Wednesday, March 15, 2023

Midweek Musings - Rollback Edition

Holy crap!  I take a day for travel and all hell breaks out.... though admittedly we have until 2026 to figure this out.

Be The Ball! - But which ball?  I've been clamoring fore the governing bodies to do something, but my first reaction is, "Why now?"  Because it seems an awkward time to force the PGA Tour into conflict with its players because....well, I think you know why.  While we obviously understand that the Five Families speak to each other, this sort of captures where we are in the moment:

There will be plenty of tweets and sound bites to parse, but keep an eye on Fred Ridley....

So, what have they done?  Nothing yet, but here's the premise:

After three years of research, listening to comments from manufacturers and requesting feedback from stakeholders, the U.S. Golf Association and the R&A are ready to start reducing distance at
the game’s elite levels, and they are going after the golf ball to do it.

On Monday, golf’s governing bodies sent letters to equipment companies to announce a proposed Model Local Rule that would allow tournament organizers to require players to use golf balls that were tested under modified Actual Launch Conditions (ALC) to reduce distance. The primary goal of the Model Local Rule would be to reduce distance at the highest levels of men’s golf — with the USGA and R&A anticipating a reduction in driver distance of 14-15 yards for the longest hitters and golfers with the highest swing speeds — while not changing equipment rules that govern recreational players.

Here's where the surlyn meets the road:

To be clear, the USGA and R&A did not say that any changes in testing are on the way for balls made for recreational golfers and players who compete in events where the potential Model Local Rule is not in place. If the testing changes are approved, equipment makers will need to make balls for elite players that meet one set of testing standards and make make different balls that meet the current set of testing standards for club players.

Needless to say, the ball-makers are apoplectic, as it threatens to undermine that linkage between Rory and Joe Blow.... Even if, like your humble blogger, you think something like this needs to be done, it's a tough time to undermine the existing ecosystem, 

Dylan Dethier's Rollback for Dummies column has some opinionated takes worth excerpting, first on the magnitude of this change:

Got it. How much shorter will pros hit it under this new rule?

Roughly five percent shorter, though that’ll vary based on the individual. But if Jordan Spieth hits a tee shot 300 yards right now, expect it to travel about 285 yards with a new ball. The change is expected to be in that 15-yard window.

That doesn’t really seem like that big a difference.

I’m with you there. It’s not a huge difference. The governing bodies were in a bit of a pickle here: Make too big a change and people are more likely to reject it. Make too small a change and you’re not making a difference.

Yeah, though a pickle of their own making.... Shack picks up on Mike Stachura suggesting it might be a little more robust than that:

In reporting the story for Golf Digest, Mike Stachura made a higher estimate: “Given that at elite speeds, every mile per hour increase in clubhead speed equates to approximately 2.5-3 yards in total distance, increasing the test speed by 7 miles per hour could result in a distance loss of about 20 yards or more.”

That seems significant to me, although I've long thought that, as important as distance is, it's equally important that the ball spin more.

I'm a little surprised that they haven't defined this more clearly:

Wait, so who does this rule apply to, anyway?

Just players in “elite competitions,” according to the proposal. They made it clear they don’t want amateur golfers to worry about hitting it shorter than they already do.

How do you define “elite competition?”

That’s not totally clear. It’s designed as an “optional” rule, so it could be event by event, but the USGA/R&A definitely hopes every pro tour will adopt the proposal after a period of feedback. In other words, they want the PGA Tour to use the new ball. They want the DP World Tour to use the new ball. They want the NCAA to use the ball, too — USGA chief Mike Whan touched on that. But where do you draw the line? Club championships? Mid-ams? Four-balls with scratch golfers? That part feels like it’s going to be messy.

Dylan's being a little silly at the end there, but the NCAAs are the first thing that popped into my mind.... That to me is where the line gets a wee bit murky.

This to me is a bit of a silly objection:

Well, players are getting longer, right?

