Mickelson & his Ping Eye2 Wedges (topics merged)

[rybo]

Phil using a Eye 2 wedge is nothing more than a political game he is playing with the USGA. Callaway submitted clubs that met all dimensional standards and were deemed non-conforming by the USGA. Phil (and Callaway for that matter) was more than a little pissed as he had been practicing with these clubs for some time and the USGA's decision came a couple of days before the start of a tournament.

Once he gets his jollies over with he'll move on. Anyway it's a 60 degree bent to 64. Its not like its every wedge in his bag. This public stunt will be short lived.

[ssp]

I don't know... we should apply a little more of this in my opinion.

 

[RICKYBOBBY]

Funny how some say hey its not against the rules so its ok, but people still bring up the boulder incident with Tiger (it was not embedded, huge and heavy but not embedded), both of these are the "Spirit of the Rule" I think. Did you think it was right for Tiger to get the boulder moved? Then apply that same logic to the Phil grooves.

[highergr0und]

Does anyone have any stats as to how many times he used it in the round yesterday?

[tinman]

Rocco & McCarron need a couple of pacifiers!!!!!!!!!!!

[Pepperturbo]

 Last evening while watching Torrey Pines event Nick Faldo mentioned Daly's & Phil's illegal wedges a few times.  I wondered what he was talking about, now I know.  I am the first to say although its technically not cheating, it calls into question Phil's character, and believe what he's doing is wrong. 

[preacher]

At least this article gets McCarron in the golf news, god knows his stellar play hasn't. They really need to stop with the garbage cheating talk. The clubs are legal, period. Phil stated he thinks the new rule is bad and is trying to stick it to them...good for him, I agree.

--jason

[SpartyOn1982]

That is all they talked about for an hour during 1st round coverage at Torey Pines. I think it ws a smart move especially for Phil since he cant use a 64* wedge that has the conforming grooves(ball slides up face). Grandfather rules rule all.

[kal32473]

[quote name='Pepperturbo' date='29 January 2010 - 12:56 PM' timestamp='1264787815' post='2212163']
Last evening while watching Torrey Pines event Nick Faldo mentioned Daly's & Phil's illegal wedges a few times. I wondered what he was talking about, now I know. I am the first to say although its technically not cheating, it calls into question Phil's character, and believe what he's doing is wrong.
[/quote]


It's wrong to be playing wedges that have been approved for play by the USGA and PGA Tour? Would you feel more comfortable if he was playing with conforming wedges that weren't approved?

[jaskanski]

Are these the same wedges that Calc has been using for years? I don't hear people getting on his back. Why not reserve judgement on Phil until the tourney finishes? If he ends up winning it by a miraculous shot from the rough that spins back into the cup, then we may have a justified point. He may also finish way down the board - and ditch the wedge for a different one next event. Everyone seems to feel that he has an unfair advantage that will win him the event, or finish higher than he should given the circumstances. It's ridiculous.

[JD3]

If its not an advantage, why did the USGA ban them? Why is Phil using an exempted version?

[tbowles411]

People are flipping out because it's the "Spirit of the rule." When your competitors are using everything conforming, and someone decides to circumvent the spirit of the rule by using court decided conforming clubs, it brings an unnecessary light upon him. While he's playing by the rules, it makes his competitors question his integrity. Nothing is worse than that.

[mat562]

It certainly[i] is[/i] an advantage to have a square grooved L wedge in play, but it's something that's there for everyone to exploit; so in the grand scheme of things I suppose it can be argued that it's not an advantage at all. Not versus the other golfers in the field, anyway.

[sliderwrx]

I'm still having trouble figuring out why anybody would have a problem with this. The wedges in question are legal. End of story. How they are legal is not my concern, that they are IS my concern. Any player on tour (or in golf for that matter) is free to put them in play as they see fit. If a player truly believes they are an advantage, they too can source some old Eye 2 wedges and use them in tournaments ruled by the USGA. All this talk about Phil violating the 'spirit of the rule' nonsense is lame. There's no cheating going on, get over it!

[Hawkeye77]

don't know what ever one thinks but i found this article

 

http://sports.yahoo....ating-?urn=golf,216497

 

that should be the link now

 

First, Phil isn't "busted" because he's not doing anything illegal, which you would know if you read the readily available reports. There is no question and the thread title is misleading.

