Jump to content

What is with the Hating on the USGA?


InTheHole

Recommended Posts

What was the point of the groove rule? Manufacturers were forced to change the way they make wedges, for what? To make the game harder for a handful of long hitting pros, or was it something else?

 

You said that the groove rule was "a joke." And I am asking why you think it was a joke. I presumed that it was more to you, than just an initiative that you disagreed with. Or, maybe that is all it is. But you said it was "a joke," and I am asking why it was a "joke."

 

 

Changing a rule for maufacturers and millions of players because you don't like the style of play from a handful of pros is a joke. Clear enough for you?

 

Uh, okay. So you disagree. Got it. The USGA has boxes of data on how different wedges spin. But what was the problem with "changing a rule for manufacturers and millions of players"? No one basically got forced into buying anything new. Manufacturers had plenty of time to change.

 

And it isn't about "a handful of pros." It has been phased in carefully to cover all of elite-level golf. So you're wrong about that.

 

I disagree with you. Does that make you "a joke"?

 

 

So in other words you don't have any reason for the rule, or have failed to mention it, other than the one I mentioned. Not surprised.

 

What exactly did the rule accomplish?

 

And of course I said the rule as a joke, not the USGA or Mike Davis is a joke, but you turn around say "Does that make you a joke" because you disagree with me. That is exactly the type of response I expect from the USGA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 471
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

What was the point of the groove rule? Manufacturers were forced to change the way they make wedges, for what? To make the game harder for a handful of long hitting pros, or was it something else?

 

You said that the groove rule was "a joke." And I am asking why you think it was a joke. I presumed that it was more to you, than just an initiative that you disagreed with. Or, maybe that is all it is. But you said it was "a joke," and I am asking why it was a "joke."

 

 

Changing a rule for maufacturers and millions of players because you don't like the style of play from a handful of pros is a joke. Clear enough for you?

 

Uh, okay. So you disagree. Got it. The USGA has boxes of data on how different wedges spin. But what was the problem with "changing a rule for manufacturers and millions of players"? No one basically got forced into buying anything new. Manufacturers had plenty of time to change.

 

And it isn't about "a handful of pros." It has been phased in carefully to cover all of elite-level golf. So you're wrong about that.

 

I disagree with you. Does that make you "a joke"?

 

 

So in other words you don't have any reason for the rule, or have failed to mention it, other than the one I mentioned. Not surprised.

 

What exactly did the rule accomplish?

 

And of course I said the rule as a joke, not the USGA or Mike Davis is a joke, but you turn around say "Does that make you a joke" because you disagree with me. That is exactly the type of response I expect from the USGA.

 

No; what is clear is that you think that the groove rule didn't produce any of its intended results. That is your opinion. And that is fine. Have you asked the USGA; "Did the groove rule fail to work out as you intended?"

 

But that is all that you have. I am pointing out that the groove rule was based on real spin data. There was a real difference in groove and spin performance. I think that the USGA is quite satisfied that they did the right thing. You can disagree. Again, it's fine.

 

But again I press you on the fact that you asserted that the rule was "a joke" and somehow indicative of USGA incompetence. As if your disagreement with them made it "a joke."

 

The rule was put into practice very nicely and according to plan. In no way was it "a joke."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The hate is so unfair. Why aren't they being praised and rewarded for their breathtaking incompetence? It's 2018 after all.

well according to millenials, its not the USGA's fault at all. the fault lies in the founding members of the tournament deciding it needed to be so tough - those are the cards they were dealt. now they just get to complain about it.

PING G430 LST / 9* (dialed to 10.5*) / HZRDUS Smoke Green 60 6.5

Dark Speed LS / 3w (dialed to 15.5*) / Denali Blue 70TX

Mizuno Pro 24 Fli-Hi / 3i / HZRDUS Smoke Black RDX 100 6.5
Mizuno Pro 245 / 4-GW / KBS Tour X

SM9 Black / 54,58 / KBS Tour S+

____________________________________________

Odyssey AI-ONE 7CH 35”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The hate is so unfair. Why aren't they being praised and rewarded for their breathtaking incompetence? It's 2018 after all.

well according to millenials, its not the USGA's fault at all. the fault lies in the founding members of the tournament deciding it needed to be so tough - those are the cards they were dealt. now they just get to complain about it.

