Tuesday Tidbits

Suddenly the calendar has gotten crowded...  Just a couple of items and I'll need to get on with my day.  Tomorrow is our regular Wednesday game, so I'll see you on Thursday.

Nothing To See Here - For years the Tour only tested spare driver heads from the various equipment vans... No need to test gamers, since it's a game for gentlemen:

Several players were deemed to be using non-conforming drivers at this week’s Safeway Open in California as the new PGA Tour testing procedure swung into full gear, Reuters has learned.

But some players are questioning the accuracy of the tour’s testing procedure, and have sent their drivers back to their various manufacturers for re-testing. 

The non-conforming drivers are from across the manufacturing spectrum, including major brands such as Titleist, TaylorMade and Cobra, two insiders with knowledge of the matter said. 

It is believed that Corey Conners, Robert Streb, Jason Dufner, Michael Thompson and Mark Hubbard were among those whose drivers did not pass the test. 

The tour has begun random testing of 30 drivers at tournaments this season.

OK, you might be curious about that accompanying photo.  The original Reuters piece didn't allow me to copy-and-paste it, and that's how Shack's screen shot appears on his post.  I think he got Corey's good side, no?

Don't you love the transparency of the PGA Tour?  Thank God for whistleblowers... That's what we're calling leakers these days, at least this week. 

As things stand, something approaching twenty percent of the drivers tested are non-compliant, but no need to share such information with the public.  You know how I feel about this, but I'm wondering how professional gamblers are going to like Living Under Par™.

Remember that Tour suit proclaiming their integrity in the rather trivial matter of the POY vote?  Care to publicly defend this?  yeah, thought so...  Remember, they tell us there is no discernable benefit from creeping over the limits, yet they all apparently do it.  Stay tuned.

Yesterday we had those ill-advised comments from Rory about course setups, and Shack ties all of this together in a short Golfweek item.  First, as relates to the driver tests:

According to a Reuters report, at least five drivers failed the PGA Tour’s new random testing procedures at the Safeway Classic. With only 30 players randomly tested each week, the number of clubs deemed non-conforming appears unexpectedly high. 

Granted, we’re nearing the end of the year. Players are likely to have hit thousands of balls and the infamous “CT creep” that alters face characteristics could have set in. No manufacturer appeared to have a majority of the non-conforming clubs, further validating the creep case. Whatever the factors, rules are rules and the latest episode is a reminder that manufacturers are delivering clubs so close to the line that drivers experiencing normal usage will inevitably fail the test.

Perhaps, but here's where the Tours omerta policy actually creates a self-inflicted wound.   I simply don't believe anything tell me, because the effort to hide things is so pervasive.

Unsurprisingly, with a day of reflection (plus his Twitter account blowing up) has Rory a bit more reflective:

OK, lad, I knew you'd see things my way....But you're gonna have to do some of that traveling you so hate, otherwise it will no longer be "Our" Ryder Cup chances.

Here's Geoff's conclusion:

Translation: one of the game’s longest and best drivers, who has benefited from an emphasis on distance over precision, does not like what he sees. While McIlroy has dropped similar hints in the last year, his remarks came after twice playing the Old Course at St. Andrews and in a year when he played his most consistent golf. 

To have a player at the top suggesting there is a problem with the way the game is played, even as he’s benefited from the shift toward distance versus overall skill, speaks to McIlroy’s integrity. His views also indicate a willingness to put the sport above his own game, something Nicklaus and Woods have also done. 

So somewhere in Far Hills and St. Andrews, the Distance Insights report is getting an update to include the weekend’s news. But at this pace, the report may not be necessary as perspectives evolve around what really matters. Even if it’s the perspective of those who benefit from the pursuit of distance above all else.

I guess Geoff didn't get the memo that Far Hills somehow became Liberty Corner....  Chances that those in Far Hills will listen?  Asymptotically approaching zero....

Wither Our Open - John Feinstein does a deep dive on future U.S. Open venues, first throwing out all sorts of rumors to swat down:

• The USGA was thinking of establishing a regular rotation of courses, much like the rota that the R&A has used for years to pick Open Championship sites. 

• The USGA was thinking of going into business with a handful of clubs, even establishing an LLC with some of those clubs. 

• The USGA was done looking for new golf courses for future Opens.

Spoiler alert, not much has changed in the USGA's thinking.  This we knew:

“It’s pretty clear that we love Pebble Beach, Pinehurst, Oakmont and Shinnecock,” Davis says. “Those four meet all our criteria: They’re great tests of golf, they set up logistically either very well or well enough, and—being honest—we’re going to make money when we go there. We’re a nonprofit, but the U.S. Open financially supports everything else we do—all our other championships and all the golf programs we sponsor—among other things.”

That might come as a relief, at least a surprise, to the members at Shinnecock, where the two most recent Opens have gone sideways.

Perhaps the Core Four could expand to five?

Davis thinks Winged Foot has the potential to join the core four, depending on how the Open fares there next year. 

