What is with the Hating on the USGA?

[clevited]

I don't like the USGA at all, mostly because of all of the stupid they excrete, but also partially because of the image they portray of stuffy rich snobs that are out of touch with most of us that pay for this sport to exist.

[pendodave]

stuffy rich snobs that are out of touch with most of us that pay for this sport to exist.

This pretty much sums up the R&A as well, but over here in the UK I can't think of a single person I play golf with who gives a second thought to their existence. We just get on and play the game according to the books they publish.

Maybe we're just more accepting of unelected authority figures over here...

It probably helps that our national open is pretty much all we want it to be, and hasn't had too many existential crises recently.

[ex0dus]

stuffy rich snobs that are out of touch with most of us that pay for this sport to exist.

This pretty much sums up the R&A as well, but over here in the UK I can't think of a single person I play golf with who gives a second thought to their existence. We just get on and play the game according to the books they publish.

Maybe we're just more accepting of unelected authority figures over here...

It probably helps that our national open is pretty much all we want it to be, and hasn't had too many existential crises recently.

 

The R&A is comfortable staying in the background. Watching some interviews yesterday I saw "presented by the USGA" on the background behind the player, in case there was anyone who didn't know they run the event. Always calling attention to themselves.

[clevited]

stuffy rich snobs that are out of touch with most of us that pay for this sport to exist.

This pretty much sums up the R&A as well, but over here in the UK I can't think of a single person I play golf with who gives a second thought to their existence. We just get on and play the game according to the books they publish.

Maybe we're just more accepting of unelected authority figures over here...

It probably helps that our national open is pretty much all we want it to be, and hasn't had too many existential crises recently.

 

USGA comes to mind a lot especially lately with the threat of a ball roll back. That grinds my gears more than any of their previous blunders combined.

[clevited]

Just another thought, why doesn't USGA make a habit of making temporary rules. What I mean is, if something comes up new to the sport, for example, anchoring, why don't they put a conditional or temporary ban on it before it gets widely adopted? They can then do their research and make an official ruling later. This prevents as much backlash, handles sudden changes in how the game is played on the fly and before it is adopted by too many.

 

They could have done that with the ball, driver size, graphite shafts, whatever they want. A new product comes out, or device or whatever, ban it temporarily and add it to a waiting list of approval.

[MountainGoat]

I don't agree with Hank Haney on very much, but I agree with his take on the USGA. From where I sit, they just look like a bunch of rich guys in blue blazers playing the best courses in the country and telling the rest of us how to behave. They cater to the private club member with a high 6-figure income and have virtually nothing to do with me.

[MtlJeff]

I don't agree with Hank Haney on very much, but I agree with his take on the USGA. From where I sit, they just look like a bunch of rich guys in blue blazers playing the best courses in the country and telling the rest of us how to behave. They cater to the private club member with a high 6-figure income and have virtually nothing to do with me.

 

They don't even cater to the 6-figure income country club member. I'm sure those guys aren't all complaining about long putters or the ball either. I would imagine their views on making golf harder are the same as any other demographic

 

The USGA's sole interest seems to be the optics of the pro game, as it relates to "what golf is supposed to be" in their views and very little else.

 

[15th Club]

I don't agree with Hank Haney on very much, but I agree with his take on the USGA. From where I sit, they just look like a bunch of rich guys in blue blazers playing the best courses in the country and telling the rest of us how to behave. They cater to the private club member with a high 6-figure income and have virtually nothing to do with me.

 

So your preference in millionaires is with the corporate board and executives at Acushnet Holdings Company, Inc.? And their millionaire "brand ambassadors"?

 

What a lot of nerve; I'll bet that Wallly Uihlein made more in his last year as Acushnet CEO than the entire tournament staff in Far Hills.

 

Edit: Could there be any better example of "Hating on the USGA" than this Mountain Goat comment? A purely personal, classist (in addition to be factless) attack.

