How The R&A Got The Groove Rule Sacked?

E. Michael Johnson reports that the proposed rollback on grooves for competition is all but dead for 2009 and not looking good for 2010.

A call to the USGA last week for a status report on the proposal produced little in the way of news, as senior technical director Dick Rugge declined to comment on specifics -- except to say there was "no set timetable for a decision on grooves."

However, industry sources familiar with the situation tell Golf World the Condition of Competition as proposed is no longer on the table, meaning tour pros are likely to be able to use current grooves in 2009.

Meanwhile, USGA and R&A officials are set to meet again this month to discuss the groove proposal, with one industry insider characterizing the ruling bodies as still somewhat apart. "The USGA is ready to go, but the R&A believes the proposed rule is trying to do too much," said the source.

"Too much" to the R&A is defined as "any action whatsoever."
 

Meanwhile in this week's SI Golf Plus, PGA Tour pros were asked:

If the USGA bans U-grooves, will you sacrifice distance in favor of accuracy off the tee:

Yes: 25%

No: 75%

While I've never believed the U-groove change would impact player thinking off the tee, I do believe it would alter the aggressiveness of their approach shots and restore the importance of firm greens. Too bad the R&A does not agree.

"But it is clear that, like the rest of us, the St Andrews-based governing body has had enough."

I finally had a chance to look over the press accounts of Peter Dawson's press conferences. Dawson offered something unprecedented in the history of golf's governing bodies: outlining architectural revisions to world class courses, all ideas of the R&A.

Knowing that anything architecture and nuanced is tough for the slingers to get their arms around, I was not surprised to read that they ran with the spin that R&A was not excessively lengthening rota courses. Nor was I expecting to find serious stories questioning the absurd notion of changing golf courses just so the R&A doesn't have to regulate equipment in any meaningful way.

I was, however, shocked to read that the R&A is on a mission to speed up play!

Dawson answered a simple question about slow play and a series of follow ups, eventually revealing that the topic had been added to the docket next time golf's suits convene to assure each other that golf in the Olympics will grow the sport and to pat each other on the back for working together on drug testing (which many of them resisted).

Check out the rave reviews for the R&A apparent determination to rid the game of slow play.

James Corrigan in the Independent:

Having watched in despair - not to mention boredom - as the final two-ball took five hours, 10 minutes to complete the final round of the Masters earlier this month, the R&A realised something must be done about what Peter Dawson, their chief executive, agreed was rapidly turning into “a cancer in golf“.

Douglas Lowe in the Herald:

The R&A have now placed slow play on the agenda for the meeting of the World Golf Foundation immediately after the Players' Championship next month in Florida. The foundation, comprising key power brokers in the game, was set up 14 years ago to help growth of the game while preserving traditions.

Iain Carter writing for the BBC:

And it is clear the R&A will be following a similar path as it sets about dealing with the biggest evil in the game at the moment, slow play.

But it is clear that, like the rest of us, the St Andrews-based governing body has had enough.

Had enough? He answered a question!

Richard Williamson in the Liverpool Daily Post:

The R&A is also keen to help cut down on the problem of slow play in the sport.

Speaking at Royal Birkdale, venue for this summer's Open Championship, Dawson urged a worldwide crackdown on the snails who are making golf less attractive and driving people away from the sport.

It's touching to read these breathless accounts of a topic that only came up after tough questioning. It's also odd to find that not one of the writers considered that just possibly the R&A and USGA's lax work on equipment regulation might have led to changes in the game that force the redesign of courses, or dare I say, play to slow down because players are waiting for greens to clear.

But slow players need not worry. If the R&A is on the case, you can bet any significant proposals will be tabled for years to come. 

"The last time the Open Championship was here at Birkdale was ten years ago in 1998, and as we know, the game has moved on somewhat since then"

Yesterday we learned that R&A chief spinster Peter Dawson was proud of the organization's revamping of 2009 Open host Turnberry. Tuesday the governing body of golf outside North American proudly announced  changes to 16 out of 18 holes at 2008 Open host Royal Birkdale, including a narrowing of many landing areas.