 

Second, the players have the right to whine about the Eye 2s, but all of that whining has to be directed to the PGA Tour. Phil is playing one modified 64 degree Eye 2, at least that's what he said yesterday. The club is legal, period. Players should not make a legal club a personal issue with other players.

 

Third, part of what is lost in a lot of this is maybe Phil is doing it to thumb his nose at the Tour at little bit. He has been very vocal about the change all the way through, made some very strong and public criticisms of the change and I think he may be sticking it to Finchem a little bit by using it, good for him.

 

Fourth, someone asked "why". The history is too long to get into, but you can find plenty on Ping's dispute back in the day and why these were grandfathered in.

 

Personally, I love the change and anything else within reason the Tour can do to not render courses obsolete and bring some shotmaking skill back into the game should be done.

 

Funny, I'm old enough to remember when Scott Simpson, I believe at the U.S. Open was making some incredible shots with his Ping wedges. I don't recall if that brought the issue to the forefront or fueled the fire, haven't gone back and checked the dates, but I remember the announcers were commenting on the spin he was getting from all sorts of lies at the time.

[jaskanski]

So what wedge did Piercy use to shoot a 64? PM had a (quoting PGA website) 'lack-lustre' 70.

[floyd]

He has been accused of being a cheater by Scott McCarron because he is using a Ping Eye 2 wedge.

[floyd]

He has been accused of being a cheater by McCarron for using the wedge.

[jlam1127]

[quote name='Pepperturbo' date='29 January 2010 - 12:56 PM' timestamp='1264787815' post='2212163']
Last evening while watching Torrey Pines event Nick Faldo mentioned Daly's & Phil's illegal wedges a few times. I wondered what he was talking about, now I know. I am the first to say although its technically not cheating, it calls into question Phil's character, and believe what he's doing is wrong.
[/


Why would you question Phil's "character" when what he's doing isn't illegal or against the rules? Whether you agree with it or not, it's one thing, questioning someone's character because of it is a bit arrogant on your part.

[puttingmatt]

I like all these phrases that I'm reading here. Calling golfers cheaters, and they are not living up to the spirit of the game. Give me a break, The ping wedges in question, are legal and welcomed under the rules of golf. They spell it out under the rules. Maybe that is the spirit that the USGA wants for the game. Not all of the rules of golf are meant to penalize golfers. In this instance, the USGA is giving the players options. They are even spelling it out in the book. If this older ping wedge is good enough for the USGA, It should be good enough for everyone. Thank you USGA and Karsten Solheim.

[born4golf77]

[quote name='HeadonaStick' date='28 January 2010 - 09:51 PM' timestamp='1264733491' post='2211091']
[quote name='born4golf77' date='28 January 2010 - 09:27 PM' timestamp='1264732041' post='2211031']
i am fine with the clubs being conforming - that is the beauty of the legal system when they actually get it right, if karsten was still around he probably would have challenged this condition of competition as well -

i am sure the wedges produce more spin than the conforming wedges currently especially out of the rough and inside 50yds where it matters most anyway- all the independent studies showed out of the fairway there is no big difference until inside 50yds or so

anyway my question for the rules experts is this - if you have an eye 2 club that is legal and the grooves are worn out and you re-groove it with the original groove pattern (u-groove pattern), is it still grandfathered in or would it have to be re-grooved to the new rule? if so then they could just find old wedges and continually re-groove them back to original

also as a side note, the first U-groove eye2's had super sharp grooves that tore up old balata balls so they rounded the edges later on. very few of the super sharp edged ones ever show up and even less in good shape

btw i would use them and not think twice. they are legal and if you think they will help you then why not- it is not dishonest to do something legal imo
[/quote]
You may not re-groove the clubs. Re-grooving makes them non-conforming.

