Some golf writers are crazy. "9 suggestions to make golf better"??

[Shindig]

I'm confused about a few things in the article.  

Quote

We don't care who or what caused it to move, but from now on—check out this radical idea!—we're only counting strokes that are actual strokes.

So he isn't planning to count it if he drops out of a hazard?  I wonder if he plays stroke and distance on O.B.

Quote

The Tour can play by its own rules, which means it could bring back anchored putting and square grooves if it wanted. Shorts for players? Sure. Laser rangefinders? Yes. 

Huh? The USGA isn't the reason shorts aren't allowed on tour, nor the reason that laser rangefinders aren't.

22 minutes ago, Fourputt said:

The author had the right idea about one thing - quit reading his drivel.

Once again, Rick summarizes a rule issue concisely. 

[boogielicious]

14 hours ago, Rainmaker said:

I like #5 - I would love to see some kind of shot clock implemented.  I think it would be fantastic for the whole game - since everybody would see that there is actually a time factor involved . .instead of copying pros who seemingly take absolutely as much time as needed (ie - forever) to hit every shot. 

I strongly dislike #2.  I have no opinion on most of the rest.  Do what you want on #7, I'm not watching it, lol. 

That's the only one I liked too. I already do 9.

[ZappyAd]

I like the idea of #5 with a shot clock - I think at the very least though you would need an official with each group who determines when play is viable and who is 'on'.  

I watch snooker which is another game where players can (and do) take sometimes several minutes to decide on a shot.  They introduced one tournament where players have a shot clock that gives them 20 seconds to take their shot (and I think it even ratchets down after so many minutes of play to 10-15 seconds a shot).  It has been quite unpopular with some of the more established players but personally I think it delivers on the entertainment front and the frames are definitely quicker.  They have possibly gone more towards the 'making players rush' end of the spectrum and I think that wouldn't work so well in golf where the time should be a bit more generous but it goes to show that if the governing body of a sport with a long tradition truly wants to make a change it is possible.  

Maybe running one event a year (sponsored by a watch maker!?) where there is a shot clock would be a good way to give it a go.  If the prize money is high enough then the players are going to turn up, surely!

[chilepepper]

1. Yes

2. No

3. Yes, make the rulings within 5 minutes tops. If they need to have paid officials at tourneys....so be it

4. I don't care

5. Yes.  Beyond having 2 proactive marshals per 9 I'm not sure how that would carry over to the weekend golfer

6. Absolutely!!

7. Don't care

8. Interesting, give it a go.

9. Well, yes and no. Growing up either I was attracted to a sport or I wasn't. Recruiting wouldn't have made a difference

[saevel25]

1. Nope

2. Heck No. Also, did the author see the study done on driving distance by the USGA? Distance is not an issue. The ball is not an issue. Golfers are just better today. 

3. For the most part the PGA Tour follows all the rules of the USGA. I do think they need to allow laser rangefinders on Tour. Though I think very few caddies would use them as much as amateurs use them.

4. No opinion on it

5. No opinion on it yet

6. I wouldn't mind seeing it more as an Open. Though how long does that last when you don't see the typical names on the leaderboard and it hurts ratings and ticket sales? I would mind seeing that 50% cut down to maybe 33% exempt. 

7. Sure

8. Not really excited about this option

9. Yep

[iacas]

1. Change 18-2
Bah, whatever. Stupid. Just trying to capitalize on the buzz. The rule is close to being fine.

2. Bifurcate.
Stupid. No reason or need to do this.

3. PGA Tour Making their own Rules.
Shorts is not a rule of golf. Duh. And this is almost like #2. So no.

4. Turn WGCs into Normal PGA Tour Events
No thanks.

5. 50 Second Shot Clock
Fine, but only if you're out of position/behind time par.

6. Open Qualifying
So the other three reigning major champs don't get in automatically? Dumb.

7. Parent-Child USGA Championships.
Fine, but will they get to wear shorts?

8. Draft for Match Play
Whatever. And how is this like the #4 suggestion?

9. Do It Yourself
Okay.

[Ernest Jones]

I like #8. Especially the picking your opponent part. Would be great if they televised the picking live on TV the morning they tee off. Kind of a bit of a Survivor vibe. 

[Lihu]

Quote

1. Move on Back. Hey USGA, change the rule on a ball that moves at address. Immediately. We all witnessed the potential disaster that the U.S. Open at Oakmont could have been if Dustin Johnson hadn't won by four strokes, adjusted to three after a controversial penalty. The new rule: If a ball moves after you address it but your club didn't touch it, replace it in the original position and play on, no penalty. We don't care who or what caused it to move, but from now on—check out this radical idea!—we're only counting strokes that are actual strokes.