Hey, it never gets windy over there, you can tighten those babies all day long and no one will notice!

Tuesday Dawson sat down for two press conferences to further discuss the changes and other issues in the game. The only thing more astonishing than his answers was the lack of one decent follow up question asking why the R&A is going around to nearly all of its rota courses and making changes! So much for the demanding British press.

Here's Dawson's joint press conference with Michael Brown and David Hill, where you better get a cart because he's going through all 18 changes. Who knew the R&A was in the architecture business?

None of the alterations is apparently more offensive than Birkdale's new 17th green, which sounds like a disaster if even the lowly scribblers in attendance were astounded by its hideous nature.

Now, this green I quite understand has caused a little bit of controversy. Many of you made comments on it yesterday, and we do fully understand those comments. Let me say a few things about it. It is a par-5, so it's not as if we're expecting the green to be hit at with long irons. The type of green it is is a green that the pros are accustomed to on many golf courses they play at. If you look at Augusta a couple weeks ago, there's probably 18 more sporty greens there than this one. But we are aware that it's a green that could get away from us if we're not careful, and we will be using conservative pin positions and taking great care with the green speed. If we weren't aware of that, we could get into trouble, but we are and we won't. We will be monitoring how this green performs during the Championship to see if anything needs to be done to it in the future. So we're aware it's controversial. We'll have to see how it goes.

And we know how well that attitude worked for the USGA.

Clearly Dawson came prepared for the writers to ask how they can justify emasculating courses instead of doing something about equipment advances. And since questioning the disturbing nature of narrowing courses might require thought, Dawson was able to slip this in.

Overall we've increased the length of the golf course by only 155 yards, which is 2 per cent. Instead of hitting it 100 yards you've got to hit it 102, so the length addition is not that significant.

Now, you'd think that just maybe someone would say, hey, isn't narrowing, lengthening and tricking up courses going to make rounds take longer? Some questions almost got there:

Q. We had a situation at The Masters this year where Trevor Immelman and Brandt Snedeker took five hours to play in a two-ball in the final round. I believe that Adam Scott's group on Sunday was three hours for nine holes. Obviously slow play is the cancer on the game. How do we get players to move quicker around the golf course?

PETER DAWSON: I think we will certainly be aiming to do better than five hours and ten minutes. I think in recent times, particularly on the weekend, we've actually done quite well at the Open. Basic play has not really been an issue, and I'm quite confident that we can do an awful lot better than that.

Q. It's not an issue at the Open perhaps but it is an issue generally. It is getting abysmal. I'm wondering with the R & A as a governing body, how do we get them to get a move-on?

PETER DAWSON: We are concerned about this. We did see some very slow play at The Masters. That's not a criticism of the Augusta event, it just happened to happen.

 He acts like it's an isolated incident!

I wasn't aware of the Adam Scott group statistic. But we do have a meeting coming up in two or three weeks of the World Golf Foundation, where everyone around the table who runs professional golf will be there, and we have put the subject on the agenda, and we hope we will be able to get some meeting of the minds that it is a problem and start to work towards some improvement.

But as you say, it certainly needs something doing about it, not just for the running of these events but for the effect it has on grass-roots play. We do see people not unnaturally copying the stars, and I think it has had an effect on pace of play generally. We all know, don't we, that pace of play is one of the issues cited for participation, and the time that golf takes is an issue that's been cited for keeping participation levels down. It's clearly an issue right across the game, top to bottom, up and down the game, and I think it behooves all the governing bodies in golf to address it.

Yes, let's narrow, lengthen and toughen courses. That sets a wonderful example and really helps speed things up!

And after a few dull questions...

Q. When you say you're looking for a meeting of minds, what is the R & A's view on what can be done?

PETER DAWSON: I think at a professional level it's like drugs. It's a 52-week-a-year occupation, and I do think that ways need to be found to, one, educate players to encourage them, and as a last resort penalise them if they don't respond. We're not seeing any slow play penalties in the game, and that's the last thing we want to see is players being penalised, but unless there's a realistic threat of it, it's hard to see that this would improve.