See: [url="http://www.golfwrx.com/forums/topic/337944-groove-sharpeningrefinishing/1rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr"]http://www.golfwrx.c...rrrrrrrrrrrrrrr[/url]
[/quote]

that article and the cleveland rep is referring to pre-2010 grooves on clubs other than ones that are grandfathered in and it does not quote a usga rule anywhere in the text. i think he is saying if you re-groove with the intention of making them sharper or bigger then they would be non-conforming if tested.

i am sure if you take an old set of irons that you love and re-groove them to the current groove standards that they would be legal. any iron/wedge that meets the standards, even if re-grooved has to be deemed legal (unless you are callaway and come up with a good solution that makes the usga change the specs again) because they meet the current specs. the cleveland guy seemed like he was talking about people trying to buy a conforming club, alter it to perform better and then use it in competition under the assumption everyone would think he was legal, which is cheating.

my question is specifically about altering a club that is deemed grandfathered in because of previous lawsuits. does the club stay conforming if altered in the form of re-grooving to the old "grandfathered" groove pattern? basically, it boils down to with respect to the grandfathered eye2's, is it once legal, always legal OR legal until altered? otherwise guys could just buy old eye2's and constantly re-groove them and stay legal. also will they test the old eye2's to see if they have original grooves?

anyone with any idea let me know or i may submit this question to the usga.org website

my view on the legality or morality of using them is that if the usga's position could have held up in court then this problem would not have happened.
the problem is the usga is reactive and not proactive- also they have some of the most confusing rules of any sport. - if they could just start from scratch with a new, easier rule book then golf would be much easier to play fairly - the o.b. rule alone is ridiculous in my opinion but that is another thread.

[tbowles411]

[quote name='floyd' date='29 January 2010 - 01:55 PM' timestamp='1264791347' post='2212290']
He has been accused of being a cheater by McCarron for using the wedge.
[/quote]
And Rocco as well...

[woodlandsgolfer]

You have to know the rules. If it is not against the rules, then it is legal. I'll never forget what my high school golf coach told me about the rules. He said, "Know the rules. All the rules. If you know the rules and how to apply them, use them to your advantage."

Would anyone take a drop off a cartpath that gave them a much better shot at the green, as long as it was a legal drop according to the rules? Of course, without a doubt. Is that against the "spirit" or "integrity" of the game? I don't think so. I do know that its legal.

[psygolf]

[quote name='Chunkylover77' date='29 January 2010 - 12:17 PM' timestamp='1264785445' post='2212065']
You can't cheat if you are playing by the rules. It's the USGA's fault this is happening not Phils.
[/quote]


So it's not cheating if the "boss" lets you "swing" them!? -wink, wink

[tomcollins]

Rocco and McCarron have access to these wedges too.

[stratkidp38]

[quote name='tinman' date='29 January 2010 - 12:56 PM' timestamp='1264787766' post='2212159']
Rocco & McCarron need a couple of pacifiers!!!!!!!!!!!
[/quote]

i find it funny that both Rocco & McCarron use broom handle putters, which are technically legal, but many purists consider to be "against the spirit of the game".

[oldpalchamp]

Interesting, two guys using long putters complaining about the "spirit of the rule."

[UnderPar18]

Phil is smart. If these grooves on the old ping eye wedge is going to help his game and he is able to play with it why not? He decided to turn to this wedge in which every pro has the opportunity to use also. It is there fault they arent. I think people should not be getting on Phil's case, but more on the USGA's case because they are STUPID. I personally dont think Phil is insulting the game of golf because it's not like he is the only player able to use these wedges. I actually applaud him for using it because maybe with all the attention and contraversy there is maybe the USGA will clean up there act and get their hands out of their A$$.

[Rohlio]

Poorly written over bearing rules always have ridiculous consequences.

I hope more people find ways to shine light on what a travashamockery this rule change is.

[ssp]

Wow..... a lot of spirited posts here.

Regardless of your opinion of this topic. It is a valid topic to disucss at the lunch table, break room, chat board... etc...

One thing that is unique about golf is the 'integrity' aspect of the game. You call your own penalities, etc.... My opinion is that this is questioning the 'integrity' of the game .... similar to boulder incident mentioned previously, then on the other side of that coin is the 'kneeling on the towel' incident with Stadler.

When you compare the boulder incident against the towel incident .... I think it is fair to question the 'actual' rule versus the 'spirit' of the rule and what is fare.

So the posters that think there is no issue here and or need to get over it, etc.... need to respect others opinions and posts.