or Connect
TheSandTrap.com › Golf Forum › The Clubhouse › Golf Talk › USGA to Cancel Publinx, add Four-Ball Championships
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

USGA to Cancel Publinx, add Four-Ball Championships - Page 2

post #19 of 35
Quote:
Originally Posted by minitour View Post

So if I understand the USGA:
We'll hide behind tradition to change the groove rule which impacts the top 1%;
We'll hide behind tradition to ban anchoring because there are guys on TOUR that don't like it;
But we won't stand up for tradition in preserving one of the nations oldest championships.

And they also won't be getting dues money from me anytime soon.

So the "blue collar" golfer is basically done...and these fourball teams, how will they be selected? State golf associations? If so, that's going to be college kids. I might as well hang it up. My national championship is now the Mid Am, until they get rid of that in favor of a shootout event.

I'm with you. I was a long time member of The USGA, but no more! They have taken away a method of putting that has been legal for a long time. This will make the game a lot less fun for a lot of recreational players. The groove rule seems to have had little or no effect, except to make golfers buy new clubs. They talk about slow play, yet they trick up great golf courses by growing deep rough,turning par 5's into par 4's, and almost killing greens in order to defend par. To me, it seems like the USGA has done more to make the game more exclusive rather than growing the game. Mabye it is just perception, but they seem to be addressing issues that affect a very small percentage of elite players, while hurting recreational players. I am a member at a semi private club, and the pros tell me that most of the courses in our area are not doing very well.

post #20 of 35
Quote:
Originally Posted by caniac6 View Post

I'm with you. I was a long time member of The USGA, but no more! They have taken away a method of putting that has been legal for a long time. This will make the game a lot less fun for a lot of recreational players. The groove rule seems to have had little or no effect, except to make golfers buy new clubs. They talk about slow play, yet they trick up great golf courses by growing deep rough,turning par 5's into par 4's, and almost killing greens in order to defend par. To me, it seems like the USGA has done more to make the game more exclusive rather than growing the game. Mabye it is just perception, but they seem to be addressing issues that affect a very small percentage of elite players, while hurting recreational players. I am a member at a semi private club, and the pros tell me that most of the courses in our area are not doing very well.

 

Just renewed my USGA membership for the year.  Can't wait to get my Merion hat!   a1_smile.gif

post #21 of 35
Enjoy it. I can not support an organization that seems to be lost and has no clue what my interests are, let alone supporting them.
post #22 of 35
Quote:
Originally Posted by minitour View Post

Enjoy it. I can not support an organization that seems to be lost and has no clue what my interests are, let alone supporting them.

I'm genuinely curious. What interests of yours do they not "support"?
post #23 of 35
Quote:
Originally Posted by minitour View Post

So if I understand the USGA:
We'll hide behind tradition to change the groove rule which impacts the top 1%;
We'll hide behind tradition to ban anchoring because there are guys on TOUR that don't like it;
But we won't stand up for tradition in preserving one of the nations oldest championships.

 

I took it the opposite way.

 

They bucked tradition and "keeping things the way they are because they've been that way for a long time" in changing the grooves (which affect more than the top 1%).

They bucked tradition and "keeping things the way they are because they've been that way for a long time" in changing the anchoring rule regarding how a stroke is made.

They bucked tradition and "keeping things the way they are because they've been that way for a long time" in removing the Publinx and adding a new tournament.

 

I see each of them as the USGA moving forward.

 

Without looking, name the last ten Publinx champs? The last three? Five of the last 20?

 

And they didn't ban anchoring because "guys on Tour don't like it." Sorry, you don't just get to make stuff up.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by minitour View Post

And they also won't be getting dues money from me anytime soon.

 

Okay. I'll send 'em an extra $10 to make up for it.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by minitour View Post

So the "blue collar" golfer is basically done...

 

There's really no such thing.

 

Not to give away the earlier answer, but Colt Knost, Clay Ogden, Ryan Moore, Brandt Snedeker, Ryan Moore again, Chez Reavie, DJ Trahan, Hunter Haas, Trevor Immelman, Tim Clark won the tournament all but one year from 1997-2007. Earlier winners include Billy Mayfair, Jodie Mudd (twice, plus his brother before that), etc.

