I'm good friends with a number of college coaches, particularly women's college coaches, and while I have no doubt that some likely care about height, most will take the player with the good scores so long as their game is commensurate. You're making a big assumption that a 5'5" girl is going to be bumping hybrids all day long.
Jamie Sadlowski is only 5'10". Sadena Parks is 5'3". Kim Sei-young is 5'4". Brooke Henderson? 5'4". Randomly chose players from the top 20 on the LPGA's Driving Distance list.
Distance is an, absolutely, but there's a big world between "bumped hybrids that roll onto greens" and "spinning the ball with irons." Height correlates to distance, but we're not talking about an R2 value of 0.89 or something.
Now, before this gets too far off topic… let's leave it at that.
P.S. Off topic because we're talking about how to get noticed by college coaches, not generalities of height and distance and impact on scoring in the vague, non-specific sense.
There are two ways he could reasonably respond to this…
A) How would he know?
B) The current rule does just that.
I think you're misreading what he wrote.
And you have no idea what the "primary cause" is, particularly since you're not even discussing a specific situation right now. I can see how soling your putter near the ball could be more likely to cause a ball to move than walking in and stopping a foot+ away from the ball.
A ball overhanging the hole is not deemed at rest until the time has elapsed (or the player taps in). The situations are not alike.
You, too, seem to be reading this incorrectly. Re-read 18-2/0.5.
There's no presumption of guilt or innocence. The facts are simply weighed, and the most likely cause determined. The player is not guilty until proven innocent.
Kindly stop just making stuff up.
On that we agree.
I have a daughter playing D1 golf. While the competition isn't as severe, D1 and high D2 coaches do have stereotypes for their golfers. They want them a certain size and a certain build. They will take a kid that is 5'9" that averages a 78 over a girl that is 5'5" and averages 75 . They know that the 5'9" hasn't maxed out their potential and can grow in the distance department just on size alone. They want girls going into greens with irons and spinning the ball, not a bumped hybrid that rolls onto the green. Heard this from several coaches in the process.
I'm curious if Phil had found a setup edge with putting if he'd share it so openly with his fellow pros? He's rather competitive, but has been open about some of his strategies in the past.
It probably depends on the individual stroke tendencies.
Did they ever look at just an exception to this rule for obvious external causes like wind and gravity?
To a large extent though the hovering of the club was only relevant to actually causing the ball to move off the greens. Just stepping in to the ball and standing there (esp. on fast greens) is likely the primary cause - absent wind.
Why is a putt that comes to rest on the edge of the cup and then goes in when a player walks toward it to mark it not treated the same under this rule. It's at rest and then it moves. Treat like situations alike, right? Why make an exception because it's on the green or near the hole?
The player walking in is the likely cause and aren't extra heavy footsteps not allowed, because they are likely to tip the balance?
Might not be 'opposite', but I do think your idea is a bit like shifting of the burden of proof from the defendant to the plaintiff. If done this way you could stick with the existing 51% threshold to be tighter on latitude.
It just seems that way with a few of the rulings as applied.
To a large extent though the hovering of the club to avoid a penalty was only relevant to actually causing the ball to move off the greens. Just stepping in to the ball and standing there (esp. on fast greens) is likely the primary cause of movement - absent wind.
I personally like that the wind moving the ball regardless of whether or not the club was grounded does not result in a penalty now.