Anti-Flog Rough, Vol. 2

/

Blue Blazer said I left out something on the Anti-Flog Rough post. That's where I pointed out the silliness of the USGA trying to grow rough to different heights depending on the hole.

Apparently the theory goes that taller rough on shorter holes will somehow negate the advantage of long hitting floggers, even though it's on the long par-4s where the dump-and-chase approach works best. 

I suggested that it is a peculiar idea for the USGA to be manufacturing lies (of the playing surface variety) even though the organization has admirably been a proponent of "play it as it lies."

Then there's the idea that the USGA, which has denied altering course setups to counteract the benefits of  equipment deregulation, is actually doing exactly what it denies by using different rough for different holes idea. They appear to be trying to counteract changes in the game.

But Blue Blazer thought I should have also pointed out that the USGA has gone to great lengths to improve the consistency of conditions throughout its Open courses: same green firmness, better bunker sand consistency, etc... and here they are actually forcing inconsistency into the setup equation. 

Why? It seems the only logical conclusion one can draw is that this is an effort to eliminate flogging, a symptom caused largely by modern equipment and ridiculously narrow fairways.

So, can anyone think of a way that super high rough on a short par-4 like the sixth at Winged Foot somehow enhances strategy or rewards skill that a normal setup would not?

Titleist Seeks Patent For Reduced Flight Ball

/

The plot thickens.

Applying for a patent, Titleist is. The product:

A high performance golf ball having a reduced overall distance while maintaining the appearance of a high performance trajectory. The golf ball includes a combination of low CoR core and cover materials coupled with a less aerodynamic dimple pattern that achieves a reduction in carry and overall distance of 15 and 25 yards versus a conventional golf ball, while still providing the look, sound, feel and apparent flight of a conventional golf ball. A high performance golf ball having a reduced distance is also achieved by controlling dimensionless coefficients of lift/weight and drag/weight at certain Reynolds numbers and spin ratios for various CoR.

And here's what Tiger has been suggesting for some time now, slowing down the core:

One golf ball component, in particular, that many manufacturers are continually looking to improve is the center or core. The core is the "engine" that influences the golf ball to go longer when hit by a club head. Generally, golf ball cores and/or centers are constructed with a polybutadiene-based polymer composition. Compositions of this type are constantly being altered in an effort to provide a targeted or desired coefficient of restitution ("CoR"), while at the same time resulting in a lower compression which, in turn, can lower the golf ball spin rate and/or provide better "feel."

Here's where they acknowledge that some ball-driver combos are outsmarting the current USGA testing:

On the new USGA standard: Advances in golf ball compositions and dimple designs have caused some high performance golf balls to exceed the maximum distance allowed by the United States Golf Associates (USGA), when hit by a professional golfer. The maximum distance allowed by the USGA is 317 yards.+-.3 yards, when impacted by a standard driver at 176 feet per second and at a calibrated swing condition of 10.degree., 2520 RPM, and 175 MPH with a calibrated ball. 

Yes, this is probably just a technicality related the USGA ball study.

But I still say that the first company coming out with such a ball and if it finds its way to classic, respected courses, has a better chance of establishing dominance in the "competition ball" or "classic course ball" market. Or even the overall market, should the USGA act.

And if that company is Titleist, they not only solidify their well-earned place atop ball sales, they earn huge points for doing the right thing from traditionalists/purists/above average golfers, a sizeable portion of their Pro V1 customer base.

PGA Tour Wine

/

102505PGA_feat.jpgI know you've been holding off on two-buck-Chuck purchases (eh, it's a west coast thing) to buy the PGA Tour's new wine. Aged in only the finest creosote protected railroad ties from the original TPC Sawgrass oak, "The portfolio currently consists of three distinctive flights at various price points."

The concept behind PGA TOUR Wines was to combine excellent wines with sophisticated packaging to reflect the high quality and standards of the PGA TOUR brand and the lifestyle of golfers. “The TOUR is very excited about this new relationship as it extends our brand to our fans and friends in a unique way that reflects their chosen lifestyle,” said Leo McCullagh, Vice President of Marketing and Retail Licensing for the PGA TOUR.  

TGC Talk From Perth

/

You won't hear a conversation like this on U.S. television this weekend:

RENTON LAIDLAW: You were talking about the difference in equipment and how it has affected the game, Ken.

KEN BROWN: Well the modern ball not only goes a long way, but it goes very straight as well. So the dispersion of your iron shots going to greens, where you were going with 5s and 6s, now your going with 8s. Certainly the bunkerings now a bit remote. 230 yards used to be a big carry with the driver.

