Potter Interviews Finchem

The USA Today's Jerry Potter interviews Tim Finchem about the state of the Tour and the game. It's pretty dull, except this bit on technology.

Q: A question now about technology. It's a big issue. I know you guys have done a lot of research on that through ShotLink. There are people saying they should roll back the golf ball, make other changes. Do you have any information now that will give you a better idea about how you should react to this?

A: I think we're not ready to pull the trigger on that decision just yet. The USGA is experimenting with some new golf balls that actually do that, or are intended to do that, to curb distance a little bit. We'll see where they go with that work.

Now, if I'm not mistaken, the USGA scoffed at the accuracy of Frank Hannigan's 2004 "Miracle Ball" exclusive. The USGA/R&A have said they were collecting balls for study, yet Dick Rugge has said that the USGA does not believe the ball should be rolled back. And the USGA has said that they nor the R&A have received rolled back balls from manufacturers for study.

Yet the commissioner says they are experimenting? Encouraging if true. Continue...

The other changes that have been made to revise the overall distance standard, and put a limit on what happens with the configuration of the face of the golf club, and things of that nature we think have had a good effect. I do think that we need to continue to look at distance. We're meeting with the other elements of the industry — the USGA, the R&A, Augusta National, the PGA — on a regular basis. And we recognize that regardless of what you do with limits on equipment, the players continue to get bigger and stronger. ... And even if you don't do anything at all with equipment to enhance it further, which I don't think will happen, that athleticism that's coming into the sport is going to continue to create a situation that these golf courses are challenged in ways that they haven't been in the past. It forces us to set them up in different ways, which in some cases may not be advantageous. So it's something we've got to look carefully at. 

Not sure what you all think, but Finchem was much more clear two years ago:

"There is some point -- nobody knows where it is -- when the amateur player feels divorced and really doesn't appreciate the game at this level, just because it's so different that it doesn't become particularly relevant," Finchem told the Palm Beach Post. "The second thing is, if everybody is driving every par 4, it's not particularly interesting to watch.

"We are anxious, because we are continuing to see some distance enhancements in a short period of time. Unless something happens, we may have to move toward bifurcating the equipment specs for amateurs and professionals. In that case, we would be more involved."

Dawson's Speak

Lawrence Donegan reports on the significant changes to Birkdale (analyzed in a post below) for the 2008 Open Championship. Donegan has this quote from Peter Dawson, who is defending the need to drastically change a storied Open venue:

"Players are getting bigger, better and stronger and we, in conjunction with the golf club itself, felt there was the need to keep the test of golf presented by Birkdale up to date. Technology has [also] been a factor in these changes. It is advancing and it would be daft for the Open Championship organisers not to recognise that fact."

But here's Dawson the day after July's Open Championship finished, an event where the driving distance average was up 27 yards over the previous Open:

"Hitting distances have reached a plateau. This is definitely happening; all this discussion that players are hitting the ball further is not true."

Donegan also writes:

...the news that a venue acknowledged by some as the best on the Open Championship rota is to undergo such extensive surgery will add fuel to the on-going debate over the introduction of a new ball, not least because this announcement comes days after a similar plan to toughen up another Open venue, Turnberry.

The Scottish course is to gain an extra 200 yards as well as 30 new bunkers in time to host the Open in 2009. "We needed to meet the challenges of the modern game," Paul Burley, Turnberry's director of golf, said yesterday. "The players are so much more athletic, the ball is flying so much further and golf technology has come on leaps and bounds in the last few years.

30 new bunkers? 

These guys make Hootie's approach to Augusta look subtle, tender and respectful.

Truth Behind The Power Game

Just when you think it's safe to go out, up comes another rabblerousing, technophobic, anti-technology, oh, my favorite, ranting distance killjoy (and that didn't even come from a manufacturer!).

Mike Clayton writes about his recent retro round at Royal Melbourne with Geoff Ogilvy, and then writes about the distance issue. Thanks to readers Mark and Graeme for the heads up on this one.

There can only be one answer if pro golf is not going to descend into an increasingly unwatchable television spectacle played largely with drivers, wedges and putters.

