What is with the Hating on the USGA?

[ex0dus]

As I understand it both were strongly against the anchoring ban, which offended the USGA. If I remember right the USGA announced their deal with FOX during the PGA championship, a punk move that pissed off a lot of people.

 

Very strange post. Why would changing TV companies make it a "punk move"? And what is a "punk move"?

 

Is this a joke? Announcing it during the PGA championship, taking attention away from a major, is absolutely a punk move.

 

https://www.geoffshackelford.com/homepage/2013/8/7/not-april-fools-usga-announces-new-tv-deal-with-fox-sports-o.html

[davep043]

Thanks davep043 for your well-thought out and well-reasoned responses in this thread.

 

It is much welcomed relief from most of the drivel I'm reading in this thread.

I appreciate the compliment, but I'm not the only one trying to get past partial truths, sarcasm, and existing prejudices. In particular, I've had a nice back and forth with Ashley Schaeffer about the potential for the PGA of America to assume some of what the USGA does now.

[caniac6]

In 1994 I was an assistant superintendent at a course that hosted the NCAA D 3 men's national championship. I was given one of the USGA's radios in case I needed to hand water any hot spots on the greens, and they would hold up play until I was done. These guys behaved like little kids that got walkie talkies for Christmas. They called me, and told me there was an emergency on #5. When I got there, there were kids in their backyard, on the other side of a big lake raising Cain like kids will do. They told me I needed to go over there and tell these kids to keep quiet. This was not even part of the neighborhood that was associated with the course. This was in Fayetteville, NC, and there were special forces, and 82nd Airborne guys that lived over there. I told the USGA guy that there was no way I was going over there, and if they wanted the kids to be quiet, they could go tell them.

[davep043]

In 1994 I was an assistant superintendent at a course that hosted the NCAA D 3 men's national championship. I was given one of the USGA's radios in case I needed to hand water any hot spots on the greens, and they would hold up play until I was done. These guys behaved like little kids that got walkie talkies for Christmas. They called me, and told me there was an emergency on #5. When I got there, there were kids in their backyard, on the other side of a big lake raising Cain like kids will do. They told me I needed to go over there and tell these kids to keep quiet. This was not even part of the neighborhood that was associated with the course. This was in Fayetteville, NC, and there were special forces, and 82nd Airborne guys that lived over there. I told the USGA guy that there was no way I was going over there, and if they wanted the kids to be quiet, they could go tell them.

I'm just wondering, doesn't the NCAA run their own tournaments? I guess I don't understand the role of the USGA in this situation.

[Ashley Schaeffer]

Thanks davep043 for your well-thought out and well-reasoned responses in this thread.

 

It is much welcomed relief from most of the drivel I'm reading in this thread.

I appreciate the compliment, but I'm not the only one trying to get past partial truths, sarcasm, and existing prejudices. In particular, I've had a nice back and forth with Ashley Schaeffer about the potential for the PGA of America to assume some of what the USGA does now.

 

I thank you for your great points on the topic.

[caniac6]

In 1994 I was an assistant superintendent at a course that hosted the NCAA D 3 men's national championship. I was given one of the USGA's radios in case I needed to hand water any hot spots on the greens, and they would hold up play until I was done. These guys behaved like little kids that got walkie talkies for Christmas. They called me, and told me there was an emergency on #5. When I got there, there were kids in their backyard, on the other side of a big lake raising Cain like kids will do. They told me I needed to go over there and tell these kids to keep quiet. This was not even part of the neighborhood that was associated with the course. This was in Fayetteville, NC, and there were special forces, and 82nd Airborne guys that lived over there. I told the USGA guy that there was no way I was going over there, and if they wanted the kids to be quiet, they could go tell them.

I'm just wondering, doesn't the NCAA run their own tournaments? I guess I don't understand the role of the USGA in this situation.

There were USGA volunteers there to help with rulings. The host school was Methodist University, and there we some of their folks there along with people from the NCAA. I met Dave Stockton, and watched him on the practice green with his son, Ronnie.