RENTON LAIDLAW: Is all this big hitting affecting the game? Is it a detriment to the game?

MIKE CLAYTON: Well I think it is. I think it cost a fortune to change golf courses. And people change golf courses for people people who are never going to play them. At Lake Karrinyup, we had a meeting and we had to explain that there is no point designing a course for Ernie Els. He plays there once ever ten years, and its a members course. And you start seeing ridiculously long courses that people can never play. I don't know how you design golf courses for pros. You need to make them 8,000 yards and if you make them that long--even 7,500 yards--you don't have any great short holes and it seems to me this is why the game is in a mess. They need to do something about it. J.B. Holmes is not going to be the only guy driving it 350 yards.

KEN BROWN: But who is going to do something about it?

MIKE CLAYTON: Well, the people who run the game. Does Titleist run the game or does the USGA run the game?

RENTON LAIDLAW: Kevin Flint for par [laughing].

KEN BROWN: You're very quiet Renton.

RENTON LAIDLAW: [Laughing]

KEN BROWN: An R&A member.

RENTON LAIDLAW: I don't think that really has anything to do with it. It's not at all relevant. [Laughing] 

Week In Review, Feb 5-11: J.B. and Jim

/

WeekInReview2.jpgThe week started off with a look at the election of Walter Driver to the USGA presidency and his inaugural Q&A.  Driver's annual meeting address was posted online, with the new USGA prez taking the opportunity to talk a whole lot about himself, prompting Ned Ludd to wonder "if President Oversized Driver has ever invited the parking attendant in the bottom of his building to a friendly round, or even to wash his hands with the Pine Valley Soap."

That didn't stop Jim Achenbach from declaring Driver a man of the people because of his speech (which included an introduction from Arnold Palmer (the jet fuel tab on that must have been pretty high if he came from the desert!).

Speaking of jet fuel, many of you jaded cynics wrote in to predict that Walter Driver and Fred Ridley used the USGA jet card to transport themselves to the AT&T pro-am, where they are playing to inspect Pebble Beach for the 2010 U.S. Open. Naturally, I'm sure they flew commercial.

The real USGA highlight came later in the week with the posting of Jim Vernon's annual meeting speech on equipment and where his committee stands with its research. The address was a landmark moment for a group that has in recent years struggled to take a stand, and now appears to be laying the ground work for a monumental decision. Stay tuned...

J.B. Holmes became this week's next great American hope with his stunning win at Scottsdale. On Saturday he displayed Spackler-esque distance, hitting an 8-iron from 198.

The inkslingers of America jumped on his bandwagon, already forgetting boring ole Bubba Watson (who they realized is not exactly the world's greatest interview). Holmes is working on his graduate degree in flogging at the young age of 23, and while Crankpot chimed in to point out that he lead the field in putting, Tom G reminded us that "Putts/GIR is a somewhat misleading stat. If you are hitting a wedge into every hole, the chances are greater that you will be closer to the hole for your birdie putt than the guy hitting 5-iron in there."

J.B.'s post round talk mentioned his 4 iron from 257 and his 3-wood into 17, prompting reader Jay to ask, "Are we entering an era where we say “what a shot!” even on a drive??"  This story on the flogging at Scottsdale suggested that the hard and fast fairways were the cause of Holmes' drives, and then went on to contradict itself repeatedly.

The Tour driving distance average jumped 2 yards but figures to take a hit this week at Pebble where most of the bombers are not playing and where the fog rolled in Friday.

I wondered if the Tour is on board with the USGA in case of a lawsuit, while reader NRH brought up a good question that hopefully someone can help answer: "wondering if any other visitors to this site with a knowledge of the law and restraint of trade precedent could inform us as to how such a case would likely turn out (beyond who has the best/most expensive attorneys of course)."

John Huggan slammed the Tour for not handling the World Golf Championships better, in a week when everyone finally noticed that the 2007 WGC's are all scheduled to be played in the U.S.

Tiger Woods reminded us that he's a traditionalist at heart, shooting down the notion that distance measuring devices should be allowed in pro golf. As usual a debate broke out on this hot-button issue and in light of that, I started a thread on the question of skill and these devices.

Jim Nugent of Golfweek made the LOL funny claim that Tiger could play in the NFL to assuage his advertisers prove that the equipment must not be regulated.

Gary Van Sickle's latest column elicited quite a bit of discussion on the issue of shorts on the PGA Tour, with The Duke questioning a photo caption including Tiger in shorts: "Letting players wear shorts might get marquee players like Tiger Woods to enter more tournaments."

