As predicted, football grabbed the lion's share of my attention yesterday, though I did catch some of the front-nine action. Seemed as though scoring was pretty good, no?
Kapalua Kraziness - Yeah, we love our alliterations far more than we should, but Golf Digest had beaten me to Maui Madness, though their ode to Old Man Par seems a tad archaic:
Par means many things to many people. For the USGA, it’s a gold standard worthy of protection. For everyday golfers, a par is something to celebrate. For the advanced analytics crowd, it’s a wholly arbitrary and essentially irrelevant number. For all the beating par takes, it does serve a genuine purpose—a benchmark for comparison. Golf has no standardized field of competition, and players compete at different times. Without those simple shorthand figures, -7 or +2, keeping score in this game would be downright impossible. Ask a pro what he shot after a round and he’s far more likely to say four under than “68.” It’s how we conceptualize scores.
Par has always been irrelevant, it's just now becoming embarrassingly irrelevant....
Cameron Smith, then, accomplished something genuinely extraordinary during an uncannily windless week on Maui. In edging Jon Rahm to win the Sentry Tournament of Champions by ashot, the 28-year-old Aussie scored better than any other PGA Tour player ever has over the course of a golf tournament. At least in relation to Old Man Par.Smith’s winning 34-under total—not a typo—broke Ernie Els’ previous 72-hole scoring record of 31 under, set at Kapalua in 2003. Prior to Sunday, the lowest winning score in relation to par for any tour event was Pat Perez’ 33 under to win the 2009 Bob Hope Classic, a five-round event. Smith at the Sentry isn’t exactly Tiger at the U.S. Open at Torrey in 2008, or even Phil at the PGA at Kiawah in 2021, but the now four-time tour winner earned some pretty impressive real estate in the record books.
The author adds context, though I don't think it reduces the shock value much at all:
Some context for the record-breaking performance: Despite no rain in the forecast either day, the tour opted for preferred lies on Thursday and Friday. That made the already scoreable Plantation Course at Kapalua even more scoreable. The Coore-Crenshaw redesign is breathtaking in its scope and a legitimately fun track that tumbles down a mountainside toward the Pacific, but it needs wind to protect it from a field full of the most recent PGA Tour winners. Absolutely begs for it. The fairways are the widest on tour, wide enough for resort-goers to enjoy their yearly round without having to buy another box of balls at the turn. The greens are huge. The tropical humidity and frequent rain keep the course soft, and all the par 5s are reachable. (Side note: There’s no reason the fifth hole should play as a par 5 going forward. Guys hit 9-iron in all week. Don’t be surprised if Kapalua’s 2023 New Year’s resolution is to become a par 72.) Without wind, well, this is what happens. It’s a common theme in low scoring. No wind.
He could have added that there are only three Par-3's on the courses, and scoring is typically highest on those one-shotters.
The scandal (I know, a tad melodramatic) buried there in was that lift-clean-cheat on Thursday and Friday, because I guess some hapless amateur caught a mudball in the Pro-Am. seriously kids, what's going on with the Tour on that subject? They now let these guys put their grubby paws on their golfballs if there's rain in the forecast...in Madagascar.
Nick Piastowski feels for a certain Spaniard, and even goes to the trouble to write his game story lede:
Dateline, Kapalua, Hawaii. Jon Rahm, behind no round worse than seven-under 66, and after athird-round 61, the best score ever on the Plantation Course at Kapalua, won the Tournament of Champions behind a 33-under total, the lowest 72-hole score in relation to par in the history of the PGA Tour. One stroke behind, in second, was Matt Jones, whose 32-under total also bested the previous scoring mark.You deserve it, fellas. Your very own, GOLF.com winner and runner-up lead. Print it out and hang it on the fridge if you like.
