Golf Lives: A Look At Genuine "Grow The Game" Courses

As golf’s leaders fuss over their PSA’s and other feel good grow the game efforts, we all know the sport will only really sustain players and passion if there are fun, relaxed and maybe a tad quirky facilities.

Callaway and Vice’s collaboration on Golf Lives is highlighting three “Home Courses” in Washington D.C., Portland and Gothenburg. This is just Season 1, so if you have nominations for similar places to highlight, please post in the comments here or message me.

Each piece, around 6 minutes, highlights the best of these places. I’m particularly enamored with Edgefield’s vibe and character, though having been to Wild Horse can attest to what a perfect golf facility they’ve created (and maintained).

The series can be seen on CallawayGolf.com or on Callaway TV on Apple TV and Roku. And below.

The description for volume 1:

“Opened in June 1939, Langston is steeped in a rich history. Known for its triumphant role in the desegregation of public golf, the course has been integral to the growth of the game’s popularity amongst African Americans. With its celebratory feel, Langston shows us golf is not only a uniter of people, but of generations.”

Beer drinkers and golf bag inventors will especially love Edgefield, described here but not mentioning the “Cartender” and the home-made bags created by a local:

“The air is fresh, the beers are cold and the vibes are electric at Edgefield. You'd be hard pressed to find a more laid back, approachable and enjoyable environment for a round. Overlooking stunning panoramic views of Northeast Portland, two par-3 pub courses (12 holes and 20 holes) wind through vineyards, thickets of blackberry bushes and a vintage distillery bar. All are welcome at Edgefield, especially those who have never swung a club.”

And the final film from Dave Axland and Dan Proctor’s Wild Horse design in Nebraska is explained this way:

“In 1997, the locals and farmers living in the tight-knit town of Gothenburg decided to build a golf course. A bank loan, a couple of tractors, and a whole lotta sweat equity later, their prairie land masterpiece is now considered one of the best in the country. Wild Horse is the soul of the community, providing unforgettable memories for all who play it.”

State Of The Game 83: Jason Day, Architecture Critic

Well started out with a few topics in mind and diverted down various (hopefully interesting) paths on the latest State Of The Game with Rod Morri and Mike Clayton. Those who play the ball-goes-too-far drinking game will have their moments, too. Stock up.

You can listen here or on your subscription feed.

Jason Day: Roll Back The Ball? Better Move The Tees Up!

In a new Golf World interview with Brian Wacker, Jason Day is asked about the prospects of a limited-distance ball at the Masters and the possible effect on the game.

First off, people would still play the Masters. But if they did that, then they better shorten the tees again. If we have limited-flight balls, we're going to have 4-irons into No. 7 and things like that.

Oh no a long iron! We can’t have that!

You see, the idea is to actually make long par-4s long again and par-5s risky again and maybe even get back to getting the fairways at Augusta National running instead of grainy and slow fairways. But go on…

But do I want the ball to go shorter? No. Why? Isn't it fun watching Dustin Johnson crush a drive over a lake 300 yards away? No one wants to see someone plod it down the right and not take it on. That's boring.

If you push trying to rein it in too far, then people will stop watching golf. People want to see risk.

Actually, when everyone can carry it 300 yards, the thrill of such risk taking is gone because it’s no longer risk. The reward for being genuinely long off the tee has been muted either because so many can do it, or because the courses have no chance of keeping up. That’s boring to watch.

The problem is the architects—some of them, anyway—decided that because the ball is going forever, they need to make courses longer to make them harder. No, you don't. Just be a better architect.

Psssssssst…most architects of the courses you play are….dead. They can’t be better architects.

Even after hearing these rationales for so many years, I’m still surprised at the level of misunderstanding about what is genuinely fun and satisfying to watch.

Video: The Great Distance Debate With Lucas Herbert And Mike Clayton

Nice work by Mark Hayes, Mike Clayton and Golf Australia to do some more extensive testing with various driver-ball combinations with professional Lucas Herbert. And most admirable of young Herbert to subject himself to the old clubs at his peril (he’s continued his fine year since being reunited with this Taylor Mades, in case you worry after seeing some of the shots hit with persimmons).

