Midweek Musings

I have much on my plate, so let's not waste any precious time on the preliminaries....

Eddie Redeems Himself - Eddie Pepperell justifiably took incoming for that tasteless tweet of his about only recently allowing women in his home to wear clothes, and in response he got all..... well, existential.  And I'm man enough to admit that I didn't see that coming:

I’ve been trying to figure out, without the help of books or an education, whether humour is as innate to human beings as suffering. This was prompted by a tweet I received from Lawrence Donegan who criticised my tweet last night where I joked about how I only

allow women into my house if they’re wearing no clothes at all. I considered responding on Twitter but 240 characters obviously isn’t enough when it comes to the topic of suffering and humour. 

It seems to me that as we still have humour, it clearly has utility, else why would it exist? It might be a social construct, but I doubt that. I’m inclined to believe humour has evolved alongside us for millennia, in spite of enormous suffering and pain. In fact, there is less suffering and pain in the world now than ever before, and it would seem, if Lawrence is anything to go by, that humour is also on the decline. Maybe the supply of jokes correspond with the amount of suffering in our own worlds? The more we suffer, the more we joke. Empirically speaking, and of course relatively speaking, any suffering I’ve ever experienced has often been followed by humour. It relieves pain.

More on topic are these comments:

That probably depends who you are. I can really only speak for myself, and plus,

remember I’m not being paid to be here, so I’m only slightly less immoral than the top guys who have showed up. For me, if I didn’t play, I sacrifice the opportunity to play against the best in the world, I miss a chance to improve my world ranking also, which objectively speaking, does hold some importance for me, since if I fall out of the Top 50 before April then I won’t be eligible for a PGA Tour event I have scheduled to play. And that means losing flights etc and having to pay for new ones, which you might say is no problem because I’ve earned a lot of money lately, though resentment isn’t good for anybody.

Two really good bits there, but that only perhaps serves to distract from the larger point, which is that we're all struggling for the answer here...  Oh, and oh so subtly also making the point that those who know with absolute certainty what he should do aren't likely sacrificing anything should he follow orders.

He also had this "slippery-slope" argument as well:

For Pepperell, the answer was no — but he recognized it’s tricky knowing where to draw the line. Saudi Arabia has come under particularly intense examination since the October killing of Jamal Khashoggi, a Washington Post columnist who had spoken out against Prince Mohammed bin Salman. But it’s not the only country to host a major golf tournament with a sketchy approach to human rights. “Like, for example, why do we play in China? Or Qatar? Or Turkey?” Pepperell asked.

Exactly.  Of those three, Qatar seems the most relevant, because Kashoggi was their agent.....though he seems blissfully unaware that the myth of Peak Oil has been discredited:

On top of all of this, maybe, just maybe, the Regime out here really do want to change. Maybe they’ve recognised the perilous state of their own affairs and in particular their reliance on a fossil fuel that won’t be here forever. It might be true that they want to Liberalise their Kingdom so that they can be competitive themselves in the future. Why should we Westerners not accept this, if it is true? After all, aren’t we the true purveyors of forgiveness?

I like this Eddie far more than yesterday's, though Shack has been a bit over-wrought on this subject as well.  I let him pass yesterday on this header yesterday, linking two events that are in  no way like each other:

Human Rights Reminder To European Tour Golfers: Haotong Li Still Alive, But Jamal Khashoggi Is Not

And his latest post continues the virtue signaling:

We’ve seen players travel to far away lands in search of easy World Ranking points and sell their mother’s for year-end world top 50 status. 

And now, look the other way on carved up journalists, beheadings, beatings, violent bigotry and 15 of 19 9-11 hijackers just to help the Crown Prince see the error of his nation’s murderous ways.

Carved-up journalists?  Man, you carve up one journalist (and really, intelligence operative would be the more accurate description) and you can never live it down.....  But much as we love Geoff on most issues related to our game, geopolitics doesn't seem to be his beat.

Making Friends - Brooks Koepka is one of those suffering from enhanced immorality according to Eddie Pepperell, though he might redeem himself in Shack's eyes with his rather harsh comments on pace of play:

“I just don’t understand how it takes a minute and 20 seconds, a minute and 15 to hit a golf ball; it’s not that hard,” Koepka said. 

“It’s always between two clubs; there’s a miss short, there’s a miss long. It really drives me nuts especially when it’s a long hitter because you know you’ve got two other guys

or at least one guy that’s hitting before you so you can do all your calculations; you should have your numbers. 

