eric5148
06-19-2005, 03:30 AM
I thought I'd break in the new forum with another juicy golf debate.
I believe different rules for golf equipment for pros and amateurs will satisfy the highest percentage of people.
First, the reasons why we should change equipment rules in the first place are:
1. The pros are making many of the great golf courses play much differently than they were intended. Simply adding length to the courses usually doesn't accomplish anything, it just makes the pros swing harder and puts more emphasis on distance as the main goal. Many courses simply don't have enough space to add any more length, making them obsolete.
2. Longer courses means longer rounds. More acreage means more work for the groundscrew, and higher operating costs.
3. The average amateur has not gotten significantly better in the last 20-30 years. Equipment technology helps bad players hit the ball in the air on their bad swings, not make more birdies and eagles from their good swings. An amateur using an illegal ball or driver to hit his drives 10 yards farther will not make the playability of the course change at all. But he will increase his enjoyment of the game.
Pretty much everyone agree on #2. Longer and more expensive rounds are things nobody likes (except maybe for little kids who's parents let them drive the cart while they play).
The vast majority of pros and the majority of amateurs agree with me on #1. Those who disagree argue that there's only about 15-20 more yards that we can possibly get out equipment technology. So the problem will eventually take care of itself. My response is that they're right, it wouldn't be the end of the world, but 15-20 yards for a pro is a huge difference. Enough to make some of the great courses play with driver-wedge on almost every par 4.
Others who disagree with #1 say that longer drives will make pro golf more entertaining for the casual viewer. I say: then why isn't Jason Zuback more popular than Fred Funk? Even a casual golf fan gets bored after a while if all they're seeing is big sweaty dudes ripping the shit out of the ball.
#3 is generally agreed upon by people with a good knowledge of golf equipment, and almost everyone in the golf equipment industry. The average hacker also agrees (but will probably insist that 10 more yards per drive will result in a much lower score).
It's easy to see now that we have a conflict of interest. We have millions of amateurs who want to enjoy the game by hitting the ball a little farther with less effort. We have the pros who want to keep playing the great classic courses the way they were intended to be played. But they're not going to give up a competetive advantage by using inferior equipment.
Unfortunately, stuck in the middle of the conflict are the competetive and low handicap amateurs. Most of which are good enough to produce the negative effects of the new technology. But they should be able to play whatever equipment they want during casual rounds, because they still play the game for fun.
IMO, it should become obvious that there needs to be separate rules for pros and amateurs. The main reasons against my opinion are:
1. It would be difficult to get all the pro tours to agree on these rules. Different rules on each pro tour would be chaos. Didn't you see what happened when the USGA and R&A disagreed on the legality of some drivers, like the ERC II?
2. One of the main attractions to golf is that people can relate to how the pros play (once in a while). Hitting a great shot with a club a pro uses is a thrill because you can say "I hit that shot just like Freddie Couples did, with the same kind of equipment." Having different rules for equipment would alienate the people who like that aspect of the game.
My response to #1 is that it would be much easier to get the people who run pro tours to agree on things than people who run the USGA and R&A. Tim Finchem and his peers have much different priorities than politics and brushing the dandruff off their blazers. They need to think about the marketing and publicity of their business. If most of their customers think that skill is becoming less of a factor (and thus, less interesting), they'll do something about it. Plus, the suits of the pro tours are communicating a lot more than they used to, mainly because of the WGC events. OTOH, the USGA and R&A love to bicker about the trivialities of rules, and try very hard to make it seem like one never gives in to the other.
As for people who agree with #2, they really have nothing to worry about. Do you honestly think that golf equipment companies will stop selling the clubs their top pros use? Anyone who has spent any time in the golf industry, or even anyone who watches golf commercials, can tell you that one of the main reasons people buy golf clubs is because their favorite pro uses that companies' clubs. And that won't change if amatuers can use clubs that are slightly better than what pros can use. Amateurs can and should have the option to buy what a pro uses, and what will help his game the most. Believe me, there will be plenty of sales of each type of club to make it profitable for companies to offer each type.
You've probably heard David Fey of the USGA preach this we-can't-alienate-people line many times. I honestly don't think he believes it that strongly. The reason he wants to discourage a double standard system is because it would put the USGA in a very difficult situation. How would they decide what rules to use for their amateur championships? I don't know, and it's a tough decision. But the low handicap competetive amateurs are the overwhelming minority. We can't make rules decisions to accomodate less than 1% of the golf playing population. The millions of weekend hackers and the pros on TV are who the rules need to be designed for.