Anyway, I’ve spoiled the results above but I think you’ll enjoy watching this not only to see what the results are, but the impact of driver head size:

USGA, R&A Ask For Your (Distance) Survey Time

The USGA/R&A distance survey is a bit like a Robert Trent Jones design: needlessly long, seemingly takes longer to get through than you think, isn’t the most rewarding experience and you’d never do it again.

But unlike some tired old RTJ effort, this one really won’t cost you a dime and will entertain at times if you are intrigued by reading between the lines or general survey construction.

If you have a few minutes, please share your thoughts no matter your place in the game. In fact, the governing bodies have made a special point to let every day golfers know their input is most valued.

It took me about 12 minutes to complete, sparing them of any Max Behr copy and pasting or Statement of Principles jabs. I figured those would not be productive roads to take.

Here is the USGA version of the distance survey, and the R&A version can be found here.

Enjoy!

What Happens If We Make The Golf Ball Slightly Larger?

The old Spalding Magna, an oversized ball

Gary Van Sickle at MorningRead.com considers the distance matter and concludes something must be done based on the next wave of players coming along and rendering most courses obsolete.

I was curious about one of this three suggestions beyond the usual bifurcation options.

I’ll credit Tom Watson with Option One, and he concedes that he heard it from golf analyst and entertainer David Feherty: make the golf ball bigger. It’s already been done once. Golf in the U.S. used a ball 1.68 inches in diameter versus the ball used by the rest of the world, 1.62 inches. The British Open switched to the bigger ball in 1974, and the United Kingdom’s small ball finally went away in 1990 for recreational golfers.

Watson said that .06 inches may have made a 20-yard driving decrease. What would another .06-inch increase mean, and would that be enough? I’d love to see some research on that.

Indeed research is needed. Because we need another study in this game!

While it seems so logically simple, this option has the potential to be costly for manufacturers and more difficult to implement due to patents. Our old pal Max Behr swore by the old floater ball and still played it when others had moved on to more advanced pellets. As anyone who has hit shots with a ball different than the weight of the modern ball, is typically not enthralled in the way many of Max’s contemporaries loathed the floater. Whether this was a matter of resisting change, struggling to adapt or legitimate complaints about the feasibility of such a ball, we’ll never know.

Either way, when writing your governing body, do not hesitate to ask for a golf ball size study. We’ve waited this long, what’s another…year.

If you need some inspiration, here was Behr’s 1937 petition to the USGA to require the "floater” the official ball for golf.

From an unbylined New York Times story, Behr’s resolution: 

“Whereas, it is out opinion that golf as pursued today no longer reflects its ancient and honorable traditions which it is out wish to protect; and, in that the ball manufacturers, not the player, dictate the sort of golf that is played which, instead of reflecting its honorable past, in a sense has become dishonorable in that mere brawn off the tee receives an unfair reward at the expense of ancient ways of skillfully maneuvering the ball—no longer required to win—we protest against the perilous state that golf has fallen into.

“Therefore, we respectfully petition the U.S.G.A. that it decree its amateur and open championships henceforth will be played with a ball that floats in water. We firmly believe that in this way only may its ancient and honorable traditions be re-established and preserved for future generations to enjoy.” 

"How long will it take the governing bodies to rescind the new rule that allows players to repair any damage on putting greens?"

That’s the question Alistair Tait asks for Golfweek as the new rule book has come off the press and the strangest new rule in golf is just months away from debuting. I figured it would take a few years but given the scenarios presented by Tait, it’s easy to envision a revision sooner than later rescinding the right to “repair damage” in your line.

Rest assured, this new rule will unreasonably delay play. It won’t affect the pace of play of fast players. What it will do is allow the snails to slow down even more. Imagine the slowest player you can think of who takes an eternity on the greens. Imagine how many blemishes said player is going to find in his or her line. I can see a situation where players will make four or five repairs on a 15-foot putt. It’s not that long ago I saw a major champion repair three ball marks on a 10-foot putt.