I looked at the USGA's latest attempt to prevent flogging, and it seems they are going about it about as badly as you can imagine.

And if you don't to read all of this stuff, I appeared on Ryan Ballengee's excellent 19th Hole Golf Show to discuss most of these topics. The show also includes a chat with Frank Thomas about his recent survey.

Callaway Sues Acushnet

/

Callaway sues Acushnet over the Pro-V1 after negotiations break down.

According to the complaint, the Sullivan patents "revolutionized the game of golf" and "have done more to change the game of golf than any other equipment advance in the history of the game."
Now this is interesting, because Titleist argues that the ball is not the only thing uh, revolutionizing the game. But instead it's the optimization, athleticism, the agronomy (LOL!) and other fun stuff.

 
Yet here is Callaway saying the ball that they created and which they claim Titleist copied has "done more to change the game" than any other piece of equipment. Ever.

So much for these two lovebirds joining hands for a joint lawsuit when/if the USGA acts.

Weekly Long Drive Contests?

/

Chris Lewis says the Tour should have a weekly long drive contest to generate a little buzz, and he looks at how they used to have such events at Tour events.

I remember while doing research on Riviera's history that they used to have one at the L.A. Open, I believe down on No. 17 certain years. And in 1941 there was a long drive contest at the LA Memorial Coliseum. Babe Zaharias competed, as did Hogan who hit drives of 260, 256 and 259 yards to win. Babe hit two 240 yarders and one 235, returning to the site of her Olympic gold medal winning performance.

Today, if they tried to hit from the peristyle end  they might think about hitting out of the stadium!

Anti-Flog Rough?

/

Back in May when Sports Illustrated threw me in a room with David Fay, Brad Faxon and Larry Dorman to discuss the state of the game, Fay said it was his hope that the rough at Winged Foot would be 8 inches on certain short holes.

This, apparently to deal with the flogging mindset that became even more widely practiced at Pinehurst just a few weeks following the roundtable.

So in reviewing Jim Achenbach's recent column on Walter Driver, I found this perplexing:

Driver also would like to be seen as an innovator, so a major change in the famous U.S. Open rough apparently will be seen in his first year as president. Driver was chairman of the Championship Committee before becoming USGA president, and his fingerprints already are all over the U.S. Open. After the USGA lost control of course conditions at Shinnecock Hills in the final round of the 2004 Open, Driver wrote a collection of course setup guidelines that were successfully adopted at the 2005 U.S. Open and will be followed at all future U.S. Opens.

Mike Davis, senior director of rules and competitions, outlined the changes in the rough by saying that for the first time the U.S. Open rough will not be a uniform height. Davis indicated that the primary rough probably would be higher on short par 4s and lower on long par 4s.

Now, for the moment I'm going to disregard the fact that growing rough at higher heights on shorter holes only reinforces the idea that the USGA is obsessed with preventing red numbers.
 

And I'm going to ignore how disturbing it is that the USGA, obsessed (and wonderfully so) with "play it as lies" golf, is working so hard to manufacture lies. (No pun intended.)

After all, course setup staffer Mike Davis is one of the real bright hopes within the USGA. He and Tim Moraghan got Pinehurst through the '05 Open despite the meddling of Tom Meeks and Lord knows who else.

And I like the staggered rough cutting concept that Davis has introduced because it has eliminated the ridiculousness of drives just missing fairways finding heavy rough, while tee shots further off line find less penalty. Davis also does not seem pre-occupied with the winning score hovering around par, as some are.

However, last I looked, flogging really separates the bombers from the shorter hitters on the long par-4's, not on the shorter holes where the USGA plans to grow more rough.

So with shorter rough on longer holes, it would seem that the players will only be that much more encouraged to flog it off the tee to get that flip wedge approach.

Apparently, the USGA doesn't see it that way...

The theme here is easy to decipher: The USGA does not want long hitters to be able to exploit shorter par 4s by bombing their drives with impunity somewhere close to the green. Some kind of remedy needs to be found, Davis indicated, and variable rough may be one answer.

No Masters For Jack

/

Scott Michaux in the Augusta Chronicle puts to rest the rumors that Jack Nicklaus might tee it up in the Masters again.

"I received a letter of invitation in early January and have already declined," Nicklaus said Thursday in a statement. "(Masters and Augusta National Golf Club chairman) Hootie (Johnson) has not pressured me at all and, in fact, other than the letter of invitation, I have not heard from Hootie."