Dawson: "We've studied the Old Course more than anyone else."

/

R&A Chief Executive Peter Dawson was asked by Rich Lerner to talk about the Old Course changes on the Golf Central wrap up of the anchoring ban coverage.

His comments in their entirety:

We've studied the Old Course more than anyone else.

Actually, I'd take Old Tom Morris, Bernard Darwin and Alister MacKenzie any day in that division (and they're dead!), but go on...

We do know that over time there have been many changes to the Old Course, bunkers have gotten smaller, there were three bunkers that don't exist now. Rough has grown up in places it never used to be.

Image Courtesy of Golf ChannelYes and I wonder who did that?

Rough has been removed from places where it once was. And the changes we're putting in now, and let me just zone in on two of them now. The Road bunker, which is rebuilt almost annually at St. Andrews because it gets so much traffic, that bunker has never been the same from one Open Championship to the next. And what we're doing this time is finalizing a design, enshrining that so that every rebuild of the bunker in the future will be the same as it has been this year.

Why that entails reshaping the front of the green well separate of the bunker, I have no idea.

And the eleventh green, which is getting quit a lot of publicity I noticed, well the left hand half of that green at modern green speeds in the summer time just can't house a pin position, a hole location.

Oh boy, he said pin position. If he'd said sand trap too he would have been forced to resign! #it'sholelocationtothebluecoatsoftheworld.

Because the slopes on that green, which were absolutely fine at green speeds a century ago, make that side of the green unusable either for championship or every day play.

Or even green speeds a decade or two ago. What changed? Ah right, the mowing heights and quality of the mowers and knowledge of the greenkeepers. How about we set an example and slow down the green?

So just a small reduction in the slope of that green will open up the green for a much wider range of pin positions close to Hill bunker, where Bobby Jones famously came to grief and will even the wear out on the green from a maintenance point of view. These are sensible changes being proposed by people who love and cherish the Old Course.

Proposed? More like dumped on a Friday, started on a Monday and without telling just about anyone!

Brett Cyrgalis talked to Dawson yesterday and also looked at the controversy for the New York Post. He had this from Dawson:

“I’m more than happy to walk around the Old Course with any architect that wants to see it,” Dawson added. “We know that piece of land and cherish it like no one else.”

Aren't all golfers architects?

First Anchoring Ban Question: Where Was The Data?

/

The USGA and R&A did an excellent job presenting their case both verbally and visually for the anchoring band. But I think many of us were anticipating some meaty empirical data to back up the USGA's case that players switching to this method have benefitted.

Graeme McDowell had suggested from his conversation with the USGA's Mike Davis that there would be data to back up the argument for this ban. (Brandel Chamblee had more empirical data on Golf Channel than the governing bodies presented and I hope to get that video up later.)

Randall Mell touched on this topic:

The USGA cites no controlled studies or experiments or research to support its argument that a new definition of a stroke is needed, and that will make the decision feel arbitrary to critics. It’s the Justice Potter Stewart deal. The USGA and R&A know wrong when they see it, and they saw the game changing quickly in ways they don’t like.

The lone data seems to be this, noted by Mike Stachura.

He also pointed to usage data that suggested belly and long putters were used by three to four percent of tour players from the 1980s through the mid-2000s before a sudden upsurge.

Davis said that in 2011 the number was 11 percent, and in 2012 it was 15 percent, and as high as 20 or 25 percent in some events. More importantly, Davis said, "in the junior game, where we've seen virtually no anchoring before, all of a sudden it's started to appear. And that caused us to say, 'Is this what we really want the game of golf to be in the future?' We came to the conclusion that fundamentally that's not part of golf."

Is this enough data to make the case?

Webb On Anchoring Ban: "It needs to be based off facts and not...what certain people think the tradition of the game looks like."

/

A few of the highlights from Webb Simpson's press conference today at the World Challenge. He was a good sport about all of the anchoring ban questions. His attitude is pretty impressive in this sense:

Q.  Do you think, assuming there is going to be a ban on anchoring you would switch to next year, even though it wouldn't go into effect until '16?

WEBB SIMPSON:  Yeah, I would switch as soon as I felt ready, so the way the process has looked like already for me is playing rounds at Quail Hollow with my buddies, and then it's going to be playing proams.  I'm just going to take it one step at a time until my comfort level gets better and better.  If I feel ready by Hyundai, I'll be putting with a short putter, and if I don't feel ready for two years, I'll wait.  I'm just going to go when I feel most comfortable.

And...

Q.  You've talked about the driver head and some other things being more negative in terms of impact on the game.  Have you expressed those views to anybody with the governing bodies, and if so, what kind of reaction did you get?

WEBB SIMPSON:  You know, it's a tricky situation for me because I know a lot of those guys well.  I know Mike very well, I know Jeff Hall very well, I know a lot of those guys, they're friends of mine.  And I think they've been great.  They've known that, hey, you're my friend, you'll be my friend no matter what, we'll continue the relationship, but it's okay to disagree.

It's an issue where you're going to have a lot of TOUR players over here and a lot over here.  But yeah, my argument the whole time is to change something that drastic, it needs to be based off facts and not so called what certain people think the tradition of the game looks like.  So that's why I've thrown out that nobody in the top 20 last year in strokes gained was using a belly putter or long putter.  This year I believe one person, I believe it's Carl Pettersson.

So that's the number one fact I've looked at to see, okay, is it really helping certain guys.  You look at how many guys are using a belly putter, long putter, and then you've got to look at other stuff.  You've got to look at the driver.  Long putter is nothing new.  I saw a highlight the other day, some guy in the early '80s was using a long putter.  I think it's becoming more popular obviously, but yeah, in 1985 if you drive it 280 you'd be the longest guy on TOUR; now if you drive it 280 you'd be the shortest guy on TOUR.  I think there's a lot of other things:  Golf ball, hybrids, there's a lot of other things that have caused bigger impacts on the game than a belly putter.  That's my stance on it.

But look, I'm not going to be one of those guys that says this is a terrible decision.  I'm just saying to make a change this big, show me the facts, and hey, they're the governing body, so we'll see what happens.

We'll find out tomorrow!