[North Butte]

I don't agree with Hank Haney on very much, but I agree with his take on the USGA. From where I sit, they just look like a bunch of rich guys in blue blazers playing the best courses in the country and telling the rest of us how to behave. They cater to the private club member with a high 6-figure income and have virtually nothing to do with me.

 

So your preference in millionaires is with the corporate board and executives at Acushnet Holdings Company, Inc.? And their millionaire "brand ambassadors"?

 

What a lot of nerve; I'll bet that Wallly Uihlein made more in his last year as Acushnet CEO than the entire tournament staff in Far Hills.

 

What is this Titleist fixation with you? What the heck does some GolfWRX'er disagreeing (or even hating) the USGA have to do with the retired chairman of the company that owns the Titleist brand?

 

Has anyone beside yourself even MENTIONED the name Titleist in this thread? Of all your non-sequiturs, that is the most persistent and, frankly, crazy one of them all.

 

It's like every possible disagreement with your own position or that of your preferred social-media loudmouths you construe as a personal attack by some company that doesn't even know you exist.

[15th Club]

I don't agree with Hank Haney on very much, but I agree with his take on the USGA. From where I sit, they just look like a bunch of rich guys in blue blazers playing the best courses in the country and telling the rest of us how to behave. They cater to the private club member with a high 6-figure income and have virtually nothing to do with me.

 

They don't even cater to the 6-figure income country club member. I'm sure those guys aren't all complaining about long putters or the ball either. I would imagine their views on making golf harder are the same as any other demographic

 

The USGA's sole interest seems to be the optics of the pro game, as it relates to "what golf is supposed to be" in their views and very little else.

 

That assertion that I have bolded is certainly and clearly wrong. The USGA is responsible for much of elite-level amateur golf, including the various national amateur championships, the Walker Cup, etc.

 

In regard to equipment technology, the USGA is now acutely (and rightly) concerned about "elite" level golf. Top amateurs, even juniors, in addition to the professional tours (all of which gleefully sponge off the USGA's doing a vast amount of equipment and rules administration for them). Which is much broader and larger than just "the pro game" as you ascribe.

[15th Club]

I don't agree with Hank Haney on very much, but I agree with his take on the USGA. From where I sit, they just look like a bunch of rich guys in blue blazers playing the best courses in the country and telling the rest of us how to behave. They cater to the private club member with a high 6-figure income and have virtually nothing to do with me.

 

So your preference in millionaires is with the corporate board and executives at Acushnet Holdings Company, Inc.? And their millionaire "brand ambassadors"?

 

What a lot of nerve; I'll bet that Wallly Uihlein made more in his last year as Acushnet CEO than the entire tournament staff in Far Hills.

 

What is this Titleist fixation with you? What the heck does some GolfWRX'er disagreeing (or even hating) the USGA have to do with the retired chairman of the company that owns the Titleist brand?

 

Has anyone beside yourself even MENTIONED the name Titleist in this thread? Of all your non-sequiturs, that is the most persistent and, frankly, crazy one of them all.

 

It's like every possible disagreement with your own position or that of your preferred social-media loudmouths you construe as a personal attack by some company that doesn't even know you exist.

 

I've already explained; there is no single force in golf that is richer, better-funded and more determined to oppose a ball rollback, than Titleist.

 

Mountain Goat went nasty and personal in an attack on the USGA. I wanted to push back in an equally raw way. And as much as anything, flag the hatred and the baseless ad hominem nature of so many of the attacks on the USGA.

[BlackDiamondPar5]

Usga said 76% of those surveyed supported a world handicap system. However their survey response rate was 0.5%, hardly a good data set to make sweeping changes. But hey it fit their elitist agenda. They simply don't represent the best interests of the game for the majority of golfers.