“Again, it’s not just the golf course,” he says. “We haven’t been at Winged Foot since 2006. A lot has changed around there since then. If all goes well with traffic, with the neighborhood, with how the club likes having us there, with how we like being there again, Winged Foot could move into that category.” 

But a rota of, say, five courses? No.

All well and god, as these are historic venues with deep roots in our game.  But Mike, what were you thinking?

“I think we made a mistake going to two new venues that were also relatively new golf courses in three years,” Davis says of Chambers Bay (2015) and Erin Hills (2017). “The first time you go to a venue, there are almost certainly going to be issues. When the golf courses are almost new, that can add to the problems.”

Ya think?  

The more difficult question of how to provide a stern test for the best players in the world is not addressed.  Ever, it seems.

Stressful Blogging -  Ron Whitten, the architecture editor at Golf Digest, has a provocative item that I'll need to deal with sensitively:

The growing and surprising mental-health challenge facing golf superintendents

Ron's got a number of case studies that he shares, and they're tough reading for sure:

Wilber is not the only one in the turfgrass business dealing with such an issue. Maintaining a golf course is a high-risk occupation and can put one’s physical well-being, personal relationships and mental health at risk. But revealing struggles with

anxiety, depression or something worse is still considered taboo in this occupation, just as it is in many other lines of work. 

Wilber admits his candor about his suicide attempt, which he revealed two years ago on the website Turfnet, might cost him his career. But he no longer cares. He believes it’s essential to bring these issues to the forefront, because it might save someone. 

“When I started writing about my struggles on Turfnet,” he says, “I got an inbox full of responses from golf-course superintendents—­like 60 emails­—mostly supportive. One said, ‘Don’t tell anybody, but I’ve dealt with depression, too.’ Another told me, ‘I wanted to kill myself, too.’ It was mind-numbing. 

“We need to get this out in the open. Real people have real struggles, and they shouldn’t have to beat themselves to death for what they are or aren’t at work.” 

A worst-case scenario in the industry has long been, Lose Your Greens, Lose Your Job. The concern of Wilber, as well as others going public with their mental illness, is a far more horrifying possibility: Lose Your Greens, Take Your Life.

Of course this item drops in a year that featured extreme weather here in the Northeast, with resulting turf damage that would try anyone's mettle.  There's no question that it's a high-stress job, with an unforgiving customer base for sure.

But it's a position of great responsibility, managing a budget that can approach $2 million dollars.  My experience is that those jobs routinely come with high levels of stress, in a sense we could say that's what they get paid for.

Obviously missing from Ron piece is any way of understanding how prevalent this is, and whether it really is increasing.  I know the difficulty in compiling data, but he makes a claim in the header that he doesn't deliver upon, and that's a problem.  So let's agree that Ron has made a first step, pointing out the existence of anecdotal information on this subject.  Let's hope someone is intrigued sufficiently to take this further.

Otherwise, I'm likely to give vent to my snarky self, and tell them that if they need a firend, they should get a dog...  Of course, most of them long since have....

Match-Play Madness - Geoff has a brilliant post up, that I'll allow him to frame:

The Morrissett brothers of Golf Club Atlas fame taught me the joy of settling golf course debates via match play. While not a perfect system to compare to works of golf

architecture, it can be incredibly effective between semi-like-minded souls. Think of golf course match play as a war of attrition that sheds outside influences that muddy so many golf course rankings. 

Forget the friendliness of staff, size of clubhouse and deliciousness of the cheeseburger. They can’t intrude on a straight-up, hole-by-hole duel. 

Sadly, there are few forums for such debates and maybe as with 18 holes of golf, laboriously debating the merits of holes strikes some as tedious. But in an incredible week when the world of golf took us to Pebble Beach and The Old Course, the two most important jewels of their respective nations prompted a match to settle a question Matt Adams and I (sort of) addressed earlier in the week for Golf Central. 

Here’s how my Pebble Beach vs. Old Course match played out. Disagree away and please, if you’ve been fortunate enough to play both, tell me your match outcomes. I won’t be hurt. (PS – we play these matches to the end, even if one course closes things out early.)

 Within that match, this might strike folks as the biggest upset:

Seventh Hole – Order another round, a long, drawn-out debate should ensue here. Pebble Beach’s 107-yard par-3 seventh remains one of the world’s most photographed and fun to play. There may be no better spot in the world of golf. But the green has morphed into a circle and old photos show a far more interesting hole. While the “High (Out)” hole requires a well-conceived tee shot, and one of the most underrated second shots in golf has you playing over the Shell bunker to a double green shared with the Eden. Sorry Pebble Beach. Old Course 2 up.

I'd have been tempted to contest this match at nineteen holes, the Tap Room vs. the Jigger/Dunvegan.....

But I can't see why anyone could be surprised at the outcome of a contest that pits the Hands of God vs. the Hands of Man. 

Good fun, and I'll leave you there.