Man, those browser tabs are breeding like rabbits... We'll be all over the place today, so buckle up.
Scenes From The Front Range - I've been watching the U.S. Amateur from Cherry Hills, or at least I've been trying to.... It's not like they seem to want anyone to actually want to see their product.
Geoff has more and deeper coverage than all three major golf websites combined, including this gripe about coverage from a day or two back:
The Amateur is getting two hours of network time Saturday and Sunday but we remain in the midst of Comcast’s full transitioning of Golf Channel to PGA Tour TV and that adds up just ten
hours of linear coverage, with five additional hours of streaming over five days. As remains the case with other events, there is no option for Peacock paying subscribers to access the Golf Channel feed due to carriage agreements (which are not keeping people subscribing to cable.)
So why not USA Network where other USGA and R&A events have been going? Apparently NASCAR and marathons of Chicago Fire (Saturday) and Law And Order SVU (Sunday) take priority.
Or why not more than an hour on Peacock where the freedom to air unlimited coverage is not impeded by the need to slip in between other programming? When you have the personnel and cameras on site?
I get that streaming is an option to fill in where schedules overlap, it's just that in our Balkanized world of streaming options, the musical chairs of sign-ups and cancellations leaves me with AppleTV when I need Peacock, the latter cancelled after we finished the first four seasons of Yellowstone.
But the timing of Geoff's notes is of interest, because he wrote it before last evenings clusterf***. A storm in Chicago pushed the BMW late, so they couldn't go to exciting match-play when Rickie still had two holes left in his opening round, could they? That being the round of sixteen at the Am, after they couldn't be bothered showing a minute of the round of 32....shessh!
Other thoughts from Geoff:
Besides handing out America’s oldest and most prestigious amateur trophy, a Walker Cup spot goes to the winner (provided they are an American). The remaining five team spots will be filled out Sunday night by the U.S. team selection committee.
America's oldest trophy, full stop, no?
This as well.... yanno what's worse than how far they're hitting the ball today? One word, altitude:
Among the new additions are crisscrossing boxes on Nos. 5 and 9, which, along with the new box on the par-4 16th, wreak havoc on volunteers trying to keep things in order. There’s also a new box on the par-5 11th that requires about 130 steps to reach from the 10th green. There, players wait for the group in the fairway that’s waiting for the green to clear on the 640-yard hole. Of course, participants are also playing the tee box on No. 1 that sits about 100 yards from the original tee. You know, the one that Arnold Palmer hit from when he famously drove the green en route to his 1960 U.S. Open win.
Only 100 yards? Nothing to see here....
As for the actual results, they're headed to the quarterfinals today, and match-ups can be found here.
The End of The Beginning - Yeah, our governing bodies aren't exactly Churchillian, but you go to war with the army you have:
The proposed rollback of the golf ball by the USGA and the R&A is now moving to its next, and perhaps most definitive—and potentially most contentious—stage.
The deadline for companies, golf associations and individuals to file documents with the USGA
and R&A on a proposed rule that could essentially roll back the ball for elite male professional events like the U.S. Open and Open Championship passed on Monday, and while the ruling bodies have not made public any of the comments they received, they apparently received plenty.
The USGA released a statement to Golf Digest on Thursday that reads, “The close of the comment period marks another important step in a thorough and inclusive governance process for golf. We’re grateful for the insightful feedback we’ve received across the game. It’s now our job, in partnership with The R&A, to thoroughly review this latest round of information we’ve received. One thing is clear‑there are many who care about golf’s future as much as we do, and all voices play a critical role as we determine the best path forward. We anticipate providing further direction on this topic in the coming months.”
Well, as long as everyone is getting along so nicely....
Shockingly, Geoff doesn't quite see things in that Kumbaya spirit, though he might be giving our governing organizations a bit too much credit:
The nearly six-month opportunity to opine on golf's most pressing sustainability and skill issue reinforced what motivates each of the leading organizations.
