It’s back!
Twenty years later Tatra Press has kindly allowed me to bring back Grounds For Golf now that golf architecture is of more interest to the masses. A new Introduction looks at what’s driven the interest growth and two new chapters I had a blast adding (plus a few edits to keep things up-to-date).
The Amazon purchase page for the book arriving June 15, 2026.
The story to coming out of Monday's U.S. Open media day: the use of some different tees to mix things up. Yet another sign that the Meeks era is over, the USGA's Mike Davis has plans to entice players to attack the par-5 12th at least two days, while playing one round from No. 3's 243-yard tee, possibly bring a lay-up option into play that served Billy Casper well in 1959.
Sam Weinman has the story.
Ryan Ballengee takes on the USGA's Distance Myths in a lengthy column that also looks at the Masters' identity crisis, caused in part by technology. Particularly interesting are his stats comparing the top 3 in 1995 v. 2005.
Meanwhile, the Cape Cod Something Or Other dutifully reprinted the myths as fact, so now there have been three willing takers.
USGA Distance Myth #4:
The longest hitters on the PGA Tour finish higher on the money list.Apparently myth #4 was designed to shoot down the theory that power has an extreme advantage in the game today. As with many of the other USGA myths, they seem to be creating the myths themselves to mask--surprise, surprise--reality.
False. While some long-driving professionals have been very successful, on average, the top 10 driving distance players have actually been falling down on the money list in recent years. From 1980-85 the average rank was 64.2; in 2000-2005 it was 77.1. The second worst single year average rank on the money list of the longest 10 drivers was in 2004 with an average rank of 103.3.
The "myth" that nearly every PGA Tour player subscribes to is that power is more important than accuracy today. And that the top players are thriving because of their ability to hit the ball a long way.
That myth appears true when looking at this breakdown of 2005's money list, where distance superceded accuracy:
Top 30 Average: 70th in Distance, 105th in Accuracy
Top 10 Average: 69th in Distance, 111th in Accuracy
Reader Pete the Luddite also provided us with an interesting graph on this same subject, looking at distance, accuracy and the money list.
Peter Kostis, yes that's right, Peter Kostis chimes in with a lukewarm review of the new-look Augusta. Now we know why he never joined in during David Feherty "living, breathing organism" speech:Bobby Jones and Alister MacKenzie designed Augusta National in the early 1930s, inspired by the Old Course at St. Andrews, which is exceptionally open and encourages a lot of creativity. Like Augusta, it’s no accident that the Old Course has always been a bombers' paradise. But with the changes, Augusta now dictates more forcefully what shots the pros must to play. Because of recently added trees and rough, you can’t drive the ball to some places that would give the best angle of attack. I don’t particularly like those strategic qualities being taken away, and because they couldn’t get the proper angle to attack certain hole locations, a lot of players in the 2006 Masters had to bail out and leave themselves long approach putts—or even intentionally aim for bunkers or chipping areas instead of trying to get the ball close. Consequently, the pros in this year’s tournament saw putts no one has had to make in years. And on Augusta’s greens, if you are on the wrong part of the green, you might as well be in a hazard, because the penalty will be at least one extra stoke with the putter.
Will there be more changes to Augusta National? If the tournament committee feels that they need to adjust the course to keep up with technology and maintain the shot values they feel Jones and MacKenzie had in mind, we may not have seen the last of the tweaks to some of the most hallowed ground in golf.
Reader MacDuff has kindly updated his mythical FedEx Cup points watch, post Hilton Head. Here is his point breakdown for those wondering.