 

The USGA gave their reasoning.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by David in FL View Post

Just renewed my USGA membership for the year.  Can't wait to get my Merion hat!   a1_smile.gif

 

:)

post #24 of 35

Since I can't figure out how to break up a quote like that....

 

 

1) I'm not making anything up.  The pressure came from somewhere.  Follow the almighty dollar.  Where do you think it came from?  The guys in NJ?  In St. Andrews?  You think THEY have the money?  Try again.

 

B) Send them as much as you want.  They won't be getting a penny from me.  Not a single cent.

 

3) Who gives a fig who won?  Don't you have any students who would sell their left nut to play in a national championship, or do you only work with the elite level guys?  This is one less opportunity for them.  That's why the blue collar guy is done.  Might as well hang it up.  You can keep concentrating on who wins the damn thing, but for some guys that isn't what it's about.  It's about being able to say "hey, I played in a PubLinks in 2015...made match play." or whatever.  Most guys that I've played with in Sectional Qualifying (for several events, not just the APL - Am, Mid Am, Open, Jr. Am back before I became ancient) acknowledged that they weren't going to win.  They know it up front! 

 

Q) They gave their reasoning behind the groove thing, too.  Doesn't mean it isn't a giant pantload of crap. 

 

David:

My interests - growing the game by making it enjoyable for more people.  Do you think the best of the best won't still be good if they can't anchor a putter or use a square groove?  What happened to scores after the groove thing?  Did they go through the roof?  Do you think they'll go up drastically when the putter thing goes into effect?  Hardly. 

 

Both will drive people away from the game.  Why?  Because the body that's entrusted with the game, growing the game, preserving tradition, is doing everything it can to make the game harder...and not doing diddly piddle about things that matter (SLOW PLAY).  I seriously am starting to think that the folks in Far Hills have their heads up their backsides for the warmth.

post #25 of 35
Quote:
Originally Posted by minitour View Post

Since I can't figure out how to break up a quote like that....

 

 

1) I'm not making anything up.  The pressure came from somewhere.  Follow the almighty dollar.  Where do you think it came from?  The guys in NJ?  In St. Andrews?  You think THEY have the money?  Try again.

 

B) Send them as much as you want.  They won't be getting a penny from me.  Not a single cent.

 

3) Who gives a fig who won?  Don't you have any students who would sell their left nut to play in a national championship, or do you only work with the elite level guys?  This is one less opportunity for them.  That's why the blue collar guy is done.  Might as well hang it up.  You can keep concentrating on who wins the damn thing, but for some guys that isn't what it's about.  It's about being able to say "hey, I played in a PubLinks in 2015...made match play." or whatever.  Most guys that I've played with in Sectional Qualifying (for several events, not just the APL - Am, Mid Am, Open, Jr. Am back before I became ancient) acknowledged that they weren't going to win.  They know it up front! 

 

Q) They gave their reasoning behind the groove thing, too.  Doesn't mean it isn't a giant pantload of crap. 

 

David:

My interests - growing the game by making it enjoyable for more people.  Do you think the best of the best won't still be good if they can't anchor a putter or use a square groove?  What happened to scores after the groove thing?  Did they go through the roof?  Do you think they'll go up drastically when the putter thing goes into effect?  Hardly. 

 

Both will drive people away from the game.  Why?  Because the body that's entrusted with the game, growing the game, preserving tradition, is doing everything it can to make the game harder...and not doing diddly piddle about things that matter (SLOW PLAY).  I seriously am starting to think that the folks in Far Hills have their heads up their backsides for the warmth.

 

 

You REALLY think new golfers will not try the game because of the type of grooves they can or cannot play? You're right, no scores have changed, either on tour or with average hacks like me and my buddies.   Anchored putters?  I can count the number of anchored putters I see recreational golfers play in year on one hand and have fingers left over.....and I'm on the course well over 100 rounds a year, year 'round.  You REALLY think that people who currently play and love the game will give it up as a result of either?  Or that either is a cause of slow play?   Sorry, I get that YOU may be disappointed by both, but neither one even moved the needle with the average rec golfer.....and serious golfers are serious golfers, they're going to play and enjoy the game no matter what. 