But Mike, the ratings are down in all sports...well, wait, not the NFL and Nascar.

Jack Nicklaus has advocated a ball for amateurs and another for elite players. Administrators argue they don't want to create two games but that is what we have now.

A "newer and better" model comes out every year and there isn't a touring pro with a three wood or a driver more than a couple of seasons old.

Profit is the manufacturers' primary motive and certainly that comes before what traditionalists would argue is "the good of the game".

Ball makers care not a dot that the best courses are obsolete in the sense of playing the way the designers intended. Their aim is to produce a ball that flies further and straighter than their competitors.

There is nothing wrong with that but when the administrators dare suggest winding back the ball, there are howls of protest. They somehow seem to think it will reduce their profits, but unless golfers protest by giving up the game because the ball goes 15 metres shorter, how can it possibly do that?

Anyway, there should be a different ball for professionals. The greatest thing the manufacturers could do is produce a ball for average players that goes further. Golfers will hit the same number of shots they have always hit and they need a ball to do it with.

What is unconscionable is manufacturers threatening to sue administrators charged with custodianship of the game if they suggest putting a cap on equipment advances. There must be compromise and innovation but the game and great courses need strong advocates who will not be bullied by those bent on profit.

Mike, come on, didn't you get the message. It's the agronomy!

Verdi: Can't Legislate Progress, Next Question

Bob Verdi asks and answers questions.

Did technology affect golf in 2005?

A tired theme, in our opinion. You can't legislate against progress. The big story in bowling, besides Asbaty, is the new scented ball. You can now collect the 7-10 split with an amaretto ball. In tennis, it was the introduction of a magnetic racket, which instantly returns to its original shape after you hit the ball and which doesn't smell like amaretto. Yet.

So, you're really not worried about emerging technology? 

I worry about technology when I call my bank two blocks away to find out whether a check has cleared and the person who picks up the phone is in New Delhi.

Here was Verdi last year writing about the issue.

Meanwhile, the piece inspired me to to offer a similar question and answer session to myself.

Did technology really impact golf in 2005, or is everyone from Jack Nicklaus to Arnold Palmer to Greg Norman to Tiger Woods suggesting this just to get attention?

A tired theme, in our opinion. You can't ask golf writers to do anything but cover stars on the PGA Tour. I mean, who wants to write about something that requires thought, historical perspective, curiousity, a grasp of science and a concern for ramifications beyond the PGA Tour?

So you're not worried about emerging technology?

Why, I'm a blogger? I'm not the one whose publication arrives in the mail three weeks after the publication date...during the non-holiday season. Or the one who calls customer service to get some Canadian telling me that postal works must be reading my issues.

The Power Struggle

Charles Happell of The Age writes about the distance debate and exposes more anti-technophobic troublemakers: Craig Parry, Greg Norman (well, he was exposed long ago) and Geoff Ogilvy.

Now 39 and in the twilight of a wonderful career, Parry, who stands 168 centimetres in his Niblicks, wonders where it will all end. How, he asks, will relative pipsqueaks such as himself remain relevant in golf's new leviathan age?

"I'm lucky I'm coming to the end of my career because I wouldn't like to be going out there now with all these strong young guys and trying to match them," Parry told The Age. "Anyone who's 5'6" and coming out on the tour now, they're going to struggle."

And that old anti-capitalist himself, Greg Norman, weighed in. 

Greg Norman told The Age last week it was time the rule-makers at the Royal and Ancient Golf Club and the United States Golf Association put a stop to the nonsense and applied the brakes to this runaway train.

"For someone like Craig Parry, it's tough. I really think it's time we woke up and put restrictions on the equipment being used by the pros," Norman said.

The former world No. 1, who now spends much of his time designing courses, said each year, his new designs have to be altered to take into account increasingly sophisticated technology.

"It affects our design work each year," he said. "Now we've got the landing areas at 300 yards (274 metres), and carries over bunkers are now something like 310 (283 metres). Back in the

old days, it was something like 265 yards (242 metres); that's how much it's changed."

And finally, guys named Geoff clearly just don't get it.

Australia's Geoff Ogilvy is a child of the 1980s, and someone who has known nothing but metal-headed drivers, graphite shafts and these new multi-layer, soft-core balls.

