| FrontPageGolf |
News Commentary Opinion
| Copyright MMXI, Front Page Golf. All Rights Reserved. www.FrontPageGolf.com is a trademark of FrontPageGolf. |
USGA's Groove rule after 18 months
Tour players say no big deal
By ED TRAVIS
Tour players say no big deal
By ED TRAVIS
 |  |  |  |  |
If the true test of a man’s intelligence is how much he
agrees with you Michael Johnson, equipment writer for
Golf Digest, is a genius.
In his June 20 online column he lays out the case
against the USGA’s illogical and unfortunate
reasoning when it came up with the ban of U-shaped
or square grooves. The argument is similar to that
made by this writer for over two years.
The Association concluded by mandating grooves with
smaller cross section on irons of more than 25
degrees loft touring professionals and top amateurs
would have to throttle back their tee shots to avoid
hitting the ball in the rough. Smaller groves are less
efficient imparting spin to a ball when the grass is of
medium length as in the rough. The 1,000 or so elite
golfers this change was aimed at therefore would
have a harder time stopping their approach shots on
the green.
Their logic continued that since there would be a
“penalty” for hitting the ball in the rough the elites
would then be forced to use a club less than a driver
from the tee in order to keep the ball in the fairway.
From the fairway they would be able to put the correct
spin on the ball with the new grooves so distance
could be controlled and it would stop close to the pin.
But this hasn’t happened in the 18 months the rule
has been in effect on the PGA Tour according to
Johnson. And as if adding insult to injury, Tour players
don’t think the groove change was a big deal. It doesn’
t affect their thinking about club selection on the tee
and in only a few instances creates a concern for a
shot to the green. The toursters still hit driver most of
the time and aren’t intimidated by the potential of
having to hit their next shot from the long grass.
In addition Johnson cites statistics on driving distance
and scoring that raise the whole groove rules situation
to the level of a fiasco.
The USGA thinks the golf ball goes too far and missed
the opportunity to something meaningful in the way of
corralling driver distance on tee shots. Instead they
settled on the groove change rule as a means of
containing the monster hitters of the PGA Tour.
agrees with you Michael Johnson, equipment writer for
Golf Digest, is a genius.
In his June 20 online column he lays out the case
against the USGA’s illogical and unfortunate
reasoning when it came up with the ban of U-shaped
or square grooves. The argument is similar to that
made by this writer for over two years.
The Association concluded by mandating grooves with
smaller cross section on irons of more than 25
degrees loft touring professionals and top amateurs
would have to throttle back their tee shots to avoid
hitting the ball in the rough. Smaller groves are less
efficient imparting spin to a ball when the grass is of
medium length as in the rough. The 1,000 or so elite
golfers this change was aimed at therefore would
have a harder time stopping their approach shots on
the green.
Their logic continued that since there would be a
“penalty” for hitting the ball in the rough the elites
would then be forced to use a club less than a driver
from the tee in order to keep the ball in the fairway.
From the fairway they would be able to put the correct
spin on the ball with the new grooves so distance
could be controlled and it would stop close to the pin.
But this hasn’t happened in the 18 months the rule
has been in effect on the PGA Tour according to
Johnson. And as if adding insult to injury, Tour players
don’t think the groove change was a big deal. It doesn’
t affect their thinking about club selection on the tee
and in only a few instances creates a concern for a
shot to the green. The toursters still hit driver most of
the time and aren’t intimidated by the potential of
having to hit their next shot from the long grass.
In addition Johnson cites statistics on driving distance
and scoring that raise the whole groove rules situation
to the level of a fiasco.
The USGA thinks the golf ball goes too far and missed
the opportunity to something meaningful in the way of
corralling driver distance on tee shots. Instead they
settled on the groove change rule as a means of
containing the monster hitters of the PGA Tour.
But regular golfers pay the price and the law of
untended consequences is alive and well. First long
ball hitters think the groove rule is at best not
meaningful and at worst a joke. Golf equipment
manufacturers, in the doldrums for years, to comply
with the new rule were required to redesign the
grooves on their irons. Money essentially wasted.
Amateur golfers wishing to comply must buy a new set
of irons before 2024 when the rule affects non-elites.
This delay was done to soften the impact on everyday
golfers but in the process will gradually kill off a
segment of the secondhand club market. However,
should regular golfers replace their irons in the next
13 years they will only be able to buy those with
conforming grooves. Most importantly, since non-
elites don’t have the skills of touring pros, they will
have more problems stopping their shots on the
green making the game harder than it already is.
As an aside, most golfers of the non-elite variety not
only don’t play by the Rules of Golf (improving lies,
dropping a ball rather than stroke and distance for a
lost ball, etc.) but do not have a regulation handicap.
By some estimates less than 20 percent of players
keep a USGA sanctioned handicap so a little thing like
playing with nonconforming irons probably isn’t on
their radar.
The final blow to the USGA credibility is this rule, which
in essence rolls back grooves to what they were
before World War II, is diametrically different than the
Association’s own principles published in 2002. To
quote, “The R&A and the USGA continue to believe that
the retention of a single set of rules for all players of
the game, irrespective of ability, is one of golf’s
greatest strengths.”
These principles go on to say the USGA is specifically
are not in favor of having “separate rules for elite
competition,” which of course is exactly what they
created by implementing the groove rule change the
way they did.
Perhaps they thought no one would notice.