Well he's right about that.

Here's the one question related to the remarkable number of changes to a course that most thought was already pretty darn good.

Q. The question I was going to ask, which I am going to ask, have you made as many changes to Open courses, to other Open courses, as you have to this one? You described 16 of the 18, which seems to me to be quite a lot.

PETER DAWSON: Well, it is, of course. Many of the changes, if you do it as a whole count, are quite minor. A number are more significant.

We've been going through a programme at all our Open venues by agreement with the clubs and the hosts of some quite significant changes. You're going to see a good deal at Turnberry next year, and you'll probably see quite a few at Livermore in 2012. Royal St. Georges we have, as well, but this is among the more significant in terms of quantum.

And why are these time test venues in need of so many "significant" changes?

I think I know why I don't get invited to their conference calls anymore.

Speaking of that, the conference call produced the killer quote of the day...

Q. My question has to deal with the course setup for the Open. As you know, there was a bit of consternation at The Masters as to how things played out the last couple years, and these questions always come up at the U.S. Open. I'm just curious your philosophy on how you like the course to play when the tournament begins in July.

PETER DAWSON: Well, the last time the Open Championship was here at Birkdale was ten years ago in 1998, and as we know, the game has moved on somewhat since then, and we have made a considerable number of course alterations here at Birkdale. Only two holes have had nothing done to them. The majority of holes, the alterations have been all about repositioning bunkers and run-off areas around the greens, but five holes have been significantly altered. And overall, the length of the golf course has gone up by 155 yards, which is only 2 percent of an increase. So the player length for this year's Championship will be 7,173 yards, but most of the changes have been designed to be strategic or requiring more accuracy from the players.

The game has moved on somewhat since then. Somewhat.

"I'm delighted with the way things have worked out and believe we have a good test there. It's narrower, longer and tougher."

Take a guess which course R&A secretary Peter Dawson is talking about? Only that lowly Turnberry, which hosted all of those exciting Open Championships but has become outdated thanks to all that heavy lifting the boys have been doing.

Mike Aitken reports:

"The Open hasn't been back to Turnberry since 1994 and in that time the links, which is a resort course that caters for visitors, was in need of attention for a major championship," he explained.

"Work needed to be done and we're very pleased that the people at Turnberry were willing to allow us to undertake these improvements. I'm delighted with the way things have worked out and believe we have a good test there. It's narrower, longer and tougher."

Isn't it great, one of the governing bodies touting the narrowing of a course. That's good for the game.

"Perhaps the most noticeable change is at the 16th which is now a dog-leg left-to-right. It's an alteration which (changes the angle] and makes the second shot to the green over the burn much harder. That change has also allowed us to take the tee back on the par-5 17th quite significantly.

And why did you need to do that? Oh right, the working out.

"Another difference is a new tee on the third which is much further back on the top of the hill. There's also a tee which is 20 yards back of the one we used last time on the 18th. Perhaps the most spectacular alteration, though, is the new tee at the tenth where the players are going to have to hit their drives over more of the water. One of the great advantages of having an Amateur before an Open is that you can see if what you've planned works. So, some late tweaks could be possible, but I don't anticipate much changing now.

Who knew the R&A provides architectural services?

Let's see now, making course changes but not addressing changes in equipment. Good thing they know how best to attack the problem.

R&A Delays Open Championship Drug Testing

Lawrence Donegan reports on the latest example of procrastination, joining grooves, the ball, etc. In this instance, they are blaming the Asian and South African Tours. The difference here is that this is something Peter Dawson has been adamant about, which may give us some insight into why they are dragging their feet on issues they aren't so passionate about (grooves, the ball, etc.).

"There is no doubt that getting a good drive away with a modern driver is easier than it was with an older driver. That’s a fact."

Reader GuttaPercha raises a great point on the post parsing Peter Dawson's comments to John Huggan.