[BNGL]

The tour pros don't like the USGA. The guys at Augusta treat the players like royals; the US Open is a democratic golf tournament, and the pros are not treated as well as at other tournaments. No sponsor cars, etc. So the pros don't particularly like the USGA. And then you have rule situations like Dustin's ball moving on the green, and that was certainly a black eye. As have been some of the recent US Open set ups.

 

The USGA tries to make the hardest setup on golf, to try to determine the best champion. Many people who watch the US Open expect that, and even enjoy it for one week a year. It is hard to be liked when you are tasked with making the most demanding setup.

 

By the way, Haney is a tool.

 

Not that it matters but I’m almost positive there’s a complimentary Lexus for the week.

 

[rangersgoalie]

...

...

 

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.

 

Exactly; the ProV had been out for four years, and the USGA had been seeing the distance gains. When I wrote, "the newly-developed urethane balls," I knew exactly the time frame I was referring to. In 2004, Shinnecock bore lots of the hallmarks of the ProV era (especially the early-ProV era). Narrowed fairways, longer rough, hard greens.

 

Seriously, what USOpen without rain did not have those traits. Winged Foot in the 70's, Olympic, Oakland hills (hogans monster) Pebble in 92 was insanely tricked up, Brookline.

The traits of US Open courses were, crazy rough, crazy fast greens, tight and tree lined for the most part. Heck, as easy as Baltusrol was in 1980. It was because it was soft and balls stayed in the fairways. I saw o e player injure his back hitting out of the rough in round two, and one player leave a pitch in the rough along side a green.

 

I did NOT see and Prov1s though :)

[15th Club]

 

...

...

...

 

Exactly; the ProV had been out for four years, and the USGA had been seeing the distance gains. When I wrote, "the newly-developed urethane balls," I knew exactly the time frame I was referring to. In 2004, Shinnecock bore lots of the hallmarks of the ProV era (especially the early-ProV era). Narrowed fairways, longer rough, hard greens.

 

Seriously, what USOpen without rain did not have those traits. Winged Foot in the 70's, Olympic, Oakland hills (hogans monster) Pebble in 92 was insanely tricked up, Brookline.

The traits of US Open courses were, crazy rough, crazy fast greens, tight and tree lined for the most part. Heck, as easy as Baltusrol was in 1980. It was because it was soft and balls stayed in the fairways. I saw o e player injure his back hitting out of the rough in round two, and one player leave a pitch in the rough along side a green.

 

I did NOT see and Prov1s though :)

 

And rest assured; few people on planet Earth are more acutely aware of the sordid history, the problems and limitations of, such US Open setups, than Mike Davis. He wants his tournament courses to be more open, wider, less cramped and faster. And he thinks that an essential element in all of that is a ball rollback.

[mokedaddy]

https://www.golfdigest.com/story/us-open-2018-usgas-davis-the-notion-that-were-going-to-be-rolling-the-ball-back-next-year-is-simply-not-the-case

[rangersgoalie]

 

...

...

...

 

Exactly; the ProV had been out for four years, and the USGA had been seeing the distance gains. When I wrote, "the newly-developed urethane balls," I knew exactly the time frame I was referring to. In 2004, Shinnecock bore lots of the hallmarks of the ProV era (especially the early-ProV era). Narrowed fairways, longer rough, hard greens.

 

Seriously, what USOpen without rain did not have those traits. Winged Foot in the 70's, Olympic, Oakland hills (hogans monster) Pebble in 92 was insanely tricked up, Brookline.

The traits of US Open courses were, crazy rough, crazy fast greens, tight and tree lined for the most part. Heck, as easy as Baltusrol was in 1980. It was because it was soft and balls stayed in the fairways. I saw o e player injure his back hitting out of the rough in round two, and one player leave a pitch in the rough along side a green.

 

I did NOT see and Prov1s though :)

 

And rest assured; few people on planet Earth are more acutely aware of the sordid history, the problems and limitations of, such US Open setups, than Mike Davis. He wants his tournament courses to be more open, wider, less cramped and faster. And he thinks that an essential element in all of that is a ball rollback.

 

But how was Shinnecock and its terrible setup related to the prov1 era, when most of the preceding us Opens were the same model

[Ashley Schaeffer]

...

...

...