Maybe if it was King Louis or Paul Casey.... But this guy wine enough that he doesn't need the fake version. Even better is that Rahm gets it:
“Well, this golf course only has one defense, and that’s the wind,” Rahm said. “If people are shooting between 20- and 26-under with 20-mile-an-hour winds, what do you expect us to do when there’s absolutely no wind? Maybe, maybe getting to 10 miles an hour gusting every so often, right?“I think that’s the difference. I’m not surprised. When it comes to records, I think, what was it, Jordan [Spieth] shot 30, D.J. [Dustin Johnson] shot 31, and Ernie [Els] shot 31, right? And all three of them won by a margin. It’s kind of weird when you look forward in the records that there’s two of us that beat that score and lost by one and two. So, you know, I know we did a really good job and we shot low, but I think those 30- and 31-unders deserve a lot more credit than my 33-under.”
Dare we be serious about this for just a sec? Obviously this kind of scoring will inevitably be tied into the ongoing distance debate, with both sides using the data as supports their own biases. For a while there, those opposed to any greater equipment regulations made the valid point that the increased distance wasn't resulting in lower scores. My own thoughts were that, at least to some extent, that was the result of lengthening courses and agronomic measures such as firmer/faster conditions, especially on greens.
My own personal sense is that the world has kept turning, and that the combination of raw speed/power, undoubtedly combined with other factors including improved technology (think launch monitors and their use to dial in wedge distances), has now blown past the superintendent's ability to keep scoring under control. And I'll guess that John Rahm agrees with your humble blogger...
The most notable comments on this scoring came from Justin Thomas, which are the basis of the Tour Confidential panel's lead question:
1. Cam Smith won the Sentry Tournament of Champions, in Maui, on Sunday with an eye-popping score of 34-under, beating Jon Rahm by just one stroke. The story of the week is in there: yep, the scoring, in particular in the third round when the 38-player field averaged nearly six under par. Justin Thomas, one of two players to shoot a course-record 12 under on Saturday, described the birdie bonanza this way: “Golf fans just need to understand what causes scores. I think everybody, they just see, ‘Oh, they’re hitting it so far now, that’s why it’s so low.’ It’s like no, it’s so low because it’s so soft and if you give us soft conditions, fairways this big, course this short, we’re going to shoot nothing.” Does JT have it right? Do gettable conditions have more impact on scoring than the distance boom?
Ummmm, the bit that jumps out to me is the "a course this short", because Kapalua maxes out at 7,596 yards, and in soft conditions should obviously play longer. You see what he's done there, so let's see if the writers pick up on it:
Sean Zak: There’s no question, just don’t let JT downplay one half of this debate. A few times a year, a tricky course will be set up firm, with greens Stimping at 14. Muirfield Village is a great example. Players have to work harder, caddies have to work harder. Scoring is just plain hard. Generally, when conditions are soft, the aerial assault is a game of darts with these robots swinging the clubs. And when they hit it as far as they do, it’s assault with wedges only. That’s more of the issue.Josh Sens: For sure. That’s why Tiger-proofing did anything but. And why just adding distance now mostly just narrows the pool of potential winners (while having terrible trickle down effects in the amateur game). The better answer is through great architecture and thoughtful setup that tests without becoming tricked up. Easier said than done.Michael Bamberger: Right, Josh. Nick Price said this in 1998: If you want to Tiger-proof a course, make it shorter. The best course I’ve seen for the pros in years was Royal Melbourne. Short, bouncy, curvey.Dylan Dethier: Sure. There’s also yardage and there’s yardage. The greens were soft this week at Kapalua. But the fairways were still plenty slopey. Some of the long holes played a whole bunch shorter because balls were rolling 30, 40, 60 yards once they landed. At Pebble Beach you can’t really say the same, especially when it’s 53 degrees and foggy. The boring answer here is the right one: It’s a combination of factors! But an incredibly wide course with extra rollout in the fairways that’s also soft on the greens is basically the perfect way to generate low scores.James Colgan: Well yes, JT is 100 percent right. Soft conditions help low scores. But, as Sean pointed out, it sure doesn’t hurt to play from soft conditions with a wedge in hand. It’s a self-perpetuating cycle.
I give them a Gentleman's B. As I've said a million times, firms and bouncy is the best defense, but spend ten minutes perusing the Tour's schedule, and you'll quickly realize that #firmandfast will be the exception.
The problem is partially the distance they hit it, for sure, but it's also how straight the ball goes. The soft, windless conditions not only make it a birdie-fest, but dramatically reduces the number of bogies and worse, because the bad shots don't go far enough off line to miss those huge fairways.