I am confused.

"...there is no doubt that getting a good drive away with a modern driver is easier than it was with an older driver. That’s a fact."

If that's so, how come every second sentence I read is saying that pros don't have to be accurate any more (better grooves, lack of strategic challenge in course set up, penal rough anyway, etc)? Just bomb and gouge, etc.

If it's easier to hit a modern driver, but at the same time we're seeing lesser percentages of fairways hit (or whatever the best indicator is), then what is going on?

So far, the various papers and administrator comments on the impact of U-grooves have ignored any significant discussion of fairway widths as possibly impacting driving accuracy. I suppose it does get in the way of the USGA/R&A's argument, but as GuttaPercha notes, the governing bod's might want to resist the temptation to suggest the modern driver is having the most significant impact on skill or distance, and then lamenting the decline in driving accuracy.

Dawson Speaks! 2008 Edition

Unlike Mike Aitken's insight-light Scotsman piece, John Huggan manages to squeeze some nuggets out of the R&A's Peter Dawson.

Naturally, the R&A head man is best on the subject of rangefinders:

“It’s very difficult to come up with a logical reason why, if a caddie can give you a yardage, or a book can give you a yardage, or a sprinkler head can give you a yardage, anyone needs that same number produced electronically. It could happen, of course, that players will end up doing all of the above. But my personal fear is that this is the first step towards the vision that every golfer should have a machine that can tell them wind speed, wind direction, the yardage and which club to use. The other end of that scale is that you pay golf the old way, with none of that sort of help.

Here's the best part:

“So where should the line be drawn? You could argue that the line should say ‘no such devices,’ but here it is has been drawn at ‘one such device.’ There are some arguments that it will speed up play, but I find it hard to believe that a device that zones in on the flagstick can do that when you have to wait for the flag to be replaced in order to use it.”

How can you argue with that? That's right, the USGA will.

On groove rule change timing:

"Right now, we remain in discussion with the USGA and would expect an announcement fairly soon.

This is very encouraging:

“Our motivation has never been to make rough more meaningful; we want to make driving accuracy more meaningful. It should matter that you hit the fairway, at least to a reasonable extent. That there should be no correlation between driving accuracy and success cannot be right. Which doesn’t mean that we want to see every fairway lined with rough. I’m not sticking up for rough. “There is also a bit of an issue with little shots from rough around the greens. Again, the combination of modern balls and modern grooves seems to produce too much of ‘bite’ on the ball when it lands. Especially when you combine that with the loft on the clubs. With a lot of loft on the club, you can hit the ball harder than you used to, even on a very short shot.

“Something is going to happen with the grooves and there may even be more action. At the Orlando show I saw a wedge that had over 70-degrees of loft. That has to be a concern.”

I don't get why loft should ever be regulated? If someone can use a spatula like that, let 'em!

This was a nice product of my interview with Pete Dye for Links:

On course architect Pete Dye’s recent comment on the USGA (“They’ve escalated the cost of maintenance. They’ve slowed down play. And they’ve completely lost control of the equipment. Outside of that, they’ve done a pretty good job.”)

“No comment. You’re not sucking me into that! You’re not going to get me to comment on Pete Dye’s designs. If he wants to comment on us, he can carry on.”

Well that's not much fun Peter.

And because it's a Peter Dawson interview, that means most of the great stuff is wiped out by absurd statements. On distance advances:

“We have the problem surrounded. Driving distances have stablised. In the last five years there haven’t been any technological innovations that have increased how far the ball goes. So the heat is coming out of the subject to a degree. But we remain committed to action should any further increases occur.

“Which is not to say that we are happy about where we are. But the game is certainly not in crisis over this issue. I’m not sure the argument that the game at the top level is less interesting to watch is any function of hitting distance. And I include in my counter argument this theory that the ball does not move sideways as much as it used to.

The game is not in crisis. Okay let's see here.