But first, some PGA-infused snark:
The PGA Tour and PGA of America let it be known through memos-bound-to-be-leaked that they were against a proposed Model Local Rule ball to address the 21st Century distance explosion. They offered a litany of reasons. Some were reasonable, some nonsensical, some hypocritical and a few clumsily just repurposed manufacturer talking points. No where did they disclose possible conflicts of interest as member organizations looking to keep lining member pockets with money and free swag.
Maybe the two PGA’s assume the world is aware of their ulterior financial motives in protecting a status quo desired by the people who give them free equipment. But the lack of any disclosure suggests they’re more than happy to take free gear and contractual money to keep convincing every day golfers to buy something resembling but not matching what the one percent enjoy.
OK, I'm guessing that this about more than those free Pro-V1s, but hold that thought...
Meanwhile, the R&A and USGA, the “governing bodies” whose “Rules of Golf” are completely voluntary for the PGA’s to abide by, take their responsibility to manage the game seriously. Their
committees are made up primarily of volunteers who, at great expense, give back to the sport. Over more than a century in this joint role of making, shaping and refining the rules, they have not always agreed. On the topic of huge distance gains over the last thirty years, they have been too careful at times or were advised of being too exposed to empty lawsuit threats by large corporations who know they must play by the Rules of Golf or lose business. Every day golfers have shown they have little interest in playing non-conforming equipment.
The two governing bodies are united in carving a path that maintains the relevance of the world’s 40,000 golf courses and key skills that all generations have valued. The non-profit organizations want to ensure that golf’s footprint keeps from expanding beyond the already enormous scale of a modern 18-hole tournament or wannabe “championship” course. They’ve also made clear they do not want to inflicting damage on a sport enjoying a surprising renaissance after the worldwide pandemic thanks to economic prosperity fueled a new appreciation for the benefits of remote work and golf.
They've been passive in the extreme, the net result of which is that their initiative hit in the midst of a civil war in the game, so let's not go overboard in our fawning....Yeah, they're the more attractive side in this battle, but that's quite the low bar.
More importantly, if we're going to war, it should be a war worth winning, no?
The USGA and R&A have proposed a watered-down distance-slowing option in the form of a tournament ball to be used in elite competitions. The ball will be tested under tighter parameters which might eat into the disproportionate gains that some elite male golfers in the one percentile of clubhead speeds enjoy with the help of modern launch monitors, lighter club materials, expert fitting, wise instruction, better fitness and access to the latest (free) equipment custom-fit to their impressive swing speeds and working around existing testing parameters. The watered-down proposal, which dropped tighter testing of driver faces that are taken up to the edge of conformity, was crafted after years of discussion with other “stakeholders” in the game who were involved throughout the process.
This to me is the strongest argument against, to wit, that the proposed MLR is so watered-down that it's not worth the effort.... I don't buy that but it's a serious argument.
But I think lumping the two PGAs together is helpful:
But the PGA Tour and PGA of America are member organizations. Their members do not pay for golf equipment. Many PGA Tour players have ball contracts believed to be in danger of being voided if the rules change. The best golfers in the world largely play on the PGA Tour and, as the organization outlined in their memo against the proposal for separate golf balls in elite events, made clear they want to keep convincing hackers to buy what they play no matter how much less the paying public enjoys in the way of benefits.
The every day PGA course professionals playing and teaching for a living want to profit from the public buying a notion that what the pros use will somehow benefit all. They should know better. Especially when they see how dramatically their course has been changed by the way a few elites can play it, or how, with advances in fitting, the average golfer has very different equipment needs that manufacturers see lower profit margins in selling.
It's also worth pointing that their member-owned status might be more of a technicality, since this calls, as usual, fort the thirds of Robert Conquest's laws of politics:
The behavior of any bureaucratic organization can best be understood by assuming that it is controlled by a secret cabal of its enemies.
Or its professional managers, though that's a distinction without a difference....To me, the position of the PGA Tour is a logical result of the current LIV-inspired stasis. Monahan needs player approval of his LIV deal, and therefore won't press the players on this in the current moment. Is that binding for the long-term? Are you done laughing at the concept of jay Monahan maintaining a consistent position on anything? Yeah, it was a good one...
