Mickelson, Harrington, Daly using PING wedges for grooves. Unfair advantage?

[zeg]

Well, if his goal is to draw attention to what he sees as a problem and he doesn't mind criticism, then he's achieved his goal. I don't think he is too worried about whether people see him as a clown. Not least because some fraction of people seem to see him that way regardless of what he does..... If it is the case that the USGA has rejected a club without sufficient explanation, that's a pretty serious problem. Given the technical precision with which these things are mandated and measured, they need to be pretty specific when rejecting a design.

[Zeph]

According to the announcers, Phil is not sporting the Eye2 wedge this week, or at least on the first round of the Northern Trust Open. They have said he did it out of respect for the other players, talking about how much support Phil got when they found out his wife and mother had cancer.

Have not heard more about it than that. I think they mentioned 3-4 players with the Eye2 this tournament. There are of course dozens of articles on it.

Phil Mickelson won't be using the Ping Eye2 wedge that led a fellow player to accuse him of "cheating," even though he hopes others will use the controversial club to keep attention on what he calls a ridiculous rule. "I won't be playing that wedge. My point has been made," Mickelson said Wednesday on the eve of his two-time title defense at Riviera in Los Angeles. "But if these governing bodies cannot get together to fix this loophole, if players stop using this wedge — which would stop the pressure of the issue — then I will relook at it and put the wedge back in play."

http://www.mercurynews.com/sports/ci_14328487

I respect these players out here. I like and respect these players. And last year when my wife and I were at one of our low points, these players came together and did one of the nicest things that could have ever been done to show support, and it meant tons for me. And out of respect for them, I do not want to have an advantage over anybody, whether it's perceived or actual. So this week I won't be playing that wedge. My point has been made. I won't play it.

http://www.paltelegraph.com/sports/w...-eye2--for-now

[Clambake]

Many people on here (and elsewhere) have criticized Phil severely for playing the Ping, including indicating that it makes him "look like a clown". Now I have absolutely zero knowledge here, but let me just toss out a hypothesis on why Phil did what he did.

None of us know what the real locker room talk has been on the wedge ruling (not the player quotes to the media, but what they really think), but let's assume a lot of it was how riduculous the loop hole is on the Ping and about the issues different manufacturers are having getting new clubs approved. No one really cares if the bottom players try the old Ping (after all, Daly must be about somewhere below 5000 on the money list, right), but manufacturers are offering up clubs where some are approved and some aren't, etc., some players are having to make bigger adaptations than others, etc. In general, assume that in general the players feel that the ruling bodies here have this one pretty screwed up, but they feel they're concerns aren't really being heard and addressed. Phil is sitting there in the locker room and hears all this, and his manufacturer is also being impacted by what most feel is a screwup. He looks around and realizes "Hey, I'm the #2 player in the world, and I've been on this tour a long time. Tiger isn't here, so I'm the top guy these days and I have the seniority and the clout. The players stood up for me with my family's troubles, so let me stand up for them. TV and the rest of the media won't give a damn about some grinder playing the old Ping, but if I put it in it will draw the attention and maybe we can get this stupid thing resolved once and for all". And we all know what happened next.

Phil made the comment that "his point had been made", so clearly he was not intending to keep playing the Ping. My hypothesis is that he played the Ping because he was clearly trying to be a lightening rod to resolve this issue; he was not doing this just to help Callaway, but was truly trying to step up and act as a senior statesman among players and fire a big warning shot across the bow of the Tour and USGA in support of all players. If this is the case, Phil isn't a clown here, but is instead a brave player willing to sacrifice some of his game (after all, he hasn't been planning on playing the Ping and using it for months to adapt) for the good of the Tour and his fellow players.

So as I said, it is just a hypothesis. Thoughts?

[iacas]

Many people on here (and elsewhere) have criticized Phil severely for playing the Ping, including indicating that it makes him "look like a clown". Now I have absolutely zero knowledge here, but let me just toss out a hypothesis on why Phil did what he did.

I think the time for hypothesizing is past. Phil's pretty much stated that he's pissed about the Callaway MAW grooves that were "conforming" (but only in his words and that of other Callaway people - the USGA never said it was) not being approved, and that's why he put the PING in the bag - to show up the USGA and their "ridiculous" (etc.) ruling on this.