 

Exactly; the ProV had been out for four years, and the USGA had been seeing the distance gains. When I wrote, "the newly-developed urethane balls," I knew exactly the time frame I was referring to. In 2004, Shinnecock bore lots of the hallmarks of the ProV era (especially the early-ProV era). Narrowed fairways, longer rough, hard greens.

 

Seriously, what USOpen without rain did not have those traits. Winged Foot in the 70's, Olympic, Oakland hills (hogans monster) Pebble in 92 was insanely tricked up, Brookline.

The traits of US Open courses were, crazy rough, crazy fast greens, tight and tree lined for the most part. Heck, as easy as Baltusrol was in 1980. It was because it was soft and balls stayed in the fairways. I saw o e player injure his back hitting out of the rough in round two, and one player leave a pitch in the rough along side a green.

 

I did NOT see and Prov1s though :)

 

And rest assured; few people on planet Earth are more acutely aware of the sordid history, the problems and limitations of, such US Open setups, than Mike Davis. He wants his tournament courses to be more open, wider, less cramped and faster. And he thinks that an essential element in all of that is a ball rollback.

 

He would do well to realize how many tournaments "he" conducts, versus how many the PGA/PGA Tour conduct(s), and the relative power he actually has in deciding the issue. He can say what he wants, and he's said some nice things. If he's smart, however, he knows where he stands.

[MtlJeff]

https://www.golfdigest.com/story/us-open-2018-usgas-davis-the-notion-that-were-going-to-be-rolling-the-ball-back-next-year-is-simply-not-the-case

 

A lot of what he says in that article is encouraging , particularly that stretched courses are sometimes more about vanity than need, and the desire to consider amateurs in their decision

 

Unfortunately I just think he's a liar with an ax to grind and it's all lip service as his mind is already made up

 

But hey that's me

[mokedaddy]

https://www.golfdigest.com/story/us-open-2018-usgas-davis-the-notion-that-were-going-to-be-rolling-the-ball-back-next-year-is-simply-not-the-case

 

A lot of what he says in that article is encouraging , particularly that stretched courses are sometimes more about vanity than need, and the desire to consider amateurs in their decision

 

Unfortunately I just think he's a liar with an ax to grind and it's all lip service as his mind is already made up

 

But hey that's me

 

Yeah it seems he's saying different things to different people at the very least.

[buckeyefl]

...

...

...

 

Exactly; the ProV had been out for four years, and the USGA had been seeing the distance gains. When I wrote, "the newly-developed urethane balls," I knew exactly the time frame I was referring to. In 2004, Shinnecock bore lots of the hallmarks of the ProV era (especially the early-ProV era). Narrowed fairways, longer rough, hard greens.

 

Seriously, what USOpen without rain did not have those traits. Winged Foot in the 70's, Olympic, Oakland hills (hogans monster) Pebble in 92 was insanely tricked up, Brookline.

The traits of US Open courses were, crazy rough, crazy fast greens, tight and tree lined for the most part. Heck, as easy as Baltusrol was in 1980. It was because it was soft and balls stayed in the fairways. I saw o e player injure his back hitting out of the rough in round two, and one player leave a pitch in the rough along side a green.

 

I did NOT see and Prov1s though :)

 

And rest assured; few people on planet Earth are more acutely aware of the sordid history, the problems and limitations of, such US Open setups, than Mike Davis. He wants his tournament courses to be more open, wider, less cramped and faster. And he thinks that an essential element in all of that is a ball rollback.

 

Which is equally narrow minded as your reasoning. That is not his or the USGAs job.

[buckeyefl]

...

...

...

 

Exactly; the ProV had been out for four years, and the USGA had been seeing the distance gains. When I wrote, "the newly-developed urethane balls," I knew exactly the time frame I was referring to. In 2004, Shinnecock bore lots of the hallmarks of the ProV era (especially the early-ProV era). Narrowed fairways, longer rough, hard greens.

 

Seriously, what USOpen without rain did not have those traits. Winged Foot in the 70's, Olympic, Oakland hills (hogans monster) Pebble in 92 was insanely tricked up, Brookline.

