Handicap Posting Narrative Unchanged: USGA Should Respond

A week removed from the USGA's announcement no longer tolerating solo rounds for handicap posting, the narrative hasn't budged. Reaction continues to paint the organization as out of touch with the demands of the modern golfer's schedule, oblivious in its reply to early criticism and worst of all, is thought to be painting most solo golfers as incapable of being trusted.

The discussion was pretty tough on Morning Drive today, with Charlie Rymer, Gary Williams, and Damon Hack talk about the new rules and offering several insights of note, especially the confusion that newish golfers have with handicapping.

I followed that segment by discussing with Williams the most disconcerting element in the social media reaction: none of the usual nuttiness when a controversy breaks out. Instead, the commenters are largely making thoughtful arguments and many are from people in the trenches who have to deal with the fall-out from this decision.

Two more writers I respect have chimed in, and they aren't sending their love and admiration toward Far Hills. Rick Young at ScoreGolf fleshes out Canada's opposition and writes:

The USGA is showcasing hypocrisy here. It might deem peer review as an integral aspect of confirming golfer ability but no longer will it take golfers on their word if they play alone.

Tod Leonard, Tribune golf writer for the LA Times and San Diego Union-Tribune, writes:

Foremost is that in a game that is so heavily based on honor and self-policing that the national governing body doesn’t assume that those playing alone will be honest about their score when posting. Because at its core this is about posting, and it’s not like you have someone standing over your shoulder when you put your score into the computer.

In the face of criticism, the USGA responded rather awkwardly with an FAQ that in some sections is laughable.

As long as someone accompanies the player during the round the player is not playing alone.

Hey, pal, got an extra four hours to spare to watch me play golf?

The player must be accompanied for at least seven holes for a nine-hole score or 13 holes for 18-hole score. This is consistent with Section 5-1 and the minimum number of holes played under the Rules of Golf.

So you can trust me for a portion of the holes but not the others?

Obviously, the USGA wouldn’t come up with the rule if it didn’t think that posting was being abused in some fashion. Maybe this is a big problem at private clubs. I wouldn’t know. But as is always the case, it’s up to organizations to police their participating players.

To discourage play of any type, especially something as treasured as solo rounds? That’s the last thing golf needs right now.

The most hurtful commentary may be from Global Golf Post's Mike Purkey, who lays out the case against the change in calm, cool fashion. And does it in a publication that goes to all USGA members for free.

There are always going to be sandbaggers and sandbaggers are always going to find a way to game the system, no matter how much they are monitored. But to eliminate playing alone as an acceptable—sometimes preferable—way to play golf and still maintain an honest and reputable handicap flies in the face of what our game was designed to give its players: a solitary walk, spoiled.

The USGA's lone reaction as noted here and mocked by Leonard, was to delineate what a solo round means versus one played with some sort of witness. It's the ultimate splitting of hairs that only an organization made up of too many lawyers could muster up and think makes sense.

To save face, the USGA needs to at least better explain the origins and thinking behind their decision, if not rescind it asap in the name of saving face with their core constituency.