Mickelson & his Ping Eye2 Wedges (topics merged)

[HeadonaStick]

[quote name='Pepperturbo' date='29 January 2010 - 07:30 PM' timestamp='1264811440' post='2213083']
[quote name='Rohlio' date='29 January 2010 - 05:19 PM' timestamp='1264807158' post='2212894']
[quote name='Pepperturbo' date='29 January 2010 - 03:05 PM' timestamp='1264795529' post='2212443']
Entertaining, even ideal response, but clearly not thought through. There isn't enough of those wedges so everyone could have them... there in lays the inequity or the unfair advantage. As for what could be done, the PGA could decide to fine or slap a healthy suspension on someone if they chose.

[/quote]

I have 6 of them in my house in Phoenix.

I volunteer for the First Tee of portland in our equipment locker we have probably about 15-20 sets of Ping Eye 2 Wedges Pre 1990. There are plenty available.

As to your other point, let me get this straight you want them to fine players for using gear that they said in their own rule are fine to use? Wow that is wacky. It is not the players fault they wrote a horrible rule.
[/quote]

You got to be kidding... you think because you know where "X" number of them are that translates into being enough for all the tour players.  I think not.  You might want to do a count of all the players that would need them, and note how many of those FT has that are in excellent condition.

I know plenty of people that donate club to kids golf groups; conditions are not what you'd see on tour.  At lunch today I spoke with my buddy who was a Pro, and now owns a very successful large LGS; he doesn't think there's remotely enough.  But what ever...

As to the fine aspect of my statement, would you please reread what I said, and not take it out of context of the question I responded to.
[/quote]
The fact remains, the clubs are not scarce. No pro has been unable to play the Pings because they can't get them. It is not a valid argument - at this point, any player who wants to play them can get them.

Scarcity does not make things unfair; there are plenty of scarce clubs being played on tour. There are even one off sets. That's one set, definitely not enough to go around. But perfectly legal and ethical. Or no?

The question you responded to was mine, and I fail to understand your response. What is the PGA going to fine or suspend Phil for, playing by the rules? In the context of the question you answered, it makes no sense.

[Skydiver22]

Don't hate the player... Hate the game. You all just don't like the fact that he's smarter than your favorite pro. The man uses a 64* wedge, with the new grooves rule the club was obsolete. He took an old "legal" eye 2 and bent it to 64*. End of discussion.

[JOHN GOLIA]

In the Spirit of the game PGA, USGA. Square grooves for all or none.

[HeadonaStick]

[quote name='JOHN GOLIA' date='29 January 2010 - 08:03 PM' timestamp='1264813411' post='2213143']
In the Spirit of the game PGA, USGA. Square grooves for all or none.
[/quote]
Square grooves are not illegal.

[sliderwrx]

I posted earlier, and have been reading this thread with some amusement. I still agree with Phil on this issue, the clubs are legal, use em!

Here's my personal take regarding the absurdity of this rule: I bought my first Ping Eye 2 Lob wedge in 1985 (?) It was stainless, the L according to the ad stood for 'Lots of Loft' I used a BeCu one beginning in 1986. That one wore out more quickly, so I switched back to stainless. I still have quite a few laying around in various grinds and varying states of face wear. After the settlement in 1990 the faces were retooled to be conforming, and the new version was referred to as Eye2 dot, and the actual groove as J groove. J groove is shallower, narrower, an more widely spaced than the 'square groove' version Phil, JD and the others are using on the tour. For the record, they spin less too, way less from tall grass. Even when new from the box they're not in the same league as the old square groove, or even remotely close to the spin milled or zip groove.

Heres the absurdity, all my current wedges are serial numbered "replacements" ordered through Karsten manufacturing using one of the original serial #'s from my quiver of old ones. I've been doing this for years, in 20 some years I have bought at least 20 new Eye2 dot wedges from Ping. All my 'dots' are non conforming according to the 2010 conditions of competition. But the old ones [b]are[/b] due to the settlement in 1990. Now in my mind THATS absurd!

I take the old ones out occasionally, and frankly for me they spin too much, I never found for my game that I needed all that backspin. I have tried out all the swoopy grooved new wedges and never could get used to them. If the guys on tour have truly relied on those grooves to be as good as they are,(as the USGA seems to insist) then I must be missing something. My scoring doesn't change according to which L wedge I'm using, in fact, my scores typically go up when I use the square grooved one, as I have a lot more 10-12 footers that check up before I want them to.