What if I don't identify with a particular ruling?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The hate is so unfair. Why aren't they being praised and rewarded for their breathtaking incompetence? It's 2018 after all.

well according to millenials, its not the USGA's fault at all. the fault lies in the founding members of the tournament deciding it needed to be so tough - those are the cards they were dealt. now they just get to complain about it.

What if I don't identify with a particular ruling?

identify yourself as a lost ball.

PING G430 LST / 9* (dialed to 10.5*) / HZRDUS Smoke Green 60 6.5

Dark Speed LS / 3w (dialed to 15.5*) / Denali Blue 70TX

Mizuno Pro 24 Fli-Hi / 3i / HZRDUS Smoke Black RDX 100 6.5
Mizuno Pro 245 / 4-GW / KBS Tour X

SM9 Black / 54,58 / KBS Tour S+

____________________________________________

Odyssey AI-ONE 7CH 35”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The hate is so unfair. Why aren't they being praised and rewarded for their breathtaking incompetence? It's 2018 after all.

well according to millenials, its not the USGA's fault at all. the fault lies in the founding members of the tournament deciding it needed to be so tough - those are the cards they were dealt. now they just get to complain about it.

 

We'll leave that to the players.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't say that I see the square groove stuff as a real issue. I don't have the data to defend the decision, but the decision was implemented in a way to minimize its impact. Manufacturers were given enough time to revise their production methods, existing clubs were grandfathered in, nobody was forced to buy new clubs. What's the big deal? I'd suggest that the anchored putter ban was a bigger deal for many golfers, but even that decision allowed enough room for players to continue to use long putters. I do agree that anchoring a club against the body differs from the image I have of a golf swing. I'm surprised that nobody has complained about the rule outlawing croquet-style putting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

No; what is clear is that you think that the groove rule didn't produce any of its intended results. That is your opinion. And that is fine. Have you asked the USGA; "Did the groove rule fail to work out as you intended?"

 

But that is all that you have. I am pointing out that the groove rule was based on real spin data. There was a real difference in groove and spin performance. I think that the USGA is quite satisfied that they did the right thing. You can disagree. Again, it's fine.

 

But again I press you on the fact that you asserted that the rule was "a joke" and somehow indicative of USGA incompetence. As if your disagreement with them made it "a joke."

 

The rule was put into practice very nicely and according to plan. In no way was it "a joke."

 

 

So what were the "intended results"?

 

*crickets*

 

What was in the "real spin data" that compelled the USGA to compelled the USGA to change the rule?

 

*crickets*

 

Why is wedge spin such a bad thing that the rules have to be changed to reduce it?

 

*crickets*

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't say that I see the square groove stuff as a real issue. I don't have the data to defend the decision, but the decision was implemented in a way to minimize its impact. Manufacturers were given enough time to revise their production methods, existing clubs were grandfathered in, nobody was forced to buy new clubs. What's the big deal? I'd suggest that the anchored putter ban was a bigger deal for many golfers, but even that decision allowed enough room for players to continue to use long putters. I do agree that anchoring a club against the body differs from the image I have of a golf swing. I'm surprised that nobody has complained about the rule outlawing croquet-style putting.

 

+1.

 

I was always an agnostic on anchored putting a long putters. I felt sorry, for any poor bastxxx whose putting was so pathetic that they had to resort to something so ungainly. I didn't want to hurt them any more than a hole the size of a Scottish drain pipe was already hurting them.

 

But the USGA saw top-level junior players learning to play that way, and it wasn't for the yips, or a bad back or for arthritic wrists. It was to take advantage of an anchored stroke.