Seems like the current rule is okay?

 

Quote

2. Separate the Twins. Bifurcate! Golf has been in decline since about the time the USGA instituted speed limits on clubs (moment of inertia; coefficient of restitution). Coincidence? One set of rules for amateurs would allow equipment makers to develop hotter, easier-to-hit clubs and maybe win back customers and generate renewed interest. Meanwhile, another set for the pros would rein in the ball and cut back on the number of Happy Gilmore drives, making 7,200-yard courses relevant again without changing any of the drama in professional golf. (Last year there were more than 1,000 drives of at least 350 yards on the PGA Tour.) It's a win-win.

This might be a great idea especially for seniors.

However, I see no reason to change the rules for the professionals, but definitely allow ordinary people to use the highest COR possible. If they are labeled "High COR" and non-conforming in some other manner like molding an NC on them or something.

 

Quote

3. Get Territorial. The PGA Tour is a business. Why let the amateurs at the USGA, who had to apologize for letting a potential penalty hang over Johnson throughout the U.S. Open's final seven holes, make the rules for professional golf? The Tour can play by its own rules, which means it could bring back anchored putting and square grooves if it wanted. Shorts for players? Sure. Laser rangefinders? Yes. Better parking for caddies than the media? Hey, no, wait—whose dumb idea is that?

I don't understand enough about this one to comment?

 

Quote

4. Change the World. Few events have less buzz than the World Golf Championships. You can thank corporate suites, smaller fields and no 36-hole cuts. Bump the fields to 132, have a cut and leave the last eight spots available for a Monday qualifier open to any PGA Tour or Web.com tour player who cares to take a crack at it. The tournament can sell one-day tickets and Golf Channel can enjoy a rare Monday with live golf instead of recaps, tips and infomercials.

I have no idea how this could make golf better?

 

Quote

5. Beat the Buzzer. You're never going to speed up tournament play until the shot clock quits being subjective. Using a shot clock that begins when an official proclaims it's a player's turn to hit eliminates any gray area. You either get the shot off in time or you don't. Three strikes and you're out—after three shots played outside the 50-second time limit, a player draws a one-shot penalty for each infraction. You won't believe how quickly the pace of play will pick up.

This might be a good idea. Golf should be played faster at all levels. The only issue is where do you start the clock?

 

Quote

6. Open Up. Make the U.S. Open really open. The event has gotten too cozy, and life atop golf has gotten too easy for the multimillionaires. The Open should be even more democratic. This year almost half of the 156-man field was exempt, while nearly 10,000 entrants competed for the remaining spots. That's just not open enough. So from now on, the defending Open champion is exempt—and everybody else plays in 36-hole qualifying. You want to win a U.S. Open, rich tour pro? You've got to earn your spot in the field, just like everybody else.

This seems good, but how does it make golf better?

 

Quote

7. Meet the Parents. The USGA smartly retired its Public Links Championship and replaced it with a Four-Ball Championship for two-person teams, saying it was the one championship missing from its lineup. Wrong! There is still no legit father-son or parent-child national championship. Oh, there's a made-for TV show annually in Florida for major winners only. Why not hold a national shootout to determine who's really the best parent-child duo? Because it might not be Lanny and Tucker Wadkins, who won the PNC Father-Son last winter. And one more thing: Everybody plays from the same tees to make it a fair fight.

I don't quite agree with this.

 

Quote

8. Feel the Draft. Lose the round-robin format that robbed the Dell World Match Play of excitement and go back to the win-or-go-home brackets. When drawing up the bracket, however, the No. 1 player in the world gets to select his first opponent; No. 2 picks his first opponent, and so on. Does Jason Day pick the lowest-ranked player in the field, for example? Or does he want to take out Jordan Spieth early? Or settle an old score with another player? Match play is always personal; now the pairings can be too. It would be a can't miss pregame show.

This might be more exciting, but there are no actual stars that you can watch like Nicklaus and Palmer or something like that.

The issue is not that you don't have great match ups, the issue seems to be the lack of distinction in the top 25 players in the world. You'd be rooting for too many players. They're all really good and could surprise you at any time.
 

Quote

 

9. Do It Yourself. None of the programs designed by golf bureaucrats to increase participation are working in a significant way, and they never are going to work. You want to grow the game? It's easy. Every one of you 25 million golfers: Find one player to bring into the game. The number of participants will double overnight. So quit reading this drivel, and get on it…

 

Golf is frustrating. You'd need to have 25M instructors bringing golfers to the course so they don't quit after the first time.