[North Butte]

I don't agree with Hank Haney on very much, but I agree with his take on the USGA. From where I sit, they just look like a bunch of rich guys in blue blazers playing the best courses in the country and telling the rest of us how to behave. They cater to the private club member with a high 6-figure income and have virtually nothing to do with me.

 

So your preference in millionaires is with the corporate board and executives at Acushnet Holdings Company, Inc.? And their millionaire "brand ambassadors"?

 

What a lot of nerve; I'll bet that Wallly Uihlein made more in his last year as Acushnet CEO than the entire tournament staff in Far Hills.

 

What is this Titleist fixation with you? What the heck does some GolfWRX'er disagreeing (or even hating) the USGA have to do with the retired chairman of the company that owns the Titleist brand?

 

Has anyone beside yourself even MENTIONED the name Titleist in this thread? Of all your non-sequiturs, that is the most persistent and, frankly, crazy one of them all.

 

It's like every possible disagreement with your own position or that of your preferred social-media loudmouths you construe as a personal attack by some company that doesn't even know you exist.

 

I've already explained; there is no single force in golf that is richer, better-funded and more determined to oppose a ball rollback, than Titleist.

 

Mountain Goat went nasty and personal in an attack on the USGA. I wanted to push back in an equally raw way. And as much as anything, flag the hatred and the baseless ad hominem nature of so many of the attacks on the USGA.

 

So somebody insulted the USGA and you felt the appropriate response was to go off on a rant about the retired chairman on a golf equipment company. Do I have that right?

 

In that case, let me just say that Paul Pogba is the most overrated, overpaid, social-media butterfly to ever kick a football and the Premier League would be better off without him.

 

Guess that'll show you how I really feel about the golf ball rollback, eh?

[davep043]

Usga said 76% of those surveyed supported a world handicap system. However their survey response rate was 0.5%, hardly a good data set to make sweeping changes. But hey it fit their elitist agenda. They simply don't represent the best interests of the game for the majority of golfers.

I'm not a statistician, but I know there are some general rules to evaluate the validity of a survey. Perhaps someone can help us out on this point, is a 1 in 200 response rate appropriate? I don't know how widely they publicized the survey either. Its completely possible that its a very reliable result, even if some people disagree with the findings. I just don't know.

[davep043]

I don't agree with Hank Haney on very much, but I agree with his take on the USGA. From where I sit, they just look like a bunch of rich guys in blue blazers playing the best courses in the country and telling the rest of us how to behave. They cater to the private club member with a high 6-figure income and have virtually nothing to do with me.

 

So your preference in millionaires is with the corporate board and executives at Acushnet Holdings Company, Inc.? And their millionaire "brand ambassadors"?

 

What a lot of nerve; I'll bet that Wallly Uihlein made more in his last year as Acushnet CEO than the entire tournament staff in Far Hills.

 

What is this Titleist fixation with you? What the heck does some GolfWRX'er disagreeing (or even hating) the USGA have to do with the retired chairman of the company that owns the Titleist brand?

 

Has anyone beside yourself even MENTIONED the name Titleist in this thread? Of all your non-sequiturs, that is the most persistent and, frankly, crazy one of them all.

 

It's like every possible disagreement with your own position or that of your preferred social-media loudmouths you construe as a personal attack by some company that doesn't even know you exist.

 

I've already explained; there is no single force in golf that is richer, better-funded and more determined to oppose a ball rollback, than Titleist.

 

Mountain Goat went nasty and personal in an attack on the USGA. I wanted to push back in an equally raw way. And as much as anything, flag the hatred and the baseless ad hominem nature of so many of the attacks on the USGA.

 

So somebody insulted the USGA and you felt the appropriate response was to go off on a rant about the retired chairman on a golf equipment company. Do I have that right?

 

The way I read it, 15th Club was talking about the options. Mountain Goat dislikes being controlled by a bunch of rich guys in blue blazers. So what are the options, who would take over if the USGA vanished? One possible group would be companies in the golf business, manufacturers like Titleist, big course owners like Club Corp or Troon, a different bunch of even richer guys in blue blazers. But if those guys gain control, it will be much more about their profits than it is now under the USGA. Is that likely to be an improvement?