 

And so they wanted to ban anchoring. Trouble is, it is so damned hard to write and enforce a rule against anchored putting. I never envied the guys who were tasked with that rule-writing. But just because it is hard to write a rule doesn't mean that it shouldn't be done. It is hard to write a rule against insider trading on the stock market. That doesn't mean that we should allow insider trading.

 

I'm a hard-core; if it were up to me, I'd enforce an absolute length limit on putters. But even that rule is hard to write.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't say that I see the square groove stuff as a real issue. I don't have the data to defend the decision, but the decision was implemented in a way to minimize its impact. Manufacturers were given enough time to revise their production methods, existing clubs were grandfathered in, nobody was forced to buy new clubs. What's the big deal? I'd suggest that the anchored putter ban was a bigger deal for many golfers, but even that decision allowed enough room for players to continue to use long putters. I do agree that anchoring a club against the body differs from the image I have of a golf swing. I'm surprised that nobody has complained about the rule outlawing croquet-style putting.

 

When Bob Jones talked Joe Dey into banning the method in 1968 there were complaints registered by Gary Player, Prescott Bush and ...Jack Nicklaus!

 

http://www.slate.com/articles/sports/sports_nut/2013/06/croquet_putting_golf_s_unconscionable_ban_on_putting_between_your_legs.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At this point, I just wonder how much the USGA is paying people to defend their ill-advised decisions and attack critics.

TI Taylormade SIM (9.0°) Tensei CK Pro Orange 70TX
TI Taylormade SIM Ti (15.4°) Tensei CK Pro Blue 80X
Callaway XR Pro (20°) Diamana White 90X
PING i210 (4i-UW) DG X100
Ping Glide 2.0 (54°) DG S400 TI
Artisan MT Grind (58°) DG S400
Taylormade Spider X Chalk SS

Taylormade TP5

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No; what is clear is that you think that the groove rule didn't produce any of its intended results. That is your opinion. And that is fine. Have you asked the USGA; "Did the groove rule fail to work out as you intended?"

 

But that is all that you have. I am pointing out that the groove rule was based on real spin data. There was a real difference in groove and spin performance. I think that the USGA is quite satisfied that they did the right thing. You can disagree. Again, it's fine.

 

But again I press you on the fact that you asserted that the rule was "a joke" and somehow indicative of USGA incompetence. As if your disagreement with them made it "a joke."

 

The rule was put into practice very nicely and according to plan. In no way was it "a joke."

 

 

So what were the "intended results"?

 

*crickets*

 

What was in the "real spin data" that compelled the USGA to compelled the USGA to change the rule?

 

*crickets*

 

Why is wedge spin such a bad thing that the rules have to be changed to reduce it?

 

*crickets*

 

Did you want me to answer, or did you want to stay safe in a presumption that I wouldn't or couldn't answer?

 

Is *crickets* how I should go about answering my own questions?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://www.usga.org/rules-hub/grooves/common-questions-answers.html

 

Some information from the USGA regarding the groove rule changes. I'm not sure where to find the reports published in 2006 and 2007, but a reasoned protest of the rules should probably involve researching that data. It looks like the USGA actually did significant study before proposing any changes, and allowed feedback from manufacturers before they finalized the revised equipment specifications.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

See my edit above for the article that outlines it. THey even called the players quitters.

 

 

 

Look. I do not hate the usga at its core. I found the testing lab to be well run and very accessible when I've had to use it for irons to be tested. Very nice folks I've spoken and worked with.

 

But. That doesn't mean that the leaders of that great membership aren't clueless. Or maybe more accurate. Very calculated in their attempts to continue their cronyism, yet pretty transparent at the same time.

 

Here's a conspiracy I've just realized.

 

The Cat who is he superintendent at Shinnecock. Now. He was the guy who set the pin on the seventh on Sunday at Shinnecock 04. And was responsible for that green. Sometime between now and then he became super at the Chicago golf club. And now super at Shinnecock. Hmmm. Both original usga founding clubs. Hmmmm. Why would you promote the guy who was in he center of that fiasco so many times ? Hmmm. To keep him quiet ? To keep the " team " together ? I don't know. Just found it pretty odd.

