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 PGA Tour Driving Distance average rose a wee, wee bit from 287.6 yards following the Heritage to 287.7 after four days of golf over the artistic, glorious, character-rich and just plain soul-stirring Redstone. Brian Allee-Walsh of the New Orleans Times-Picayune sits down for a Q&A with Commissioner Tim Finchem.
Q: A local business leader said your decision to bring upwards of 50 corporate leaders to New Orleans to participate in Monday's economic forum will be the "most powerful thing to happen in our city this spring." What is your response?Oh some crafty editor inserted that (with) after the dreaded interface word. Somehow I think he really did mean to say "interface our customers." Just sounds so much more MBAish, don't you think?
A: It's a nice comment. I don't know powerful it will be. It should be helpful, because what we're trying to do is get the positive side of the equation in front of the corporate community and get them thinking about business, not just tourism, but business in general. We thought the best contribution we could make along that line was to interface (with) our customers. We have a broad range of companies that are involved in our tour. We want to bring those companies in and let them hear first-hand from the city, state and the feds about the future of New Orleans and why people are optimistic.
Q: How did the idea hatch?I know, I know, I was worried too. Platform has been on the sidelines for some time now, but it's back. Well, "kind of."
A: It goes back to last fall when our golf course was damaged and we had to move our tournament. We were trying to figure out a way to get things moving on our tournament. Then the community down there was telling us that there were some struggles with other sports and wanted us to be the first major televised sporting event to happen in post-Katrina. That was when we decided to move our Commissioner's Cup competition, where we invite all CEOs of our sponsoring companies to New Orleans. The idea to is to combine that with this message and use it kind of as a platform.
Of course, on the telecast that weekend we'll be trying to weave in some of the messaging that comes out of those meetings. We have a TPC club presence there and a longtime tournament history. So we're obviously about the community and it just made sense to try to help out.Weave in the messaging that comes out of those meetings. Let me set my TiVo now.
Q: How much did your business interruption insurance play into the decision for the PGA Tour not to reopen the TPC of Louisiana for a year after the storm?Oops! Where did that little cut slider come from!? Sorry I interrupted...
A: I don't know the details on that.
I don't think it was hugely significant. It was a combination of things. A lot of our employees got spread around. It had something to do with some of the work that had to be done on the golf course. Once we determined that we weren't going to be prepared to play the tournament there, and we were moving the tournament, that sort of took away the necessity to get the golf course ready that quickly. So there were a number of factors. I can't really speak to the extent to which the insurance-related matter figured into it. It may have had some impact.Given that most players hate the course, were you hoping it was completely destroyed? Oh sorry...
Q: Are you hopeful that the golfers will take time to tour the devastation for themselves?Uh, am I missing something here? What's interesting about the spouses tagging along?
A: I think they will. Interestingly, we've invited spouses with our corporate guests. Particularly in a situation like this you wouldn't see a fairly good turnout of spouses because it's partly a golf event. But a lot of spouses are coming because there is this interest in terms of where New Orleans is and what has happened. There's that side of it.
Q: You must be proud of the PGA Tour players' relief efforts and fund-raising work the past eight months, specifically the three Louisiana pros, Kelly Gibson, David Toms and Hal Sutton. Do you anticipate the contributions of your players increasing during the week of the tournament?Sheesh, relax, it was just an innocent question!
A: I can't speak to that. I don't want to assume anything. The players have families at home and they give an awful lot themselves for charities around the country. Our tournaments raised over $90 million last year for well-deserving charities. The players themselves raised over $25 million in fund-raisers around the country. People need to recognize that they do an awful lot. Whatever we're doing in New Orleans is just an extension of that. But it's also important to recognize that there are hundreds of thousands of people around the country who are impacted by what players do and what tournaments do.
Q: As you look long-term at the FedEx Cup Championship Series, what is your vision? Are you looking at this as a Final Four or Super Bowl environment?