The PGA of America is quite the different kettle of fish, though an organization noted for being even less responsive to its members. Shack has some dirt:
The PGA of America never prefaced the anti-MLR stance by saying they get their golf balls for free or that they
have a retirement program funded by the manufacturer most aggressively against changing the status quo. The PGA of America raised a few reasonable points that were all likely addressed behind closed doors by the R&A and USGA (on the policing of different golf balls and handicapping a bifurcated game). But the PGA of America’s professionals decided they want to keep telling the public to buy premium-priced goods without concern for the potential side effects or the perverse logic of getting 15-handicappers to overpay for stuff that won’t help them as much as the elite golfer.
Of course you'll have noticed that the MLR doesn't affect the customers of those 29,000 PGA of America members, so where is their skin in this game?
The only thing they do seem actually interested in is their 1 1/2 major events, the flagship PGA Championship and the biannual Ryder Cup. Those events require the cooperation of the Tour, so the question is whether that codependency explains their position.
Or is their position driven by conviction? Yeah, that was another good one....
That "further direction" will be quite interesting, no? One can only sense that it all hinges on Fred Ridley, no? His comments in April seemed clear, though perhaps we're all hearing that which we want to hear, but the coming poker game is completely different depending on the extent of Ridley's conviction.
With the two governing organizations aligned with the Masters, it's easy for me to see the PGAs getting squeezed. It will take quite a bit of starch in the collar, but Geoff has laid out some of the arguments, but heads will explode if they have to adjust to different ball for three weeks out of the year. Combined with further discussions of the effect of the manufacturers, that seems a hard bridge to choose to die on.
But if Augusta goes squishy, then the arguments change dramatically, becoming regulators who don't understand the professional game upending hundreds of years of blissfully unbifurcated history....
Stay tuned...
Phil v. Billy - This was always going to be a tough week for Phil, and we're still only dealing with excerpts (though they likely contain most to all of the juicy bits). I did appreciate the comic genius of Phil's Ryder Cup denial, denying only that which wasn't actually alleged. But The Fire Pit Collective has given Billy Walters some pixels, and the portrait of our hero won't be a pretty thing:
I am staring at the world’s most famous left-handed golfer and can’t believe what he is saying. It’s a bright spring day in April 2017 and Phil Mickelson is sitting on my patio in Carlsbad, Calif., overlooking surfers on a sparkling blue Pacific Ocean.
By that point, Phil was a Hall of Fame golfer and winner of 43 tournaments on the PGA Tour. We
had shared an eight-year friendship that featured rollicking rounds of golf and high-stakes sports gambling. When Phil showed up, he owed me $2.5 million on losing bets that I had placed on his behalf. I had
let the debt slide for the better part of three years, and it had continued to grow. Frankly, there were more pressing matters on my mind, specifically a high-profile insider-trading case involving 10 counts of wire and securities fraud. The three-week criminal trial had just ended—badly, for me.
I’d lost the biggest bet of my life in front of 12 Manhattan jurors believing they would see through the government’s criminal case. The jury—prevented by the judge from hearing about the illegal actions of government agents—returned guilty verdicts on all charges.
When Phil arrived in his black, tricked-out SUV, I was in my 70th year of life, under house arrest with an electronic tracking bracelet around my right ankle, and racing to get my business affairs in order. I was awaiting a July hearing, which would deliver another shock to my system when the judge disregarded the official pre-sentencing recommendation of one year and a day in prison. Instead, he hit me with a sentence of five years.
As it turned out, Phil came to my home not to make amends or offer a mea culpa, as I had anticipated. Instead, he came to finally settle up the money he owed me. I sat there speechless as he moaned about losing lucrative sponsorships with ExxonMobil and Barclays along with 25 percent of his deal with KPMG. He even whined about the $32 million depreciation he had to take on his precious Gulfstream V jet. All the while, I was about to go to prison after losing a trial that cost me more than $100 million in legal fees, fines, and restitution.
