Late-Week Lethargy

But is it really late in the week?  I mean, this is far from how a Friday used to feel:

Though you could use that...

Schedule Stuff - Saw a funny riff where folks were discussing their most unneeded purchases.  The hands-down winner was that 2020 Planner....  I treasure mine, as I'm counting the hours since my last haircut.

The PGA Tour put out some kind of press release on the revised schedule, that from a socially-distanced vantage point doesn't seem to change anything that we had seen previously.  The only actual news seems to be this confirmation:

The first four events will be held without fans, but the Tour will “closely monitoring the situation at the federal, state and local levels, and ultimately we are going to follow every single recommendation that they make,” Tyler Dennis, chief of operations for the PGA Tour, said in a conference call.

But this is the buried lede:

The Greenbrier will no longer host a PGA Tour event, officials from the West Virginia resort announced on Thursday. Golf Digest's Dave Shedloski first reported the news

Wednesday night. 

"A Military Tribute at the Greenbrier" was originally scheduled for the second week of September, but that date has been taken by the Safeway Open. Additionally, The Greenbrier and the PGA Tour have elected to cancel A Military Tribute at The Greenbrier for the remaining years of the contract, which was previously planned to run through 2026.

So, what went wrong?

In a statement, Greenbrier officials said the tournament moving to the fall had not gone as well as hoped compared to its Fourth of July date. The Greenbrier said attendance and the attractiveness of sponsors "dropped significantly."

So, you effed up...you trusted Jay!  Because, really, who coulda seen that happening?

This from the AP is pretty telling:

The yearly tournament, A Military Tribute at The Greenbrier, has struggled to draw fanfare after moving from summer to fall. Last year, attendance dragged as the matches went up against college football home games, even as one of Justice's family mining companies bought 30,000 tickets to give away to fans.

This is a pity, as it's one of the more interesting golf courses they play.  But this from Geoff indicates a profound discomfort with elemental theories of cause and effect:

Just a reminder here that the PGA Tour rearranged it’s calendar schedule to the dreaded wraparound for two reasons: to avoid football season and to elevate the fall events into tournaments with FedExCup points status. The Greenbrier took a year off to accommodate a leap to the fall and now, is no more with seven years left on its deal.

That's some pretty tortured logic there...   The PGA Tour plays in the Fall for a very simple reason... so that no one else can.  The rest are just the accommodations necessary to keep the train moving.  The Fall Finish was originally a portion of the schedule for the have-nots of the PGA Tour, but those events couldn't be sustained.  Nurse Ratched was forced to elevate them to full status just to keep them going, hence the dreaded Wraparound Schedule.

The bit about not competing with football only ever applied to his precious FedEx Cup playoffs....  as for other events, it;s long been apparent that once the ink dries on your contract to hold an event, then you're pretty much on your own.  Just ask the guy that used  The International....  In deference to Mark W., I will exercise restraint and specifically not reference the Western Open.

Am the only that thinks there's some math to be discussed?  See if you can pick it from this tweet from Curmudgeonly James Corrigan:

Apparently they will award a FedEx Cup on September 3rd that will include at most one major, that PGA Championship scheduled for early August on the Bay.  But will the 2021 FedEx Cup include two each of the U.S. Open and Masters?  Now, I've never cared much for the event, as the astute reader might have noticed, but I am always in the marker for additional reasons the hold in contempt.

You'd be only logical for thinking that we just hit the high-water mark in stupidity, but you'd be premature.  Even with the disclaimer that they're contractually-required to carry water for the Tour, this might just eviscerate any remaining trace elements of self-respect:

Biggest winners (and losers) from the new PGA Tour schedule

RBC Heritage 

The RBC Heritage looked to be on the tough luck side of things after the Tour put a halt to the season following the Players Championship, but the new schedule found a spot for the Hilton Head event. The tournament is scheduled to be the second event after the restart and though it will be played in the absence of fans, it is in a far better position than being skipped over altogether.

Really?  You're declaring victory because Jay wrote some things in on a calendar?  Shouldn't we actually wait and see if it, I don't know, actually happens?  I'm actually thinking that the biggest winner is The Greenbrier, because they no longer have to take Jay's phone calls.

Here's an interesting thread as well, dealing with the issue of players concerned that the Tour might be pushing the enverlope:

Q. What about the players who don't feel comfortable? There are going to be players who don't feel comfortable coming back. What happens to those players if

you start and they're not comfortable coming back playing again? 

ANDY PAZDER: That's a question I think you need to direct to individual players. My only experience with anything like this I guess would be the first few tournaments following 9/11. We had players that were uneasy about air travel. That's one of the beauties of being a PGA TOUR member; you're an independent contractor. You're not required to be at any PGA TOUR event. So they have that discretion to play tournaments where they favor the golf course or tournaments in this instance, to your question, they may or may not feel comfortable. But that's an individual player decision. 