The traits of US Open courses were, crazy rough, crazy fast greens, tight and tree lined for the most part. Heck, as easy as Baltusrol was in 1980. It was because it was soft and balls stayed in the fairways. I saw o e player injure his back hitting out of the rough in round two, and one player leave a pitch in the rough along side a green.

 

I did NOT see and Prov1s though :)

 

And rest assured; few people on planet Earth are more acutely aware of the sordid history, the problems and limitations of, such US Open setups, than Mike Davis. He wants his tournament courses to be more open, wider, less cramped and faster. And he thinks that an essential element in all of that is a ball rollback.

 

But how was Shinnecock and its terrible setup related to the prov1 era, when most of the preceding us Opens were the same model

 

Well, it wasn't but he had to come up with something. Of course, it wasn't rooted in facts but simply more propaganda.

[tannyhoban]

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.

 

Nice summary on the putter. And the last straw that broke support from many. Hardcore. Putter envy. Great reason to make a rule.

Kinda like the R&A with the Schenectady way back.

[rgk5]

Haney is angry because he was never good enough to compete in the U.S. Open.

[tannyhoban]

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.

 

Lynch mob, dear god. Nope, just not a paying dues member of the USGA any longer. Bifurcation of the rules no matter the timeline was the main disagreement i have with the grooves. You do realize that the vast majority of the green fees paying public pays zero attention to the USGA, right?

 

Simplify the rules and maybe more would pay attention.

[North Butte]

So if the vast majority of golfers 100% agree on the self-absorbed cluelessness of USGA that makes us a “lynch mob”? Nobody is getting hanged, a bunch of us simply agree in our assessment. Agreement among a large group is not the same as mob mentality.

[TheInfidel]

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

 

Nailed it.

 

*loud applause heard all around the forum.

[braincramp52]

...

...

...

 

Exactly; the ProV had been out for four years, and the USGA had been seeing the distance gains. When I wrote, "the newly-developed urethane balls," I knew exactly the time frame I was referring to. In 2004, Shinnecock bore lots of the hallmarks of the ProV era (especially the early-ProV era). Narrowed fairways, longer rough, hard greens.

 

Seriously, what USOpen without rain did not have those traits. Winged Foot in the 70's, Olympic, Oakland hills (hogans monster) Pebble in 92 was insanely tricked up, Brookline.

The traits of US Open courses were, crazy rough, crazy fast greens, tight and tree lined for the most part. Heck, as easy as Baltusrol was in 1980. It was because it was soft and balls stayed in the fairways. I saw o e player injure his back hitting out of the rough in round two, and one player leave a pitch in the rough along side a green.

 

I did NOT see and Prov1s though :)

 

And rest assured; few people on planet Earth are more acutely aware of the sordid history, the problems and limitations of, such US Open setups, than Mike Davis. He wants his tournament courses to be more open, wider, less cramped and faster. And he thinks that an essential element in all of that is a ball rollback.

 

99.9% of the golfing world hit the ball a little over 200 yards off the tee but the USGA thinks they need to roll back the ball. That tells me the USGA doesn't give a rats Word not allowed about the millions of people that keep them and touring pros in a job. And it certainly does nothing to grow the game.

[braincramp52]

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.

 

Lynch mob, dear god. Nope, just not a paying dues member of the USGA any longer. Bifurcation of the rules no matter the timeline was the main disagreement i have with the grooves. You do realize that the vast majority of the green fees paying public pays zero attention to the USGA, right?

 

Simplify the rules and maybe more would pay attention.

 

Wish I could "like" this more than once.

[davep043]

 

Lynch mob, dear god. Nope, just not a paying dues member of the USGA any longer. Bifurcation of the rules no matter the timeline was the main disagreement i have with the grooves. You do realize that the vast majority of the green fees paying public pays zero attention to the USGA, right?

 

Simplify the rules and maybe more would pay attention.

I have to admit, I was trolling a bit with that one. But a lot of what I was reading was not reasoned disagreement, but ____ is a fool, and _____ is stupid. That doesn't advance any discussion, and I enjoy discussion. Personally, I think bifurcation would be foolish, golf is one of the very few sports that are played by the same rules, no matter what level, and I'd prefer to keep it that way.