[bermuda]

[quote][color="#1C2837"]Square grooves are not illegal. [/color][/quote]


Thank you for pointing out this oft-mentioned error!

[url="http://www.usga.org/news/2009/september/qa_groove.aspx"]From the USGA Web site:[/url]

[quote][color="#505050"][b]What are the basics of the new groove regulations?[/b] [/color][color="#505050"][color="#505050"]Although the complete technical specifications of the new groove requirements are more detailed, the following statements summarize the key changes:[/color]

[color="#505050"]• The volume of grooves is reduced.[/color]

[color="#505050"]• Groove edge sharpness is reduced for clubs with lofts greater than or equal to 25 degrees.[/color]

[color="#505050"]A common misconception is that "V" shaped grooves will be required under the new specifications and that "U" shaped grooves will no longer be allowed. This is not the case. However, any "U" shaped groove must conform to the new specifications for both cross sectional area/spacing and edge radius.[/color]

[/color]
[color="#505050"]The complete technical specifications can be found in the Test Protocols for Equipment section at[url="http://www.usga.org/equipment/testing/protocols/Test-Protocols-for-Equipment/"]www.usga.org[/url].[/color][/quote]


Further:
[quote][color="#505050"][b]Exception: [/b] Clubs manufactured before March 31, 1990 that meet the criteria of USGA Decision USGA/4-1/100, such as the Ping Eye 2 irons, will be permitted for play when the above Condition Requiring Clubs Conforming with Groove and Punch Mark Specifications Effective Jan. 1, 2010 is in effect." [color="#000000"][/quote][/color][/color]

"U" grooves = square grooves. The edges must now be radiused instead of 90 degrees. And it's not just wedges. Anyone may use a whole set of Eye2s.

[labattize]

they make a good point about the degree of wedges. Phil is using a 64 Ping because the new wedges have no bite or spin! im pretty sure his other wedges are conforming. The pros could hit a 2x4 and still put it within 10' of the pin. go Lefty!

[walterjay25]

Last week TGC stated that McCarron was running for a position on the USGA board. I feel that this is nothing more than a political move by McCarron. Phil voiced his displeasure with the new USGA groove rules during his Wednesday news conference. And part of me feels Phil is using this wedge to stick it to the USGA. McCarron is now firing back on behalf of the USGA. I'm really not surprised at all.

Personally, I feel it is right for Phil to stick up for Callaway. However, because I put Phil on such a high pedastill, I'd prefer it if he did not use the Eye2 wedge and just used his Callaway wedges.

[whatsthecourserecord]

Was watching some coverage about this on TGC and my wife just asked me who this Scott McCarron was and is he important. Maybe a good barometer for the very casual golf fans feelings about all this nonsense.

[idratherbedrivingatitleist]

If pros think that they are getting taken advantage of by Phil, Hunter, etc. then for god's sake, go out and buy an eye 2 and quit with the crying. Sounds like a bunch of baby's... buck up little campers.

[LEFTY-8]

So is it 100% confirmed that Phil is using the ping wedges?

[SnapFade2]

[quote name='LEFTY-8' date='29 January 2010 - 10:49 PM' timestamp='1264830559' post='2213730']
So is it 100% confirmed that Phil is using the ping wedges?
[/quote]


yes and he is a cheater

[Pablito Woods]

[quote name='Seve0992' date='25 January 2010 - 10:25 PM' timestamp='1264476335' post='2204310']
The Ping wedges "would" be illegal under the new groove rule. However, the USGA shows very little foresight and even less common sense. I think every player should track down some eye2's and play them just to demonstrate the USGA's absurdity. I also wish several companies would file lawsuits to make the USGA consider more seriously the consequences of their actions.