Two weeks ago, at Royal Melbourne, playing with Bob Shearer and Mike Clayton, the group used a number of clubs that were made before Ogilvy was born: among them a persimmon driver, three wood and Slazenger one iron with a blade not much thicker than a letter opener.

Ogilvy found the experience fascinating. The shots he hit in the sweet spot went virtually as far as his modern clubs; the ones hit slightly off-centre sounded clunky and went a fraction of the distance.

At the end of the round, he decided it was not the new clubs that were the problem but the ball. "I realise now that the problems lie mostly with the ball," Ogilvy said.

"I feel very strongly that the balls should be backed off, certainly for the pros. It's a shame to change all these classic courses such as Augusta and St Andrews. We need a uniform professional ball."

It's The Shoes

First there were tees to supplement all of that improved athleticism allowing for distance increases, now we have shoes to add to the list of reasons guys are hitting it longer.

According to T.J. Tomasi, Padraig Harrington says of his Hi-Tec shoes:

The shoes have increased my ball speed from 166 mph to 173 mph. Each mile per hour is equivalent to about 2 1/2 yards, so that's an additional 15 yards on my drives. This has taken me from the top 100 in driving distance in Europe to being in the top 10 in the space of a year, which is amazing.

They've also taken his voice down two octaves and made his blond highlights almost look natural.

Unfortunately, his memory might not be so "amazing" since Padraig finished 13th in 2004 European driving distance, 30th in 2005.

Thanks to reader Tuco for this.

Barona Had Just One Obstacle...

Five-year-old Barona Creek (No. 78 in Golfweek's Top 100 Modern) has overcome its dated back tee yardage to earn the right to host two Nationwide Tour Championships. Tod Leonard writes:

With a hotel/casino on site and plenty of room for corporate hospitality and the expected 5,000 spectators, Barona's only obstacle to getting a top-level event was its length. At 7,088 yards from the championship tees, it was deemed short for today's big hitters with high-tech clubs. In October's Collegiate Cup, for example, Denver's James Love shot a 10-under-par 62 in the first round and went on to card 15-under in three rounds.

But the club has made extensive renovations this fall, adding 12 new tees to lengthen the course to about 7,500 yards. Several jagged-edged bunkers – among the course's standout design traits – were added. 

Where's the R.I.P. Ball?

This summer Lawrence Donegan wrote about a rolled back ball that a manufacturer distributed to certain people. As you may recall, it was stamped "R.I.P. Distance" on one side and "This is the ball Jack wants you to hit" on the other.

Now, the manufacturers haven't submitted the requested rolled balls to the USGA for their ball study, but one of them was able to make this ball and stamp it facetiously? Go figure.

Arjun Atwal: Another Anti-technology Anarchist

From one of my favorites, the Sunday Indian Express:

Q: Let’s talk a little bit about what’s changing with your game. Is technology doing something to your game like it’s doing to tennis, or with cricket — what’s happening with golf?

ARJUN ATWAL: Well, with golf, you know, they’re actually going a little overboard with the distance. Distance meaning the golf ball is going a lot longer when you hit it than it did 20 years ago, or maybe even 10 years ago. What that does is make old-style golf courses like the RCGC obsolete. They’ve become too short, not challenging enough. Anyway, today’s players work out a lot; they’re much, much stronger than players before. And you’ve got equipment which is far superior. But they can only go so far with the golf ball. I think Jack Nicklaus, who is the greatest player that ever played, has put up a point to the USGA and the RNA, which are the governing boards of golf around the world, that you must now put a limit. And I think he’s right. Otherwise they’ll be building 8,000 yard golf-courses and only the long hitters will survive. Shot-making ability will go from the game.

2,059 and Counting

2,059. That's how many PGA Tour drives finished over 350 yards in 2005 according to the Tour's stat gurus.

You may recall that last week the longest drive stat was looked at here, and it was pointed out that ShotLink was now tallying all long drives hit this year (unlike in past years where only drives hit on the pair of measuring holes counted toward the longest drive stat).

However, the 2005 list ended at 978 drives of 357 yards or more. 2,059. I had 1,500 in the pool.