Also, I get the impression most don't feel it's a screwup or a bad rule. Virtually everyone I've heard supports the rules change. Phil even thinks it'll put a bit more emphasis on skill and has said that he benefits from the rule.

[B Keller]

I would have thought "too many holes" might have been funnier, but it wasn't.

David and I both live in the Dallas area. We have a sports radio station with a host that is big into cycling. There have been many an interview with him that talks about his fantastic bike crashes...so that's why I thought it was so funny.

[Clambake]

I think the time for hypothesizing is past. Phil's pretty much stated that he's pissed about the Callaway MAW grooves that were "conforming" (but only in his words and that of other Callaway people - the USGA never said it was) not being approved, and that's why he put the PING in the bag - to show up the USGA and their "ridiculous" (etc.) ruling on this.

Yes, I was hypothesizing and specifically said so, but I said so with a purpose. Everyone here is "hypothesizing" on this issue, including you Erik, unless you happen to have some secret inside knowledge from Phil's inner circle. But I think you missed my point which was to offer a defense of what Phil did in that perhaps he was trying to act for the greater good and get the ruling bodies to close their loophole before it truly gets abused. I wasn't arguing that the players think the groove rule itself was a bad rule, but that the loophole in the system is an issue, and it appears that the club conformance approval is not as cut and dried as the USGA would like to think (after all, we should assume that the engineers at Callaway know how to read a spec sheet and build a club, so if there is an issue with conformance then it must not be as clear as the USGA would like to think). Daly or Wilson playing the club wasn't going to push the issue, so Phil has the clout to step up and make it happen. People on here have been slamming Phil for playing the Ping, so I was simply trying to get people to open their minds more and not simply paint him a clown without thinking of potential other motivations. You present the case that he was motivated simply by his Callaway allegience, and I was presenting a case that perhaps his motivation was broader than than in stepping up as a highly visible representative of all the players. I honestly have no idea of the truth (nor do you), but I simply wanted to get people to think a bit outside the hastily assembled box.

In a world of sound bites, it is all too easy to draw judgement too quickly, and I'd like to hope this forum remains open to exploring issues in the golf world beyond the typical media tripe, and those who read here are exposed to different thoughts and ideas before forming their judgements.

[frobenius]

If Phil was doing this for the greater good then why is he against the players policing themselves? This is about Phil and his vendetta against the USGA. The fact that he stopped using the wedge because of the respect for the players is laughable.

[daneos]

No, i dont think its un-fair at all. Its up to the tour pro's if they want to use 70's wedges.

[Rolf Harris]

I've had Ping Eye 2's for 8 years (up until last year). They're great clubs from 3 - 9 but I stopped using the sand & pitching wedge ages ago.

They're useless in my opinion. The sole is far too big, causes too much bounce, they're not a club for a top quality golfer who needs precision around the green, Mickleson probably already knows this.

[iacas]

Yes, I was hypothesizing and specifically said so, but I said so with a purpose. Everyone here is "hypothesizing" on this issue, including you Erik, unless you happen to have some secret inside knowledge from Phil's inner circle.

It's not hypothesizing to take what he says were his reasons and say "these were his reasons." He's pretty much given his reasons - several times now - and they date back to his 45-minute confrontation at Liberty National last year. I'm just saying I don't think hypothesizing is necessary - he's kind of laid it all out for everyone.

But I think you missed my point which was to offer a defense of what Phil did in that perhaps he was trying to act for the greater good and get the ruling bodies to close their loophole before it truly gets abused.

I still hate that it's called a loophole. It's not - it's explicitly stated. But ok. I didn't miss your point, I reject it. Phil doesn't do much "for the greater good." Phil is not well liked among his peers and that's almost obvious given that several of his fellow peers spoke out against him!

Furthermore, the "ruling body" can't "close" the rule unless John Solheim agrees to modify the setlement contract they wrote in 1990 (or the 1993 one with the PGA Tour, but I see that as less likely).

I wasn't arguing that the players think the groove rule itself was a bad rule, but that the loophole in the system is an issue

If they do, then I think they should blame Karsten Solheim, not the USGA. And if they do, why have only 6 of 218 players used the wedges in tournament rounds (doesn't include the Northern Trust). I think that if Phil hadn't been trying to make some sort of point in support of Callaway, we'd be at 5/218 and nobody would really care. It'd be a curiosity, and little else.