The real burr under the USGA’s saddle is the elite
players hit the ball so far they have made the old,
tradition-soaked venues from the eras of Jones,
Hogan, Palmer and Nicklaus obsolete; too short for
the modern player.
untended consequences is alive and well. First long
ball hitters think the groove rule is at best not
meaningful and at worst a joke. Golf equipment
manufacturers, in the doldrums for years, to comply
with the new rule were required to redesign the
grooves on their irons. Money essentially wasted.
Amateur golfers wishing to comply must buy a new set
of irons before 2024 when the rule affects non-elites.
This delay was done to soften the impact on everyday
golfers but in the process will gradually kill off a
segment of the secondhand club market. However,
should regular golfers replace their irons in the next
13 years they will only be able to buy those with
conforming grooves. Most importantly, since non-
elites don’t have the skills of touring pros, they will
have more problems stopping their shots on the
green making the game harder than it already is.
As an aside, most golfers of the non-elite variety not
only don’t play by the Rules of Golf (improving lies,
dropping a ball rather than stroke and distance for a
lost ball, etc.) but do not have a regulation handicap.
By some estimates less than 20 percent of players
keep a USGA sanctioned handicap so a little thing like
playing with nonconforming irons probably isn’t on
their radar.
The final blow to the USGA credibility is this rule, which
in essence rolls back grooves to what they were
before World War II, is diametrically different than the
Association’s own principles published in 2002. To
quote, “The R&A and the USGA continue to believe that
the retention of a single set of rules for all players of
the game, irrespective of ability, is one of golf’s
greatest strengths.”
These principles go on to say the USGA is specifically
are not in favor of having “separate rules for elite
competition,” which of course is exactly what they
created by implementing the groove rule change the
way they did.
Perhaps they thought no one would notice.
The real burr under the USGA’s saddle is the elite
players hit the ball so far they have made the old,
tradition-soaked venues from the eras of Jones,
Hogan, Palmer and Nicklaus obsolete; too short for
the modern player.
A case in point would be the US Open site,
Congressional CC, which Rory McIlroy dismantled so
convincingly even though it played to about 7,400
yards. McIlroy averaged almost 313 yards off the tee
which, presuming he was able to keep his drive
somewhere in the vicinity of the hole he was playing,
pretty much guarantees lots of scoring opportunities.
And he hit more than 86 percent of the greens in
regulation, rough or no rough.
New materials and designs resulting in equipment
changes are as much a part of the game as the 19th
hole. Innovation allowing the ball to be hit a greater
distance and the hand wringing reaction by the
powers that be has occurred many times. Evidentially
the USGA has not been paying attention. They haven’t
learned from the past.
Over the last 125 years new equipment technology
has caused the lords of the game to panic several
times. In most instances they had, what could only be
charitably described as, inappropriate reactions. If you’
re interested, take some time to read about the
introduction of steel shafts or the gutta percha ball.
(Frank Thomas’ book “From Sticks and Stones” is
excellent on the topic.)
What was said and done is eerily the same as now.
The USGA has yet to learn they improvements in
technology, agronomy or player conditioning have
changed the game and will continue to change it.
The result unfortunately is they (and the Rules of Golf)
have become less relevant to the great majority of
players who could care less about C.O.R. and M.O.I.
and “plain in shape” clubheads or any of the other
restrictions put on the game for the sake of tradition.
We need a ruling body not a bureaucracy such as
what the United States Golf Association has become.
They act like they are out of touch with the typical golfer
who just wants to go out and have fun playing the
greatest game even invented.
A bureaucracy’s main goal is self-perpetuation and
what better way to do insure your future than put rules
in place everyone must live by and that need you to
continually interpret and modify. Restrictions in the
name of tradition are just another way to make golf
less enjoyable for the average golfer.
Congressional CC, which Rory McIlroy dismantled so
convincingly even though it played to about 7,400
yards. McIlroy averaged almost 313 yards off the tee
which, presuming he was able to keep his drive
somewhere in the vicinity of the hole he was playing,
pretty much guarantees lots of scoring opportunities.
And he hit more than 86 percent of the greens in
regulation, rough or no rough.
New materials and designs resulting in equipment
changes are as much a part of the game as the 19th
hole. Innovation allowing the ball to be hit a greater
distance and the hand wringing reaction by the
powers that be has occurred many times. Evidentially
the USGA has not been paying attention. They haven’t
learned from the past.
Over the last 125 years new equipment technology
has caused the lords of the game to panic several
times. In most instances they had, what could only be
charitably described as, inappropriate reactions. If you’
re interested, take some time to read about the
introduction of steel shafts or the gutta percha ball.
(Frank Thomas’ book “From Sticks and Stones” is
excellent on the topic.)
What was said and done is eerily the same as now.
The USGA has yet to learn they improvements in
technology, agronomy or player conditioning have
changed the game and will continue to change it.
The result unfortunately is they (and the Rules of Golf)
have become less relevant to the great majority of
players who could care less about C.O.R. and M.O.I.
and “plain in shape” clubheads or any of the other
restrictions put on the game for the sake of tradition.
We need a ruling body not a bureaucracy such as
what the United States Golf Association has become.
They act like they are out of touch with the typical golfer
who just wants to go out and have fun playing the
greatest game even invented.
A bureaucracy’s main goal is self-perpetuation and
what better way to do insure your future than put rules
in place everyone must live by and that need you to
continually interpret and modify. Restrictions in the
name of tradition are just another way to make golf
less enjoyable for the average golfer.