Architects, change those turning points! 300 is out, bring on 340!

Shoot, might as well go with 350 just in case the guys really start hitting the weights this winter. 

Tiger On A Rollback

Kelly Tilghman interviewed Tiger Woods September 28th. Because a transcript was slow to appear and I was more interested in his surprising comments that he'll be getting in the course design business soon than expected, I missed this bit where he says there is "no doubt" that Hootie, the USGA and R&A want to roll the ball back. Thanks to reader Tom for the reminder.

And credit Tilghman for asking some fine questions in a tough environment (Nike plugfest). The entire interview is much more interesting than Tiger's usual game of press room Dodgeball. (Not that I blame him.)

Anyway, here's what should have made headlines:

Tiger Woods: Here's the deal, I have talked to Hootie and talked to the heads of USGA, also to Peter Dawson, they want to roll the ball back, no doubt about that. They want to put a speed limit and there is one now but they are making golf courses so long that you can't play some of the old championship venues. That's what they are afraid of. They are trying to protect the integrity of some of these major championship venues and the great golf courses, where they can still provide a great championship but not have us shoot 20 under par. But also to have it so that the average golfer can enjoy a round of golf. Well, that's the dilemma. New technology has helped the average golfer hitting balls slightly further and slightly more accurate. But for professionals, we have made leaps and bounds because our proficiency and to be able to make contact and launch the ball correctly each and every time. If you take the average consumer and they hit a driver, they have probably got old equipment five years ago to now maybe 10 yards, 12 yards carry, and we're carrying it to 25, 30 yards further than some of the guys. The further you hit, the more technology is going to help you. That's what they are looking at. They have got all these lists of numbers especially at Augusta, where we're landing the golf ball versus three years ago, and three years ago guys are hitting it 12 to 15 further in the air easily, everybody. That's what they are afraid of. That's one of the reasons why Augusta made some changes each and every year and are probably a leader in that.

I am sure there will come a point in time where they will have to slow it down because we can't play Merion anymore. You can play U.S. Amateur but a professional I think would probably shoot a little lower scores than they did. St. Andrews, if they have to change the course there to accommodate us, then you know things are changing. Hey, I am one of the guys that if they did roll the ball back, it would help me out a little bit. I would have an advantage. Any long guy who hits the ball long and high would have more of an advantage because now we're having to hit longer irons in the greens, other guys are having to hit hybrids and woods, so you have an advantage.

From a personal standpoint and competitive standpoint, I won't mind them rolling the ball back because I would have an advantage.

"Great Game's Long Goodbye"

It took way too long for John Huggan to weigh in on the Tour's '07 concept and the state of the game.

Oh but it was worth the wait.

A season-long points series will lead to a play-off-style Fed-Ex Cup involving leading qualifiers that will, it is hoped, identify the biggest draws in the game. Otherwise, America's ever-diminishing attention span, and its desire to satisfy an out-of-control gambling habit, may switch from fades to football even earlier than it does now.

Ah he was just warming up.

As always when the PGA Tour is involved, this proposed change to a long-established status quo has nothing to do with what may or may not be good for the game. To the surprise of no-one, this is all to do with money. Instead of taking a long, hard look at an increasingly one-dimensional product involving the use of driver, wedge and putter, Finchem and his army of sycophantic minions have gone for what appears to be a short-term fix: dazzling disgruntled networks with big names and numbers in advance of imminent negotiations for the renewal of television contracts.

Oh heck, why am I interrupting?

Such a move, you won't be shocked to hear, is shortsighted, and pays no attention to recent history and the demise of tennis as a participation/spectator sport in the US. As bigger racquets and hi-tech materials removed entertaining 'feel' players, such as John McEnroe and Ilie Nastase, from the upper echelons, tennis became more and more a power game dominated by big-serving behemoths. And not surprisingly, the public rejected that tedium. From a peak of 34 million in 1975, it is estimated that only 13 million Americans play tennis and only rarely does it make it onto network TV.

Golf is going the same way. The numbers are not pretty, yet administrators on both sides of the Atlantic do nothing to stop the game becoming more about grunts than guile.