I didn't watch all that much of the weekend, though I did see a bunch of the first two rounds. The most damning thing I can say is that I never got the sense that Jon Rahm was actually playing all that well, yet he shot -33!
2. World No. 1 Jon Rahm, fresh off not playing since the middle of October, looked like he had hardly skipped a beat at the Tournament of Champions, peeling off rounds of 66, 66, a course-record 61 and an 66, only to not win on the Plantation Course at Kapalua. Four rounds into 2022, let’s set a prop bet: Rahm will win over/under four times this year. And please explain your answer!Zak: Under! Only once in his professional life has Rahm won four times in a calendar year, and that’s inclusive of both European and PGA Tour schedules. That’s a lot of winning. There are too many good players to consistently beat like that. Disclaimer: I’d love to watch a 6-win season!Bamberger: I don’t know. Three more? I could see it. I’ll take four.Sens: Well, since I picked him to win the Grand Slam a few weeks ago, I should prolly stick with ‘over.’Dethier: Under. It’s damn hard to win four times on Tour! He’ll win three, though, which is pretty close.Colgan: It’s about time somebody took over golf for a period of time again. If anybody’s gonna do it, it’ll be Rahm. Give me the over.
As I tried to say Friday in response to the Golf Channel announcers promoting a Rahmbo-Collin Morikawa cage match, I'm most interested in whether the Spaniard can separate himself from the pack to any meaningful degree. Morikawa is a cold-blooded assassin, but I don't actually think he's consistently good enough with the putter to run away from the pack. Rahm is the only guy I think can do that, but doing it very difficult. As the man once said, these guys are good!
I think we can all agree that the week of the Model Local Rule was a yawn:
4. Week 1 of the new PGA Tour rules changes is in the books, and a wrinkle has revealed itself with the use of Tour-approved yardage books, and the ban on the formerly-allowed greens books. While most players said they were OK with the change, honesty will be in play, as there will be little to prevent a player or caddie from simply taking the old info and penciling it in the new books. Cause for concern?Zak: Golf’s honor code should win out here. This is a player-driven rule, and players don’t want their reputation tarnished if any little advantage they (or their caddie) creates becomes a stinky rumor. The reliance upon that endless amount of information should cede in importance to players’ routines, too.Bamberger: I agree. When guys cheat, it’s usually because the opportunity presents itself, not because it’s premeditated.Sens: In the end, you still have to hit the shots and stroke the putts. I suppose some might try to take advantage, but even if they do, will it have a profound impact on results? I doubt it.Dethier: I’m with Sens. Does it really matter? They holed plenty of birdie putts this week, theoretically without the books. If you give golfers access to extra resources, they’ll use them, but I’m not convinced they actually help these finely-tuned pros that much. I hope they don’t cheat, because cheating is a bummer, but I’m not concerned about any potential advantage. Read the putt, hit the putt.Colgan: I’m not too worried about it. We rely on honesty all the time in the golf, I don’t see why this would be any different. And when honesty doesn’t work? Karma is a powerful beast.
How about just noting that -34 was achieved without the books.... I think it's completely fair and important to note the enforcement issues, but at least they didn't use that as an excuse to do nothing. And, as I've said often, so glad that this initiative came from the players.
Women's Day - Big announcement from the USGA on Friday, which was all good news for sure. I'll start with the least exciting bit:
The U.S. Women’s Open is adding a presenting partner that will allow the USGA to nearly double the championship’s prize money payout to $10 million in 2022, the associationannounced on Friday.ProMedica has been brought on as the first-ever presenting sponsor of a USGA championship. This will allow the governing body to boost the overall prize money payout in the championship by $4.5 million, bringing it a couple million shy of the $12.5 million the association hands out at the men's U.S. Open. However, Mike Whan, the USGA CEO, said the purse will be bumped to $11 million and then $12 million over the next five years.