 

[saevel25]

10 minutes ago, Lihu said:

This might be a great idea especially for seniors.

However, I see no reason to change the rules for the professionals, but definitely allow ordinary people to use the highest COR possible. If they are labeled "High COR" and non-conforming in some other manner like molding an NC on them or something.

No one is stopping people from using non-conforming clubs if they want. They just can't post a handicap, which is fine. 

Just play the game how ever you want. I see no reason for two sets of rules when people already are liberal with the rules to begin with. 

I wonder if people promoting two sets of rules like Gary Player realize that a lot of golfers already don't play the game 100% by the rules :) 

[Jeremie Boop]

20 minutes ago, Lihu said:

This might be a great idea especially for seniors.

However, I see no reason to change the rules for the professionals, but definitely allow ordinary people to use the highest COR possible. If they are labeled "High COR" and non-conforming in some other manner like molding an NC on them or something.

 

Most people don't care about whether their equipment is conforming or not unless they are trying to keep a valid handicap and/or plan on competing. Nothing stops the average person who wants to buy higher COR/MOI equipment and using it. The average golfer doesn't even follow the rules for the most part anyway, they take mulligans, free drops, kick out from under trees/bad lies etc. Bifurcating rules doesn't make golf better. *I guess @saevel25beat me to this one*

For the most part all the suggestions in the article don't really make golf "better". A timeclock for the PGA players won't really make the game better, a parent/child competition doesn't make the game better *it's not even a new concept, I played in a father/son outing years ago, not something I think would be fun/exciting to watch on TV*, so yeah. Most of those ideas for "making golf better" just don't really work that way.

Edited June 30, 2016 by Jeremie Boop

[Lihu]

6 minutes ago, saevel25 said:

No one is stopping people from using non-conforming clubs if they want. They just can't post a handicap, which is fine. 

Just play the game how ever you want. I see no reason for two sets of rules when people already are liberal with the rules to begin with. 

I wonder if people promoting two sets of rules like Gary Player realize that a lot of golfers already don't play the game 100% by the rules :) 

 

5 minutes ago, Jeremie Boop said:

Most people don't care about whether their equipment is conforming or not unless they are trying to keep a valid handicap and/or plan on competing. Nothing stops the average person who wants to buy higher COR/MOI equipment and using it. The average golfer doesn't even follow the rules for the most part anyway, they take mulligans, free drops, kick out from under trees/bad lies etc. Bifurcating rules doesn't make golf better. *I guess @saevel25beat me to this one*

For the most part all the suggestions in the article don't really make golf "better". A timeclock for the PGA players won't really make the game better, a parent/child competition doesn't make the game better *it's not even a new concept, I played in a father/son outing years ago, not something I think would be fun/exciting to watch on TV*, so yeah. Most of those ideas for "making golf better" just don't really work that way.

I think the main thing stopping people from purchasing non-conforming equipment is the lack of good marketing by the big manufacturers.

Like you, most people seem to think that it's cheating, and equate it with kicking balls out of divots or not scoring correctly or whatever.

If they market it for shorter hitters who just want to be out there playing more effectively, but also people who play by the rules in every other way that could entice more people to play it. I also think they should be allowed to keep a handicap, but there would be a special designation for them or maybe their CR/slope gets adjusted for the type of clubs used?

They're still playing golf, just with something to help them keep up with others. I would think you two of all people would appreciate not having to wait an extra 5 minutes a hole for your playing partners to catch up with your tee shots. I know I would and do.

We just need to eliminate the stigma that people using non conforming equipment as overall cheaters. They're attempting to play golf by the rules in every other way, except this one. I happen think their differentials can be adjusted really easily by a single NC or C button as you enter your score.

[Jeremie Boop]

8 minutes ago, Lihu said:

 

I think the main thing stopping people from purchasing non-conforming equipment is the lack of good marketing by the big manufacturers.

Like you, most people seem to think that it's cheating, and equate it with kicking balls out of divots or not scoring correctly or whatever.

If they market it for shorter hitters who just want to be out there playing more effectively, but also people who play by the rules in every other way that could entice more people to play it. I also think they should be allowed to keep a handicap, but there would be a special designation for them or maybe their CR/slope gets adjusted for the type of clubs used?

They're still playing golf, just with something to help them keep up with others. I would think you two of all people would appreciate not having to wait an extra 5 minutes a hole for your playing partners to catch up with your tee shots. I know I would and do.

We just need to eliminate the stigma that people using non conforming equipment as overall cheaters. They're attempting to play golf by the rules in every other way, except this one. I happen think their differentials can be adjusted really easily by a single NC or C button as you enter your score.