 

 

 

still wondering about this guy >^^^^ quoting myself .....which is sad ..lol

Callaway epic max LS 9* GD-M9003 7x 

TM Sim2 max tour  16* GD  ADHD 8x 

srixon zx 19* elements 9F5T 

Cobra king SZ 25.5* KBS TD cat 5 70 

TM p7mc 5-pw Mmt125tx 

Mizuno T22 raw 52-56-60 s400

LAB Mezz Max armlock 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://www.usga.org...ns-answers.html

 

Some information from the USGA regarding the groove rule changes. I'm not sure where to find the reports published in 2006 and 2007, but a reasoned protest of the rules should probably involve researching that data. It looks like the USGA actually did significant study before proposing any changes, and allowed feedback from manufacturers before they finalized the revised equipment specifications.

 

Yeah the 2006 study was published. I recall it as a .pdf somewhere a long time ago. 2007 was a quick surprise follow-up, wasn't it? The groove thing is so settled to me, that I haven't given it much thought for many years.

 

I hope somebody looks it up and provides a link. I don't have the time to do all the research for my four-dozen or so opponents here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At this point, I just wonder how much the USGA is paying people to defend their ill-advised decisions and attack critics.

 

Not enough! I'll take just one million, of the 19 million that Wally Uihelin took home from Acushnet Holdings Company, Inc., in 2016. And for that, I'll work a lot harder at it.

Actually, I quite enjoy rebutting the lynch-mob mentality of the USGA haters. I don't have to agree with everything the USGA does to appreciate the very difficult things that they actually do. And I've yet to see anyone suggest a better option, other than one reasoned approach to a better handicap system.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No; what is clear is that you think that the groove rule didn't produce any of its intended results. That is your opinion. And that is fine. Have you asked the USGA; "Did the groove rule fail to work out as you intended?"

 

But that is all that you have. I am pointing out that the groove rule was based on real spin data. There was a real difference in groove and spin performance. I think that the USGA is quite satisfied that they did the right thing. You can disagree. Again, it's fine.

 

But again I press you on the fact that you asserted that the rule was "a joke" and somehow indicative of USGA incompetence. As if your disagreement with them made it "a joke."

 

The rule was put into practice very nicely and according to plan. In no way was it "a joke."

 

 

So what were the "intended results"?

 

*crickets*

 

What was in the "real spin data" that compelled the USGA to compelled the USGA to change the rule?

 

*crickets*

 

Why is wedge spin such a bad thing that the rules have to be changed to reduce it?

 

*crickets*

 

Did you want me to answer, or did you want to stay safe in a presumption that I wouldn't or couldn't answer?

 

Is *crickets* how I should go about answering my own questions?

 

 

*crickets* is my prediction of your response. I would certainly welcome your answers but don't expect them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...

...

...

...

 

15th, do you agree with the way the USGA handled the DJ situation in 2016?

 

 

Pretty much, yeah. I haven't given it much thought since then. If the feeling was that the damage done was damage to Johnson's confidence and psyche and self-control by informing him of the ruling under consideration, it didn't much matter, did it? If the question was, was it an incident that revealed some kind of insular arrogance of the USGA, that too was blown up by several things. One was that by informing Johnson early, the USGA was trying to make it as clear as possible as early as possible what they were considering. In response to other 'notification' kerfuffles.' But the USGA regretted that, and openly said so if I am recalling correctly. I think the ruling itself was a close call; I recall being torn about it. I wasn't exactly sure. That happens in sports, doesn't it? Close calls? And then in the end the USGA has taken steps to try to better deal with that entire scenario in the future.

 

I don't know; is "Dustin Johnson" the worst thing anybody can come up with, regarding the USGA? Personally, I think it is a non-issue which is why I'm probably not the best person to ask on that one.

 

Do you want this to be a trap question for me? I think if you asked the USGA itself about the Dustin Johnson case, their answer would be something like, "We are dissatisfied with how that occurred, and we want to avoid it in the future..."

 

I was just wondering if you agreed with how the USGA handled it.