Given the widespread improvement of putting surfaces in golf, perhaps the golf course superintendents of the world will save the governing bodies.

Then again, it could take just one or two weeks where greens are not ideal and the sight of players setting up shop to primp and repair a line will send fans looking for their remotes and TV executives to pick up their red phones.

Golf Players Poll: Brandel Up, Trump Down, Tour Setups About Right, A Third Concerned About Distance

The old SI and now all-Golf Magazine/Golf.com players poll is great fun as always, with bad news for President Donald Trump, good news for Golf Channel’s Brandel Chamblee and a host of other fun topics covered.

But since this blog leans toward course setup, architecture, history and distance debates, the obvious questions of note for yours truly:

ARE YOU CONCERNED THAT TOUR PLAYERS ARE HITTING THE BALL TOO FAR?

YES: 32%
NO: 76%

“I just wish I hit it farther.”
“Equipment has taken a ton of skill away from the game.”
“The problem is that the ball goes too straight.”
“Yes — 300 yards doesn’t cut it anymore.”

32% is a steady number given that 100% believe they are paid to say all distance, some manufacturers are actively pressuring players to preach distance and the PGA Tour and PGA of America leadership believes more distance will grow the game.

Three years ago, the number was at 29%, so the slight increase is amazing given the pressures exerted on players to brag about that athleticism and declare the joys of modern technology advances.

As for bifurcation:

SHOULD THERE BE TWO SETS OF EQUIPMENT REGS: ONE FOR PROS, ANOTHER FOR EVERYONE ELSE?

YES: 39%
NO: 61%

“It would ruin the golf industry.”

Amazing to think the golf industry is seen as dependent on what the players play, not on how much people are enjoying the sport or buying equipment based on need or design intrigue or something other than pro golfers.

This one is a huge win for the PGA Tour Rules referees. Huge!

TOUR SETUPS ARE GENERALLY…

…TOO SHORT: 0%
…TOO LONG: 7%
…ABOUT RIGHT: 93%

“Tour setups are typically, well, too lame.”
“Fact: No one bitches when they’re leading the tournament.”

That 44% thought Phil should have been DQ’d does not suggest much admiration from the PGA Tour set for the USGA rules committee.

SHOULD PHIL HAVE BEEN DQ’D AT SHINNECOCK?

YES: 44%
NO: 54%
NO COMMENT: 2%

“He acted like an idiot. If it were me, I’d be out.”
“He should’ve been praised.”

R&A Rules Chief Rickman Confident New Rules Will Speed Up Play

As the USGA and R&A rolled out the actual written Rules of Golf coming in 2019—please give them clicks, much editing went into this!—Golfweek’s Alistair Tait asked the R&A’s David Rickman about the proverbial elephant in the room: spike mark tapping.

While spikes are virtually gone, the idea that players can massage their line continues to not sit well with many, including yours truly, who is struggling to reconcile playing the ball as it lies while being freed up to manipulate the ground between your ball and the hole.

Besides the philosophic disconnect, Tait zeroes in on the past lessons learned from allowing spike mark tapping on the European Tour and Rickman says times have changed.

“It was an area in the extensive discussions that we talked about for some time because in all of this we were interested in speeding the game up, and this change in particular could potentially even go the other way. But what I would say is that it does present a completely different dynamic,” he said.

“I think we’ll see people repairing damage as a collective at different times. I think what you will also see is that the putting green surfaces will generally be maintained throughout the day through the actions of all the players at different times in a much higher standard. So those players at the end of the are only repairing the minimal damage that hasn’t already been repaired. I think in reality it will work.”

I don’t. And this is someone who believes in Rickman’s views on the rules. Primarily, I just can’t see how you can instill a “play it as it lies” mentality in today’s players or future generations when you can now make it lie on the greens. They already complain when all 18 greens are not of the same firmness and speed, and providing a free-for-all to manicure lines seems like less of a slow play issue and more of a core value undermining problem.

