RX Phoenix

Alex B . . . the big picture still stands, Phil represents the Tour, who is paying Phil? The prize money comes from Companies who believe that golfers represent what they are trying to sell to the public . . . Integrity. The Tour has huge prize money because of this link, I follow the Tour partly because the golfers represent the best that sport has to offer, great sportsmanship, integrity, etc. Take that away and you take a large chunk of the appeal. To dismiss this big issue is missing the boat. To say Phil is just an independent contractor who doesn't need to pay any attention to the image of the Tour is really bad business perception. He should take this into account. Still no one has addressed the point I made about Phil trying to spite the Tour about it's stand on the Callaway grooves, is this too way off the mark???

Shanks, how would you resolve the issue? If Ping isn't going to cause a stir why would this loophole still be there and what is the way out? I hear what you are saying but the issue of Phil's integrity is still on the table. BTW Karstens insistence that the measurement is on the walls is funny, do the walls bite the ball or is the bite at the apex? Would you agree that Phil is doing this out of spite because Callaway is having a problem getting their grooves approved? If he is then he is losing sight of the bigger issue of the 'spirit of the game' IMO.

It's an analogy (the banning of the grooves would be a local rule) to illustrate the issue of INTEGRITY, not meant to be taken literally. The bigger question here is about Phil and how other players are viewing him as well as the public, I know my opiinion of him has changed. Lee Westwood said it best, that under no circumstances would be be using this wedge even though he has many of them and I'd say most players would feel this way too.

Try this simple analogy to clear this issue up: Your club holds it's Club Championship with rules banning the square grooves, one player breaks the rules, wins the Championship and then threatens to sue if the win isn't recognized. The Competition Committee decides they might lose the lawsuit or spend too much $$ pursuing it and therefore backs down from the conflict. Now . . . how are the members of the Club going to view that player, as just an intelligent guy seeing opportunity and seizing it, and admiring him for it? Or as a guy they wouldn't want to do business with? Clearly the threat of a lawsuit by Ping is what is driving this and keeping the loophole open and Phil is hiding behind this threat in trying to get an advantage. However if Phil could use the new Callaway wedges this wouldn't be happening at all. The difference between calling Phil a 'cheater' and saying that using the Pings is 'cheating' is a difference in that the 'cheating' could mean it is 'cheating the game' which has a different connotation. Meaning it is not technically cheating but a sidestepping of the integrity of the game or 'cheating the game'. I've always seen Phil as a person of integrity, I'd guess he is doing this as a way to put pressure on the Callaway grooves issue, and it clearly has stressed him out and put him off his game.

What a petulant brat Phil is to try and intimidate others into silence on this issue by calling the cheater comment 'slanderous', that's pathetic. Everyone knows what the intent of the new rule is, to limit spin and try and reshape the game a bit, why does Phil think he's not covered by this. So what if it is a technicality, Phil sounds all lawyered up on this. I suppose he's doing this to make a point on behalf of Callaway about their grooves not being allowed, he's really thumbing his nose at the Tour . . . clearly he's not above this type of childishness. The comments some have made about 'playing for a living' justifying him trying to get an unfair advantage . . . come on, Phil is hardly playing for a living, he's playing for Callaway on this issue. Can anyone who really knew the older players like Palmer/Nicklaus/Watson etc. even remotely imagine that they would stoop this low, exploit this technicality, and exhibit what is at best very poor sportsmanship? Not a chance, it's called integrity. Phil shouldn't have been called a cheater, but his integrity should be questioned here. I don't think he's getting much of an advantage but he is very clearly thinking more about Callaway than his fellow competitors. Is he being silly . . . yes, and he's insulting our intelligence by the way he's 'spinning' this. Just when I was ready to spend the year following Phil and rooting for him to be #1 he shanks it and reveals poor character, what a shame to start the year this way.

Playing 36 on Sunday is asking a lot of him, if he gets close he'll be dangerous down the stretch, but I don't see him winning, just a top 10 would amazing stuff. He's back to his chunky body type and can still putt, he wants to win, his head is right, what a story.

It could be a case of 'horses for courses'. Probably not a SB, 79 for a 13HC is very much in play on any given day or course. And as a poster mentioned, how long they have been playing is important. Players who end up with low HC go through a phase of sometimes scoring low, other times going high, their not as consistent with their scores as someone who has played a long time.

Try the FrEaK by TopFlight . . . I found one while playing recently, used it a bit out of curiousity, then bought dz. for $16, played several rounds and find that it's a very good ball. It is not a rock like the Pinnacle or Warbird, will give you maximum distance, but still feels good on irons, and putting. For chipping it may be a bit hard, but you can't have everything.

Some courses are going to 5 and even 6 sets of tees. Here are some labels and common colors. Children ORANGE Juniors YELLOW Ladies RED Men's WHITE Tournament BLUE Championship BLACK I've been on courses where a lot of kids are playing and the tees are halfway up the fairway.

It depends on your putting stance. If you like to bend a lot then get a 33, but if you like to be more upright get a 35". The 35" will give you a bit more versitility as you can always choke up on it on shorter putts and grip it at the end for long bombs.

It's hard to see subtle slopes on TV, so it may seem that a pro is drawing the ball back on a level surface, but usually there is some slope that they intentionally play to, and as quoted above, with those greens, even a little spin is going to bring the ball back. What I have is some side spin, so hitting a wedge with some fade will cause the ball to release to the right which can also be helpful.

Just keep in mind that golf can be a somewhat 'ridiculous' game. How one keeps a mental edge is very important. If a Scotty does that for you great, I've found it does the opposite, and I'm talking about subtle feelings of confidence and how to manage them. For me, Cameron=too much pressure to justify the club being in the bag. When I used the Cameron the other players were always watching to see if I would putt fantastic, in their minds this putter was supposed to be so great that how could anyone use it and not putt fantastic. I never could live up to the expectations of others for this putter.

Go with the Sabertooth. Make a putt with the Scotty and you'll feel, "I was supposed to make that." Make a putt with the Sabertooth and you'll feel, "wow, that was a great putt I just made."

Sometimes I end up scratching my head after a left breaking putt goes right, does that qualify for a scratch golfer?

Here's the thing: With a Scotty 3 putt, you can't blame the putter, it's got to be just a crappy Indian doing the putting! With a (for example) Spider 3 putt, everyone looks at the putter and says, "I don't know why you don't 3 putt every time with that thing." the Scotty carries such high expectations, people expect you to be a great putter if you have a Scotty. And a 3 putt seems disgraceful. With the other example, you can shrug off a 3 putt, and then feel like you are exceeding expectations when you putt well.