How many wedges are out there? And even if a wedge performed 15 or 20% better, how many pros would switch to it from their current equipment? How many COULD given their contracts? I think the issue's been overblown already.

and it appears that the club conformance approval is not as cut and dried as the USGA would like to think (after all, we should assume that the engineers at Callaway know how to read a spec sheet and build a club, so if there is an issue with conformance then it must not be as clear as the USGA would like to think).

Well, let's not forget that the whole mess was started because engineers (at PING) assumed they knew what the rule meant, but they still made an assumption and changed a previously approved club into a non-conforming club.

Without seeing the MAW grooves, I'd call this speculation, a close cousin to hypothesizing, I suppose. But, frankly, I'll side with the USGA on this one until we get more facts. Right now we have only Callaway's side.

You present the case that he was motivated simply by his Callaway allegience, and I was presenting a case that perhaps his motivation was broader than than in stepping up as a highly visible representative of all the players.

Have you read and listened to everything he says? No, we don't know the truth - maybe Phil's doing it because Amy told him to - but I'm 90% confident that the truth is that Phil's pissed on behalf of Callaway. It comes out in everything he says, and it's not by reading between the lines - it's right there. He loves to talk about how it's confusing and bad because Callaway built "conforming" clubs that aren't "approved," but here we have a PING that's not "conforming" but IS "approved." That seems to be his _whole_ point.

In a world of sound bites, it is all too easy to draw judgement too quickly, and I'd like to hope this forum remains open to exploring issues in the golf world beyond the typical media tripe, and those who read here are exposed to different thoughts and ideas before forming their judgements.

Look, with all due respect, the issue's so old now I feel as if it's pretty clear now. At first I didn't know either - particularly since the rule would likely benefit Phil (as he later agreed) - but more and more information's come out, Phil's said more and more, and I'm fairly confident in my position on this. Confident enough that I think we're past the point of hypothesizing. That is all.

You're free to have a different opinion, of course, just as each of us are free to think the other is crazy.

[drumon]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/golf/8497352.stm

Padraig is also considering using the old wedges, but is waiting on guidance from Tim Finchen, he wants the tour authorities to make the decision for him!

[DavidFehertysBike]

Paddy's lame. He should just have the balls to use them if he wants. Phil did.

[drumon]

Agree, it seems a bit weak. I know he advocates making the most of technology to play to the highest standard, but this doesnt add up.

Has anyone measured the performance of these Ping wedges to see if they really are as good as something new? though I'm sure they do work well.

Anyway, Padraig's approach to this, not being sure whether to use them or not, is surely setting oneself up for a fall!

[DavidFehertysBike]

I dont think we would really notice a difference between the ping with the old grooves, and say a vokey with the new grooves, but the pros might see a slight difference.

[DBeane]

I think these guys have lost touch with a very important aspect of golf...being cool.

Uncool - whining like a little bitch if someone wants to use the Eye 2 wedges

Cool - Having the attitude that, I dont carry if your using Rodney Dangerfields bag out of Caddshack....I'll still beat you.

To me this is an old debate, I remember when Greg Norman threw a fit after Calcavechia stopped a wedge out of deep rough in the Nelson back in the late 80's. People are acting like the Eye 2 wedge thing is new, this argument has been going on for 20 years. If they were really that much better, and gave the players that much of an edge, these wedges would be going the 5 grand a piece on e-bay and everyone would be carrying them.

My 2 cents -Beane

[plugged]

Callaway said that Phil's Ping 64-deg spun 25% more than an equivalent new groove wedge. For a pro, that's significant.

[Zeph]

That may be so, but it's the same for everyone. The better you are with the wedges, the more you gain from this rule. We get it that the pros don't like the new wedges, but it's not cool to play the Eye2 wedges when 95% of the players are playing new ones. What do they hope to accomplish with it? Are they going to play Eye 2 forever? Always having a lot of people look down on you for being a douche bag.

Phil just used the wedges to make a statement, on both the rule and the Callaway-wedge-decline.

Padraig waiting for Tom Finchem to do what, abolish the exemption of the Eye2 wedges?

[boogielicious]

Tom Watson made a spectacular wedge shot in Hawaii with the new grooves. He knew the ball wasn't going to spin from the rough, so he played it that way. He called it a "flyer". His advantage though is that he is old enough to remember playing that way all the time. I think after the Pros get used to it, it won't be a big deal.