Certainly a case could be made that introducing spike-mark tapping could have alleviate pressure on supers to present perfect conditions. But the first time you watch an elite player turn golf into curling by massaging their line, I’m confident you’ll miss the old play it as it lies days.

We’ll find out soon enough!

"Strokes gained guru Mark Broadie’s pioneering analytics have radically altered the game"

Nice work by Golf Magazine’s Josh Sens to profile strokes gained creator and professor Mark Broadie as the stat has become more mainstream than ever.

Here’s a fun one I found in preparing for today’s Alternate Shot topic of best comeback win in 2018: Keegan Bradley is 174th in strokes gained putting heading to the Tour Championship following his win at the BMW Championship. Where, amazingly, he lead the field in strokes gained putting according to the numbers gurus at ShotLink:

While that number may be foreign still to a lot of fans, more and more people are understanding that the numbers say Bradley did something both impressive for the week and astounding given his season-long performance on the green.

For that kind of wisdom and satisfaction as fans in knowing something just a little bit deeper about the performance, we have Broadie’s work to thank. So for those who don’t know his story, check out the piece. And for those who do, I’m clipping this nugget as a tantalizing possibility on the stats front:

As for future projections for golf analytics, Broadie sees nearly boundless opportunity for exploration, limited only by the availability of good data. One area he has in mind is strokes-gained categories that account for factors such as wind, turf conditions and the contours of a shot. Another is quantifying performance under pressure, a topic Broadie has been working on of late. He believes he’s onto something.

“For mental toughness, the only stat that attempts to measure it is bounce-back,” he says. “And I think there are better ways.”

Hmmmmm!

Golf's Annual List Of Overpaid Non-Profit Executives Is Out!

As we near the final quarter of 2018, Golf Digest has compiled the salaries of golf leaders from 2015, the most recent year posted on various Form 990s. Tack on a safe 10% since and you can visualize how much golf's non-profit leaders are making.

John Paul Newport was charged with making sense of the numbers and noted the spike down in Ponte Vedra, but as he points out it's a large operation generating revenue on many fronts compared to other golf organizations making most of their money off one or two major tournaments. 

If Davis and his colleagues in golf's top nonprofit jobs deserve what they earn, why the big jump in pay for PGA Tour executives? Primarily because, practically speaking, the tour functions more like an entertainment business than a trade association.

PGA Tour Inc. qualifies as a nonprofit because it exists not to make money for itself or for owners and shareholders, of which there are none, but primarily to organize, support and create opportunities for its members, independent contractors that we commonly refer to as tour pros.

Eh eh, that's TOUR.

Anyway, the real standouts on this year's list include Mike Whan crossing the two commas line, a bevy of PGA of America C-level salaries climbing nicely, the NGF's Joe Beditz raking in $448k and of course, AJGA head Stephen Hamblin making over $500k now. Who knew junior golf could be so lucrative? Oh right, we learn that around this time every year. 

Chris Kirk: “The driver and the ball don't go any further than they did eight years ago."

Rex Hoggard on Chris Kirk's post-67 comments about "everyone missing" how the manufacturers have not made better equipment, it's just fitting and, sigh, better athletes who are propelling distance increases (including a major spike this year.)

From GolfChannel.com:

“The driver and the ball don't go any further than they did eight years ago. That's the thing that everybody is missing,” said Kirk, who opened with a 67 for a share of the early lead at the Dell Technologies Championship. “Guys are making it go further. People wanting to change the rule and change the ball and change the stuff, it doesn't matter.”

And there's why we don't consider PGA Tour pros as futurists.

DJ Tests Jack's 1-Iron And Persimmon Driver, Early Reports Suggest He Survives The Experience

We don't have all of the Trackman numbers, but with Jack Nicklaus' old 1-iron and driver it's said Dustin Johnson hit the ball 232 yards and 290 yards, respectively. 

Even better he survived the experience of hitting those non-game-growing, too-hard-to-hit clubs that somehow did not kill the game. Worse, it grew when people hit the ball shorter! Perish the thought!