Yeah. The USGA said pro tours got four percent longer just this year!

So are we going to be right back in this spot in a few years?

Great question. Some manufacturers would tell you that current restrictions have already basically capped the equipment; pros will keep hitting it longer because they swing harder than ever, but there’s a limit to that.

But if they do keep hitting driver farther, then yeah. The USGA mentioned we might be back here in 10-15 years — and then we’ll have to make another similar change.

Oof.

Yeah.

OK, but that just makes it all the more important to do this now.  As we've found to date, you can't stop the wheels of progress, although it's equally true that some causes of distance gains, launch monitor-driven optimization, for instance, may have reached the saturation point.

Okay, another problem. This is meant to keep courses from expanding, right?

Yeah, partly.

But it’s only for elite competitions?

Yes.

So how big a difference is it really making for courses?

Well, it means that pro events can continue to be held at the courses they’re currently at. I think there’s a legitimate concern that to make courses difficult for pros, they need to push these courses to the edge. Rock-hard greens, hole locations in corners, that sort of thing. They make ’em borderline unfair to keep scoring in check.

I think we all know that we should be rolling the ball back for all players, but the inaction on this front has probably made that a bridge too far.

The real issue is that the game has become less interesting and more one-dimensional at the elite level.  To me that's the ground that this fight should be conducted on.  Yeah, when you see tee boxes on the Old Course that are actually OB or on another golf course, that's a sign that something is out of whack.  But, as the questioner notes, that's one golf course that we see every five years at best.

Golfweek's gearhead David Dusek has some helpful clarifications, and you'll be relived to hear that women are not hardest hit:


No. 3: Women's golf is not a problem

There is no distance problem in women’s golf, and thankfully, the USGA and R&A appear to agree.

Slumbers said he does not think the proposed MLR that would require golfers to use distance-reducing balls should be adopted by the LPGA, LET or other top-level women’s tours.

Lucky for Brooke, because she's still dealing with losing her 48" driver shaft...This one amuses me only because of the poor old guy pictured:

No. 4: Nothing will change for recreational golfers

The USGA and R&A’s joint press conference hammered this point, and both organizations want recreational golfers to know they are not the problem. No one is going to force club players to make any changes.

If the proposed MLR is adopted and made available for implementation starting in 2026, nothing at your local club will change. Not now, not in 2026 and likely not at any point in the future. Use any approved driver you like, and play any already-conforming ball you buy in the pro shop. You, Mr. and Mrs. 13 Handicapper, are not the problem.

“The number one piece of feedback we’ve heard, from virtually all aspects of the game is, ‘Please don’t negatively impact the recreational golf,'” Whan said moments into Tuesday’s press conference.

I've no clue what Stanley Schwartz of Delray Beach, FL did to deserve this, but he's become the poster child for bad golf....  Although that's some serious clubhead speed he's generating, no?

Dusek comes at the ball makers issue from, well, from our perspective:

No. 5: However, golf ball prices are going to rise

If the MLR is passed and adopted by the PGA Tour and other men’s tours, golf equipment companies are going to be compelled to make tens of thousands of golf balls that pass the modified Actual Launch Conditions (ALC) test, and that is much more complicated than just going to a filing cabinet and pulling out the blueprints for the 2008 Pro V1, TaylorMade Penta and Callaway Diablo.

Brands must dedicate R&D resources to designing the new balls, change manufacturing processes and coordinate testing and logistics to get the distance-reducing balls to the appropriate players and events. And remember, guys like Jordan Spieth, Collin Morikawa and Hideki Matsuyama don’t pay for their golf balls. Covering those costs has to come from somewhere, meaning the retail prices golfers pay for equipment will likely rise.

I guess that makes sense, though I've been focused elsewhere.