So I would direct you to reach out to some of the players that you know to get their direct perspective. I can't speak on their behalf as it relates to that.

An answer that the libertarian in me would usually embrace.  But...

This is where Jay's disgraceful Players' Championship performance comes home to roost.  He demonstrated himself to be Under Par™ in both leadership and competence, and all too focused on protecting the Tour's feedlot.  Whether players will trust him remains a very good question...

And let me add, though it should be obvious, that golf performance is measured on a relative basis.  These are world-class athletes, and they're not genetically predisposed to let others rack up points and money with them on the sidelines, so Pazder's comments will garner pushback.

But, shall we take a specific look at that schedule?

The RBC Heritage in Hilton Head, South Carolina, which had been canceled, was put back on the schedule and will follow the Charles Schwab Challenge on June 18-21. The Travelers Championship in Cromwell, Connecticut, would be next in line June 25-28, followed by the Rocket Mortgage Classic in Detroit July 2-5.

If you're looking for a point of conflict, methinks that Detroit event makes as much sense as any.   Why?  Because that's the Motherland of Governor Half-Whit, who is showing no hesitation in allowing her Stalinist freak flag to unfurl.  That's why I always take care to maintain my strategic popcorn reserve...

Brooksie, Mi Amigo - I haven't actually listened to it, but I'm plenty surprised (and pleased) to see this:

Quick hits with Brooks Koepka: 'I could play St. Andrews every day for the rest of my life'

I've never considered Brooks much of a thinker about the game...  In fact, he's never shown any real insight or interest in architecture or the history of the game, as far as I've noticed.  But if he gets the Old Course, then that speaks well of him.

In fact, my initial reaction was to wonder when he had managed to play it, but I was able to confirm that he did, in fact, play in that 2015 Open Championship.  

Brooksie also did an Instagram Q&A with Clause Harmon, and I'll leave you to decide what you think of the porn 'stache:

Does anybody else find this...well, curious:

Koepka also almost created what would have been an epic Masters moment. Koepka was in the mix late on Sunday despite dropping a ball in Rae’s Creek and doubling the 12th hole, but he eagled 13 and had a chance to grab the solo lead at 15 when he faced another eagle putt. He couldn’t believe it when he missed. He tapped in for birdie and made it a five-way tie for the lead at 12 under. Thing is, Koepka was so confident he was going to make that eagle putt, he even told his caddie, Ricky Elliott, a celebration strategy before he hit it. “I remember saying to him, ‘I’m going to point at Tiger if I make this thing,’ and I still to this day can’t believe that putt missed.” Koepka finished one shot behind Woods, in a three-way tie for second.

So, as I understand things, Rory's MO is to focus on process to the exclusion of results, whereas Brooks focuses on his celebration....  I'm gonna go with Rory here.

This is very true, though:

Koepka says it’s harder to get onto the Tour than it is to keep your card. Opportunity is a big difference, he says, as is the ability to feel comfortable in those uncomfortable situations. “There’s not really much of a difference between guys playing mini-tour golf or whatever it might be and the guy who is just keeping his card,” he said. “It’s a little bit of a break going their way.”

That's because, to a certain extent, the Tour is set up as a protection racket....  

Existentially Yours -  A couple of strange reads today on a common theme.  First, Brad Klein is typically thoughtful on subjects of an architectural note, but this Morning Read piece is quite odd.

Shall we begin with a civics lesson?

The pattern of closings across the country is a function of decentralized decision making. Federal policy has ceded day-to-day management of the crisis to the states, with governors largely making decisions based on input from their health experts and public-policy advisers.

If by "federal policy" you mean the Constitution, sure.  The term of art is Federalism.... 

In most states, local authorities also retain the authority to make judgments about allowing golf to continue. In Connecticut, where golf is allowed, Hartford County’s public courses reported booked-out tee times all weekend. But in Fairfield County, adjacent to New York City, golf courses have been closed to limit opportunities for social gathering and to keep workers at home.

Wow!  How crazy is that?  It might sound so, but that's only if you fail to look at the underlying data, which shows that Hartford bears little resemblance to Fairfield:

And for those wondering about the constitutional underpinnings of the imposition of Marshall law, there will be blood litigation:

The story is not without its legal complexities, particularly when a course operator resents being told to shut down. After Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Wolf deemed golf to be a non-essential activity and thus subject to closure, the owner of Blueberry Hill Golf Club in Russell, in the state’s northwest corner, took umbrage with the decree. Now, the club has filed a lawsuit against the state, claiming violation of due process because the governor lacked the proper legislative authority. It likely won’t be the only suit of its kind that is filed in the coming weeks.

As they should.  When the Stae forces your business to close it should be deemed a taking, and require just compensation.

I'd be curious to know what points Brad thinks he's making, because I could discern exactly none.