Thousands of courses are facing safety issues and are spending money to lengthen, the world's number one player says if it's up to him, they'd play balata and persimmon, ratings stink, pace of play has never been slower with bottlenecks caused by more reachable par-5s and par-4s, the R&A and USGA are considering an unprecedented rollback in equipment is being considered to help offset the problem, players are now going to be tested for drugs because distance has become so vital to success, and finally several great layouts are in danger of no longer being viable major sites, destroying one golf's unique connection to its origins.

But most of all, the technology boom has not grown the game. Some could argue that the side effects of the techology race are driving participation down.

When does it become defined as a crisis?

“If we have our robot hit shots with old balls and new balls and set the dial to hook or slice, then the results are identical. Except with the driver. The modern driver head is what prevents the ball from bending. It has nothing to do with the golf ball. The irons still bend the ball just as much.

“As Walter Driver of the USGA said to me recently, ‘everyone is entitled to their own opinions about distance and technology, but they are not entitled to their own facts.’

Oh good one Walter! Aren't you the one who said distance advances were 75% athleticism? How did you come up with that, uh, fact?

“The driver is very different. The way the head deforms at impact takes out sidespin. You can hit straight pulls or pushes. But slicing and hooking is more difficult.

“So there is no doubt that getting a good drive away with a modern driver is easier than it was with an older driver. That’s a fact. But is it too easy? I think there is merit to the argument that it is easier to get round in 66 than it used to be, but it is not easier to win a golf tournament. There are so many other factors involved in winning. In fact, you can easily argue that finishing first has never been harder."

Yeah, because of Tiger!

"It’s highly unlikely there’ll be any more equipment changes in the short term."

BBC's Iain Carter reminds you that if you were using a spring-like effect driver, your five year grace period is now up. He also talks to the R&A's David Rickman, who says the driver rule change has slowed down distance increases. And it sure sounds like the R&A is on the fence when it comes to regulating U-grooves.

“The new limit has been part of that calming of driving distance,” Rickman said. “The other aspect is that there hasn’t been a big advance in terms of ball technology in this period.”

For many the golf ball is already travelling too far. Traditional courses need to be lengthened to remain contemporary and new ones require more land. Therefore, the game becomes more expensive and takes longer to play, which hardly boosts its ability to attract new players.

Currently the two rule-making bodies, the R&A and USGA are in consultation with manufacturers discussing ball technology and clubface grooves.

Some groove patterns enable players to impart controlled spin on shots from the rough, thereby negating the benefit of finding a fairway.

This enables players to bash away carefree drives and then gouge the ball from the rough and still make birdies. “Bash and gouge is known and understood,” Rickman says before adding a counter argument. “But the best player still seems to win, so we have to be careful before we change anything.”

Key meetings will take place between the regulators and manufacturers later this month at the major golf trade show in Orlando.

It’s highly unlikely there’ll be any more equipment changes in the short term. The process is fraught with legal difficulties and manufacturers have to be won over – after all it is their aim to sell us the equipment that makes the game easier.

And no one wants to further alienate those players for whom it's already been an expensive new-gear new year.

All five of them.

And Lord knows, the masses have been taking up the game in droves to buy the latest stuff, because we know that's what grown men live for: shopping! 

And Now A Word From Our Sponsors...

They've revamped USGA.org. You can probably guess what I think.

Tell me (and our Far Hills readership) what you think of the key difference between the USGA and R&A home pages, and what is says about the two organizations.

 

"Why would anyone bother trying to design a course for us?"

For those of you new readers who haven't followed the technology debate and its impact on the game, John Huggan offers a juicy primer that is also filled with some fresh quotes and thoughts for those of you who have tracked this key issue.

The other day, former US Open champion Geoff Ogilvy played a round with friends at the splendid Kingston Heath course in his home city of Melbourne. When they came to the 567-yard 14th hole, which was playing downwind, admittedly, Ogilvy hit a good drive... before striking a 7-iron approach through the green.