If I were Jay Monahan, I'd be quite worried about the effect this might have on the Titleist marketing budget.  Sponsors have been forced to pony up ever-increasing sums, but will the manufacturers continue to market through Tour broadcasts when they are no longer selling the ball that Rory is launching to Stanley Schwartz of Delray Beach, FL?  

We'll have lots more on this as the story develops, but with a three-year lead time we can pace ourselves... Golf.com convened a special Tour Confidential panel that we may spend more time with in coming days, but this would seem to be the threshold question:

So many questions to ponder! First up, will the PGA Tour adopt the rule? In a statement Tuesday, the Tour said, in part, “We will continue our own extensive independent analysis of the topic and will collaborate with the USGA and The R&A, along with our membership and industry partners, to evaluate and provide feedback on this proposal. The TOUR remains committed to ensuring any future solutions identified benefit the game as a whole, without negatively impacting the TOUR, its players or our fans’ enjoyment of our sport.” What’s your read? Will the Tour fall in line?

Hirsh: I think we need to hear from more players. The decision is ultimately up to them, but it sounds like none of them want to hit the ball shorter. I say no.

Sens: In a word, no, not when more immediate financial interests would appear to favor the status quo.

Dethier: Early feedback hasn’t been great. But there are three years between now and implementation — something could give. The USGA could modify its proposal. The Tour could find some halfway point. But incentives favor the status quo, to Sens’ point. Tour pros don’t want a big change when they’ve optimized to get here. This will also complicate the marketing engine that connects pros to ams; if you’re using a different ball, that connection disappears. The USGA is taking a risk here, because potential rejection from top Tours could create a power struggle that nobody would win.

Barath: At the end of the day, I think you might hear some grumbling, but the PGA Tour and its players are going to fall in line with the rule changes. As a whole, golf is still much bigger than the PGA Tour, and if two of golf’s majors are going to be played under certain equipment parameters, the Tour will follow suit — especially if Augusta National quickly sides with the governing bodies.

Wall: With two-plus years to get the PGA Tour on board, I think there’s a good chance we see them fall in line. It would still be intriguing if only the U.S. Open and Open Championship adopted the MLR golf ball, but you need complete buy-in from the tours to legitimize the current proposal. 

Marksbury: That’s interesting to think about, Jonathan. I could see this rolling out for just USGA and R&A championships. Or maybe there could be some kind of calculation to discern if a given course could benefit from implementing the rule. It would be super-fun to see some iconic, old-school courses that were perhaps once considered obsolete because they are “too short” to challenge the pros as hosts of future tournaments. This rule could make that possible.

We'll need more time on this subject, but you'll quickly discern how awkward the timing is....  The players will hate this for sure, they simply don't like any change to their routines.  So, is this a good time for Jay to be cramming things down players' throats?   Is Jay even a decision maker any more after that Delaware meeting?

Gee, how do we think LIV will play this?  For anyone with lingering doubts, the poster child for distance gains has offered his opinion and you'll be shocked to know he hates it... This is going to be quite the tough sell, although it's equally hard to imagine the governing bodies proposing this without it being pre-sold to ANGC and the PGA Tour.

OK, gonna leave this for another day and hit some low impact blogging...

Tiger v. The Hermanator - Tiger, who has long called for a golf ball that spins more, will obviously be a key player in the debate ab out the golf ball rollback.  Fortunately, he doesn't have anything else going on his life that could diminish his reputation....

Tiger, or more accurately his attorneys, have hit back at Erica's filings:

“Ms. Herman is a not a victim of sexual assault or abuse sought to be protected by Congress
when enacting the statute,” said the document Murray filed Monday. “Rather, Ms. Herman is a jilted ex-girlfriend who wants to publicly litigate specious claims in court, rather than honor her commitment to arbitrate disputes in a confidential arbitration proceeding.”