1 Mickelson 15346.87 9
2 Singh 13234.37 9
3 C.Campbell 12837.5 11
4 Furyk 12712.5 9
5 Gf. Ogilvy 12237.5 8
6 Toms 11871.87 7
7 Sabbatini 11741.66 8
8 Pettersson 11333.33 11
9 Glover 11279.16 8
10 Olazabal 10875 7
11 Verplank 10725 8
12 T.Woods 10659.37 6
13 Pernice 10625 8
14 Mayfair 10479.16 9
15 Donald 10289.37 7
16 Weir 9809.37 7
17 Oberholser 9550 8
18 T.Clark 9547.5 9
19 Van Pelt 9277.5 10
20 Goosen 9162.5 6
21 Cink 8633.83 8
22 Gay 8500 9
23 Z.Johnson 8475 8
24 Lehman 8350 7
25 Villegas 8025 7
26 Ames 7975 6
27 Parnevik 7967.5 9
T28 Appleby 7925 7
T28 Els 7925 7
30 Pampling 7867.5 7
31 Bohn 7770.83 8
32 Love III 7762.5 8
33 Rollins 7675 7
34 D.Wilson 7425 8
35 Chopra 7424.5 8
36 JB Holmes 7420.83 7
37 Funk 7337.5 8
38 Vn Taylor 7237.5 6
39 Garcia 7175 6
40 Warren 7112.5 7
41 Jerry Kelly 7100 5
42 G. Owen 7062.5 7
43 Couples 6825 7
44 Franco 6800 7
45 Imada 6717.5 8
46 Barlow 6657.5 7
47 Bertsch 6550 7
48 Baird 6517.5 7
49 Fischer 6425 9
50 Choi 6400 6
51 Langer 6354.16 7
52 Jobe 6330 6
53 D. Howell 6262.5 5
54 Pat Perez 6262.5 7
55 Leonard 6220.83 7
56 Allenby 6187.5 6
57 Palmer 6166.66 6
58 F.Jacobson 6050 5
59 Bryant 6050 6
60 Rose 5991.66 6
61 Purdy 5975 6
62 JJ Henry 5875 5
63 M.Wilson 5852.5 5
64 A.Scott 5850 5
65 J.Ogilvie 5845 6
66 Crane 5770 5
67 N.Green 5662.5 7
68 Bjornstad 5655 6
69 Atwal 5625 5
70 Harrington 5537.5 5
71 J.Byrd 5500 4
72 DiMarco 5384.37 5
73 Curtis 5375 7
74 Hoffman 5332.5 5
75 Beem 5318.75 7
76 Waldorf 5225 6
77 Calc 5200 8
78 Westwood 5187.5 5
79 Slocum 5150 7
80 Hart 5137.5 6
81 Olin Browne 5137.5 7
82 Cabrera 5100 5
83 Bub Watson 5075 5
84 Branshaw 4937.5 5
85 Maggert 4937.5 7
86 D.Clarke 4900 4
87 RS Johnson 4875 4
88 Flesch 4805 7
89 Triplett 4750 4
90 Watney 4737.5 6
91 Senden 4625 4
92 Baddeley 4600 5
93 Matteson 4600 6
94 Barron 4581.25 5
95 B. Quigley 4525 4
96 J.Smith 4512.5 5
97 Herron 4507.5 5
98 Br.Davis 4437.5 7
99 Gore 4387.5 4
100 Gove 4387.5 5
101 Azinger 4300 5
102 Howell III 4300 8
103 Sluman 4287.5 8
104 Lickliter II 4225 4
105 Micheel 4225 5
106 Frazar 4187.5 6
107 Cook 4000 4
108 Dickerson 3975 7
T109 Veazey 3962.5 4
T109 Kenny Perry 3962.5 4
111 Lonard 3937.5 6
112 S.Jones 3912.5 5
113 Estes 3825 4
114 Faxon 3812.5 6
115 Pavin 3787.5 4
116 Immelman 3650 4
117 Lowery 3612.5 6
118 Leaney 3550 3
119 Kaye 3550 4
120 Kent Jones 3537.5 4
121 Petrovic 3512.5 5
122 Sindelar 3512.5 6
123 Gronberg 3462.5 4
124 Poulter 3425 5
125 Jimenez 3387.5 3
126 Geiberger 3312.5 5
127 Stankowski 3290.5 6
128 Sean O'Hair 3287.5 6
129 Kevin Na 3275 4
130 Katayama 3171.87 4
131 Gamez 3037.5 5
132 JL Lewis 3025 6
133 H.Stenson 3012.5 3
134 S. Maruyama 3000 5
135 Ridings 2912.5 4
136 B. Haas 2912.5 5
137 Garrigus 2880 4
138 Durant 2875 7
139 Daly 2850 4
140 WMacKenzie 2837.5 3
Because I admire his work and know that he's respected down in Augusta, I was dreading Jaime Diaz's Golf World story after reading the headline and subtitle: "On Second Thought, Masters officials knew precisely what they were doing when they executed the most recent changes to Augusta National."