 

The U.S. Amateur used to be open ONLY to members of established Clubs.  That was changed years ago to allow for the "average guy" to compete.  Replacing the Publinx with a different format championship doesn't take away a single person's ability to participate......it's just a format change.  You could argue that with 4-ball, you actually increase the number of people that can participate since each side is now comprised of a 2-man team.  And, FWIW, I note that the minimum handicap requirement has actually gone UP from 4.4 for the Publinx to 5.4 for 4-ball.  Heck, I may have to grab my buddy and drag our sorry butts out there for local qualifying next year!    Now that'd be a travesty to the game!   a3_biggrin.gif

post #26 of 35
Quote:
Originally Posted by minitour View Post

1) I'm not making anything up.  The pressure came from somewhere.  Follow the almighty dollar.  Where do you think it came from?  The guys in NJ?  In St. Andrews?  You think THEY have the money?  Try again.

 

You're making it up. Where's your proof that "some guys on tour don't like it" was the reason? I think it came from precisely where the USGA/R&A said it came from.

 


Quote:
Originally Posted by minitour View Post

3) Who gives a fig who won?  Don't you have any students who would sell their left nut to play in a national championship, or do you only work with the elite level guys?

 

The U.S. Amateur. The U.S. Mid-Am. The U.S. Open. The U.S. Senior Open. The US Junior Amateur. Etc. There are a lot of events they can play for. Who cares who won? YOU DO, since it was part of your argument. The event isn't won by "blue collar" guys.

 

You're right, it's one less opportunity... big whoop.

 


Quote:
Originally Posted by minitour View Post

Both will drive people away from the game.  Why?  Because the body that's entrusted with the game, growing the game, preserving tradition, is doing everything it can to make the game harder...and not doing diddly piddle about things that matter (SLOW PLAY).  I seriously am starting to think that the folks in Far Hills have their heads up their backsides for the warmth.

 

But anchoring a putter doesn't make putting easier, and the grooves you said only affect the top 0.1% of players or whatever, so you're arguing against yourself.

 

That's fine. You have an opinion. But it doesn't seem terribly well formed or all that rational to me.

post #27 of 35
Quote:
Originally Posted by minitour View Post

3) Who gives a fig who won?  Don't you have any students who would sell their left nut to play in a national championship, or do you only work with the elite level guys?  This is one less opportunity for them.  That's why the blue collar guy is done.  Might as well hang it up.  You can keep concentrating on who wins the damn thing, but for some guys that isn't what it's about.  It's about being able to say "hey, I played in a PubLinks in 2015...made match play." or whatever.  Most guys that I've played with in Sectional Qualifying (for several events, not just the APL - Am, Mid Am, Open, Jr. Am back before I became ancient) acknowledged that they weren't going to win.  They know it up front! 

It's not one less opportunity because they are replacing it with another event.  Additionally, the point of the Public Links event is no more because nobody is excluded from any of the other events.  If the US Am was actually a "private club members only" event (and somebody above said it used to be) then you have a really good reason for having this event.  But it's not.  You qualify for the Am, you pay your money, you play ... same is true for the Mid-am, open, etc, etc.  So there is no need for this event.  Might as well mix it up and start a new tradition.

 

Good for the USGA.  This makes all the sense in the world to me.

post #28 of 35
Quote:
Originally Posted by iacas View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by minitour View Post

3) Who gives a fig who won?  Don't you have any students who would sell their left nut to play in a national championship, or do you only work with the elite level guys?

 

The U.S. Amateur. The U.S. Mid-Am. The U.S. Open. The U.S. Senior Open. The US Junior Amateur. Etc. There are a lot of events they can play for. Who cares who won? YOU DO, since it was part of your argument. The event isn't won by "blue collar" guys.

 

You're right, it's one less opportunity... big whoop.

 

 

Actually, you're the one that brought up the winners (prove otherwise - the winners was your core argument).  I just said the blue collar guy is done...and he is.

