But first, on the lack of shotmaking in today's game:
One of the things we get criticized for in our generation is a lack of shot making, and I think that some of the modern architecture has actually called for a lot of shot making. It calls for hitting the ball far, hit with a lot of spin, and it doesn't really matter which way you work the ball, right to left or left to right. I think sometimes my era or my era of player basically gets criticized a little unfairly with the style we need to play, when really the courses that we play -- we play what the courses call for, if that makes sense.
No argument there. Could mention the lousy setups too. But, hey, why be picky when he says stuff like this:
Q. One of the things that's been kind of operating under the radar is the USGA has asked some of the equipment manufacturers, the ball manufacturers, to come up with a ball that doesn't travel as far as what we have today, and of course golf is the only sport that doesn't have a uniform ball. Where do you stand on that? Is there something there that needs to be fixed or should it be left alone?
JIM FURYK: What do you mean by uniform ball? I have a very strong opinion, but I need you to clarify uniform ball.
Q. You show up at a tournament site, like what Jack Nicklaus has talked about, and when you're checked in you're given five boxes of balls and that's what you're playing with.
Of course Jack Nicklaus has never advocated the idea of everyone playing one manufacturers ball, but we'll let the scribbler slide because at least he or she is asking about the issue, a rarity:
JIM FURYK: With all due respect to my idol, who I really respect Jack Nicklaus, one of my two favorite people in the game of golf along with Byron Nelson, I strongly disagree with that theory. The reason I say that is what ball would we use?And...
We as players have the opportunity to play different styles of ball, and I'm not talking about the distance; I don't mind that the distance gets reined back. I have no issue with that. Courses with millions of dollars of renovations, they don't always go over real well. I would say more often than not when you renovate a golf course, the changes aren't liked rather than liked, if that makes sense.
I wouldn't mind seeing the golf ball getting reined back or pulled back a percentage. But when you make every player play with one ball, I think you're treading a thin line there.
What I mean by that is -- I'll pick two players out. Tiger Woods, probably the ball that he plays on the PGA TOUR is probably the softest ball played on Tour. I had an opportunity to hit it at the Presidents Cup. I heard what other players said about it and how they felt it flew, and it's very soft and very spinny. He has a lot of power, generates a lot of club head speed and he wants a soft ball because he feels he can control the ball better with a lot of spin on it.
I don't mind, and I know our commissioner has worked with the USGA and has worked with some of the governing bodies to try and come up with plans for the future so that if the world of golf feels like we need to limit the golf ball, they're trying to put a plan in place so we can do that down the road, if needed. I think that's what the USGA is doing right now with some of the manufacturing companies, and I am all for that.
But I'd like to see the companies have a little leeway what they can do with the balls as far as making them softer, harder, spin rates, up, down to try to fit golf balls to players. It's one of the reasons I'm with the company I'm with right now, Srixon, is they can make a ball for me that I'm comfortable with.
You hear Tiger talk about it. When I hit a shot and I look up in the air, I want to see the ball where I expect it to be on a good golf shot. Companies are good enough now that they can adjust hardness, softness, launch angle, spin rate to give the ball a feel and look of how we want it to look in the air. I think that's very, very important.
Limiting it is fine; one golf ball, I would strongly disagree with.