But now comes the thumb-sucker of the day:

Playing golf during a pandemic might be safe. But is it right?

 How I wish he were kidding...  To be fair, though, there's some thoughts of interest in here, mostly because he solicits thoughts from three interesting individuals, one of whom your humble blogger knows of.  

Calling Rabbi Marc Gellman the funniest rabbi on the planet is doing him a profound disservice, as he's one of the funniest Jews on the planet (a category in which my peeps dominate).  He used to speak at the Met. Golf Writers annual awards dinner, and the man can work a crowd:

Gellman says: “Once exceptions are made to the ‘stay home’ rule, we must all agree that there are several morally defensible reasons to get out of your home. Securing food and medicine are obvious exemptions because they are necessary in a morally intuitive way. 

Rabbi Gellman

The case that opens up this issue is the question of whether it is ethically defensible to go for a walk away from the world of other people but inside the world of nature,” Gellman says. “If it is clear to everyone that people walking dogs are not committing an ethical offense, then we must ask, is this not discrimination against non-dog owners?”

Critical to remember, Gellman says, is that “true ethical dilemmas are always a conflict of good things and hardly ever a conflict between the totally good and the totally evil.” The social distancing that alone seems to hold the promise of reducing the number of infections is good, and personal recreation in fresh air to relieve stress is also good. Gellman thinks the underlying issue is privilege. “This virus has scratched the scab off the anti-golf prejudice that still exists in the United States.” In times of no crisis, people with disposable time and money can be dismissive of those who envy them. But in a time of crisis, should golfers show solidarity? Enjoying our silly, stupid, wonderful game when so many others are suffering from grief or are home-bound with underlying conditions could be seen as rubbing these poor peoples’ noses in it.

That answer comes in the philosophical distinction between non-malevolence and benevolence, Gellman says. “Put simply, you are always obligated not to hurt someone. But you are not obligated on the same level to help someone. You could help a lot of people by giving away all your money, but you don’t have to.” Showing solidarity with your fellow man by not playing golf then, becomes something like a good deed.

OK, admittedly not his funniest bit.  And I could use a reminder of how someone not playing golf actually helps others.  It's really just virtue signalling, typically imposed by an authoritarian non-golfer.  

But the author saves his best for last:

Sadhguru Jaggi Vasudev, known to his followers as Sadhguru, is a spiritual leader and frequent speaker on stages such as the United Nations and the World Economic Forum. When he changes his flowing robes for modern golf clothes and knots his long beard so it won’t interfere with his golf swing, it is one of the greatest metamorphoses of style in the world.

The U.N. and Davos seem quite the feeble appeals to authority in the current moment, and I feel certain that a sinecure from the WHO is imminent.

But what about solidarity? For what it’s worth, my rock-climbing brother who lives in

Utah reports the local climbing community has ceased activity entirely. While the chance of transmitting COVID-19 on a remote cliff might be even be less than a blade of grass to a golf ball, the climbers there don’t want to risk stressing an overwhelmed hospital system with an injury. But more so, there’s a strong sense of “demonstrating that we’re all in this together,” Dave says. Climbing is far from a sport of privilege (in its purest and cheapest form, there’s no rope), and so are climbers one-upping golfers in the benevolence department? 

Sadhguru says: “If this is one’s idea of solidarity, then football players should not play football because most people cannot play the game. Swimmers should not swim because most people don’t have a swimming pool in the world. Welcome to deprivation, then! This is not the way to handle life.

Sir, just one niggling detail.  To wit, that our so-called leaders keep reinforcing the fact that we are not, it so happens, in this together.  And when you've lost The View, you've lost America...

Never Let a Crisis Go To Waste - Joel Beall and Christopher Powers use the temporary flexibility in USGA rules (think raised cups) to argue for the following:

Which golf rules need to go?

I might need a bigger blog.

The real problem is the format of the article, a back-and-forth discussion, seems to get in the way of concise arguments.

 As far as the matter goes, here are their candidates:

Powers: How about both the new drop rule and the caddie-lining-up-their-player rules, which were both implemented in 2019. The Rules of Golf were supposed to be

simplified, and all the USGA did with these two is make them more complicated. Within two months, there were multiple infractions of both these rules. Had those rules not been tweaked, there would have been no issues. Does that sound “simplified” to you? 

Beall: By the tone of your remarks and use of quotation marks, I’m going to say no.

Powers: Simple solution: Instead of having an exact height to drop from, like the knee or shoulder, just make it anywhere above the knee. You want to drop it shoulder height? Go for it! From the waist? Have at it! But let’s not get the microscope out to see if a player is dropping in direct line with their kneecap. 

For the caddie-lining-up-their-player rule, I can see both sides. It’s a distinct advantage, especially for world-class players, to be lined up perfectly by their caddie. But where it gets silly is when Haotong Li is lining up a two-footer and he gets penalized and loses six figures on top of it because he simply didn’t step away after his caddie just happened to be behind him.

