| Copyright MMX, Front Page Golf. All Rights Reserved. www.FrontPageGolf.com is a trademark of Front Page Golf. |
| FrontPageGolf |
News Commentary Opinion
 |  |  |  |  |
It was the opinion of many, this writer included, the United
States Golf Association's changing of the allowable
dimensions of grooves on club’s with more than 25
degrees of loft (essentially 5-iron and up) was a bad idea.
Golf’s ruling body provided for a staged implementation -
January 2010 for professionals and amateurs in USGA
championships – with most golfers given until 2024 to
comply…unless of course one were to buy a new set of
irons sometime in the next 14 years.
The arguments against this ruling were and are twofold.
One of golf’s many charms is no matter how bad or good
a player was, he or she played on the same competition
ground and with the same equipment as everyone else.
Secondly for the majority of golfers, i.e., the less skilled,
decreasing the “bite” of grooves on a wedge and other
short irons makes it measurably and disproportionately
more difficult to stop approach shots near the pin or for
that matter on the green when playing from either the
rough or fairway.
Less skilled golfers by definition hit fewer fairways, have
more trouble hitting out of rough and are more likely to use
hard cover, lower spinning balls. Since control of a golf
ball is in direct proportion to the amount of spin imparted,
it was easy to see a looming problem for the typical
weekend warrior. Short irons with the new less aggressive
V-grooves instead of the former box- or U-shaped grooves
produce shots with less spin and thus less control.
Succinctly, why make the game harder for most players
and why segregate pros and elite amateurs with a
different set of equipment rules (for 14 years anyway)?
The USGA’s rationale was they wanted to ensure the
older, shorter courses would not become obsolete due to
the greater distances the 1,500 or so best players in the
country were able to hit the ball, that is, to preserve the
game. The thinking is by making it harder to spin/stop a
ball on the green a premium was placed on accuracy of
tee shots.
No more swing hard, go find it and swing hard again.
Finesse and shot making would return. Never mind what it
meant to millions of ordinary golfers.
In truth the USGA has been really running hard to catch up
from an early lack of understanding or even caring as new
materials, designs and manufacturing techniques created
a sea-change in the world of golf equipment. These
technological advances were the principal reasons for the
increase in distance by touring pros and elite amateurs.
States Golf Association's changing of the allowable
dimensions of grooves on club’s with more than 25
degrees of loft (essentially 5-iron and up) was a bad idea.
Golf’s ruling body provided for a staged implementation -
January 2010 for professionals and amateurs in USGA
championships – with most golfers given until 2024 to
comply…unless of course one were to buy a new set of
irons sometime in the next 14 years.
The arguments against this ruling were and are twofold.
One of golf’s many charms is no matter how bad or good
a player was, he or she played on the same competition
ground and with the same equipment as everyone else.
Secondly for the majority of golfers, i.e., the less skilled,
decreasing the “bite” of grooves on a wedge and other
short irons makes it measurably and disproportionately
more difficult to stop approach shots near the pin or for
that matter on the green when playing from either the
rough or fairway.
Less skilled golfers by definition hit fewer fairways, have
more trouble hitting out of rough and are more likely to use
hard cover, lower spinning balls. Since control of a golf
ball is in direct proportion to the amount of spin imparted,
it was easy to see a looming problem for the typical
weekend warrior. Short irons with the new less aggressive
V-grooves instead of the former box- or U-shaped grooves
produce shots with less spin and thus less control.
Succinctly, why make the game harder for most players
and why segregate pros and elite amateurs with a
different set of equipment rules (for 14 years anyway)?
The USGA’s rationale was they wanted to ensure the
older, shorter courses would not become obsolete due to
the greater distances the 1,500 or so best players in the
country were able to hit the ball, that is, to preserve the
game. The thinking is by making it harder to spin/stop a
ball on the green a premium was placed on accuracy of
tee shots.
No more swing hard, go find it and swing hard again.
Finesse and shot making would return. Never mind what it
meant to millions of ordinary golfers.
In truth the USGA has been really running hard to catch up
from an early lack of understanding or even caring as new
materials, designs and manufacturing techniques created
a sea-change in the world of golf equipment. These
technological advances were the principal reasons for the
increase in distance by touring pros and elite amateurs.