Phil is smart to play within the rules and put some pressure on the USGA to keep the rules constant... not randomly alter a rule that has already been in effect and unchanged for 70+ years! The club rules are VERY difficult to test and administer. The USGA has had clubs submitted for conformity for years and now by changing the rule the water is very muddy. The one piece of equipment that is everyone uses on every shot is a BALL. Nearly everyone buys a dozen balls frequently. Simply adjust the amount a ball can spin or the speed it can leave a club under certain test conditions and publish a new conforming ball list. How simple. Better yet... quit promoting rock hard greens that roll like fresh asphalt and maybe guys could actually hold a green with something other that a 73* milled, zip grooved, face etched, low bounce, spinner shafted, extreme lob wedge and a urethane ball. When I watch the old Shells Wonderful World of Golf I'm fascinated by the softness and slowness of the greens. No wonder the lob wedge wasn't around... it wasn't needed. Now, its a near necessity on any tour level course.

On another very similar front, I continue to hear that the USGA is "investigating loft". Particularly the lofts of wedges that equal or exceed 60*. If they have already taken away a significant amount of spin and now begin to reduce loft, are they not tying the arms of the low ball hitter who needs spin and loft? If this is the case, why not put a lower limit on loft and tell everyone they have to play with a driver that has at least 12*? That would reduce distance and level the playing field by strapping the guy who hits it sky high and creates quite a bit of spin.
[/quote]
Thank you, great quote hear. Golf is a great game, but the USGA has royally screwed it up with these new rules. Not only are they very ineffective for most pros, but it pisses the companies off when they have to make clubs with new grooves, and some new designs follow the conditions of the rules and still are stamped ILLEGAL. Even the testing for this whole process is a joke, so this grandfather rule should show them how badly they messed up and teach them not to make idiot moves like that without thinking it through.

If clubs are deemed legal for any reason, then using the word "cheating" is incorrect, ignorant, and pointless- no one agrees with you because you're making an incorrect statement. Everyone's entitled to their opinion, but don't base yours off of false information. Also, I like the golf ball idea, but it shouldn't be so definite. Every golfer still needs a unique type of ball, so just changing the cover slightly might work to make it spin less. There still would be a need for tour balls, distance balls, spin balls, and golf balls that are in between somewhere, so strengthening each cover in a different way could reduce spin and keep most other characteristics intact.

[bogeyk]

What the equipment companies should do is band together and not advertise in any USGA publication or televised event(US Open, US Am, etc.) to show their displeasure with the groove rule. It would obviously hurt the network who paid for the rights, but having to scramble for advertisers would lead to some uncomfortable phone calls with NBC and the USGA. I doubt you could get everyone to do it, but hitting the USGA in the pocketbook may be a good way to voice their opinion.

[rooks]

[quote name='bogeyk' date='30 January 2010 - 05:20 PM' timestamp='1264836051' post='2213804']
What the equipment companies should do is band together and not advertise in any USGA publication or televised event(US Open, US Am, etc.) to show their displeasure with the groove rule. It would obviously hurt the network who paid for the rights, but having to scramble for advertisers would lead to some uncomfortable phone calls with NBC and the USGA. I doubt you could get everyone to do it, but hitting the USGA in the pocketbook may be a good way to voice their opinion.
[/quote]


I think you'll find that companies are loving it. Everybody has to buy new irons / wedges ... they'll be laughing all the way to the bank.

[bogeyk]

Everyone has to buy new clubs before 2024. Aside from stocking up on some wedges I will probably hang onto my irons longer than in the past. Why would I want to have a disadvantage? Give me sharp grooves until they pry them out of my hands.

[pingman1]

[quote name='Robert Brown' date='27 January 2010 - 12:26 AM' timestamp='1264573567' post='2206837']
Good topic... There is nothing low or bad about using a legal club...every pro can if he wishes. The reason why the Eye 2 is legal is because the USGA lost the legal battle so bad that they had no choice but to do as Ping wished... they could have really been hard on the USGA if they would have wanted to... Ping took care of the people that bought their clubs! In this situation, it is not the pros or Ping that is low...there is no wrong going on!! Bob
[/quote]

+1, very well stated.

[laseranimal]

If Mr McCarron is having problems locating said "scarce" item perhaps I can aid him

http://shop.ebay.com/?_from=R40&_trksid=p3907.m38.l1313&_nkw=ping+eye+2+wedge&_sacat=See-All-Categories


I had forgotten the Callaway/USGA ruling. This is obviously Phil going after the stupid rulemakers. He's no more cheating then guys who are using chippers, long putters and 460cc drivers.