A: The PGA Tour FedEx Cup Championship Series, those last four weeks, it's unheard of in this sport to have all the best players playing head-to-head in the same field week after week after week. It just doesn't happen. There is a question of stamina. There will be a lot of movement after these players are seeded. They'll be seeded after the first part of the season and when they go into the playoffs they'll be seeded again. It has a tremendously exciting potential to elevate a consistent relevance with the fans and will give the media a lot of things to focus on and continue to raise the profile of the sport. I'm very optimistic about what can happen. Now we have to execute and we have a lot of work to do to bring this on next year. I'm very bullish on it.
He's bullish! The part about players being seeded after the first part of the season is interesting.
And I don't know what this next answer means:
Q: Are you concerned that you might lose some elite international players who might be involved in the European Tour at that time of the year?If this doesn't make you laugh out loud, I don't know what will...
A: Not really. It may be that a particular player who's also playing the European Tour and isn't very highly seeded, he might not play in the FedEx Cup Championship Series. Mathematically, everybody has a shot and there's a lot at stake here. Each of these tournaments in and of themselves is going to be a big tournament. So you add it all up, I've got to believe virtually everybody is going to be playing.
Q: Is there one accomplishment you're most proud of during your tenure?See, I told you it was funny. Continue...
A: It's a very simple one. I'm most pleased that we've developed and continued a history of a close working relationship between the people who work at the Tour and the players.
That's fundamental. I think we've done a much better job of working closely with our tournaments and represent our volunteers out there on the charity side. There are a lot of specific things I'm pleased that we've done. It's like anything else in business, you can't move away from the fundamentals. There are things that might have more notoriety and have a little bit more flash that are great, but in this sport it's very important to have these working relationships. We have a great team here.
Garry Smits reports on Tom Fazio's latest masterwork, Florida's Amelia National (aren't we about to run out of names you can put next to National?).
You'll be shocked to learn that the course is going to be tough from the back tees, but still playable from the member tees.
"Tom did a very nice job," said 2005 Players Championship winner Fred Funk, who conducted a clinic and participated in an opening-day tournament, along with Fazio. "It's a very good test from the back tees, but it's also going to be a very good member's course."According to Smits, the only thing left is a decision on the signature hole.
Although a "signature hole" hasn't been established, it might be the 460-yard, par-4 18th, with a series of fairway bunkers down the right side. But the par-5 ninth hole, reachable in two shots for good players, is a twisting, winding beauty, and the parallel par-4 fourth (424 from the back tees) and par-4 fifth (405) form a picturesque pairing.The American Society of Signature Hole Comittees (ASSHCom) will have a tough decision on their hands. I say give 'em two signatures, the front nine and the back nine signature holes.
You may have noticed that AP story about Tiger Woods saying he may not play until the U.S. Open because of his dad's health?
Well, so far the vigil has included a 440-deep bungy jump (what a great idea!) and a $500k night at the MGM Grand's "Mansion" tables.
From the Las Vegas Review-Journal:
Playing blackjack in Las Vegas was more profitable over the weekend for Tiger Woods than his recent Masters appearance. Woods, who won $315,700 for sharing third place in the Masters, told friends he won more than $500,000 on the green felt surface at the MGM Grand's Mansion.
This may not be the endorsement he's looking for, but Monty has Paul Casey on his side when it comes to the 2010 Ryder Cup captaincy. Count me in too. After all, wouldn't it be fun to have the European writers rooting for America every now and then! What better way to have Huggan and Donegan and Lawrenson rooting for the red, white and blue than a Monty captaincy!
"I think he'd be a wonderful captain," said Casey, who is hoping to be in the team for the showdown in September at the K Club outside Dublin.
"I know it is not the same level, but I played for Monty in the Seve Trophy last year and he has been a fabulous captain for that."
In a world populated by truants, he is a true student of the sport from which he makes a living. Good grief, the man even reads books!And...
He's curious, too. At home for a brief visit over the winter, Ogilvy, with former European Tour professionals Mike Clayton and Bob Shearer, played Royal Melbourne using wooden-headed clubs.
"It was a whole new level of fun," he says, smiling at the memory. "You had to hit it well for the ball to go anywhere. The difference between a good hit and a bad one with a driver was about 40 yards. With a modern driver you can hit the ball anywhere on the face, really. The difference is only about five yards. Only afterwards, when I had thought about it more, did I get depressed by all of that."