Groove Effect
The horse was out of the barn and galloping down the fairway
By ED TRAVIS
The horse was out of the barn and galloping down the fairway
By ED TRAVIS
These three diagrams illustrating the change in the rules
governing the allowable cross section of grooves in clubs with
25 degrees or more of loft are from the USGA announcement
made in 2009. Thus the top diagram is labeled "Example of a
Current Square or "U" Groove".
governing the allowable cross section of grooves in clubs with
25 degrees or more of loft are from the USGA announcement
made in 2009. Thus the top diagram is labeled "Example of a
Current Square or "U" Groove".
The crew in Far Hills was behind the curve when it came
to the introduction of solid core urethane cover golf balls
(the Titleist Pro V1 in 2000), the graphite shaft and even
the use of titanium for club heads. It was almost as if
someone said, “Oops, we gotta do something ‘cause the
pros are hitting it too far.”
The USGA made other attempts to rein in distance such
as putting an upper limit on the coefficient of restitution
(trampoline effect) of clubheads; a cap on driver shaft
length since the longer the shaft the greater the potential
to generate clubhead speed; and most recently tighter
specs on golf ball performance.
However, for all intents and purposes the horse was out
of the barn and galloping down the fairway.
What was left was to penalize golfers for hitting the ball
farther and presumably therefore more often into the
rough by making it more difficult to control the distance the
higher lofted clubs hit the ball, particularly from grassy lies.
The USGA has seemingly accomplished what they set out
to do. According to an article on Golf.com by Rob
Sauerhaft, research done by Hot Stix shows exactly the
results the new groove cross section was meant to
produce. Hot Stix found clubs with V-grooves made it
more difficult to control the distance either from the fairway
or rough since balls have measurably less spin, roll out
more on the green and are affected more by the wind
compared with box-grooves.
Basically there was a degradation of spin, therefore
control, by around a third.
The USGA’s accomplishment, meeting its goal, should
not go unrecognized but in a few years probably not too
many will remember or maybe even care about this high
jacking of tradition for the sake of an ill conceived idea of
the proper way to preserve the game.
Golfers always have and hopefully always will be able to
take advantage of better equipment, agronomy and
physical conditioning.
And there should be no tears shed for the touring pros.
Not only do they have the skill to compensate for a roll
back in grooves (scoring average seems to be unaffected
so far this year), they have the skill to generate more spin
using a more lofted wedge and softer cover ball.
to the introduction of solid core urethane cover golf balls
(the Titleist Pro V1 in 2000), the graphite shaft and even
the use of titanium for club heads. It was almost as if
someone said, “Oops, we gotta do something ‘cause the
pros are hitting it too far.”
The USGA made other attempts to rein in distance such
as putting an upper limit on the coefficient of restitution
(trampoline effect) of clubheads; a cap on driver shaft
length since the longer the shaft the greater the potential
to generate clubhead speed; and most recently tighter
specs on golf ball performance.
However, for all intents and purposes the horse was out
of the barn and galloping down the fairway.
What was left was to penalize golfers for hitting the ball
farther and presumably therefore more often into the
rough by making it more difficult to control the distance the
higher lofted clubs hit the ball, particularly from grassy lies.
The USGA has seemingly accomplished what they set out
to do. According to an article on Golf.com by Rob
Sauerhaft, research done by Hot Stix shows exactly the
results the new groove cross section was meant to
produce. Hot Stix found clubs with V-grooves made it
more difficult to control the distance either from the fairway
or rough since balls have measurably less spin, roll out
more on the green and are affected more by the wind
compared with box-grooves.
Basically there was a degradation of spin, therefore
control, by around a third.
The USGA’s accomplishment, meeting its goal, should
not go unrecognized but in a few years probably not too
many will remember or maybe even care about this high
jacking of tradition for the sake of an ill conceived idea of
the proper way to preserve the game.
Golfers always have and hopefully always will be able to
take advantage of better equipment, agronomy and
physical conditioning.
And there should be no tears shed for the touring pros.
Not only do they have the skill to compensate for a roll
back in grooves (scoring average seems to be unaffected
so far this year), they have the skill to generate more spin
using a more lofted wedge and softer cover ball.