Oh I'll stop here because he goes into that tedious USGA/R&A Statement of Principles stuff which you know all too well from the last week. And the various stats also thrown in your face here and here this week.

Demo Day at East Lake

An interesting item I missed (thanks to reader Peter for alerting me), came from Doug Ferguson's Tour Championship notes:

GLORY DAYS: For those who believe the golf ball is solely responsible for distance gains, the pro-am at the Chrysler Championship showed other factors at work. The wooden driver, for example.

As the PGA Tour reached a conclusion to its "Drive to a Billion" charity campaign, it had five persimmons drivers available on the first tee and asked players to give it a crack, then use their titanium drivers for the shot that counted on their pro-am scorecard.

Adam Scott hit it pure, a majestic ball flight with a slight draw to the middle of the fairway. Out came his Titleist titanium driver - same golf ball, by the way - and another beautiful swing. Stepping it off, it was 32 yards longer.

Davis Love III also ripped the wooden driver. His modern driver sent the ball 40 yards longer.

Guess the ball is overrated? Might as well just buy some run-of-the-mill Callaways since the clubs are doing all the work, eh?

Or maybe there is a unique ball-club synergy that allows players to exceed the Overall Distance Standard, and someone ought to test for that?

Tour's Longest Drive Stat

Not a big fan here of the PGA Tour's "longest drive" stat since Kapalua, Colorado and cart paths skew the numbers. Still, I found these numbers interesting in light of the USGA/R&A's 2002 "any further significant increases in hitting distances at the highest level are undesirable" benchmark:

1992 PGA Tour Longest Drive Stat
0 drives over 400 yards
3 at 350 yards or higher

1993
0 drives over 400 yards
18 over 350 yards

1994
0 drives over 400 yards
4 over 350 yards

1995
0 drives over 400 yards
22 over 350 yards

1996
0 drives over 400 yards
13 over 350 yards

Bored yet? Hang in there.

1997
0 drives over 400 yards
28 over 350 yards

1998
5 drives over 400 yards
46 over 350 yards

1999
1 drives over 400 yards
112 over 350 yards

2000
0 drives over 400 yards
42 over 350 yards

2001
1 over 400 yards
79 over 350 yards

2002
1 over 400 yards
80 over 350 yards

2003
1 over 400 yards
118 over 350 yards

2004
32 over 400 yards
210 over 350 yards

2005
19 over 400 yards
978 over 350 (but list stops at 357!)

Okay, before you go what the $%*& (like I did), consider this: in 2005, the Tour apparently started using ShotLink for the longest drive stat. So instead of taking the long drives from the two measuring holes, 2005 encompasses all of the drives hit. Still, you are probably talking about a significant number of drives over 350 yards hit in 2005. (I've asked for the number from the Tour, as well as the possibility of finding out the tally from the two measuring holes only.)

For another comparison that shows just how much those work out programs and brick hard fairways are compensating for the lousy clubs and balls, the Nationwide numbers still just worked off of two measuring holes in 2005:

2002
3 drives over 400 yards
125 over 350 yards

2003
9 drives over 400 yards
199 over 350 yards

2004
4 drives over 400 yards
138 over 350 yards

2005
4 drives over 400 yards
303 over 350 yards

Nearly double the number of tee shots over 350 yards since 2002 when the line was drawn?  

Something's going on. Either we're talking about optimization of launch conditions, better workout programs, widespread use of performance enhancing drugs, really firm fairways, or, did I mention optimization launch conditions?

Tiger On?

Not sure what to make of this from Tiger's pre-tournament press conference:

Q. You mentioned that you feel a 300 yard drive that you didn't feel in your 20s. What are the things you see later in your career that you might change in your game? We know MJ went to the fade away later in his career. What are some of the things you may incorporate into your game later on?

TIGER WOODS: I don't know. Certainly that's dependent on equipment changes, whether or not we're going to make any equipment changes, whether I can roll the ball back or not, reduce the club face or whatever we're going to do. You're going to have to adjust. I think that's the great thing about this game. You have to keep it fluid. Things always have to adjust. I have plenty on my plate to work on, all the changes I'm trying to incorporate in my game. That will keep me busy for a long time.