That's not a misprint. How long does a hole have to be before one of the game's leading exponents is unable to reach the putting surface with two full-blooded shots? Given that Ogilvy hit a drive and 7-iron around 575 yards, he was capable of reaching a green about 200 yards further on with his 3-wood.

Let's make the hole 800 yards in length, just to make him think a little. As the world No.11 asked companions rhetorically: "Why would anyone bother trying to design a course for us?"

Fast forward... 

"I don't pay too much attention to distance statistics, because most of my courses are not being built for the professionals," says leading designer Tom Doak. "But I try to stay abreast of what's going on, because the governing bodies don't!"

Wow, the Doakster finally speaking out forcefully! Better late than never.

And from Huggan: 

The typical response to this new breed of tour player has been predictably, and disappointingly, one-dimensional. Most courses have resorted to golf's most boring hazard - longer and thicker rough - and ever-increasing length, and in the process have destroyed any semblance of strategic choice for players who are supposed to be the best.

In other words, thinking and planning have largely been eliminated from the game at the highest level. On almost every hole there is but one choice of shot, with the creation of interesting angles for the approach something those old guys did before technology ran amok. It is tedious and heartbreaking to watch and, no doubt, to play.

The danger is that the average golf club committee will imagine that growing more and deeper rough and creating longer holes by way of more back tees offer the way forward for their course. Big mistake. That approach ignores the fact that the average golfer gains little or no advantage from modern technology. Largely starved of the club-head speed that is yardage's fuel, his drives have "stretched" by only a few measly yards. Besides, there is a better way.

"On most of the courses we work on, we put in back tees for the good player only on those holes where the green size is appropriate," says former European Tour player Mike Clayton, now a much-respected course designer. "We would not, for example, make a 310-yard hole 40 yards longer just because we could.

"In fact, par-70 is the answer to many tour course design questions. By reducing the par by two shots, you create two less vulnerable holes. Throw in a couple of great short par-4s and a short par-3, and it is possible to keep a course around 7,000 yards in length while still making it both difficult and thought-provoking for the professionals, and playable for the members without having tees they never go anywhere near."

Of course, all of that could be achieved by hauling the ball back 50 yards. Come on guys, get it done!

50? Shoot, I'll take 20 at this point. 

R&A Insists They Knew Exactly What They Were Doing...

Though as Mike Aitken's piece suggests, it's not clear why they are playing the Open in England two straight years other than they were anxious to not stay away from Lytham for too long.

Not just a question of serendipity, David Hill, the R&A's director of championships, explained how the impact of the London Olympics in 2012 had forced a break with tradition. "It wasn't just coincidence that the Open will be in England two years running," he acknowledged. "We didn't want to hold the championship at Royal St George's in 2012, the year of the Olympics in London, and didn't think going there the year after was a particularly good idea either."

One of the most popular venues on the rota - 183,000 spectators came through the gates when Ben Curtis thwarted Thomas Bjorn in 2003 - Sandwich is the only links in the south east of England which stages golf's most venerable event. Drawing spectators from London as well as Kent and the surrounding area, St George's was a hugely successful Open four years ago and the R&A didn't want to cloak it's appeal in the shadow of the Olympics.

Bearing in mind that Lytham last held the Open in 2001 when David Duval was in his pomp, the Lancashire venue will have had to wait 11 years for the championship to return by the time the event goes back to St Anne's in 2012.

Two Opens In A Row For England

Take that, Scotland...

ROYAL ST GEORGE’S AND ROYAL LYTHAM & ST ANNES TO HOST THE 2011 AND 2012 OPEN CHAMPIONSHIPS
 
The R&A has named Royal St George’s and Royal Lytham & St Annes as the venues for the 2011 and 2012 Open Championships.
 
Royal St George’s last hosted The Open Championship in 2003, when Ben Curtis, from the United States, won after a final round 69 that was good enough to hold off Thomas Bjorn, who led for most of the final day, and Vijay Singh by 1 stroke.  This will be the fourteenth time that The Open has been staged at Sandwich, the southern-most venue on The Open rota.
 