It is cheating... And the people who would use the clubs are also the same ones that would play mulligans and such. There's nothing wrong with that, they aren't hurting anyone by playing those clubs or breaking those rules because they aren't competing.

I don't care how far or short the people I play with hit the ball, not even a little. I play with a woman I work with and she sometimes struggles to hit the ball more than 10 yards and it doesn't bother me in the slightest. If you gave her some juiced up clubs and she was able to hit it further, I still wouldn't care. What people use and how they play makes no difference to me unless we are competing against each other. People have no qualms saying "I'm taking a mulligan" so why should they feel bad about having a club that doesn't conform? I don't know anyone that would care if their clubs were conforming or not outside of those of us on here to are working to improve out game and/or want to carry a legitimate handicap. You are right about one thing, manufacturers right now don't really market non-conforming clubs and that's because people tend to want what the pros use.

[saevel25]

56 minutes ago, Lihu said:

They're still playing golf, just with something to help them keep up with others.

A game is defined by it's rules. Not playing by the rules is not playing the game. They would be playing a version of golf. 

58 minutes ago, Lihu said:

We just need to eliminate the stigma that people using non conforming equipment as overall cheaters. 

They would be cheating if they agreed to play by USGA rules. Any other form of golf then is up to them. 

1 hour ago, Lihu said:

I happen think their differentials can be adjusted really easily by a single NC or C button as you enter your score.

I don't. It would be extremely hard to value non-conforming clubs. 

[Shindig]

1 hour ago, saevel25 said:

No one is stopping people from using non-conforming clubs if they want. They just can't post a handicap, which is fine. 

I'd like to let my future opponents know:  I'm okay with it if you post a handicap for a score you produced with mulligans, lift-cheat-place, and non-conforming clubs.  Just don't expect to be allowed to do it when playing against me. 

 

Just now, saevel25 said:

A game is defined by it's rules. Not playing by the rules is not playing the game. They would be playing a version of golf. 

One of my former playing partners used to ask me on the first tee if we were playing "winter rules."  One summer round in Southern California, I had enough of saying "no" and said "I'm here to play golf, you play what you want."  I wish I could claim originality on it. 

[iacas]

1 hour ago, saevel25 said:

No one is stopping people from using non-conforming clubs if they want. They just can't post a handicap, which is fine.

That said, too, there is a decent amount of difficulty in finding non-conforming equipment. Manufacturers have found that they can't sell it easily, so they don't make it.

[Lihu]

9 minutes ago, iacas said:

That said, too, there is a decent amount of difficulty in finding non-conforming equipment. Manufacturers have found that they can't sell it easily, so they don't make it.

This is kind of my take on it.

Personally, I have no issues with other people using non-conforming equipment. I haven't found a need to do so, so I don't.

It's kind of the FITA archery purist point of view regarding compound bows. They have their place, but not in a FITA sponsored tournament. I really don't care if I am standing side by side with someone using a compound bow, it's just that their 300 score is not the same as mine.

I feel the exact same way with non-conforming equipment.

 

16 minutes ago, saevel25 said:

A game is defined by it's rules. Not playing by the rules is not playing the game. They would be playing a version of golf. 

They would be cheating if they agreed to play by USGA rules. Any other form of golf then is up to them. 

Someone can shoot an 85 on the same course and tees I am playing, but he didn't shoot the "same thing" as me. It's different. Did he enjoy the game that is a variant of golf? Probably, otherwise he would not be using it.

I am just saying that there could be a concession in USGA to change the CR or slope ratings for non-conforming equipment. If even his putter is non-conforming he gets a higher differential or something.

 

16 minutes ago, saevel25 said:

I don't. It would be extremely hard to value non-conforming clubs. 

It would be a broad sweeping reduction in the CR/slope ratings or something. Assume 20 or even 40 yards per hole and adjust accordingly, or something.

 

I think it would simply allow more people who are less as strong and perhaps older than us to still enjoy the game rather than doing other things like bench rest shooting or whatever. . .

Quite simply put, many people just can't carry a drive more than 190 yards or so.

[Rainmaker]

1 hour ago, saevel25 said:

I wonder if people promoting two sets of rules like Gary Player realize that a lot of golfers already don't play the game 100% by the rules :) 

I would go even further and say that, overwhelmingly, most golfers do not play by the rules.  Most golfers don't even know all the rules. 

I would bet that 80% of the groups teeing off at my local course will break one or more rules during their round - knowingly or not. 

[iacas]

@Lihu talking crazy again.