 

I think at this point we need to get rid of the Senior only events, women's only events, Mid-Am, Jr. Am, etc.....

 

You can just play in the US Open.  Doesn't matter whether you're 3, 87, man or woman.  Think of all of the money the USGA would save by only having one event...oh, and the four-ball.

Hey, it's just a few less opportunities... "big whoop".

post #29 of 35
Quote:
Originally Posted by minitour View Post

Actually, you're the one that brought up the winners (prove otherwise - the winners was your core argument).  I just said the blue collar guy is done...and he is.

 

I think at this point we need to get rid of the Senior only events, women's only events, Mid-Am, Jr. Am, etc.....

 

You can just play in the US Open.  Doesn't matter whether you're 3, 87, man or woman.  Think of all of the money the USGA would save by only having one event...oh, and the four-ball.

Hey, it's just a few less opportunities... "big whoop".

He brought them up as a counter argument to your "blue collar guy" argument.  If it's an event for the blue collar guy then why are all the winners NOT blue collar guys?  That was his point.

 

And if you say it doesn't matter who won, then the counter to that is, then who gives a fig which am tournament they are losing?  Why can't they continue to suck in the regular am and the mid-am?  Whoever this mythical blue collar guy you are talking about happens to be, he has a lot of choices of tourneys he can play in.

post #30 of 35
As I said, with that logic, we should chop the whole schedule down to just the US Open. That way the losers are still losers and the best golfer wins.

I like this idea. Fewer choices. Like carrying just a pitching wedge. I don't get so confused over all of my short game choices.
post #31 of 35
I know this is tough to understand, but please try....

There are NO FEWER CHOICES. One format was simply replaced by another. The same people who could previously compete in the Publinx are fully eligible to compete in the 4-ball.

Given that the minimum hcp has been raised, MORE golfers are actually eligible to enter.

Hmmmmmm. Now that I look back at this, I guess it's not all that tough to understand, or at least shouldn't be.....
post #32 of 35

The US AM was for private club members up till the late 70s.  So the PubLinx was neccesary as far back as the 20s.  It has been a defacto NCAA event for the longest time.  99% of top college programs and players have very nice private club privledges 3/4 of the year and some are manipulating the rules to play and have a path to the Masters.  Keep in mind these are top amatuers...the next big thing types not muni hustlers.  I recall growing up in SoCal playing against Tiger who was a muni/navy course kid....but he also had access and honorary membership to some of the best clubs around (as long as his crazy dad stayed away). 

 

There is also an economic issue here.  PubLinx has to be at a public facility and it is becoming harder and harder to for a course owner/operator to give up control to the blue blazers for a year to host a championship.  There isnt any money in it for the course (unlike an open at Torrey or Bethpage). 

 

I think there is an aspect of this that is appealling to the mid am/club player.  The four ball is our game and I will be looking forward to the qualifier.  The SCGA four ball is one of the most popular of the year.  This will keep the college kids out due to the spring schedule and the fall qualifiers that prevent the collge kids from signing up due to NCAA and USGA rules.

post #33 of 35
Quote:
Originally Posted by David in FL View Post

I know this is tough to understand, but please try....

There are NO FEWER CHOICES. One format was simply replaced by another. The same people who could previously compete in the Publinx are fully eligible to compete in the 4-ball.

Given that the minimum hcp has been raised, MORE golfers are actually eligible to enter.

Hmmmmmm. Now that I look back at this, I guess it's not all that tough to understand, or at least shouldn't be.....


You see a team format played in the early spring replacing an individual format played in the summer as an equal trade?
 

I'll try to remember that when I have to shovel my car out to get to 4-ball sectional qualifying. 

 

I'm going to laugh my hairy round butt off when all of the southern golfers that have been playing all winter long make the trip up north to the qualifying locations to play us northerners that have been buried under 4' of snow for 5 months so they can qualify with a "smooth" 74 because nobody else breaks 80.

 

This whole thing just stinks of fail.

 

But I guess we'll have to agree to disagree.  Clearly whichever side you're on (and there's plenty in the show that would agree with me - reference the tweets), you've probably dug your heels in and are not changing your mind.  Nothing wrong with that, but at this point I guess we should just try to keep it civil.