On the two previous occasions when the Championship was played at Royal St George’s the Champions were Greg Norman in 1993 and Sandy Lyle in 1985, a victory that catalysed the most successful period in European golf.  Indeed, Open Championships at Royal St George’s are steeped in the history of the game with previous winners including J H Taylor, Harry Vardon, Walter Hagen, Henry Cotton and Bobby Locke.
 
Royal Lytham & St Annes most recently hosted The Open in 2001 when David Duval of the United States shot a closing round of 67 to record a three shot win over Sweden’s Niclas Fasth.
 
That was the tenth time The Open had been played over the testing Lancashire Links since the legendary amateur Bobby Jones won the first there, in 1926.  In the subsequent nine Opens at Lytham, Tony Jacklin, in 1969, remains the only British winner.
 
Over the years, both courses have been used extensively for R&A Championships, with Royal St George’s playing host to The Amateur Championship in 2006 and due to hold the Boys Amateur Championship in 2009, while Royal Lytham & St Annes was the venue for this year’s Amateur Championship in June.
 
Commenting on the announcement, David Hill, Director of Championships for The R&A said:
 
“We are delighted that The Open is returning to Sandwich and Lytham, both outstanding championship courses that have produced a succession of worthy champions.
 
“The Open is a huge undertaking for any club and The R&A would therefore like to thank both clubs for their cooperation, which has enabled the Championship to return to these two fine venues.”
 

British Mid-Am RIP

I guess they don't have enough college players to motivate the over-25 set to enter...

THE R&A TO DISCONTINUE BRITISH MID-AMATEUR
 
The R&A has elected to discontinue the British Mid-Amateur Championship and remove it from its championship calendar. The British Mid-Amateur, first played in 1995, restricts entry to male amateur golfers aged 25 and over.   Despite various reviews of the championship over recent years, small fields for the event and a subsequent lack of quality in depth, mean that the event is no longer viable.
 
Commenting on the decision The R&A’s Director of Championships, David Hill, said: "The British Mid-Amateur has produced some notable champions beginning with Gary Wolstenholme in 1995 but it has struggled to establish itself as a sufficiently distinctive event in the British men's amateur golfing calendar.”
 
Matthew Cryer will be the final player to have his name engraved on the Mid Amateur trophy, having won earlier this year at Alwoodley Golf Club. A place in history awaits the Englishman as the trophy is destined for the British Golf Museum in one year’s time.
 

Walker Cup Web Sites

Yes, there are two official sites for this weekend's Walker Cup at the splendid Royal County Down (no, television does not do it justice).

The R&A has their own site while the USGA also features an original site (including John Mummert's image posted to the left).

According to the USGA, the Walker Cup will be televised on ABC from 2-4 EST Sunday. I'd check local listings though just in case.  After all it may be on ESPN on ABC.

Club Adjustability Rule Change

From the R&A press release on rule changes to accomodate adjustable clubs:

“We believe that the Rule change regarding club adjustability will create opportunities for both manufacturers and golfers alike, without diminishing the challenge of the game,” said David Rickman, R&A Director of Rules and Equipment Standards.

“Top professional golfers have long had the opportunity to have their clubs adjusted or modified quickly and often. This has allowed them to ‘fit’ their clubs to their swings as they wished. By changing the Rules to permit greater club adjustability, all golfers will have the opportunity to enjoy similar fitting benefits” added Rickman.

Yes, the benefits of tour vans will be felt by millions of golfers with this move! 

Update on 2007-08-29 13:54 by Geoff

Huh, an oddly similar quote from the USGA's Dick Rugge. You know what they say great minds...

“We believe that helping average golfers without taking away from the challenge of the game is a good thing for golf,” said Dick Rugge, USGA senior technical director.

“PGA Tour players have long had the opportunity to have their clubs adjusted or modified quickly and often. This has allowed them to fit their clubs to their swings as they feel the need to do so. By relaxing the rules to permit club adjustability, average golfers can enjoy similar fitting benefits.”