The presenting sponsor thing is a classless bit for a national championship, though probably necessary given the actual economics of women's golf. The more important bit is the announcement of future venues, which leaves them with quite the Murderer's Row for the next decade:
2022: Pine Needles Lodge & Golf Club2023: Pebble Beach Golf Links2024: Lancaster Country Club2025: Erin Hills2026: The Riviera Country Club2027: Inverness Club2028: Oakmont Country Club2029: Pinehurst Resort & Country Club2030: Interlachen Country Club2031: Oakland Hills Country Club2034: Merion Golf Club2038: Oakmont Country Club2042: Oakland Hills Country Club2046: Merion Golf Club
Not sure I'll be with you to cover that Open at Merion in 2046, so you might need to make other arrangements.
My only concern is that, while it's great to have the women play storied venues such as Oakmont and Pebble, shouldn't they also be conscious of carving out their own presence that's not dependent upon the patriarchy? A place like Pine Needles I'd think, though it's a bit odd to include both PN and Pinehurst in their rota.
Inverness and Oakland Hills are both abandoned U.S. Open venues, suddenly of interest after faithful restorations of those Donald Ross classics (the former of which was a worthy Solheim Cup venue last fall).
The TC gang had thoughts:
3. The USGA, in Mike Whan’s first major move as the governing body’s new CEO, announced three blockbuster changes to the U.S. Women’s Open. Among the enhancements: more signature venues — including Riviera in 2026, Inverness in 2027 and Pinehurst No. 2 in a back-to-back with the men in 2029 — and a boost in purse size, from $5.5 million last year to $10 million this year, with a promise to take it soon to $12 million. What is the biggest potential ripple effect from these announcements?Zak: Events love to boast a big purse size. Events love having the “biggest purse in golf.” All it will do is continue to raise the bar for the second biggest purse in golf. And the third and the fourth. Sure, adding a presenting sponsor technically cheapens the name of the event, but if that’s what it takes for women’s golf to move closer to equal pay for its championships, it is such a small, small price to pay.Sens: The money is the least interesting part of it. Staging events at cooler venues makes for more compelling competitions, which draws more eyeballs. Which the women’s game deserves.Dethier: The biggest potential ripple effect is that the U.S. Women’s Open cements itself as the biggest event in all of women’s golf, that more people are eager to watch them play familiar and/or intriguing golf courses and therefore more people stick with the game both as a televised product and as a pastime at home. That’s best-case, of course! But the USGA is doing the right thing in embracing the women’s game wholeheartedly. It’s a non-profit, after all, with the stated goal of growing the game. When it comes to getting girls and women involved, there’s still plenty of work to do. A few million bucks to the best women on the planet is just a start.
Bamberger: BIGGEST ripple effect? More exposure for the women’s game, which means more girls, all over the world, taking up the game.Colgan: You’re right on, Sean. Purse payouts, exposure, growth — they all come incrementally. Big changes mean smaller changes, too. In this case, the purse jump has the potential to reimagine the way we view prize money for women. That’s a damn good thing, and I’d say presents a pretty significant ripple effect.
They still have to earn those eyeballs, which I suspect will remain a struggle.
Let me just leave you with one point, the significance of which I remain unclear. The women's game differs from the men's in that the LPGA controls all of the women's majors, with this one exception. Obviously, with former LPGA Commish Mike Whan running the USGA that might not matter much, but this should be, but hasn't always been, the most important event in women's golf. Cynic that I am, it's probably the most important again by default, since the LPGA has committed an unforced error and abdicate their ties to the historic Dinah Shore.
Crypto Golf - Only because the TC panel covers it, but this silly item appeared last week:
Dudas, 42, is a native of Connecticut and graduate of Stanford who grew up playing golf and now lives in Manhattan, an entrepreneur with a handful of start-ups under his belt. He is also a driving force behind LinksDAO, a virtual community that aims to shake things up in the real world by reimagining the country club. Central to LinksDAO’s plans, as outlined on multiple online platforms, is to buy a Top 100-caliber course and transform it into a modern golf and leisure club: a playground for “a global community of thousands of enthusiasts.”This crowdfunded purchase would be made with cryptocurrency.
Dudas is clearly going for the Meltwater Mentions, but I hope he's aware that he's ineligible for the Tour's PIP program.