Cool experience today at Bears Club. @jacknicklaus and @garyplayer wanted to see @DJohnsonPGA hit Jack’s old 1 iron and Persimmon driver. pic.twitter.com/eX0joF4AgQ

— Dustin Johnson Golf School (@DJGolfSchool) August 29, 2018

Poll: Are 59's Losing Their Luster?

I was at a golf course snack bar when the Golf Channel was showing highlights from Brandt Snedeker's 59 at the Wyndham Championship. It was the 10th such round in PGA Tour history and when some golfers looked up and asked if he'd shot 59, I said yes and they went, "ah that's great" and then went about decorating their hot dogs.

A decade ago, I'm pretty sure we all would have stopped what we were doing to watch all of the highlights and regale in the history playing out before our eyes. 

Throw in a 58 by Jim Furyk and it seems like the 59 has gone from golf's equivalent of a perfect game to a no-hitter. Still an amazing feat and worth dropping what we're doing to see a player break the barrier, but also not quite as satisfying as it should be.

Is this because of how many have occurred since Al Geiberger broke golf's sound barrier, perhaps coupled with the 13-under-par nature of the first three when par-4s sometimes actually required a long-iron approach?

Or has the role of distance, improved technology, amazing agronomy and golf courses put in a strategically untenable position played a role in making them a little less magical?

First, our Golf Central discussion, followed by a poll...

Are 59s Losing Their Luster?

Yes, they no longer are as incredible as they first seemed

No way, a 59 is a 59

Eh...somewhere in between

 

pollcode.com free polls

Distance Insights Project Goes Global To Confirm Good Players Are Driving The Ball Longer Than Ever

And now, a survey...

The USGA and The R&A to Engage Global Golf Community in Distance Insights Project

Sports Marketing Surveys Inc. appointed to conduct research to secure feedback
and perspectives this fall

LIBERTY CORNER, N.J. AND ST ANDREWS, SCOTLAND (Aug. 14, 2018) - In an effort to thoroughly inform the Distance Insights project through the lens of the global golf community, the USGA and The R&A will engage with golfers and a wide range of golf’s stakeholders to gather perspectives on the potential causes and impacts of increased distance, beginning in September. 

The Distance Insights project began in May as part of the governing bodies’ overall efforts to ensure the long-term sustainability of the sport. Primary and third-party research is currently being conducted to review historical data and ascertain the past, present and future implications of increased distance on how the game is played. 

In this latest phase of the Distance Insights project, research will be conducted with a series of golfers and stakeholder groups worldwide, banded into 12 general categories. Each group will be asked a series of universal questions to elicit broad perceptions of distance in golf, as well as group-specific questions relating to their area of expertise. The findings of the global perspectives research are expected to be a vital component of the full Distance Insights report, scheduled to be released in 2019.

Sports Marketing Surveys, Inc., an independent and international full-service sports research consultancy, has been selected through a global RFP process to provide multi-layered research and insight expertise for this phase of the project. 

Stakeholder categories are as follows:

• Championship committees

• Course Facility professionals/managers

• Facility maintenance providers, including superintendents/greenkeepers

• Golf administrative organizations

• Golf course architects/construction professionals

• Golf equipment retailers

• Golf equipment manufacturers

• Golf professionals/teachers

• Golfers

• Media

• Non-golf stakeholders

• Tournament golf spectators  

The SMS Inc. research will be conducted throughout the world and in several languages, including Chinese, English, French, Japanese, Korean, Portuguese, Spanish and Swedish, and involving golfers and those working in the industry in both established and emerging golf communities.

The work will principally focus on gaining an understanding from various stakeholder groups into how distance in golf has impacted them over their full golf experience, if at all, and its projected impact into the future. It will include analysis of feedback received to date from the global golf community, following the project’s initiation earlier this year. 

Information on the Distance Insights project, including frequently asked questions, historical data and general terms and conditions for submitting data, can be found at usga.org/distanceinsights or randa.org/distanceinsights.