I'm also assuming that Rocco and Scott won't be lifting, cleaning and placing the next time the PGA tour allows them to do so because to LCP would be against the spirit of the game which as we all know is to play the ball DOWN!

[mbshaf]

[quote name='rooks' date='30 January 2010 - 07:30 AM' timestamp='1264836621' post='2213810']
[quote name='bogeyk' date='30 January 2010 - 05:20 PM' timestamp='1264836051' post='2213804']
What the equipment companies should do is band together and not advertise in any USGA publication or televised event(US Open, US Am, etc.) to show their displeasure with the groove rule. It would obviously hurt the network who paid for the rights, but having to scramble for advertisers would lead to some uncomfortable phone calls with NBC and the USGA. I doubt you could get everyone to do it, but hitting the USGA in the pocketbook may be a good way to voice their opinion.
[/quote]


I think you'll find that companies are loving it. Everybody has to buy new irons / wedges ... they'll be laughing all the way to the bank.
[/quote]

I disagree. Most of us who are playing newer model irons have conforming grooves now anyway. If you don't, it doesn't matter unless you are playing in professional competition right now. For these guys it is mainly affecting wedges and 100% of players with status have access to conforming clubs free of charge (and get bag money for putting them into play). The only guys really being forced to buy new clubs are all the guys without an equipment deal who are trying to qualify their way into tourneys. This is such a small percentage of players it will not make a blip for equipment manufacturers bottom line. This is a hard hit to the manufacturers who are required to change their grooves on all wedges sold after this year. Amateurs, who aren't required to play them, aren't going to run out to replace their old wedges with new anywhere near the rate they had in the past. Ebay and other sites selling wedges with non-conforming grooves in mint condition will be the retailer dejour for a while, further hurting the bottom line for companies manufacturing wedges. I could see this hurting companies like Cleveland particularly hard.

This rule change and method of roll out is just an unfortunate catastrophic bungle that is confusing, poorly managed and costly to everyone involved. Phil's argument about submitting clubs that perfectly meet the rules and still having them labeled as non-conforming highlights the state the game is in at the moment. What incredibly bungling leadership. Equipment design is now a very scientific process. Everything easily quantifiable. There should not be this type of ambiguity around the rules governing the game.

[dbleag]

I'm too lazy to go through this whole thing to see if anyone else said it already, but PING wedges with their square grooves didn't seem to help John Daly the last few weeks, did they?

[mbshaf]

I think further proof of the stupidity of the new rule change are scores being carded so far this year since it went into effect. There was a time at Kapalua (before Glover had a meltdown) that Ernie's tournament record was seriously in jeapordy. Ryan Palmer shot the lights out the following week (as did Freddy and Watson). The Bob Hope was a total shootout (inclement weather and all) and Torrey Pines isn't slowing the guys down a bit (with an 8 under the opening day).

Spinning the ball has its advantages, but also has it drawbacks. Think of all the guys you've seen roll off the green after putting one in tight. I bet more shots have been lost to excessive, poorly controlled, spin than have been saved by it's use. I'm guessing the real jury will be scoring this year. Some will argue, if the scores stay low, that it restored the "spirit of the game" and required more "shot making" skills. "Rewarded accuracy off the tee". That is really ludicrous. It isn't the USGAs job to dictate what style of play is favored and that is exactly what they are attempting to do with this rule change.

As a hypothetical question, why does the PGA need the USGA? What would prohibit them from establishing their own rules committee, adopting very clear and, in the case of equipment, quantitative rules and applying them uniformly to its members.

Equipment manufacturers then side with the PGA as opposed to the USGA and all equipment is submitted through them for approval. State golf associations could check clubs against PGA conforming lists for all competitions.

The rules are what they are. Max out equipment, set courses up accordingly and move on. We'll all still have our own way of getting around.

[pingman1]

[quote name='Body_Visions' date='29 January 2010 - 03:56 PM' timestamp='1264802173' post='2212714']
As the starter of this topic, I [b]demand[/b] it gets back on topic. Leave the long putter out of this argument. There is nothing illegal with the long putter. This is about wedges!
[/quote]

There is nothing illegal with this wedge either.

[1603]

This is not Phil´s problem! in every other sport,F1,nascar ,sailing etc. the govering bodies set out the rules and everybody gets on with it. Alot of the players that are moaning can´t put pings in their bags besause of contracts.At the endof the day this is another governing body mess!!Is Phil allowed to use his ping in europe?

