Not the usual melange, we'll need to go deep on this subject... During my trip, news broke that the USGA and R&A intend to take action against the ubiquitous green-reading books. Now the cynical among you might be excused for thinking that "action" meant the appointment of a task force.... But if you give in to such cynicism, then the terrorists have won.
As I was taking the day to supplement Bobby D.'s cash flow, additional information was released that clarified the ruling bodies's positions. First this, from Shack's extensive coverage of the issue:
USGA, The R&A Announce Plans to Limit Use of Green-Reading Materials Beginning in 2019
Clarifications reaffirm the position that a player’s ability to read the greens is an essential skill that should be retained; still allows for traditional yardage books, handwritten player and caddie notes
LIBERTY CORNER, N.J. AND ST ANDREWS, SCOTLAND (July 31, 2018) - The USGA and The R&A are proposing regulations regarding the use of green-reading materials, reaffirming the need for a player to read greens based on their own judgment, skill and ability.
Following a six-week period of feedback and consultation with interested parties that begins today, the regulations will be finalized in a published “interpretation” of Rule 4.3 (Use of Equipment) and adopted Jan. 1, 2019, when golf’s new rules take effect.
Well, we can't have our game de-skilled now, can we? Perhaps this is off topic, but you know what else de-skills our game? Never mind, but am I the only one that doesn't see this as the most significant issue in the modern game? If the priorities seem skewed, I'd encourage you to think through who's ox is being gored....
So, why the need for a long post if they're merely going to ban this relatively-new offering to the tour professionals? Because, in their infinite wisdom, the ruling bodies are not simply banning books, they are planning to regulate font sizes and hand-written materials. Get a load of this from that very same press release:
The key elements of the proposed interpretation are as follows:
- Minimum Slope Indication Limit – A minimum slope indication limit of 4 percent (2.29 degrees) is proposed (this includes lines, arrows, numbers or any other indicators); this will have the effect of eliminating such indicators of slope from those areas of the putting green where the hole is most likely to be positioned (which tend to be cut on reasonably flat sections of the putting green with a degree of slope of less than 3.5 percent - or 2 degrees). This proposed limit also equates roughly with the amount of slope that is readily visible to the naked eye.
- Maximum Scale Limit – A maximum scale of 3/8 inch to 5 yards (1:480) is proposed; this will limit the size in print form to a pocket-sized publication and has the effect of restricting the space for handwritten notes (also referenced below).
- Indicative Information - General information that is included in traditional yardage books or course guides, such as basic illustrations that show the outline of the putting green and include indicative information like the tops of ridges or general slopes, will continue to be permitted.
- Handwritten Notes - Handwritten notes will continue to be allowed, but such notes cannot be used to create either a direct copy or a facsimile (replica) of a detailed green map.
Ya got that? They are regulating the size of the paper, the scale of the green representation and the level of detail in the player's hand-written notes.... I picture them mobilizing a fleet of rules officials in golf carts to investigate a reported font violation on the 8th hole....
So, shall we dive into how people have responded? Here's an interested party, one of those oxen cited above:
Why?
That is the question Jim Stracka is asking the U.S. Golf Association and R&A after the two governing bodies announced Tuesday that they would be regulating green-reading materials.
“I don’t understand why they are doing it,” said Stracka, who is president of StrackaLine, the company that for 10 years has been producing green-reading guides for PGA Tour golfers, more than 300 Division I college golf teams and more.
“Putting stats haven’t changed in 25 years,” Stracka told Golfweek via phone on Tuesday. “PGA Tour pros are still making about 50 percent of their putts from inside of 8 feet. … There is no exactness in putting.”
Hmmmm.... Gotta love the man's entrepreneurial talents, as he's created this nice little business, but his basic point seems to be that the rules bodies are putting at risk his scam, selling books that don't actually help the guys.
Though this puts the issue rather directly:
Also, Stracka said the new rule creates a quagmire of potential problems, especially when enforcing the rule.
“It’s a piece of paper,” Stracka said. “How do they limit what you put on a piece of paper?”