Indeed, the modern game in general is a bit of a worry for Ogilvy, a self-confessed and unabashed traditionalist.
"Two important aspects of golf have gone in completely the wrong direction," he maintains. "Most things are fine. Greens are generally better, for example. But the whole point of golf has been lost. Ben Hogan said it best. His thing was that you don't measure a good drive by how far it goes; you analyse its quality by its position relative to the next target. That doesn't exist in golf any more.
"The biggest problem today is tournament organisers trying to create a winning score. When did low scores become bad? At what point did the quality of your course become dependent on its difficulty? That was when golf lost the plot. The winning score should be dictated by the weather.
"The other thing is course set-up. Especially in America, there is too much rough and greens are way too soft. Then, when low scores become commonplace, they think how to make courses harder. So they grow even more long grass.
"But that misses the point. There is no real defence against a soft green. Today's players with today's wedges can stop the ball from anywhere. The angle of attack and the shape of the shot mean nothing. It doesn't matter where you hit it, as long as it is between the out- of-bounds stakes or between the trees. And so the game becomes a one-dimensional test of execution, time after time after time."
As you'd expect, Ogilvy is a big fan of the endlessly-fascinating strategic aspect of true links golf, and the Old Course at St Andrews in particular. It was there last year that he finished fifth in the Open Championship, shooting the lowest score over the final two rounds.
"St Andrews is the best course in the world because of the shots it makes you play," he points out. "In our increasingly black-and-white game, the Old Course is a million shades of grey. Stand on a tee there, and you have choices to make about where to hit your drive. That's a huge contrast with any course covered in rough, where any decision has already been made for you. It's: 'Hit it here you're good, hit it there you're f*****.' Which is stupid.
"Look at the last hole. It is a masterpiece, all because of one little hollow in front of the green. You have a 150-yard-wide fairway, and you don't know where to hit it. One day you might want to get some spin on the approach, so you lay back a bit. Then the next day, you might want to go way left, so that you can access a pin cut way to the right. On another day, you might want to hit past the pin, and on others that may not work - all on a dead-flat hole with no rough and one little hollow.
"But, because the green is firm, it is one of the best holes in the world. Plus, everyone gets to hit the fairway. And everyone finds his ball.
"If the first game of golf was played on some of the courses we play today, it wouldn't be a sport. It would never have been invented. People would play one round and ask themselves why they would ever play a second. It would be no fun."
Ogilvy also has some strong opinions on Augusta National, where he recently finished tied for 16th place in his first Masters.
"I've read a few of Bobby Jones' books," he says. "I don't think he'd be that flustered by the addition of length. I think he'd have done the same, given the neglect of equipment by the USGA and the R&A. But there is no way he'd have grown rough. He'd have kept it 100 yards from trees to trees. And every blade of grass on the course would have been cut short.
"With the greens they have there, they don't need rough. Which is what Jones wanted. His philosophy was: 'Okay, you have 100 yards to hit into, you tell me where you want to go.' Move the pin 10 feet, and the other side of the fairway becomes the place to be. That's the aspect that has been lost. And if Augusta misses the point, what hope has golf got?
"My mind goes back to the Road Hole at St Andrews during last year's Open. It's the most fearsome hole in golf, and yet they had to grow all that silly rough up the right-hand side. If they hadn't, we would have been hitting chip shots to the green. Symbolically, they could not allow that. That golf hole is the reason the golf ball needs to be changed. It's no fun with the modern ball. I was hitting a 4-iron off the tee at the Road Hole! Are you kidding me?
"There are people who seem to think winding back the ball is impossible. Rubbish! All they have to do is get a ball from 1995, test it every way you can think of, then make those numbers the limits. Job done."
Lorne Rubenstein talks to Greg Norman about the Canadian Open and his issues with the PGA Tour:
"It's a shame that tournaments like the Canadian Open, which have had a tremendous history, are not kept up in the upper echelon of events," the Australian said. "I really, really, truly believe that, because national events are made by the competitors. I remember watching the Australian Open when Jack Nicklaus and Gary Player and Arnold Palmer always came down."