[MtlJeff]

I don't agree with Hank Haney on very much, but I agree with his take on the USGA. From where I sit, they just look like a bunch of rich guys in blue blazers playing the best courses in the country and telling the rest of us how to behave. They cater to the private club member with a high 6-figure income and have virtually nothing to do with me.

 

They don't even cater to the 6-figure income country club member. I'm sure those guys aren't all complaining about long putters or the ball either. I would imagine their views on making golf harder are the same as any other demographic

 

The USGA's sole interest seems to be the optics of the pro game, as it relates to "what golf is supposed to be" in their views and very little else.

 

That assertion that I have bolded is certainly and clearly wrong. The USGA is responsible for much of elite-level amateur golf, including the various national amateur championships, the Walker Cup, etc.

 

In regard to equipment technology, the USGA is now acutely (and rightly) concerned about "elite" level golf. Top amateurs, even juniors, in addition to the professional tours (all of which gleefully sponge off the USGA's doing a vast amount of equipment and rules administration for them). Which is much broader and larger than just "the pro game" as you ascribe.

 

I didn't say you weren't responsible for it. Only that you don't care about those things nearly as much as the optics of the pro game. That seems to be far and away the primary concern of the USGA the past several years

 

Equipment regulation being right or wrong is an opinion, not a fact. As I've said in countless threads, I'm waiting for data to support the need for it, going into details about how many courses are being modified out of the 20000+ in the US, what percentage of courses hold elite events, where their funding comes from to modify it and if they are still profitable when they do.

 

Let them just show organized data instead of saying "billions" and "horrible" and saying pros hit it 5yds further

 

[15th Club]

I don't agree with Hank Haney on very much, but I agree with his take on the USGA. From where I sit, they just look like a bunch of rich guys in blue blazers playing the best courses in the country and telling the rest of us how to behave. They cater to the private club member with a high 6-figure income and have virtually nothing to do with me.

 

So your preference in millionaires is with the corporate board and executives at Acushnet Holdings Company, Inc.? And their millionaire "brand ambassadors"?

 

What a lot of nerve; I'll bet that Wallly Uihlein made more in his last year as Acushnet CEO than the entire tournament staff in Far Hills.

 

What is this Titleist fixation with you? What the heck does some GolfWRX'er disagreeing (or even hating) the USGA have to do with the retired chairman of the company that owns the Titleist brand?

 

Has anyone beside yourself even MENTIONED the name Titleist in this thread? Of all your non-sequiturs, that is the most persistent and, frankly, crazy one of them all.

 

It's like every possible disagreement with your own position or that of your preferred social-media loudmouths you construe as a personal attack by some company that doesn't even know you exist.

 

I've already explained; there is no single force in golf that is richer, better-funded and more determined to oppose a ball rollback, than Titleist.

 

Mountain Goat went nasty and personal in an attack on the USGA. I wanted to push back in an equally raw way. And as much as anything, flag the hatred and the baseless ad hominem nature of so many of the attacks on the USGA.

 

So somebody insulted the USGA and you felt the appropriate response was to go off on a rant about the retired chairman on a golf equipment company. Do I have that right?

 

In that case, let me just say that Paul Pogba is the most overrated, overpaid, social-media butterfly to ever kick a football and the Premier League would be better off without him.

 

Guess that'll show you how I really feel about the golf ball rollback, eh?

 

How could you not get this? One of the handful of the most important players in the golf ball debate is Titleist. They have made it so. They are doing organized public relations, doing sarcastic television advertising, putting up corporate webpages, and God-only-knows how much private lobbying on the subject of any ball rollback.

 

Jack Nicklaus made it a story, when he rightly called out Titleist last month. Jack knows what is going on.