Her NDA with Woods said she agreed to arbitrate any dispute with him in consideration for the opportunity to continue to spend time with him and to be privy to certain private and confidential aspects of his personal life and his professional and business endeavors

“For more than six years, Ms. Herman enjoyed the benefits of her agreement,” Woods’ attorney stated in court records Monday. “Now that her relationship with Mr. Woods has ended, however, she seeks to disregard her obligation to arbitrate disputes with Mr. Woods. Even worse, she seeks to justify her refusal to arbitrate by making salacious and insidious implications to federal statutes applying only to claims relating to sexual assault disputes and sexual harassment disputes.”

And what exactly were those benefits?

Is this all about money?  Probably, but this is the bit that seems worrying:

Herman has not made specific allegations of such misconduct by Woods in her lawsuits. But her lawsuit against Woods implied she would say more if the court released her from the NDA. Her attorney also made the following reply when filling out a form for her lawsuit against Woods:

“Does this case involve allegations of sexual abuse?” asked the form.

“Yes,” answered Herman’s attorney.

Her attorney answered the same question with a “no” in the other lawsuit against the trust filed in October.

The good thing is that women already hate the guy....  he really just needs to make this go away.  I did find this tweet a bit curious though:

So much for so many?  Like what, for instance? 

Alan, Asked - There's no easier blogging than an Alan Shipnuck mailbag, and there's no lazier blogger than yours truly.  A match truly\y mad in heaven:

Does Scottie Scheffler have the X-factor to carry the PGA Tour further? @PeteKnot

In a word, no. He’s a wonderful human being and clearly a spectacular golfer but Scheffler does not ooze charisma and there’s not much dramatic tension in his story: Nice guy wins. I think he’s a fun supporting character to have around and I enjoy watching him play golf, but if Scheffler is the leading man the Tour may feel it at the box office.

I don't think we should put this on the one guy, but I find him a welcome contrast to the PReeds and Poulters of the world.  but further down in the column is this Q&A that indicates that perhaps not all the a******s went to LIV:

Conventional wisdom says LIV took all of the Tour’s villains, but is Cantlay a candidate for that role? There’s rumors he’s been total pain in these top player meetings, and he seems to
want to get paid while having zero interest in being entertaining. What say you? #AskAlan@cpfolds

A Tour player who has dealt with Cantlay on some governance issues recently described him to me as a “terrific penis.” I was slightly baffled until another person in the conversation said, “That means he’s a big dick.” I haven’t laughed that hard in ages. Cantlay can certainly be smug and smarmy, which is a good starting point for villainy. So is a Goldman Sachs hat. But Cantlay is so corporate and controlled that I don’t think he’ll ever lean into the role like an Ian Poulter or a Patrick Reed, which is a shame because, as you point out, there are way too many nice, normal, boring dudes on the PGA Tour.

Heh!  Scottie at least conveys a sense of joy and gratitude, whereas a dour humorless guy like Patrick just seems to feel entitled.... That's likely a bit unfair, but it's an interesting contrast to the prior answer, no?

This seems about right:

What are your thoughts on the Tiger tampon incident and any ‘fallout’ since? Too harshly criticized? Dealt with fairly? Swept under the rug too quickly? @Deven_Stillar

To quote one of our great philosophers, it is what it is. It was a dumb joke, and after what seemed like Woods’s heartfelt apology, the whole thing disappeared quickly, probably rightfully so. It wasn’t a newsflash that Tiger has a sophomoric sense of humor and despite the trappings of middle age, has never really grown up.

It's still curious, though.  For instance, that whole bit about it being a private joke while on national TV.... He's just a bit of a dick, I've always thought.  Perhaps not a perfect penis, but better than most...