The result is that a once significant championship is reeling. It's becoming possible to contemplate the contemptible: that it could become a bottom-feeder on the PGA Tour, or disappear altogether. That's unlikely, but the scenario was once impossible even to imagine.
"A Canadian Open isn't just for the professional golfers," Norman said. "It's also what the Royal Canadian Golf Association does behind the scenes to bring out a Mike Weir into the world. That can come only through national associations and [a tournament like] the Canadian Open."
There was emotion in Norman's voice. He doesn't like a lot of what's going on with the PGA Tour, and has been trying to get access to its financial records. Norman's engaged lawyers to help him. He's been stymied, but said he won't give up. Norman wrote a letter to PGA Tour members before their mandatory meeting with commissioner Tim Finchem and his staff during last month's Players Championship.
"I needed them to know what I was doing," Norman said. "I didn't want them to be told what I'm doing."
Norman will have more to say in his new book, which is scheduled for October publication. As for now, perhaps the RCGA should contact him. Norman doesn't plan to play the Canadian Open, but the former winner and two-time British Open champion has a passion for national championships.
Someday, when the Champions Tour has been put out to pasture and folks wonder how something once so successful was run into the ground, they can watch the 2006 Legends of Golf and say, "ah, now I see why it died."
We kicked the week off with John Huggan's excellent update on Musselburgh, prompting reader tread softly to write, "Musselburgh Golf Course must be saved from floodlighting - for it's history alone..and what's wrong with a little sentimentality in an increasingly cynical world? and when was floodlighting anything but a harsh intrusion on nature's own 24-hour illumination set-up!?"
Regarding the ongoing Augusta National debate, I pointed out the difference between Hootie Johnson's view of long hitters and the views of most traditionalists (who don't blame the players for simply taking advantage of equipment). Sean Murphy chimed in, "Come on Hootie, Manufacture a True Golf Ball, and restore the sport to what it once was, 'GOLF'!" While Carl wrote, "Hootie, please restore, Jones's and Mackenzie's true test of golf. Manufacture your own ball, and lets remind the people sitting at home what golf use to be, and how it should be played."
We monitored the Augusta National course changes reaction. Jaime Diaz weighed in with a lukewarm analysis, as did Peter Kostis. Both are interesting reads worth checking out if you missed them the first time.
Gary Van Sickle analyzed the changes from the patrons point of view, prompting reader Glyn to say, "He has a point. There is so much roped off area it creates congestion and bad viewing. And also awkward flow getting from hole to hole at times." MacDuff, who attended this year, wrote that the "introduction of more seating areas has narrowed viewing on the whole. 14 green now only visible from the rear for standing patrons, small seating area to the left only way to get a good view of buried elephant. On 17 green no one could now see from right side i.e. Jack's 1986 putt from the famous film-clip."
Greg Norman was back in the news, still awaiting to see the PGA Tour's books, as he would seemingly be allowed to do as a member. Reader R. Thompson asks, "If Finchem was never a professional golfer, why would Norman have to ask for all of the financial information when that information is suppose to be made membership knowledge, especially with the organization being a non-profit."
The Tour is also not making any friends in Washington where Leonard Shapiro reported that the D.C. stop has been given a May ultimatum to find a sponsor. Pat wrote, "Finchem's strategy of lieing to Booze Allen about a TPC Avenal re-do and then lieing to members of Congressional in an effort to stiff arm his agenda into place has rubbed people here in D.C. the wrong way."
And M. Kavanaugh agreed and wondered: "I'm afraid that other title sponsors will follow in Booze Allen's footsteps, pulling those dollars and investing them in a manner which grants the corporate name more recognition.
The Phil two driver debate continued, and I remain somewhere in the middle of both sides on this. Some wonderful reader comments on this, with most making strong points in support of the idea that this is just a traditional part of the game, and not an example that technology has gotten out of hand.