[mbshaf]

Scott McCarron can't win (or top 10) with either set of grooves and whining about it isn't going to help him. Having a nobody with political aspirations publicly calling one of the games better ambassadors a cheat on national TV is a shame. Mr. McCarron should be ashamed of himself and what he's stooped to. Also, if he has any aspirations of being named to the USGA let's hope he learns to interpret rules based on their merits, not his emotions.

He missed the cut and now he's whining like a child. Perhaps he should focus his misplaced displeasure on his own preparation rather than attacking those who bettered him on the course (which, if I'm not mistaken, was a group made up overwhelmingly of players not playing Eye 2s).

[HeadonaStick]

[quote name='mbshaf' date='30 January 2010 - 08:42 AM' timestamp='1264858927' post='2213979']
I think further proof of the stupidity of the new rule change are scores being carded so far this year since it went into effect. There was a time at Kapalua (before Glover had a meltdown) that Ernie's tournament record was seriously in jeapordy. Ryan Palmer shot the lights out the following week (as did Freddy and Watson). The Bob Hope was a total shootout (inclement weather and all) and Torrey Pines isn't slowing the guys down a bit (with an 8 under the opening day).

Spinning the ball has its advantages, but also has it drawbacks. Think of all the guys you've seen roll off the green after putting one in tight. I bet more shots have been lost to excessive, poorly controlled, spin than have been saved by it's use. I'm guessing the real jury will be scoring this year. Some will argue, if the scores stay low, that it restored the "spirit of the game" and required more "shot making" skills. "Rewarded accuracy off the tee". That is really ludicrous. It isn't the USGAs job to dictate what style of play is favored and that is exactly what they are attempting to do with this rule change.

As a hypothetical question, why does the PGA need the USGA? What would prohibit them from establishing their own rules committee, adopting very clear and, in the case of equipment, quantitative rules and applying them uniformly to its members.

Equipment manufacturers then side with the PGA as opposed to the USGA and all equipment is submitted through them for approval. State golf associations could check clubs against PGA conforming lists for all competitions.

The rules are what they are. Max out equipment, set courses up accordingly and move on. We'll all still have our own way of getting around.
[/quote]
The unique thing about golf is that we all play by pretty much the same rules and the USGA (and R&A) make those rules. There is nothing stopping the PGA Tour from adopting their own rules, but then, would it be golf?

[jaskanski]

Speaking of missed cuts - how many players [i]using [/i]Eye 2 wedges dropped below the cut line? Calc for sure - Daly obviously. Chris Riley? Riley even got "shot of the day" on the pgatour.com website for his wedge shot birdie on 16 using the alleged Eye 2 wedge. Nice shot, but there's still no advantage in missing the cut. Hence there was no performance advantage?
Maybe - and just maybe here, there needs to be a little bit of talent involved in making a wedge do what it's designed for. Perhaps that's why people are very quick to burn Phil's butt on the subject, but somehow ignore the same usual suspects who fail to match their conspiracy theory criteria. McCarron also missing the cut is poetic justice.

[mbshaf]

[quote name='HeadonaStick' date='30 January 2010 - 02:07 PM' timestamp='1264860446' post='2214017']
[quote name='mbshaf' date='30 January 2010 - 08:42 AM' timestamp='1264858927' post='2213979']
I think further proof of the stupidity of the new rule change are scores being carded so far this year since it went into effect. There was a time at Kapalua (before Glover had a meltdown) that Ernie's tournament record was seriously in jeapordy. Ryan Palmer shot the lights out the following week (as did Freddy and Watson). The Bob Hope was a total shootout (inclement weather and all) and Torrey Pines isn't slowing the guys down a bit (with an 8 under the opening day).

Spinning the ball has its advantages, but also has it drawbacks. Think of all the guys you've seen roll off the green after putting one in tight. I bet more shots have been lost to excessive, poorly controlled, spin than have been saved by it's use. I'm guessing the real jury will be scoring this year. Some will argue, if the scores stay low, that it restored the "spirit of the game" and required more "shot making" skills. "Rewarded accuracy off the tee". That is really ludicrous. It isn't the USGAs job to dictate what style of play is favored and that is exactly what they are attempting to do with this rule change.