I would think some of this is inconsistent, at best:

#AskAlan Which tour is better equipped to survive this war? While your tweets give an indication of your favorite, I’d like to hear it from you out loud one day. @mundungus22

I’m not sure to which tweets you’re referring, but in the short term there is an obvious answer. The Tour has lost three longtime sponsors in the last month plus (Honda, Dell, Mayakoba) and others are pushing back against the ever-increasing price tag for a product that has lost a lot of starpower. Many of the Tour’s lesser players are also grumbling about the new way of doing business. Meanwhile, Saudi Aramco posted a $161 billion profit in 2022. That money feeds into the Public Investment Fund, which floats LIV. So, if this is a question of resources, LIV clearly has a monumental advantage, as even Jay Monahan has admitted. But there is more at play here. The point of sportswashing is to improve your public image. I’m not sure LIV has done that for Saudi Arabia. A few years ago I don’t think golf fans collectively gave much thought to MBS, but now everyone has an opinion, and judging by what I read on Twitter, most of them are quite negative. If LIV fails to attract a large audience, and some stars jump ship and the whole thing disappears from the public consciousness, that does’t reflect well on its benefactors, especially in a culture that values saving face. The PGA Tour is not going anywhere. LIV has a lot more money but remains a more precarious experiment.

Alan is certainly hitting on themes I've noted, as I actually think this is quite the cock-up for the Saudis.  But left unsaid is how little talent they've actually attracted for all their riches, it's just not remotely competitive.

I still haven’t found out if you are for or against LIV? @ReneSchaufuss

Good. Why do I have to pick a side? The golf world, and the golf media, has already become too tribal. I am intrigued by LIV, and exasperated and amused. The new league has made some monumental mistakes and gotten some things right. The players can be obnoxiously self-righteous and comically oppressed, but they also make a lot of good points. The tournaments are kind of ridiculous but also sort of fun. The Saudi Arabian government has done, and continues to do, abhorrent things, and the outcry around the assassination of Jamal Khashoggi undoubtedly stoked the sportswashing campaign that birthed LIV. But from the genocide of the Native Americans to the internment of Japanese citizens to the treatment of Blacks during the Jim Crow years to the torture at Abu Ghraib and the policy of “extraordinary rendition,” the U.S. government has often been on the wrong side of history. The source of LIV’s money is extremely uncomfortable, but it’s also true that we all happily burn Saudi oil and many American politicians (and business leaders) are in bed with the Kingdom, so it seems weird to hold golfers to a higher standard than public servants. I know nuance is unfashionable in these polarized times, but that is what I aspire to.

Alan is, I believe, the prototypical SoCal liberal and this is a pretty disgusting case of whataboutism.  We hear this all the time, as Alan cites some obvious historical mistreatment to justify accepting the Saudis current abuses.  But the logical extension of that premise is that we can never criticize anyone, excepting, of course, Donald Trump who is responsible for every calamity that has ever afflicted anyone.

Although maybe the single most curious thing is what did they get right?

When will the PGA Tour players be able to wear shorts in competition? Another LIV thing they can copy. @ABFlorida21

Hopefully never. I know it makes me sound like a fuddy-duddy, but I’m not a fan of the look—all that leg hair and those dainty little socks, and lots of dudes clearly skip leg day. Even when I’m covering hot, humid tournaments I wear pants; I’m there to work and it makes me feel (and look?) more professional. It’s not asking too much for the players to do the same.

I couldn't agree more.... It's a horrible look and I'm surprised they're allowed to wear shorts for the Wednesday Pro-Ams.

Resurgent Rickie, buy or sell? #AskAlan@DeeFnCee

Buy! I’ve always loved the saying, “Form is temporary but class is permanent.” Fowler was a world-class player for a long time. He got fired by Butch Harmon because the swing guru was frustrated by Rickie’s lack of commitment, which can happen when a guy is devoting seemingly every day off to shooting commercials and cashing endorsement checks. But a lot of that has fallen away and Fowler has been left behind by his peers. At 34, he has to know time is running out if he’s ever going to be the player he was, or the player he was supposed to be. A focused, motivated Fowler can still do some dynamic things in this game.

The Butch bit is new to me, but rings true.  Not sure I expect too much from the man in orange, but we can at least credit him with continuing to grind and not taking the large check presumably offered by LIV.