Dan G wrote, "What about Ray Floyd adding a 5 wood when he torched Augusta the year he won? It's not like the idea of adding clubs based on the course you're playing just came about yesterday." Reader Simmz said, "Sarazen created the sandwedge; Travis utilized "technology" with the center-shafted Schenectady putter...While I personally embrace tradition, it is difficult to argue that any of these club adjustments and innovations are wrong when the governing bodies deem them legal >>> circling back to Geoff's original beef with the governing bodies - they have lost control of the game!"
Glyn asked, "What's the difference between 2 drivers or 4 wedges? A club is a club. If he wants to carry 2 drivers he has to take a club from somewhere else. The extra driver isn't the issue, the issue is that he can give up another club somewhere else because of how the game is played at the pro level."
While John V says, "If the club that he hits 25 yards shorter than his driver had a "2" on the bottom, none of this would have been news." And RM says "Phil is a pure shotmaker, and a crative genius. I would put his skills against any player from any era using any equipment. Golf is about making choices. He is obviously making good ones. I don't see the issue at all."
While St. Pete replied, "The issue RM is that professionals could take out 4 or 5 clubs today and not really miss any of them because of how far the ball goes today."
Tom Fazio seemed pleased with his changes to Augusta National and Winged Foot, and as always, pays no attention to what the master architects wrote or the potential ramifications. Reader af wondered if anyone is "concerned that land costs money,takes more money to maintain and potentially could reduce the number of people that can or even want to play the game.not to mention , maybe reducing the number of players based on size or strength of the person. we are losing the "greatest game ever played" and very few seem concerned."
Hux chimed in too with some killer MacKenzie quotes like this one: "It is often suggested that we have already got to the limit of flight of a golf ball. I do not believe it, as there is no limit to science.” And Hux wrote: "Seeing Mr. Fazio has gone to the 'scripture', does he believe what's good for the goose is also good for the gander?"
On the USGA position paper which I haven't had a chance to read yet, there were plenty of interesting reader comments. Smolmania: "if you try to tell me that JB, Bubba, Tiger and Phil don't have a disproportionate advantage over the Corey Pavins of the world, you've got your head in the clouds."
Pete the Luddite replied, "I absolutely loved reading this article and I'm glad you found and posted it for us. It shows all of us what we can do to lengthen our game if we want. Optimizing launch conditions will get you further off the tee than swinging out of your shoes at the ball. Dammit, my father was right all along while I was growing up. Swing smooth and hit the ball correctly. THAT IS THE MISSING/HIDDEN POINT OF THE ARTICLE: you will go further by hitting the ball best, not harder. Realistically, we aren't going to be able to warp up our swing speeds substantially, but we CAN swing better at the ball and launch it better."
The USGA, after years of silence on the distance debate (and the overall message: distance is a myth...great call there!). They issued their Distance Myths at the Masters and we are finally able to look at them.
Regarding the myths by Dick Rugge, reader J.P. writes, "Can Dick explain to the posters here how the distance exploded in 2003? Why the ball blaster isn't in use anymore to test Cor? And why Iron Byron was calibrated at 120 instead of 109? How long was the blaster and 109 used by iron Byron?"
Ryan Ballengee took them on in a story that prompted reader P. Bigley to write, "I looked at the differences between 2002 and 2003, wow! It appears the USGA choose money over principle. Sad."
Thanks to reader Brian for the heads up on this Bob Gillespie story in The State. In it, Tom Fazio pats himself on the back for taking advantage of the elasticity that Alister MacKenzie and A.W. Tillinghast left behind, and apparently they knew the governing bodies would sell the game out and change golf courses instead of regulating equipment:
So what’s next at Augusta National? Fazio defers to his boss — “Obviously, Mr. Johnson has control of that situation; he’s the guy to talk to” — but says there is room, and precedent, to add more length to the 7,445-yard course.
“If you look at the history of Augusta National, it would lead you to believe they’ll continue to do exactly what they’ve done in the past,” he said. “Mackenzie said in his book, which he wrote in the late 1920s and early 1930s, how golf holes should be laid out so when you walk off the green, you walk forward to the next tee. So there was that space available so you can add more length.