“Obviously if you’re the first guy you might take ten extra seconds, but it doesn’t take that long to hit the ball, especially if it’s not blowing 30. 

“If it’s blowing 30 I understand taking a minute and taking some extra time with some gusts, you know changing just slightly, I get that but if it’s a calm day there’s no excuse. 

“Guys are already so slow it’s kind of embarrassing. I just don’t get why you enforce some things and don’t enforce others.”

This is from a podcast to which I've not listened, but apparently The Professor was specifically referenced in the question to Brooksie.... However, Bryson begs to differ:

“It’s actually quite impressive that we’re able to get all that stuff done in 45 seconds; people don’t realize that it’s very difficult to do everything we do in 45 seconds,” DeChambeau said on Tuesday. “I think that anybody that has an issue with it, I understand, but we’re playing for our livelihoods out here, and this is what we want to do. If we want to provide the best entertainment for you, it’s part of our process, or it’s part of my process, at least.” 

DeChambeau partially blames his lack of experience for his measured approach. He says he's put on the clock "almost every week" but is accustomed to it now. Still, it's not his intention. 

“We try and speed up,” DeChambeau said. “Trust me, we do our due diligence to speed up and do our best. We’re not trying to slow anyone down. I’m not trying to slow anyone down. It’s just a part of the process, and unfortunately the Rules of Golf allow for a certain amount of time, and we’re (using it) to our fullest potential.”

So, how do we resolve this disagreement?  We;;, I'm inclined to suggest protractors at twelve paces,  but go to that second link and watch the video embedded therein....  I'm gonna go way out on a limb and guess that Brooks spends far less time on air density than Bryson.

John Feinstein takes on the issue of slow play, including some amusing strolls down memory lane:

If there is one subject that will stir debate in a PGA Tour locker room, it is the issue of pace of play. It can also lead to confrontations, such as the time years ago when Jerry Pate and Ronnie Black stood nose-to-nose on the first hole in Greensboro after Pate told Black walking off the tee that he needed to keep moving during the round because he didn’t want to get put on the clock because of Black’s meanderings. Black didn’t take the comment well, and the two men engaged in a spirited shouting match. 

The slow-play moment that might be most most vividly remembered on tour took place almost 14 years ago, during the last round of the now-defunct Booz-Allen Classic, played that year at Congressional. By the (unfortunate) luck of the draw, Sabbatini (who had to slow down most days to play at under 100) was paired with Crane (who had to floor it to hit 40). Crane’s nickname among the rules officials is “The Anchor.” (The best rules officials slow-play nickname is Langer’s: Herr Sundial). 

The two men were paired on Thursday and Friday and then, because they were tied after 36 and 54 holes, ended up together on Saturday and Sunday. Late in the final round, Sabbatini simply couldn’t take it anymore. After hitting his ball in the water at the 17th hole, he walked up to drop before Crane had played his second shot. Then, after putting out, he left the green while Crane was still circling his putt and walked to the 18th tee.

Paul Azinger, who was working the tournament on television, blasted Sabbatini for his lack of etiquette. So did many others in the media, in part no doubt, because Sabbatini can be prickly and because Crane is almost always a willing interview. Many players will tell you that slow play is a breach of etiquette. Playing at “a reasonable pace” is considered part of the game’s etiquette. 

The day after the Sabbatini-Crane incident, I was standing on the range at Pinehurst—site of that year’s U.S. Open—when Sabbatini walked out to hit some balls. It was late afternoon and there were perhaps 20 players practicing. Almost every one of them stopped what they were doing and clapped for Sabbatini.

Caution needs to be the watchword any time one finds oneself on the same side of an issue as the notorious South African Czech..... That said, I've always thought that Glen "All" Day was the best of the slow-play induced nicknames...

This is tedious because there is no will to do anything, as John competently recounts, though it does provide amusement.

On Pinheads - I skipped this in yesterday's post, but it's been fun watching folks adapt to the new rule, not least myself during our play in Florida.  Adam Scott has become the poster child for leaving the pin in on all putts, regardless of length, whereas the Professor has been going back and forth.

Here's Adam explanation of his putting at Torrey:

Scott missed two short putts that might have been the difference. But flagsticks are off

the hook. He just forgot to adjust to his radical new putter setup. 

“Making the putter change was a pretty good experiment this week, it worked nicely,” he said after his first Farmers appearance. “I learned a lot with that style of putting this week, and it was quite a big adjustment, I have to say. And I made some errors out there with it, but hopefully it’s looking all positive and I like that.” 