I'm glad to learn that you think they handled it just fine.

 

I wrote what I wrote, Ashley Schaeffer. That is what I think.

 

Yeah. I know. You think the USGA handled it fine. Love it. It's perfect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At this point, I just wonder how much the USGA is paying people to defend their ill-advised decisions and attack critics.

 

Not enough! I'll take just one million, of the 19 million that Wally Uihelin took home from Acushnet Holdings Company, Inc., in 2016. And for that, I'll work a lot harder at it.

Actually, I quite enjoy rebutting the lynch-mob mentality of the USGA haters. I don't have to agree with everything the USGA does to appreciate the very difficult things that they actually do. And I've yet to see anyone suggest a better option, other than one reasoned approach to a better handicap system.

 

And of course I've made it clear that I haven't agreed with the USGA on everything, either. I agree with the USGA mostly, for good reason. So prefer to deal with specifics, and with specific reasons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's cause Mike Davis is an idiot. No special exempt for Retif Goosen but gives one to Erie Els and Furyik. The setup at Shinnecock will be so hard and take the players 6 hours to play will be boring and unwatchable. Us open is the worst major.

 

I'm on the fence on special exemptions but this one made me sad because Goosen played really well last week, won some tough Opens and is a great guy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's cause Mike Davis is an idiot. No special exempt for Retif Goosen but gives one to Erie Els and Furyik. The setup at Shinnecock will be so hard and take the players 6 hours to play will be boring and unwatchable. Us open is the worst major.

 

I'm on the fence on special exemptions but this one made me sad because Goosen played really well last week, won some tough Opens and is a great guy.

The groove rule was a joke. Chambers Bay, likewise. The anchoring ban, another joke. Anchoring was fine until someone won a major, then all of a sudden the USGA decided to ban anchoring because they didn't like the way it looked. And of course the rule was a mess which why there is still controversy about anchoring. The DJ ruling....ugh.

 

During the Open Championship you hardly ever hear anyone mention the R&A. During the US Open the USGA it is exactly the opposit.

 

I have made it a personal policy to challenge anyone, anytime they say something like, "the groove rule was a joke." My usual habit and custom is to first ask, "Why do you think it was a joke?"

 

And when they tell you why, which has happened a dozen times in the distance thread, you just turtle up and play "bad lawyer from NCIS".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At this point, I just wonder how much the USGA is paying people to defend their ill-advised decisions and attack critics.

 

Not enough! I'll take just one million, of the 19 million that Wally Uihelin took home from Acushnet Holdings Company, Inc., in 2016. And for that, I'll work a lot harder at it.

Actually, I quite enjoy rebutting the lynch-mob mentality of the USGA haters. I don't have to agree with everything the USGA does to appreciate the very difficult things that they actually do. And I've yet to see anyone suggest a better option, other than one reasoned approach to a better handicap system.

 

 

the best approach i can think of for handicap system is to use T scores only for a true index.... and anyone who wants to get strokes and doesnt have T scores can negotiate them on the 1st tee based on what his or her playing partners are accustomed to them shooting. Thats the only way we will do away with the baggers.

Callaway epic max LS 9* GD-M9003 7x 

TM Sim2 max tour  16* GD  ADHD 8x 

srixon zx 19* elements 9F5T 

Cobra king SZ 25.5* KBS TD cat 5 70 

TM p7mc 5-pw Mmt125tx 

Mizuno T22 raw 52-56-60 s400

LAB Mezz Max armlock 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At this point, I just wonder how much the USGA is paying people to defend their ill-advised decisions and attack critics.

 

Not enough! I'll take just one million, of the 19 million that Wally Uihelin took home from Acushnet Holdings Company, Inc., in 2016. And for that, I'll work a lot harder at it.

Actually, I quite enjoy rebutting the lynch-mob mentality of the USGA haters. I don't have to agree with everything the USGA does to appreciate the very difficult things that they actually do. And I've yet to see anyone suggest a better option, other than one reasoned approach to a better handicap system.

