than able to bear it. For over 99% of golfers and golf courses in the world, this means nothing. It is easy for me to understand how someone such as Jack Nicklaus, whose entire world consists of elite golf and championship golf courses, sees this as akin to armageddon, but there is really no reason for the rest of us to feel this way. Even if they are the greatest golfers in the world, and our heroes.

My USGA index is 10.5. I played the Rutgers University Golf course today. With a urethane ball and a titanium blaster driver, I hit my tee shot 280 on one of the par 5s, leaving me only 200 to the green. It was probably the longest drive on level ground I've ever hit. I hooked the second shot out of bounds and made a 7.

Is there anyone out there who honestly thinks the game is too easy?

Homers in the majors, Knox? Where were you during the steroid era?

shorten the ball 20% and move to the next forward tees.....if they're feeling freaky on certain rounds they (rules officals) could choose to use a few back tees......I hit woods to some par 4's and would love to see the pros have to take wood as well......why not?

Oh so we are in the "No Spin Zone" now huh? Admit you love O'Reilly!!