 

I see it as a terrible move by the USGA and an afront on what I consider to be the part of the game the USGA should be protecting (public course play).  They dropped the ball with all of the exceptions to the public facility rule and all they had to do was eliminate all of the exceptions.  But they decided to go with this four-ball format. 

 

Hey, in fairness, I enjoy four-ball!  Back before I got married the first time (you know...when I was allowed to have friends) we used to play all the time in a four-ball format.  I'm not saying that I don't like the idea.  But to eliminate the APL, I think, is a terrible dis-service to the public course player.  Additionally, the timing is terrible for those of us that barely get to look at a golf course before the Masters.

 

I also understand that you think it's a great decision.  I can live with that.  c2_beer.gif

post #34 of 35
Quote:
Originally Posted by minitour View Post


You see a team format played in the early spring replacing an individual format played in the summer as an equal trade?
 

I'll try to remember that when I have to shovel my car out to get to 4-ball sectional qualifying. 

 

I'm going to laugh my hairy round butt off when all of the southern golfers that have been playing all winter long make the trip up north to the qualifying locations to play us northerners that have been buried under 4' of snow for 5 months so they can qualify with a "smooth" 74 because nobody else breaks 80.

 

This whole thing just stinks of fail.

 

But I guess we'll have to agree to disagree.  Clearly whichever side you're on (and there's plenty in the show that would agree with me - reference the tweets), you've probably dug your heels in and are not changing your mind.  Nothing wrong with that, but at this point I guess we should just try to keep it civil.

 

I see it as a terrible move by the USGA and an afront on what I consider to be the part of the game the USGA should be protecting (public course play).  They dropped the ball with all of the exceptions to the public facility rule and all they had to do was eliminate all of the exceptions.  But they decided to go with this four-ball format. 

 

Hey, in fairness, I enjoy four-ball!  Back before I got married the first time (you know...when I was allowed to have friends) we used to play all the time in a four-ball format.  I'm not saying that I don't like the idea.  But to eliminate the APL, I think, is a terrible dis-service to the public course player.  Additionally, the timing is terrible for those of us that barely get to look at a golf course before the Masters.

 

I also understand that you think it's a great decision.  I can live with that.  c2_beer.gif

What I would like to hear from you is why you think this tournament is necessary.  I understand that you like it, and maybe your counter is that you don't think getting rid of it was necessary, and that's fair, but what purpose does it actually serve?

 

It has been said a couple of times above that the regular US Am was exclusive to members of private clubs for many years.  Any sensible person would agree that while that was the case that it was necessary to have a tournament that the public could play, and even better that it was exclusive to public course players.  Completely fair.  But now that it has been 30 some odd years since that private club requirement has existed in the US Am, it doesn't seem particularly relevant.  Also, consider the fact that the Mid-Am serves the purpose of weeding out all of the only-amateur-in-name college players who are on the fast track to the pros.

 

In looking at the entry requirements, anybody who has a USGA index of under 1.4 can try to qualify for the Open, 2.4 for the USAM, 3.4 for the Mid-Am and Senior Open, 4.4 for the Publinks, 6.4 for the Junior Am, and 7.4 for the Senior Am.

 

If you are just arguing on behalf of all competitive golfers who carry an index of between 3.5 and 4.4 who are between 25 and 49, and college kids who aren't quite good enough for the Am (1.5 to 4.4), then I guess I see your point.  Of course, I'd hardly call those "blue collar guys."

 

Furthermore, IF YOU ARE referring to that group of people, who's to say that the USGA wouldn't appease them by raising the handicap requirements for the Mid-Am to 4.4 from 3.4, or some similar additional changes?

post #35 of 35
Quote:
Originally Posted by Golfingdad View Post

What I would like...

What I would like is a red candy mustang GT with all the bells and whistles.

 

But for now, I'm willing to agree to disagree.  I've said my peace, you've said yours.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Golf Talk
TheSandTrap.com › Golf Forum › The Clubhouse › Golf Talk › USGA to Cancel Publinx, add Four-Ball Championships