 

The PGA of America.

The PGA of America can adopt the USGA rules that make sense.

PGA of America Rules can govern all play.

PGA of America Professionals, who run the local tournaments, can interpret and apply their own association's rules for local tournaments.

PGA of America Professionals, who talk to players, give lessons, run youth clinics, and otherwise are on the front lines of the game, can give the feedback and comments directly to their own association to govern the game in the US.

The PGA of America can decide which "studies" it wants to fund using member dues, but the members, who are in touch with the game, will have a say on what is needed.

The PGA of America can decide which "studies" it wants to fund via other means, and outsource them to the lowest bidder.

The PGA of America can outsource equipment testing to the lowest bidder. The USGA can submit a bid.

 

In short, the Professional Golfers Association of America is WAY more in touch with the amateur game than the USGA. Somewhat ironic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No; what is clear is that you think that the groove rule didn't produce any of its intended results. That is your opinion. And that is fine. Have you asked the USGA; "Did the groove rule fail to work out as you intended?"

 

But that is all that you have. I am pointing out that the groove rule was based on real spin data. There was a real difference in groove and spin performance. I think that the USGA is quite satisfied that they did the right thing. You can disagree. Again, it's fine.

 

But again I press you on the fact that you asserted that the rule was "a joke" and somehow indicative of USGA incompetence. As if your disagreement with them made it "a joke."

 

The rule was put into practice very nicely and according to plan. In no way was it "a joke."

 

 

So what were the "intended results"?

 

*crickets*

 

No, not "crickets." You could ask the USGA, or write to them, or research what their thinking was. But you want me to do that for you, right? You could find and read the 2006 published study. And personally, although I don't speak for the USGA, I expect that their answer might be along the lines of, "The combination of technolgocially-produced distance, plus the desire/habit of utilizing longer rough around the greens to penalize errant shots, made us want to de-emphasize the technologically-produced control that comes from the combination of square grooves and urethane-covered golf balls in longer grass.

 

What was in the "real spin data" that compelled the USGA to compelled the USGA to change the rule?

 

*crickets*

 

It's in the 2006 report, among many other places including some university studies. Look 'em up. The data was rather consistent.

 

Why is wedge spin such a bad thing that the rules have to be changed to reduce it?

 

*crickets*

 

It was to do more, to reward play from short grass and to penalize play from long grass. Very generally. Incrementally, some might say. And of course the USGA's testing showed that it didn't much matter what sort of grooves you had, if you were playing with a down-market ball like an ionomer-cover ball. So that the majority of recreational players who never purchased urethane balls had nothing to worry about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Honest ignorance here, with an honest question, what organization was behind the Lexi Thompson ruling? That was the most atrocious decision I've heard about in professional golf, and painful to watch.

 

Honest, clear answer: it was the USGA.

 

And the USGA supplied a completely public accounting of the ruling, and the reaction, HERE. I commend it to you, straight up.

 

I thought it was the correct ruling. I have absolutely no problem, with any golf ruling as long as it is the right ruling. I don't care if it was caught by a tv assistant director, or a commentator, or a former USGA executive having a cocktail at home in Florida on his big-screen.

 

And by the way; what other sports league or front office is as transparent as the USGA?

 

Edit.; yes, the event was the ANA Inspiration, an LPGA-sanctioned event. That's probably a better answer, if you are asking who imposed the ruling. The Rules of Golf were obviously "behind the ruling." Too much USGA-defense on my mind this week, a/k/a "USGA Hateweek."

 

15th, do you agree with the way the USGA handled the DJ situation in 2016?

 

And the blaming of the super for loosing the greens at Shinnecock , when they know full welll they establish Control weeks or months before the event.

 

I blame the USGA completely for the Seventh green in 2004. Again, I say that what gets overlooked in that was the upset that the newly-developed urethane ball phenomenon was causing at that time, as the ruling bodies were coming to grips with an unprecedented distance gain in the few years preceding that championship.