 

The fact that there may be fanboys of the Titleist brand at GolfWRX, and personal fans of Titleist's aforementioned "brand ambassadors", and who have never given any thought to Titleist's anti-rollback activism, is all the more reason for me to mention it. Those are the guys who need to hear it, if there is going to be a rollback debate, or even litigation.

 

It isn't even controversial! We are talking about Titleist's openly-held position of public advocacy!

[North Texas]

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!!

 

Not that convinced on the "intelligent" part.

 

And, while you are probably talking about posters on here, it is painfully obvious that Mike Davis and the USGA are certainly being attacked personally.

[BlackDiamondPar5]

Usga said 76% of those surveyed supported a world handicap system. However their survey response rate was 0.5%, hardly a good data set to make sweeping changes. But hey it fit their elitist agenda. They simply don't represent the best interests of the game for the majority of golfers.

I'm not a statistician, but I know there are some general rules to evaluate the validity of a survey. Perhaps someone can help us out on this point, is a 1 in 200 response rate appropriate? I don't know how widely they publicized the survey either. Its completely possible that its a very reliable result, even if some people disagree with the findings. I just don't know.

They buried it in one, that's 1 email. If they were really interested in a broader response rate they could have queried multiple times, put a notification on the GHIN website, let GHIN/handicap admins know so they could inform members to complete the survey, local DGAs could have sent emails to remind people etc. I'd be willing to bet their survey group was skewed and hardly homogenous. That's the problem.

[15th Club]

Just saw this, linked at Geoff Shackelford's website; from his Golfweek article from pre-Open press conferences comes the news that before Tuesday, neither Jordan Spieth* nor Justin Thomas** knew about the new USGA playoff format. Which was not only announced to considerable fanfare and discussion in February, but also was actually used, in the US Women's Open just two weeks ago at Shoal Creek.

 

Honestly, it's no big deal if the two young players didn't know about it. What could they do, to change it or specially prepare for their competition this week? Nothing, really.

 

But in the context of commenters suggesting that we really need to ask current Tour players about things like a ball rollback, or course setups, it is a noteworthy bit of cluelessness about their sport. They are both great players, and fun to watch. And often, fun to listen to. But being a great player doesn't make you wise about the administration of the game of golf.

 

 

*Titleist brand ambassador; not that there's anything wrong with that.

**Titleist brand ambassador; not that there's anything wrong with that.

[davep043]

 

But in the context of commenters suggesting that we really need to ask current Tour players about things like a ball rollback, or course setups, it is a noteworthy bit of cluelessness about their sport. They are both great players, and fun to watch. And often, fun to listen to. But being a great player doesn't make you wise about the administration of the game of golf.

 

Similarly, for many of the PGA Tour pros to comment one way or another about specific rules, or the general "complexity" of the rules, is really not something I care to pay much attention to, given their relative ignorance about the actual rules.

Notice I specify PGA Tour Pros, I think most PGA of America members have a much stronger grasp of the rules than their Tour brethren.

[JaNelson38]

Just saw this, linked at Geoff Shackelford's website; from his Golfweek article from pre-Open press conferences comes the news that before Tuesday, neither Jordan Spieth* nor Justin Thomas** knew about the new USGA playoff format. Which was not only announced to considerable fanfare and discussion in February, but also was actually used, in the US Women's Open just two weeks ago at Shoal Creek.

 

Honestly, it's no big deal if the two young players didn't know about it. What could they do, to change it or specially prepare for their competition this week? Nothing, really.

 

But in the context of commenters suggesting that we really need to ask current Tour players about things like a ball rollback, or course setups, it is a noteworthy bit of cluelessness about their sport. They are both great players, and fun to watch. And often, fun to listen to. But being a great player doesn't make you wise about the administration of the game of golf.

 

 

*Titleist brand ambassador; not that there's anything wrong with that.