I believe different rules for golf equipment for pros and amateurs will satisfy the highest percentage of people.
First, the reasons why we should change equipment rules in the first place are:
1. The pros are making many of the great golf courses play much differently than they were intended. Simply adding length to the courses usually doesn't accomplish anything, it just makes the pros swing harder and puts more emphasis on distance as the main goal. Many courses simply don't have enough space to add any more length, making them obsolete.
2. Longer courses means longer rounds. More acreage means more work for the groundscrew, and higher operating costs.
3. The average amateur has not gotten significantly better in the last 20-30 years. Equipment technology helps bad players hit the ball in the air on their bad swings, not make more birdies and eagles from their good swings. An amateur using an illegal ball or driver to hit his drives 10 yards farther will not make the playability of the course change at all. But he will increase his enjoyment of the game.
Pretty much everyone agree on #2. Longer and more expensive rounds are things nobody likes (except maybe for little kids who's parents let them drive the cart while they play).
The vast majority of pros and the majority of amateurs agree with me on #1. Those who disagree argue that there's only about 15-20 more yards that we can possibly get out equipment technology. So the problem will eventually take care of itself. My response is that they're right, it wouldn't be the end of the world, but 15-20 yards for a pro is a huge difference. Enough to make some of the great courses play with driver-wedge on almost every par 4.
Others who disagree with #1 say that longer drives will make pro golf more entertaining for the casual viewer. I say: then why isn't Jason Zuback more popular than Fred Funk? Even a casual golf fan gets bored after a while if all they're seeing is big sweaty dudes ripping the shit out of the ball.
#3 is generally agreed upon by people with a good knowledge of golf equipment, and almost everyone in the golf equipment industry. The average hacker also agrees (but will probably insist that 10 more yards per drive will result in a much lower score).
It's easy to see now that we have a conflict of interest. We have millions of amateurs who want to enjoy the game by hitting the ball a little farther with less effort. We have the pros who want to keep playing the great classic courses the way they were intended to be played. But they're not going to give up a competetive advantage by using inferior equipment.
Unfortunately, stuck in the middle of the conflict are the competetive and low handicap amateurs. Most of which are good enough to produce the negative effects of the new technology. But they should be able to play whatever equipment they want during casual rounds, because they still play the game for fun.
IMO, it should become obvious that there needs to be separate rules for pros and amateurs. The main reasons against my opinion are:
1. It would be difficult to get all the pro tours to agree on these rules. Different rules on each pro tour would be chaos. Didn't you see what happened when the USGA and R&A disagreed on the legality of some drivers, like the ERC II?
2. One of the main attractions to golf is that people can relate to how the pros play (once in a while). Hitting a great shot with a club a pro uses is a thrill because you can say "I hit that shot just like Freddie Couples did, with the same kind of equipment." Having different rules for equipment would alienate the people who like that aspect of the game.
My response to #1 is that it would be much easier to get the people who run pro tours to agree on things than people who run the USGA and R&A. Tim Finchem and his peers have much different priorities than politics and brushing the dandruff off their blazers. They need to think about the marketing and publicity of their business. If most of their customers think that skill is becoming less of a factor (and thus, less interesting), they'll do something about it. Plus, the suits of the pro tours are communicating a lot more than they used to, mainly because of the WGC events. OTOH, the USGA and R&A love to bicker about the trivialities of rules, and try very hard to make it seem like one never gives in to the other.
As for people who agree with #2, they really have nothing to worry about. Do you honestly think that golf equipment companies will stop selling the clubs their top pros use? Anyone who has spent any time in the golf industry, or even anyone who watches golf commercials, can tell you that one of the main reasons people buy golf clubs is because their favorite pro uses that companies' clubs. And that won't change if amatuers can use clubs that are slightly better than what pros can use. Amateurs can and should have the option to buy what a pro uses, and what will help his game the most. Believe me, there will be plenty of sales of each type of club to make it profitable for companies to offer each type.
You've probably heard David Fey of the USGA preach this we-can't-alienate-people line many times. I honestly don't think he believes it that strongly. The reason he wants to discourage a double standard system is because it would put the USGA in a very difficult situation. How would they decide what rules to use for their amateur championships? I don't know, and it's a tough decision. But the low handicap competetive amateurs are the overwhelming minority. We can't make rules decisions to accomodate less than 1% of the golf playing population. The millions of weekend hackers and the pros on TV are who the rules need to be designed for.