See what I mean?  First, has there been a subsequent tweak to the drop rule?  I tend to agree with his solution here, but this failure to understand the real world is a mainstay of the USGA.  In this case, guys have been dropping from shoulder-height since the days of Old Tom, so those habits die hard....  Since a shoulder-height drop is disadvantageous (except in those case when the player wants to place his ball), a mechanism to avoid penalties for instinctual behavior, perhaps a short-term local rule, would have been wise.

The bigger problem is that second rule, because they're too busy on tangents to actually tell us whether they think caddies should be able to align the players.  There's little doubt that the USGA/R&A screwed up the drafting of the rule, see Li, Haotong, but I strongly believe that they were right to ban the practice.

This one would seem to be their biggest issue:

For me, the first change is the obvious: Relief from a fairway divot hole. When they rolled out its revisions last year, the USGA and R&A knew the divot question was

coming, so much that they had a prepared statement for it: 

“One of the primary objectives for the overall initiative is to make the rules easier to understand and apply, but to also make sure we maintained the traditions and principles behind the game,” said Thomas Pagel, USGA senior director of rules & amateur status. “And the principles are to play the ball as it lies and the course as you find it. So to write a rule that allows a player to sort of deviate from that, was not something we were wanting to do.” 

The problem is, golf already deviates from that principle, and often. A Tour player can go off the grid but if their ball is behind a grandstand, congrats, relief. An errant shot finds the cart path? Boom, free drop. Same if you shank it into a flower bed or feel there’s casual water beneath your feet.

Remind me never to debate with these guys, because they have obvious difficulty staying on topic.  Grandstands are an interesting issue, but one that only applies to the game at the professional and elite amateur levels.   But let's stay focused on this issue, one which involves the dreaded F-word.

I've been pondering this one for years, and there's no easy answer.  Before we get too carried away with the injustice of a divot hole, let's remember that "Play it as it lies" is the most basic rule of our game, dating back to those hearty souls at Leith Links in 1744.  I would argue strongly that we should be reluctant to weaken this core tenet, come hell or casual water.  As Mike Clayton was arguing earlier in the week, that basic ebb and flow of luck in our game is among its greatest charms, and I do think it becomes a less interesting endeavor to the extent that we legislate perfect lies.

But do not abandon hope, as I'm here with the an obvious solution.  Think about that stream of consciousness above, specifically the reference to relief from a cart path.  That's an unnatural change to the turf and we don't expect (though we do allow) play from such a surface.  If turf is torn up and the area re-sodded, we similarly allow free relief...  So, isn't the placement of divot mix into a divot the same concept?  In order to maintain this delicate balance, I would grant relief when the divot has been treated, which I find the most difficult lie to handle.

Women Hardest Hit -  Scott Michaux writes for the Augusta Chronicle, but at his new blog makes the case for a change of dates:

Here’s my suggestion – have the Masters finish the first Sunday in April. That’s just one week earlier than the current locked-in dates, but it’s a week that could have a profound effect not only on the Masters but the rest of the sports calendar. 

From the Masters standpoint, it’s more likely to be at its most colorful best. Daily high temperatures are comparable to the ensuing week (this year the highs ranged from 69-82 compared to 76-86 a week later), but it’s more likely that the spring blooming season in that part of Georgia will be at its most optimal. 

But the biggest benefit for golf would be breaking up a logjam of “big” events that have clustered in the weeks leading up to the Masters. The PGA Tour has wedged in two WGC events and the Players Championship in a six-week stretch, which puts a strain on player scheduling and often dilutes the quality of fields in the surrounding regular tour events. 

By moving the Masters up one week, that would create an opportunity to move the WGC Match Play event from its cramped date between the Players and Augusta to perhaps a place in May leading into or immediately following the PGA Championship. For many years, the WGC event at Firestone was conducted immediately before the PGA in August and the marquee players seemed to like that arrangement just fine.

let's see if I have this right.  The Masters date sucks because of the extent to which Nurse Ratched cluttered the calendar, but it's the Masters that should move?  What's wrong with this picture....  And he thinks that March Madness will move as well.

But can anyone see the fatal flaw from the hint in my header?  Anyone?  Bueller?

The date he just happens to select is occupied by the ladies' first major, and that's already been adversely affected by the Augusta ladies amateur event.  By all means, guys, bigfoot their date and see how that look suits you.

Shockingly, this is not from the N.Y. Times:

Coronavirus: Financial chasm between men's, women's tours even greater in tough times

You know what chasms also increased?  Those between the PGA Tour and the Korn Ferry and Euro Tours....  This is what happens in the bad times, folks.  Of course we could mitigate it by, you know, letting people go back to work...  

I'll hope to see you folks early next week.  Until then, stay safe.