But as with other headlines that celebrate Hootie Johnson as the architectural second coming of Tillinghast, the stories themselves paint a much different picture.
After Diaz lays out all of the worst case scenarios that didn't pan out (you know, because Tim Clark finished second), he then raises plenty of questions about the renovation and the way Augusta now plays.
Ben Crenshaw, in one of the apparently complimentary quotes, is really not very kind if you read between the lines:
"It's a hard golf course now," said Crenshaw, whose two Masters victories (1984 and 1995) came on a shorter, more wide-open track that allowed a kind of swashbuckling style that would be too low-percentage to fit the more stolid demands of the current 7,445-yard beast. "Every part of the game gets examined, and it used not to be like that," explained Crenshaw, who also happens to be a first-rate course architect. "You had times in the past where you had a green light, and it was so exciting to just let it go. Now, every hole is difficult. It's hard for a guy to really get on a run. You're trying to avoid danger. You've got to really watch it."
Sure, some will see hard and test in there and get excited (because it takes such genius to create a difficult golf course).
Then there was this from Geoff Ogilvy:
"I don't know if it's my place to say," said the 28-year-old Australian, who finished T-16 in his first Masters, "but I've been dreaming about playing here for 20 years, and I think what they've done is borderline tragic, to be honest with you. I don't have a problem with the lengthening, because it is ridiculous where we hit it. But the answer isn't to narrow the fairways, because that just takes away the freedom of expression that always made Augusta special. They should keep the length, but take out the new trees and cut the rough. Then they'd be back to having the best golf course in the world."
And Scott Verplank:
"Sure, they lost a little of the character of the golf course," said Verplank. "But the game has changed so much. If somebody would fix the equipment issue, Augusta wouldn't have to do this."
Another, anti-golf ball technology, Hollywood elite, media member. Oh wait, he's a player. Oops!
Also with the Diaz story is a sidebar on Johnny Miller's triumphant return to Augusta to kiss up to Peter Dawson as part of NBC's bid to get the British Open after a 12 year hiatus, he proves just how stunningly how out of touch he is by not only revealing he was unaware that major winners could play in the Wednesday par-3 contest, and then offered up this brilliance:
Though he considers Augusta National's latest course revisions to make good sense, Miller said he is not in favor of a rollback in the modern golf ball or other substantial equipment reform. "The professional game is in good shape," he insisted. "A good way to cut some distance would be to cut the fairway grass a little longer, the same length we played on in the 1970s. It would stop drives from rolling 50 yards."
Oh what a great idea. You know, because it's really all in how much the ball is rolling Johnny.
Note to Dick Ebersol: hire Faldo, and hire him fast.
Yes, George Willis in the New York Post actually tries to pass off as "news" this report on the USGA's tiered rough concept.
Even though the USGA's Mike Davis has talked about the concept since taking over for Tom Meeks, and even though this written explanation has been up on USGA.org for two weeks.
Here's a strange story about a man charged with DUI after flipping a cart that included his three youngsters. Thankfully, everyone is okay.
The PGA Tour Driving Distance average dipped from 288.3 after the Masters to 287.6 following the Heritage.