 

In any event, I don't think that anyone at the USGA is blaming any superintendent or staff member now. And as far as I know, one person (Walter Driver) did that out of defensive ignorance or misinformation.

 

Tom Meeks, ex- of the USGA says that he alone takes the blame.

 

Again, isn't this a case of mythmaking taking over the actual story? The actual story is that a mistake was made, and it was made for a complex of reasons. But the mythmaking takes over, because the popular narrative is to try to find reasons to hate on the USGA.

 

And none of those reasons was the ball. The ProV1 had been out for four years by that point and the USGA had their hands on them before that point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://www.usga.org...ns-answers.html

 

Some information from the USGA regarding the groove rule changes. I'm not sure where to find the reports published in 2006 and 2007, but a reasoned protest of the rules should probably involve researching that data. It looks like the USGA actually did significant study before proposing any changes, and allowed feedback from manufacturers before they finalized the revised equipment specifications.

 

 

That is exactly why I think the groove rule was joke. They change the rule for everyone because they don't like the way the best players in the world are playing.

 

that the rough had become less of a challenge for expert players, and that driving accuracy was less of a key factor for success. The technical specifications were designed to restore the challenge of playing shots to the green from the rough by limiting the performance on those shots, therefore making sure that driving accuracy remained a factor of success in the game for expert players.

 

The funny part is that the USGA has made the rough less of a challenge in the US Open than it was in past years, but I am sure the irony is lost on them

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Our picks

    • 2024 Valspar Championship WITB Photos (Thanks to bvmagic)- Discussion & Links to Photos
      This weeks WITB Pics are from member bvmagic (Brian). Brian's first event for WRX was in 2008 at Bayhill while in college. Thanks so much bv.
       
      Please put your comments or question on this thread. Links to all the threads are below...
       
       
       
       
        • Like
      • 31 replies
    • 2024 Arnold Palmer Invitational - Discussion and Links to Photos
      Please put any questions or comments here
       
       
       
      General Albums
       
      2024 Arnold Palmer Invitational - Monday #1
      2024 Arnold Palmer Invitational - Monday #2
      2024 Arnold Palmer Invitational - Monday #3
       
       
       
       
      WITB Albums
       
      Matt (LFG) Every - WITB - 2024 Arnold Palmer Invitational
      Sahith Theegala - WITB - 2024 Arnold Palmer Invitational
       
       
       
       
       
      Pullout Albums
       
      New Cameron putters (and new "LD" grip) - 2024 Arnold Palmer Invitational
      New Bettinardi MB & CB irons - 2024 Arnold Palmer Invitational
      Custom Bettinardi API putter cover - 2024 Arnold Palmer Invitational
      Custom Swag API covers - 2024 Arnold Palmer Invitational
      New Golf Pride Reverse Taper grips - 2024 Arnold Palmer Invitational
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
        • Like
      • 15 replies
    • 2024 Cognizant Classic - Discussion and Links to Photos
      Please put any questions or comments here
       
       
       
       
      General Albums
       
      2024 Cognizant Classic - Monday #1
      2024 Cognizant Classic - Monday #2
      2024 Cognizant Classic - Monday #3
      2024 Cognizant Classic - Monday #4
       
       
       
      WITB Albums
       
      Brandt Snedeker - WITB - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Max Greyserman - WITB - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Eric Cole - WITB - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Carl Yuan - WITb - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Russell Henley - WITB - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Justin Sun - WITB - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Alex Noren - WITB - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Shane Lowry - WITB - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Taylor Montgomery - WITB - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Jake Knapp (KnappTime_ltd) - WITB - - 2024 Cognizant Classic
       
       
       
      Pullout Albums
       
      New Super Stoke Pistol Lock 1.0 & 2.0 grips - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      LA Golf new insert putter - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      New Garsen Quad Tour 15 grip - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      New Swag covers - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Jacob Bridgeman's custom Cameron putter - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Bud Cauley's custom Cameron putters - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Ryo Hisatsune's custom Cameron putter - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Chris Kirk - new black Callaway Apex CB irons and a few Odyssey putters - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Alejandro Tosti's custom Cameron putter - 2024 Cognizant Classic
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
        • Like
      • 2 replies
    • 2024 Genesis Invitational - Discussion and Links to Photos
      Please put any questions or comments here
       