And they HAVE simplified the rules, changed a significant number of them, and rewritten them in much plainer language.

 

99.9% of the golfing world hit the ball a little over 200 yards off the tee but the USGA thinks they need to roll back the ball. That tells me the USGA doesn't give a rats Word not allowed about the millions of people that keep them and touring pros in a job. And it certainly does nothing to grow the game.

The USGA has said that its appropriate to keep track of distance, they haven't specifically recommended anything, and I agree. I do NOT want the rulemakers to be surprised in 5 or 10 or 20 years when every hole is reachable from the tee for every decent player. The time to gather data is now.

 

The rules have always had to respond to changes in technology, and not just clubs and balls. It wasn't all that long ago that you were not allowed to lift your ball on the green in most situations, nor were you allowed to repair pitch marks. Any guess why those rules were changed? Underground sprinkler systems helped to produce softer conditions, so pitch marks were deeper, and balls picked up more mud when they landed. Better mowers produced smoother faster greens. A growing percentage of players grew to believe that they "deserved" to have smooth greens and clean balls, so the rules were changed to allow SOME repair of greens, and allowing the ball to be lifted and cleaned.

[Swisstrader98]

This thread should be the model for all WRX threads. Little to no personal attacks and just healthy intelligent discussion. One of the best threads I’ve seen here.

 

Nice to see!!

[JaNelson38]

 

And rest assured; few people on planet Earth are more acutely aware of the sordid history, the problems and limitations of, such US Open setups, than Mike Davis. He wants his tournament courses to be more open, wider, less cramped and faster. And he thinks that an essential element in all of that is a ball rollback.

 

If that's the case, then he's a grade A liar, based on his interview with Jaime Diaz on GC on Monday. He specifically brought up that there are no plans to issue any directives to roll back the golf ball.

[braincramp52]

And rest assured; few people on planet Earth are more acutely aware of the sordid history, the problems and limitations of, such US Open setups, than Mike Davis. He wants his tournament courses to be more open, wider, less cramped and faster. And he thinks that an essential element in all of that is a ball rollback.

 

If that's the case, then he's a grade A liar, based on his interview with Jaime Diaz on GC on Monday. He specifically brought up that there are no plans to issue any directives to roll back the golf ball.

 

But did he say " for now "?

[JaNelson38]

And rest assured; few people on planet Earth are more acutely aware of the sordid history, the problems and limitations of, such US Open setups, than Mike Davis. He wants his tournament courses to be more open, wider, less cramped and faster. And he thinks that an essential element in all of that is a ball rollback.

 

If that's the case, then he's a grade A liar, based on his interview with Jaime Diaz on GC on Monday. He specifically brought up that there are no plans to issue any directives to roll back the golf ball.

 

But did he say " for now "?

 

Id have to go back and see the interview again, but I specifically remember him saying something to the effect of, "Everybody thinks that we are going to roll back the golf ball...they couldnt be further from the truth". Again, not word for word, but something to that effect. Much of the interview centered around equipment and the ball.

[North Butte]

What Mike Davis wants and what the USGA are actually planning on implementing are not necessarily the same. It's clear that he personally has a dream of being able to set up courses with 40, 50, 60 yard wide fairways running like concrete, move up tees on Par 4's to make them "driveable" yet still see the best players in the world unable to better par on a 7,200-yard Par 70 course set up like that.

 

His dream setup and scoring scenario requires either a 9,000 yard course or a ball that is rolled back more than 20%. I doubt he'll ever see that happen but USGA will eventually do some halfway version of it I'm betting.

[USAF Retired E7]

I feel i can say this as a guy who grew up under a WWII Army Air-core vet .who saw action in france , germany, and the occupation of Japan after.... .... Think about it .. if they gave out free tickets to every service person retired or active ...3/4 of the gallery would get in free . I appreciate the service and am active in supporting Veteran organizations, as well as active service people in my business.... But they cant do it for free. Not unless they set it up somehow that way.

 

3/4 of the fans at a PGA event are active duty or retired military people? Doubt that's true even at the Valero Open in San Antonio.

 

If I read this correctly, you don't get a discount if you served 1 tour. Just active duty and retirees are offered a discount.