How many LIV guys top 20 at the Masters? @theanfieldscoop

About 17 or 18. They are going to bring a raging intensity as if their entire professional reputation rests on a strong performance, which it kind of does.

 Raging intensity?  really, from the guys that took the easy money to avoid the grind?

If Tyrrell Hatton was from SoCal would we talking about how’s he the biggest a$$hole on tour? @fakePOULTER

I love watching Hatton play. We disparage many pros for being emotionless robots, but that ain’t Hatton. We want the players to avoid cliches and give us real answers, and it does’t get any ballsier than criticizing Augusta National and Riviera. In conversation, Hatton is quite courtly and funny and even thoughtful. That he completely loses his mind on the golf course is, to me, riveting theater. I hope he never changes.

I agree.  It's not always pretty, but he's an original....

#AskAlan The DP World Tour event in Kenya had a Kenyan make his first-ever cut. Tom Hoge barely made the cut at the Players before shooting a course record. Don’t the golf kingpins understand the no-cut events ruin great moments and diminish a great sport? @david_troyan

Yeah, they know and plainly don’t care. Right now professional golf is a clash of titans, and apparently catering to the top players is all that matters. For now, we’ll just have to savor these little moments as they come.

Personally I think there should still be cuts at the designated events next year. If a player is plus-10 on a Friday at an event and the leaders are somewhere around 10 under, he doesn’t deserve to play on the weekend. @PhillipeStLeger

Totally disagree—make these guys suffer! If they want free money they are going to have to slog through four rounds no matter how meaningless they are. That’s the only way we’ll get the stars to reconsider their position and embrace cuts in the designated events.

Alan's humor aside, it's a big mistake.  I'm more upset about the field size, but there is little reason to tune in early in the week now, and the guys will be phoning it in.

In the vein of tomorrow’s announcement about a possible equipment rollback: what would any of the top 20 players shoot on, say, Augusta with a brand new, vintage 1975 set of Wilson clubs and balls? @GothamGolfClub

First of all, it’s wild that the USGA and R&A have had decades to control distance advances but have somehow waited to do it until this very fraught moment when the professional game is in turmoil. As Michael Bamberger and I podcasted about last week, both LIV and the PGA Tour are straining to present more entertaining products, so why would they agree to new rules that some (many?) fans will think makes the golf less compelling? If one tour opts out of bifurcation with its own local rules, then surely the other one will have to do the same; it’s hard to sell Scottie Scheffler driving it 260 yards with throttled-back equipment if Dustin Johnson is blasting it 360 with state-of-the-art weapons. So there are still moves left of the chessboard.

To your question, it depends on which Augusta National they’re playing. If it’s the 1975 version, at 6,800 yards with no rough and few trees and slower greens, then plenty of top players are going to shoot in the mid- to high-60s. But few would break par if they have to take on today’s ANGC, which is much tighter, more penal, significantly brawnier and has more fearsome greens.

The timing almost couldn't be worse, the only caveat being that three-year timing, with the hope that LIV would be a distant memory by then.  There's little doubt that they won't be using the MLR, so it leaves Jay in an awkward spot for now.

We'll leave you with some August funnies:

Can I bring a GoPro on a practice day at the Masters? @easetweets

Definitely. The guards will be happy to hold it for you at the security checkpoint until you’re leaving the grounds.

Azaleas are in full bloom in Atlanta this week and I assume will be in Augusta well before the Masters. Am I right? @ERobfratesi

I love that we’re fretting about flowers three weeks before a golf tournament. Every year upon arriving in Augusta you hear the whispers: “It’s a bad year for the flowers”; “The dogwoods came early”; etc. Somehow the course always looks nice, so I am unbothered by what is or is not blooming in Atlanta right now.

I'll catch you as the week unfolds.  Good to be home.  

at

No comments:

Post a Comment