**Titleist brand ambassador; not that there's anything wrong with that.

 

What is the above post supposed to insinuate? That because Jordan Spieth and Justin Thomas were unaware of a rule change makes them ignorant about golf? I'd be willing to bet most PGA Tour players dont know the rules of golf that well...its why you see players call for rulings all the time. They probably have a decent idea of what the rule is, but they're not sure. That doesnt make them ignorant about golf where their feelings and opinions about the game they play for a living shouldnt be considered. In the end the players are still the most important piece to the success of the PGA Tour and golf in general.

 

No different than a race car driver - most race car drivers probably wouldnt be very good about explaining or executing the rules on the mechanical side of building a race car, but they're damn good at driving them.

 

I mean, you cant give Jack Nicklaus a pat on the back because he makes a statement you agree with, while in the same breath think Spieth and Thomas are ignorant buffoons because they didnt know a rule chance that is going into place for the first time this year, and use that as an example of why PGA Tour players feelings should be ignored.

 

Of course Titleist wants to keep the ball rules status quo - any changes now would cost them money. Lots of money. They've spent a fair deal on research and development to get the ball where it is at now....rolling back the ball basically makes years worth of work, development and research wasted. And it forces them to now go into research and development to make a ball that would adhere to whatever rollbacks would be put in place. And in an industry where there isnt a ton of profit margin to begin with, every dollar matters.

[braincramp52]

Well, I guess if I'm going to be honest I don't care what the USGA does. They can outlaw and roll back anything they want. I'm going to play golf how I want and with the equipment I want regardless of what they say and do.

[DFS PFD]

Just saw this, linked at Geoff Shackelford's website; from his Golfweek article from pre-Open press conferences comes the news that before Tuesday, neither Jordan Spieth* nor Justin Thomas** knew about the new USGA playoff format. Which was not only announced to considerable fanfare and discussion in February, but also was actually used, in the US Women's Open just two weeks ago at Shoal Creek.

 

Honestly, it's no big deal if the two young players didn't know about it. What could they do, to change it or specially prepare for their competition this week? Nothing, really.

 

But in the context of commenters suggesting that we really need to ask current Tour players about things like a ball rollback, or course setups, it is a noteworthy bit of cluelessness about their sport. They are both great players, and fun to watch. And often, fun to listen to. But being a great player doesn't make you wise about the administration of the game of golf.

 

 

*Titleist brand ambassador; not that there's anything wrong with that.

**Titleist brand ambassador; not that there's anything wrong with that.

 

What is the above post supposed to insinuate? That because Jordan Spieth and Justin Thomas were unaware of a rule change makes them ignorant about golf? I'd be willing to bet most PGA Tour players dont know the rules of golf that well...its why you see players call for rulings all the time. They probably have a decent idea of what the rule is, but they're not sure. That doesnt make them ignorant about golf where their feelings and opinions about the game they play for a living shouldnt be considered. In the end the players are still the most important piece to the success of the PGA Tour and golf in general.

 

No different than a race car driver - most race car drivers probably wouldnt be very good about explaining or executing the rules on the mechanical side of building a race car, but they're damn good at driving them.

 

I mean, you cant give Jack Nicklaus a pat on the back because he makes a statement you agree with, while in the same breath think Spieth and Thomas are ignorant buffoons because they didnt know a rule chance that is going into place for the first time this year, and use that as an example of why PGA Tour players feelings should be ignored.

 

Of course Titleist wants to keep the ball rules status quo - any changes now would cost them money. Lots of money. They've spent a fair deal on research and development to get the ball where it is at now....rolling back the ball basically makes years worth of work, development and research wasted. And it forces them to now go into research and development to make a ball that would adhere to whatever rollbacks would be put in place. And in an industry where there isnt a ton of profit margin to begin with, every dollar matters.

We're not asking players to understand kinematics, we're asking them to understand the very foundation of the game (the rules) they get compensated incredibly well to play.