       
       
      General Albums
       
      2024 Genesis Invitational - Monday #1
      2024 Genesis Invitational - Monday #2
      2024 Genesis Invitational - Tuesday #1
      2024 Genesis Invitational - Tuesday #2
      2024 Genesis Invitational - Tuesday #3
      2024 Genesis Invitational - Tuesday #4
       
       
       
       
      WITB Albums
       
      Rory McIlroy - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Sepp Straka - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Patrick Rodgers - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Brendon Todd - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Denny McCarthy - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Corey Conners - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Chase Johnson - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Tiger Woods - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Tommy Fleetwood - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Matt Fitzpatrick - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Si Woo Kim - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Viktor Hovland - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Wyndham Clark - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Cam Davis - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Nick Taylor - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Ben Baller WITB update (New putter, driver, hybrid and shafts) – 2024 Genesis Invitational
       
       
       
       
       
      Pullout Albums
       
      New Vortex Golf rangefinder - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      New Fujikura Ventus shaft - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Tiger Woods & TaylorMade "Sun Day Red" apparel launch event, product photos – 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Tiger Woods Sun Day Red golf shoes - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Aretera shafts - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      New Toulon putters - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Tiger Woods' new white "Sun Day Red" golf shoe prototypes – 2024 Genesis Invitational
       
       
       
       
       
      • 22 replies
    • 2024 Waste Management Phoenix Open - Discussion and Links to Photos
      Please put and questions or comments here
       
       
       
       
      General Albums
       
      2024 Waste Management Phoenix Open - Monday #1
      2024 Waste Management Phoenix Open - Monday #2
       
       
       
       
      WITB Albums
       
      Ben Taylor - WITB - 2024 Waste Management Phoenix Open
      Garrick Higgo - WITB - 2024 Waste Management Phoenix Open
      Billy Horschel - WITB - 2024 Waste Management Phoenix Open
      Justin Lower - WITB - 2024 Waste Management Phoenix Open
      Lanto Griffin - WITB - 2024 Waste Management Phoenix Open
      Bud Cauley - WITB - 2024 Waste Management Phoenix Open
      Corbin Burnes (2021 NL Cy Young) - WITB - 2024 Waste Management Phoenix Open
      Greyson Sigg - WITB - 2024 Waste Management Phoenix Open
      Charley Hoffman - WITB - 2024 Waste Management Phoenix Open
      Nico Echavarria - WITB - 2024 Waste Management Phoenix Open
      Victor Perez - WITB - 2024 Waste Management Phoenix Open
      Sami Valimaki - WITB - 2024 Waste Management Phoenix Open
      Ryo Hisatsune - WITB - 2024 Waste Management Phoenix Open
       
       
       
       
       
       
      Pullout Albums
       
      Jake Knapp's custom Cameron putters - 2024 Waste Management Phoenix Open
      New Cameron putters - 2024 Waste Management Phoenix Open
      Tyler Duncan's custom Cameron putter - 2024 Waste Management Phoenix Open
      Greyson Sigg's custom Cameron putters - 2024 Waste Management Phoenix Open
      Sunjae Im's custom Cameron putter - 2024 Waste Management Phoenix Open
      Ping's Waste Management putter covers - 2024 Waste Management Phoenix Open
      Vincent Whaley's custom Cameron - 2024 Waste Management Phoenix Open
      Odyssey Waste Management putter covers - 2024 Waste Management Phoenix Open
      Super Stroke custom grips - 2024 Waste Management Phoenix Open
      Cameron putters - 2024 Waste Management Phoenix Open
      Zac Blair's custom Cameron putter - 2024 Waste Management Phoenix Open
      Bettinardi Waste Management putter covers - 2024 Waste Management Phoenix Open
       
       
       
       
       
       

       
      • 12 replies

×
×
  • Create New...