I knew those overhanging trees were good for something! By the way, how do they grow grass there!?
There was 1 350-or-longer drive, with the season total at 845.
I received a complaint from someone who said my recent Golfobserver.com column on Hootie was unfair. Why? Because this well-meaning soul said that Hootie shares the same feeling about the distance issue as folks like myself.
But actually there is a big difference. Well, several. First, most of us who like classic golf courses wouldn't hire Tom Fazio to mow them, much less alter them based on his track record.
But the primary point relates to something Olin Browne touched on in Rex Hoggard's Golfweek.com column:
"The powers that be have become offended by the big hitters."
This view came through loud and clear in Hootie's press conference ("If Hogan were hitting a damn pitching wedge.."). His anger over the situation is directed at the players, almost as if this were baseball and he was having to deal with juiced players.
But as comedian Robert Wuhl pointed out a few weeks ago, in golf the equipment is juiced, not the players.
Hootie and those trying to offset eye-opening driving distances need to direct their frustration toward the governing bodies, not the players or even course designers.
The "big hitters" and manufacturers are simply doing what they are allowed under the rules.
The rulemakers--many of them members at Augusta National--are the ones who have let the game down.
And some of the results may surprise you. Others may be crying media bias!
Golfweek's Rex Hoggard ties up a few loose Masters ends. First, there is this quote from Joe Ogilvie, reminiscent of Tom Weiskopf's cadaver line from a April, 2000.
"It's like if you have a really good looking woman, but after her 20th or 30th 'plastic surgery,' she really doesn't look as good," Joe Ogilvie said.
On the Masters ball concept, Hoggard seems to think the idea is still floating around:
A winning score south of double digits and an eclectic leaderboard may keep Hootie and the bulldozers at bay for at least a year or two. But it seems Augusta National officials remain interested in the idea of a "Masters" golf ball to combat the distance gains of modern orbs.
"What are they going to call it?" asked Nick Price at the Players Championship. "The dogwood ball? What do you do, turn around and tell the manufacturers we're going to play the dogwood ball this week."
The green jackets may be closer to creating a "dogwood" ball than some would think. Sources said last week officials were measuring not only the length of players' drivers, but which particular brand and model of ball went where.
And on the David Toms rant from earlier this week, Hoggard made this point:
During Toms' tenure on the PGA Tour's four-player Policy Board, it didn't seem as if he spent a lot of time rocking the boat. But since being freed of his elected duties, Toms has been pulling fewer punches than CNN lightning rod Lou Dobbs.
Earlier this week, Toms rifled a few well-aimed – and well thought out – 5-iron shots directly at Augusta National Golf Club.
"It's still a place where the players walk around on eggshells," Toms said. "It's like, the only place all year where the players don't feel like they are the most important thing there."
Although there are no shortage of prima donnas on the PGA Tour, Toms is not one of them, and his observations likely resonate among his Tour card carrying brethren.
Commissioner Tim Finchem drops a juicy nautical metaphor in this Bruce Berlet story on how Hartford landed back on the 2007 PGA Tour FedEx Cup schedule.
First, you might some want some Dramamine after this song-and-dance routine on the summer vs. fall...
"It was a tough call but we thought, for a lot of reasons, that it could work quite well in Hartford in the fall," Finchem said. "But that was a miscalculation of the attitude of the community, which felt strongly that it could not be as strong in the fall. That led to the shift in interest in the Champions Tour, which obviously isn't as big a deal but what [the Jaycees] thought might work better in the summer than the fall date.
"Hartford had always been a priority for us, but [its date] had moved around a lot and inhibited the tournament from being able to grow from a marketing standpoint. We never felt Hartford was a tournament that didn't deserve to be in the summer, but we just had to make some choices. We made the determination that we were going to lock people into dates as best we could, and we felt Hartford would be good in the fall because of agronomics, weather, being one of the top two or three courses in that time frame and being able to be marketed well."