[Ashley Schaeffer]

Just saw this, linked at Geoff Shackelford's website; from his Golfweek article from pre-Open press conferences comes the news that before Tuesday, neither Jordan Spieth* nor Justin Thomas** knew about the new USGA playoff format. Which was not only announced to considerable fanfare and discussion in February, but also was actually used, in the US Women's Open just two weeks ago at Shoal Creek.

 

Honestly, it's no big deal if the two young players didn't know about it. What could they do, to change it or specially prepare for their competition this week? Nothing, really.

 

But in the context of commenters suggesting that we really need to ask current Tour players about things like a ball rollback, or course setups, it is a noteworthy bit of cluelessness about their sport. They are both great players, and fun to watch. And often, fun to listen to. But being a great player doesn't make you wise about the administration of the game of golf.

 

 

*Titleist brand ambassador; not that there's anything wrong with that.

**Titleist brand ambassador; not that there's anything wrong with that.

 

What is the above post supposed to insinuate? That because Jordan Spieth and Justin Thomas were unaware of a rule change makes them ignorant about golf? I'd be willing to bet most PGA Tour players dont know the rules of golf that well...its why you see players call for rulings all the time. They probably have a decent idea of what the rule is, but they're not sure. That doesnt make them ignorant about golf where their feelings and opinions about the game they play for a living shouldnt be considered. In the end the players are still the most important piece to the success of the PGA Tour and golf in general.

 

No different than a race car driver - most race car drivers probably wouldnt be very good about explaining or executing the rules on the mechanical side of building a race car, but they're damn good at driving them.

 

I mean, you cant give Jack Nicklaus a pat on the back because he makes a statement you agree with, while in the same breath think Spieth and Thomas are ignorant buffoons because they didnt know a rule chance that is going into place for the first time this year, and use that as an example of why PGA Tour players feelings should be ignored.

 

Of course Titleist wants to keep the ball rules status quo - any changes now would cost them money. Lots of money. They've spent a fair deal on research and development to get the ball where it is at now....rolling back the ball basically makes years worth of work, development and research wasted. And it forces them to now go into research and development to make a ball that would adhere to whatever rollbacks would be put in place. And in an industry where there isnt a ton of profit margin to begin with, every dollar matters.

 

Dingdingding.

 

Also, I'm fairly certain JS and JT know the playoff format for virtually every other tournament they play week in and week out. The two majors that least resemble the weekly PGA Tour are the ones that have the different formats. I'm not even sure what the USGA has done. Is it two holes of sudden death followed by 18 holes using Ben Hogan's driver? Who can keep up? More importantly, who cares? The USGA can have its tournament, fu-k everything up once again, and we are back to normal next week.

[buckeyefl]

Just saw this, linked at Geoff Shackelford's website; from his Golfweek article from pre-Open press conferences comes the news that before Tuesday, neither Jordan Spieth* nor Justin Thomas** knew about the new USGA playoff format. Which was not only announced to considerable fanfare and discussion in February, but also was actually used, in the US Women's Open just two weeks ago at Shoal Creek.

 

Honestly, it's no big deal if the two young players didn't know about it. What could they do, to change it or specially prepare for their competition this week? Nothing, really.

 

But in the context of commenters suggesting that we really need to ask current Tour players about things like a ball rollback, or course setups, it is a noteworthy bit of cluelessness about their sport. They are both great players, and fun to watch. And often, fun to listen to. But being a great player doesn't make you wise about the administration of the game of golf.

 

 

*Titleist brand ambassador; not that there's anything wrong with that.

**Titleist brand ambassador; not that there's anything wrong with that.

 

From the person who keeps name dropping Nicklaus.Classic

 

You really have a tinfoil hat when it comes to Titleist. Not surprising but completely out of wack ( again not surprising) Do you really think the golf ball company they use has anything to do with their opinions? Is there a Titleist Illuminati?