As a hypothetical question, why does the PGA need the USGA? What would prohibit them from establishing their own rules committee, adopting very clear and, in the case of equipment, quantitative rules and applying them uniformly to its members.

Equipment manufacturers then side with the PGA as opposed to the USGA and all equipment is submitted through them for approval. State golf associations could check clubs against PGA conforming lists for all competitions.

The rules are what they are. Max out equipment, set courses up accordingly and move on. We'll all still have our own way of getting around.
[/quote]
The unique thing about golf is that we all play by pretty much the same rules and the USGA (and R&A) make those rules. There is nothing stopping the PGA Tour from adopting their own rules, but then, would it be golf?
[/quote]

It would definitely be golf. Why would it be any less? The USGA is in a state of crisis in leadership. There should not have been a change to the rules concerning grooves in the first place. If tournament directors wanted even par scores (which aren't being achieved by these new grooves if you look at the first few tourneys....still going low) then they could set up the courses so that they would be penal from the rough. Second cuts that only allow 30 yard shots with a full swing reward accuracy off the tee. You don't have to reinvent the rule book to set up the style of play you intend. The USGA could work with tournements and superintendents to set courses up appropriately. Some events are shoot outs and that's just fine. The USGA is ruining golf with their silly attempt so regulate playing styles through changes to equipment rules. That is the real violation of the "spirit of golf". Not players following the rules.

Equipment is not the problem. I don't care what type of equipment (conforming, pre C of C) you use. Torrey Pines can still be set up so that even par is a good score for the pros.

[phil75070]

How many times in a round is a player going to have a situation where he absolutely must hit a shot where the ball has to spin enough to get close to the pin, where only the Ping Eye2s will perform, where there is no other shot that can be played? The bigger concern all along should have been the fact that these guys can hit the ball as long and straight as they do, driving 330 yard par 4s with today's equipment. The driver can be pulled out of the bag, theoretically 14 times per round. The USGA's concerns are misplaced and their attempt to correct their past failures has resulted in an absurd rule. Blame the USGA for this mess, not Mickelson, Daly or anyone else choosing to use the Ping wedges.

How the Ping wedges got approved for play is a moot point. The fact is they are just that, approved for play. If I understand Phil correctly, he has submitted wedges that conform to the specifications in the rule in regard to design and measurements and have been ruled non-conforming because of the way they perform when there is no performance criteria in the rule. That would be like saying the maximum length of a driver is 48" and ruling a 48" driver non-conforming because it hits the ball too far.

One player plays a ball that through testing has been determined to best meet his performance criteria while another player plays a ball solely because of endorsement money. Both balls are legal. Does the first player have an unfair advantage? One's clubs are designed to meet his exacting requirements and max out his performance. Does he have an unfair advantage over others who choose not to go that route? If they truly wanted golf to be strictly about talent there should be one ball and one design of clubs that everyone plays.

The rule allowing Ping pre-1990 Eye2 wedges to be played applies equally to all players. How is that "unfair"?

[pickerjohn]

Many years ago I was a fan of the USGA,
and then in a PGA Tour event in Florida,
a young Pro, badly in need of a break,
played the Tournament of his life, then
when he went in and was signing a card that
would have put him in a playoff as I remember,
he was informed that he had been DQ'd because
his putter grip had more than one flat side,
and yet the same people (USGA) who made that
rule were allowing Pro's to attach any length
putter to any part of their body with immunity.
I haven't understood the USGA since, and they
keep right on with the silliness. Your putter can
be longer than your driver, right? Square grooves
are illegal, right? (oops! maybe not in all cases).
Not condeming people who choose to use long putters
attached to whatever part of your body, you are
within the rules.

[phil75070]

[quote name='1603' date='30 January 2010 - 07:42 AM' timestamp='1264858973' post='2213981']
Is Phil allowed to use his ping in europe?
[/quote]

That is a good question! I went to the R&A site and searched their informational club database. The Eye2 wedges are not even listed to show yes or no but under the Irons category the Eye2s are listed as meeting the 2010 groove rule but with the comment: "Applies only under USGA Rules of Golf."

Therefore, I would think that if it is a European Tour event or any event played under R&A governance then they are not allowed. If it is a jointly sponsored event it gets muddy.