“Mackenzie had that in his mind when he laid (the course) out, and I assume he and Bob Jones talked about that. It’s a natural, obvious progression.”
Fitter, stronger players and technological improvements in equipment have shrunk many classic courses, and while the solution is not always length, that’s part of the equation, Fazio said. His work at New York’s Winged Foot Country Club, site of June’s U.S. Open, also involved lengthening the course.
“People say, ‘Where’d you get that length? We thought (the course) was out of land,’ ” he said. “But there was space. There’s always some space. That’s the history of golf.”
Yep, nothing a little dynamiting can't fix to uphold the one of the great traditions of the game: stampeding all over classic designs!
I wonder if Carolyn Bivens called Tim Finchem to congratulate him on this news of coterminous brand pollination, courtesy of PGATour.com:
NEW YORK -- PGA TOUR star Vijay Singh will appear on NBC’s “The Apprentice.” on Monday, April 24, from 9-10 p.m. ET/PT.
Singh, winner of three major championships and 28 titles on the PGA TOUR, joins Donald Trump and Season 5 candidates at the new Trump National Golf Club in Bedminster, N.J. Don't miss Singh's grand entrance by helicopter with Trump.
Donald Trump’s children, Ivanka and Donald Jr., watch as the candidates engage in an all-out street war while creating a souvenir program for Ellis Island. The teams race against the clock to take pictures, write copy, create and finally, sell their souvenir programs.
Gold Rush tries to break Synergy’s four-week winning streak and struggles amongst themselves while half of Synergy’s team misses the boat and gets left behind. The winning contestants travel to the Trump National Golf Club in Bedminster, N.J. to play golf with PGA TOUR player Vijay Singh and Trump.
Who’s on each team:
• "Gold Rush" -- Charmaine, Lee, Tarek, Michael
• "Synergy" -- Allie, Andrea, Roxanne, Sean, Tammy
The team with the most revenue from the one-day sales event wins and hits the links with one of the world’s best golfers, Vijay Singh. The losing team heads to the boardroom where another candidate is fired.
Myth's 5 and 6:
5. Most of the PGA Tour professionals swing at 120 mph or more.
False. The average swing speed on the PGA Tour is approximately 113 mph. There are some who swing at or higher than 120 mph, but they are clearly in the minority.
Again, one has to ask in this rather lame exercise, where has there been a "myth" perpetuated that "most" players swing at 120 mph or more?
These two myths are yet another reminder why these talking points were not a good idea. The overriding theme for those who skim this and report back to their 19th Hole pals will be that distance increases in recent years are a big myth in the USGA's eyes. (At which time, the group will have a hearty laugh and toast a drink to those wacky men and women in blue.)
Myth #6 is at least an attempt to refute the claim that the USGA dropped the ball on optimization, though some might say that's not the wildest idea either.
6. The USGA ball test doesn't control ball distance well enough because actual pro golfer swings are different than the test method.
False. The test method employed by the USGA, using a 120 mph swing speed, is representative of the swing conditions used by the longer PGA Tour professionals. The USGA tests balls like the PGA Tour pros hit balls.
So in Myth #5, 120 is suggested as an almost ridiculous number, yet in Myth #6 they tout it as the testing standard? Again, I understand the logic and nuance. But as a selling point to a large audience that you so badly need to spread positive word-of-mouth, it's hard to envision a positive response where constituents and supporters say, "see, they are laying the groundwork for action."
Is there a more clever purpose behind these myths that I'm missing? Please help!
The USGA has posted a lengthy position paper by Steven Quintavalla explaining how longer hitters are not getting a disproportionate advantage. I don't have time to read it today, but would love to hear your thoughts...
The worst kept secret is now confirmed by the R&A (no link yet): "The Open Championship will return to St Andrews in 2010, from 15 to 18 July. It will mark the 150th anniversary of the playing of the first Open in 1860 at Prestwick."
Geoff Shackelford is a Senior Writer for Golfweek magazine, a weekly contributor to Golf Channel's Morning
Copyright © 2022, Geoff Shackelford. All rights reserved.