[buckeyefl]

Just saw this, linked at Geoff Shackelford's website; from his Golfweek article from pre-Open press conferences comes the news that before Tuesday, neither Jordan Spieth* nor Justin Thomas** knew about the new USGA playoff format. Which was not only announced to considerable fanfare and discussion in February, but also was actually used, in the US Women's Open just two weeks ago at Shoal Creek.

 

Honestly, it's no big deal if the two young players didn't know about it. What could they do, to change it or specially prepare for their competition this week? Nothing, really.

 

But in the context of commenters suggesting that we really need to ask current Tour players about things like a ball rollback, or course setups, it is a noteworthy bit of cluelessness about their sport. They are both great players, and fun to watch. And often, fun to listen to. But being a great player doesn't make you wise about the administration of the game of golf.

 

 

*Titleist brand ambassador; not that there's anything wrong with that.

**Titleist brand ambassador; not that there's anything wrong with that.

 

What is the above post supposed to insinuate? That because Jordan Spieth and Justin Thomas were unaware of a rule change makes them ignorant about golf? I'd be willing to bet most PGA Tour players dont know the rules of golf that well...its why you see players call for rulings all the time. They probably have a decent idea of what the rule is, but they're not sure. That doesnt make them ignorant about golf where their feelings and opinions about the game they play for a living shouldnt be considered. In the end the players are still the most important piece to the success of the PGA Tour and golf in general.

 

No different than a race car driver - most race car drivers probably wouldnt be very good about explaining or executing the rules on the mechanical side of building a race car, but they're damn good at driving them.

 

I mean, you cant give Jack Nicklaus a pat on the back because he makes a statement you agree with, while in the same breath think Spieth and Thomas are ignorant buffoons because they didnt know a rule chance that is going into place for the first time this year, and use that as an example of why PGA Tour players feelings should be ignored.

 

Of course Titleist wants to keep the ball rules status quo - any changes now would cost them money. Lots of money. They've spent a fair deal on research and development to get the ball where it is at now....rolling back the ball basically makes years worth of work, development and research wasted. And it forces them to now go into research and development to make a ball that would adhere to whatever rollbacks would be put in place. And in an industry where there isnt a ton of profit margin to begin with, every dollar matters.

 

Common sense, you has it!

 

The other person, not so much. Being a zealot is hard work and can be quite confusing so you may need to give him a pass.

[JaNelson38]

 

We're not asking players to understand kinematics, we're asking them to understand the very foundation of the game (the rules) they get compensated incredibly well to play.

 

Forgetting/not knowing the USGA playoff system in its first year of existence is hardly a misunderstanding of "the very foundation of the game".

 

I follow and play golf religiously and I have to say I completely forgot about the new USGA playoff format until it was brought up in that press conference. These guys are focused on their games heading into a major, not rules changes to the game of golf or the equipment they play.

[North Butte]

We're not asking players to understand kinematics, we're asking them to understand the very foundation of the game (the rules) they get compensated incredibly well to play.

 

Forgetting/not knowing the USGA playoff system in its first year of existence is hardly a misunderstanding of "the very foundation of the game".

 

I follow and play golf religiously and I have to say I completely forgot about the new USGA playoff format until it was brought up in that press conference. These guys are focused on their games heading into a major, not rules changes to the game of golf or the equipment they play.

 

If the number of holes in a playoff is "foundation of the game" element then the game has been on mighty shaky ground for a very long time.

[buckeyefl]

 

We're not asking players to understand kinematics, we're asking them to understand the very foundation of the game (the rules) they get compensated incredibly well to play.

 

Forgetting/not knowing the USGA playoff system in its first year of existence is hardly a misunderstanding of "the very foundation of the game".

 

I follow and play golf religiously and I have to say I completely forgot about the new USGA playoff format until it was brought up in that press conference. These guys are focused on their games heading into a major, not rules changes to the game of golf or the equipment they play.

 

Yep. A slight overreaction.