But here's where I think he goes off the rails:
As for other vagaries around the concept, some clarity can be found in the term DAO itself, which sounds like Confucian philosophy but isn’t. It stands for decentralized autonomous organization: a governing body without a top-down leadership. Decisions are community-based instead and carried out on the blockchain, a secure database for recording transactions.If you’re of a certain age or analog mindset, the previous paragraph may have left your head spinning. But the gist is this: All the key decisions around the club — from its location and its price points to its daily operations — will be made by community members.
Which drops just as your humble blogger has come to the conclusion that member ownership is destined for the ash heap of history. I actually think that the better model moving forward is for strong central control, as it's the only way in which costs can be controlled.
5. LinksDAO, a virtual community of golf-lovers with a nose for disruption is aiming to shake things up in the real world by reimagining the country club. Central to LinksDAO’s plans is to buy a Top 100-caliber course and transform it into a modern golf and leisure club: a playground for “a global community of thousands of enthusiasts.” This crowdfunded purchase would be made with cryptocurrency, and the collective said it has already raised $11 million. In your mind, does this approach to club-building have legs?
Zak: Totally! People have more money, more work freedom, a greater ability to travel and more enhanced communication practices than ever before. Investing it in tangible things, experiences, or community building has also become increasingly popular with the best generation: the millennials (wink, wink). It makes perfect sense. Side note: They’ll need a lot more than $11 million to create or buy a Top 100-caliber course.Sens: Raising the money to buy and renovate a course strikes me as the easy part. The tougher part will be delivering on the other disruptive pledges these groups are making. LinksDAO, like other recently formed groups in this space, say they want to upend stodgy club conventions and create a new, more egalitarian culture. And they plan to do it by giving every member a say. Sounds great in theory. But what happens when the tough decisions start. Which property, exactly, do you buy? Who gets the premiere tee times? Where do you cap membership? And on. No matter what currency people spend, no matter what platform they communicate on, in the end, they’re still people, driven by ego and self-interest. Prone to power grabs both large and petty. Some are quite nice. Many are insufferable. That, in my opinion, is where the bigger challenges lie for LinksDAO and the others. At some point, as they go about trying to reimagine the old country club model and bring this dreamy ‘community’ from the ether to the real world, they’re going to run up against human nature. Crypto financing and utopian talk do not alone solve for that. It will be interesting to see how it all unfolds.Bamberger: Yes, it has legs. People are tired of class distinction in every walk of life. “You’re good enough for us; you’re not.” Here, if you can pay, you can play. Look at how well the Pebble Beaches and the Pinehursts are doing. This is an extension of that, with less tradition, and lower walls. It’s like hoodies. That’s not a debate anymore. Of COURSE you can wear a hoodie. This is another version of that. This is, Come on in.Dethier: We’ve seen all manner of country club reinvention in the last decade-plus, and this is another version of that. I welcome further reinvention! With that said, while I’m no Luddite I think these projects have raised more questions than answers, so far. The crypto gang is great at talking a big game, and there are a lot of them, and they are worth a lot of money. How that actually translates to a more welcoming experience when you pull up to a course? I’m eager to see.Colgan: This particular idea seems like a nightmarish web of legal and logistical hurdles, but as far as disrupting the traditional country club structure is concerned, consider me a supporter. It’s about time somebody found some success with a different approach.
I find this laugh-out-loud funny.... Yeah, everyone has a criticism of the existing private clubs, but they're going to acquire a top-100 course using crypto-currency, and everyone is going to be welcome? Yeah, that's not how this here planet works.... It's just going to be hipster, crypto-elite, which sounds far more terrifying to me than the stuffy snobs that currently make us tuck our shirts in. Of course, I'm an old guy that just wants you to get off my lawn, so take my criticism for what it's worth.