The length was standard, the grip a claw, but the angles were extreme: 6 degrees of loft and a grip 3 inches in front of the blade made Scott “a little fiddly getting into position.”

The missed putts were more “carelessness” than any kind of yippiness. But combined with his decision to leave the flagstick in to have something to aim at, he finished 14th in strokes gained putting and set his 2019 PGA Tour season off to a strong start.

That last bit about having something to aim at is what's been bothering me about the discussion, including the broadcast commentary.  He's always been allowed to leave the pin in for aiming purposes, he just needed to have it tended by his caddie.  Obviously the longer the putt the more it's a factor, but I've always thought there's a benefit to the pin in terms of judging distance.

Those Tour Confidential busybodies took on the issue as well:

1. Bryson DeChambeau, who has become the poster boy for flagstick-in putting, picked up his first European tour victory when he dominated the field at the Omega Dubai Desert Classic and won by seven. Meanwhile, at Torrey Pines, Adam Scott — another flagstick-in proponent — shot 65-68 on the weekend to finishrunner-up behind Justin Rose. Are these guys on to something? Why haven’t more people followed suit yet? 

Sean Zak: For starters, let’s be careful what we attribute success to. If the flagstick helps Adam Scott, great, but it’s way, way, way too early to act like he’s onto something. He

gained eight strokes simply approaching the green. Why haven’t a lot of players followed Bryson’s almost-always-in mentality? Well, they’re creatures of habit, far more than you or me. Give them some time. 

John Wood: Most of these guys will give anything a try if they see someone else having success with it, be it a new shaft, a new driver, or a different way of eating their breakfast (LEFT hand rather than right). It’s something so new and so foreign, it’ll take some time for guys to adjust and give it a whirl. You gotta realize these guys have been incredible at golf for anywhere from 10-40 years, all the while putting with the flagstick out. I foresee more and more people giving it a whirl with Adam and Bryson having high-profile success with it. It’ll be interesting to me when we play events (Augusta and the U.S. Open come to mind) that use thicker, heavier metal flagsticks with no give. I think they would be more prone to having a ball ricochet off them than the fiberglass flagsticks we use day in and day out on tour that have some give. 

Alan Shipnuck: Whatever Adam Scott is doing is going to inspire other pros to try the opposite. But Bryson is the bellwether — if he keeps piling up Ws other folks will certainly try it, because why not? 

Josh Sens: I’m with Alan here. As much as they are creatures of habit, they are also always on the lookout for an edge. And if the flagstick in gives them one — be it real or perceived — we’ll be seeing more and more players go to it with every passing week. 

Dylan Dethier: Nearly every study and piece of research done so far — save the USGA’s “Eh, it should be about the same” handwave – shows this gives a slight advantage. If the only thing working against it is muscle memory, it’s only going to get more popular.

So they're creatures of habit who will try anything?  Square peg meet round hole.... Here's the thing, the guys that will be most likely to throw caution to the wind are the guys that are struggling on the greens.... Duh!  Yanno, like Adam Scott.

But as for research, up until now all we had was Dave Peltz, and his work on the subject was long ago with a markedly different golf ball.  MyGolfSpy.com, has recently conducted their own research, and here are their conclusions:

OBSERVATIONS 

Leaving the flagstick is always an advantage vs. taking the flagstick out

Leaving the flagstick in also keeps the ball closer to the hole on misses

The less rigid flagstick has the highest make % and least distance after a miss

The most rigid flagstick is still an advantage for both makes and misses vs. flagstick out

Dead center strikes on the flagstick provided the best make % while leaving the shortest remaining distance to the hole on misses

Off-center strikes on the flag still provided a higher make % vs. flagstick out

While the advantage is not as significant leaning the stick forward (toward the golfer) is still an advantage vs. taking the flag out 

VERDICT 

Don’t let the tradition of pulling the flag out while you putt get in the way of shooting lower scores. 

Leave the pin in.

I will note that during our play in Florida it felt really weird leaving the pin in on shorter putts.  Also a bit awkward figuring out the to-and-fro of the pin going in and out, though I suspect that's transitory.

But given that we were in Florida I have an obvious follow-up question.  What happens to all of this research if the pin is moving in the wind?  

There's more, but I'm going to leave you nice folks there and attend to some obligations.  Not to worry, though, we'll get to everything over the next couple of days, I promise.