Amazing what work it is to say "the 84 Lumber people were more willing to meet our price, then they changed their mind."
Now, for those permutations of the port of call...
"But the community felt they would much prefer to be in the summer, so we worked with them on all the permutations. We already knew it could work in the time frame and told St. Paul we weren't in position to do exactly what they wanted to do to trigger their commitment. But when 84 Lumber stepped aside, they were the first port of call and everybody got excited."
You know I've been thinking, the Commissioner could better tap into the youth market if he would talk more like HBO's Ali G. Using the Ali G translator tranzlata, see how that last statement could better connect with the coveted 18-34 year olds:
"but da community felt dey would much dig to be in da summa, so we worked wiv them on all da permutations. we already knew it could wurk in da time frame and told st. paul we weren't in position to do pacifically wot dey wanted to do to trigga their commitment. but whun 84 lumba stepped aside, dey were da first port of call and me crew got excited."
"Me crew" is just so much more youthful. Anyway, just a suggestion on skewing younger Commissioner. Yours in branding, Geoff.
Oh, and he also talked to Berlet about the FedEx Cup...
Finchem said the FedEx Cup points system is likely to be finalized at a tour board meeting in June, with major championships having more points but not "throwing the system out of whack." Players will accumulate points from January to mid-August, and those higher in the standings will have an advantage going into a three-event series in suburban New York, Boston and Chicago before playing the Tour Championship.
"Top players have to pay attention to the aggregation of points and that translates into the likelihood of playing a more concentrated schedule," Finchem said.
Ah, maybe he's been looking at MacDuff's FedEx point standings?
Steve Campbell looks at the new Houston Open design by Rees Jones and David Toms that is debuting this week.
If the Tournament Course lives up to the reputation of its designer, then the SHO should be a breakout hit. Rees Jones has established himself as major-championship course doctor of sorts, the man the United States Golf Association and PGA of America turn to when they want to upgrade a classic layout. The son of renowned course architect Robert Trent Jones, Rees Jones has performed major undertakings at the likes of Congressional, the Country Club, Bethpage Black, Pinehurst, Torrey Pines, Medinah, Hazeltine, Baltusrol, East Lake, Sahalee and Atlanta Athletic Club.
"I've been very fortunate in my life to have done a lot of these championship venues," said Jones, whose body of work includes Redstone collaborations at Shadow Hawk and The Houstonian. "The more I do, the more I understand what you must do to challenge the best."
Nothing like learning on the job!
To that end, Jones designed a course that plays longer from the back tees than any on tour so far this season. The Tournament Course is also 51 yards shorter than the adjacent Peter Jacobsen/Jim Hardy Redstone Member Course, which served as SHO's halfway home the previous three years. Jones describes the Tournament Course as a "neo-classic" design that favors strategy and shot-making over raw power.
Longest on the Tour so far, but it favors strategy and shotmaking over raw power. Makes sense.
One of the distinctly Toms touches was No. 12. The 338-yard par-4 is, depending on the wind, drivable. With the reward of a possible eagle comes the risk of hitting the tee shot in the lateral water hazard right of the green.
"I'm hoping they set up the golf course to let guys use that risk-reward strategy," Toms said. "We don't get that very often. There's always thousands of people around those holes, trying to see what the pros can do, seeing if they can make an eagle or a double (bogey). They're well-received with the spectators, and the pros like them as well."
Wishful thinking based on this year's course setups.
"The golfer has a choice," Jones said. "I think that's great for a championship. We're making them strategize. The winner will be under par. But we're making him manage his game by the green contours and the angles of the greens. He knows the easy route may lead to a three-putt or the harder route could lead to disaster but has a greater reward."
It all sounds so good.
Geoff Shackelford is a Senior Writer for Golfweek magazine, a weekly contributor to Golf Channel's Morning
Copyright © 2022, Geoff Shackelford. All rights reserved.