Exit Bound - I'm looking to get on with my day, but want to cover something that relates to our discussion of scoring last weekend. Both Golf Digest and Golfweek have articles up with their authors detailing that which they hope for in 2022. The former is pretty conventional (a Tiger sighting, how imaginative), but does include this on scoring:
Tour events won by a score of single-digits under par (Aka, less birdie-fests)Call this a curmudgeon take. Sure, fans love birdies. But last season was the first in the history of the PGA Tour (non-majors) that there was not a tournament won by a player shooting single-digits under par. (Rory McIlroy shot 10 under to win at Quail Hollow, the lowest total of the season.) This doesn’t mean all PGA Tour setups are too easy. A number of cut lines were still over par. To look at the winning score is to isolate the most elite of the elite. And they are using equipment more optimized to their games than ever before. And the depth of talent on the PGA Tour has seemingly never been better.Still, variability from tournament to tournament maintains the distinctiveness of each tournament. A few more difficult setups will break up some of the monotony. Traditionalists still like seeing players struggle to make pars at a U.S. Open. Usually, we get a Honda Classic or Memorial Tournament where pars are not easy to come by, too. Let’s hope that an emphasis by PGA Tour setup officials in 2022 brings back scoring just a hair. —Stephen Hennessey
You mean like -34?
Before I move on, this was interesting as well:
Calls for armlock ban grow
Despite a non-insignificant amount of players using the method, there appears to be a tangible
groundswell against the armlock, which some assert takes the art and skill out of putting. Billy Horschel called for a ban after playing a round with Will Zalatoris (who uses the armlock) during last year’s RBC Heritage, with Xander Schauffele experimenting with and later abandoning it while simultaneously agreeing with Horschel’s sentiments. “I am for banning the armlock putters, but if everyone else is going to use it, and I feel like they have a bigger advantage, I may as well do the same,” Schauffele said at the Memorial. We’re not necessarily advocating for the ban itself, but merely for the debate to expand. Because there’s nothing better than getting bent out of shape about the Rules of Golf. “Better” is the word we are looking for, yes? —J.B.
Let it blow at St. AndrewsIt might be wishful thinking, especially if the wind doesn’t blow off the North Sea, but I want to see the Old Grand Lady stand up to the big boys of professional golf in the 150th Open Championship.Of all the 2022 tournaments, this is one that doesn’t need a cloud of potential embarrassment looming overhead.But that’s going to be the case if the air is still. If it is, most likely, the Home of Golf is going to get ransacked. Right in front of the Royal & Ancient Golf Club of St. Andrews in Scotland, which was founded in 1754.Repeat, if the wind doesn’t blow, the rumpled, timeworn ground will get lit up by bigger, faster, and stronger players teaming with technology to launch missiles and make the course play more to a par of 68 than its scorecard-written 72.With little room to lengthen the course, players will be salivating. The most recent year the Old Course hosted the Open was 2015, when Zach Johnson shot 66-71-70-66 and won in a playoff in 2015. That year, the course played to just under 7,300 yards and featured seven par-4s measuring under 400 yards, including the 356-yard 18th, which Bryson DeChambeau might reach with a 3-iron this year.In 2000, when Tiger Woods completed the career grand slam on the Old Course, he set the scoring record of 19 under with rounds of 67-66-67-69.Unless the course is saved by the much-needed ally named wind, Tiger’s record is gone. Branden Grace holds the record for the lowest round in major championship history with a 62 (Royal Birkdale in 2017). Unless it blows, that’s gone.What would the powers in the R&A and U.S. golf Association do if someone puts his signature to a 59? Heck, a 58? Or two or three players do. Picture DeChambeau, Jon Rahm, Brooks Koepka, Dustin Johnson, Rory McIlroy and others unleashing lumber and driving multiple greens or at the least having flip wedges into the greens over and over and over again.And the greens aren’t exactly menacing.It could be a red-number blitz of humiliation. If so, perhaps it would be the proverbial final straw and significant action will be taken to limit distance. But after all these years, it would just be sad if it came at the expense of the Old Grand Lady. So let it blow, let it blow, let it blow.
I've had this date metaphorically circled on my calendar for quite some time. It's one thing to shoot -34 at a glorified silly-season event like Kapalua, but there is no limiting factor to how low they could go on the Old Course if it's soft and windless.
But is Steve right to hope for wind? Or is it better to see the wages of our sins and have someone post a 59 in a major, as a way to force the governing bodies to address the equipment issues.
On that cheerful note, I'll wish you a good week. I head home Thursday, but have no clue as to whether I'll blog further this week. That will depend upon the combination of content and motivation, neither of which has been in great supply.
No comments:
Post a Comment