Stracka also points out that the USGA example of a conforming green guide, which depicts a mapping of the 18th green at St. Andrews’ Old Course, is actually non-conforming when taking into account the stipulation of disallowing indicators where there is a slope of less than 4 percent (2.29 degrees). On the example, Stracka insists there are arrows in “illegal” areas of the green.
“Their example is not correct,” Stracka said, “so how do they expect people to distinguish what’s legal and not legal?”
Here's a quick reax from Geoff:
Which begs the question: if they haven't impacted putting numbers, then what is being sold other than a tool that slows down play, appears to cut down on the importance of local knowledge and experience, while enriching a few?
To my way of thinking, Geoff is way too quick to accept his premise that putting has not improved as a result of these green maps. We had a analogy in the equipment debate, where those against a rollback cite the absence of improvement in scoring. But of course golf course were made longer, tighter and more resistant to scoring through firmer and faster greens. Similarly, to the extent that greens are faster than they were ten years ago, that would possibly counter the increased knowledge of subtle slopes. Stracks himself confirms this in Mike Stachura's treatment of the issue for Golf Digest:
“I can see that the USGA is trying to eliminate the ‘exactness’ of putting by limiting slope information,” he said. “[But] very few golfers understand slope … and even fewer know what to do with it. Over the past few years, I have talked to a few professional golfers that think they can calculate the exact break of a putt because they know the slope percent between the ball and the hole … but the reality is that doing that is impossible because of the effects of Stimp [speed], grain, moisture and wind on the putt.
As for the USGA screwing up their example, did we expect anything different?
Other reactions are summed up nicely in this header to a Rex Hoggard item:
Tour players ask: Why not just ban green books?
Yeah! Interestingly articulated by my pick for the worst green-reader on Tour:
“If it was me I would just ban them completely – and I use them – but I think green reading is a skill that can be developed just like your swing,” Rory McIlroy said. “It’s sort of halfway there. They are trying to come up with a solution that isn’t the whole way, but if it were me I’d say get rid of them. It’s a step in the right direction but I don’t think it’s the full step.”
Then why haven't you developed it? OK, today isn't about bashing Rory, though his lack of self-awareness is always amusing....
Shack includes this graphic, though I'm unclear if it's the allegedly incorrect example discussed above:
Is that the Valley of Sin at the lower left?
The next bit isn't likely to make any of us feel more comfortable about the process, as it implies a co-opting of those providing the materials:
Pagel said that the USGA and R&A intends to work with the makers of the green-reading materials and encourage them to submit materials to confirm they areconforming to the new interpretation. Such books could potentially receive some type of imprint so that tournament officials would know from a distance that they are conforming.
Pagel felt comfortable that the line being drawn on the matter was an appropriate one.
“What we’re saying here is for the best interest in the game moving forward, the skill of reading a putting green should be retained,” Pagel said.
Egads! I know I sometimes go far afield for my analogies, but this reminds me of the U.S. Government settlement with the tobacco companies from way back when.... The guys making the books will be protected and against future competitors, but what happens when Bryson goes off the reservation?
Just to go full circle, here's a couple of the more thoughtful lasses from Lytham:
LYTHAM ST. ANNES, England – Laura Davies and Catriona Matthew have criticized the R&A for failing to ban green-reading books outright ahead of the $3 million Ricoh Women’s British Open at Royal Lytham and St. Annes.
The R&A and USGA released a joint statement on Tuesdayannouncing plans to limit the use of green-reading materials beginning Jan. 1, 2019. The two British veterans say the governing bodies haven’t gone far enough.
“I think they should ban them completely,” Matthew said. “They’re kind of halfway what’s acceptable, what’s not. If you don’t want people to use them, just ban them outright.”
Matthew, winner of the 2009 Ricoh Women’s British Open, feels the governing bodies have waited too long.
Like with the anchored putter?
I'm also reminded of their first attempt to address the issue of balls moving on the greens, that was characterized by a failure to understand how the issue would play out in the real world. In that case they thought they were helping the player, not realizing that the player would be unable to identify the cause of his ball moving...
We'll see where they come out after the comment period, but this seems obviously convoluted and unworkable. Stay tuned, kids.
No comments:
Post a Comment