I thought to myself: Thousands of people stand in line waiting for Phil’s autograph, but if I could
buy back my association with him, I’d pay top dollar.
Phil ended our meeting with a bizarre invitation.
“I’m going to be here for the next two and a half weeks,” he told me. “Wanna play some golf?”
What a guy! I would tell you to read the whole thing, except that I might excerpt it all before I'm done. Walters has always maintained that all he needed from Phil was truthful testimony, and here's some background on that:
One month prior, in March 2017, as Susan and I flew to New York for the trial, I still was hoping that Phil would agree to testify. When we arrived in Manhattan, I learned through our lawyers that Phil intended to invoke his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination if we called him to the stand. I reached out to a mutual friend and asked a favor.
“Listen, I hate to put you in the middle of this,” I said. “But I need Phil to publicly declare what he told the FBI—that I never gave him inside information. I need you to ask him to do that. Tell him all I want him to do is tell the truth.”
A call was made. A meeting set.
According to our mutual friend, here is the message he delivered to Phil: “This is Bill’s life at stake. This is his freedom. He could potentially go to prison for a long time. He would like you to just say the truth: That Bill never gave you inside information.”
“Okay, I’ll do it,” Phil told him.
“Are you positive?” our friend asked. “Because when you leave, I’m going to call Bill.”
Phil reiterated that he would issue a statement.
To this day, after countless hours of reflection, I still wonder whether I would have walked out of court a free man had Phil testified or spoken out on my behalf. We knew the prosecution would not call Phil to testify because he’d already told FBI agents in two separate interviews that I had never provided him with insider information on Dean Foods or any other stock. The last thing prosecutors wanted to see, given the power of his celebrity and personality, was Phil Mickelson walking into a courtroom and testifying on the witness stand under oath that, as far as he knew, I was not guilty of the charges they’d brought against me.
Is it true that he never gave Phil inside information? Walters does have some news to break, or at least a new twist to the circumstances:
Unknown to the public, Mickelson was involved in a separate money-laundering investigation. More than a decade before the start of my partnership with Phil, he had been betting big-time through Silveira, a former San Diego stockbroker and avid golfer. In the spring of 2010, Mickelson asked Silveira if he would do him a favor. Mickelson wanted to transfer several million dollars to Silveira and then have Silveira wire it from his personal bank account to the offshore book to pay off Phil’s gambling losses. Unfortunately for Silveira, he said yes. The wire transfer quickly caught the attention of the criminal division of the IRS.
With the feds on his heels, Phil told me that his friends at KPMG, his main corporate sponsor at the time, had introduced him to a D.C. attorney named Gregory Craig. He was not just any lawyer; Craig had been chief White House counsel for President Obama. With boyish looks and trademark white tousled hair, Craig had an Ivy League pedigree, having attended Harvard as an undergrad and Yale Law School. Craig also was tight with Preet Bharara, then the U.S. attorney in the powerful Southern District of New York, former U.S. attorney general Loretta Lynch, and the director of enforcement at the SEC. Now that’s political juice.
With Mickelson in the midst of a money-laundering investigation and a target of an insider-trading investigation, what did super-lawyer Craig do to get the prosecutors off Phil’s back? He performed a legal trick so improbable that it was like Harry Houdini pulling a rabbit out of a hat while in chains underwater.
On May 19, 2016 – nearly a year before my trial –the SEC issued a press release headlined “Pro Golfer Agrees to Repay Trading Profits.’’ The statement, which was related solely to the Dean Foods case, named Phil as a “relief defendant,” government-speak for people not accused of any wrongdoing but named in complaints for “purposes of recovering alleged ill-gotten gains in their possession from schemes perpetrated by others.”
It went on: “Mickelson neither admitted nor denied the allegations in the SEC’s complaint and agreed to pay full disgorgement of his trading profits totaling $931,738.12 plus interest of $105,291.69.” It also noted that I had “urged” Mickelson to trade in Dean Foods stock and he later sold almost $1 million in profits to pay off part of his gambling debt to me.
“Mickelson will repay the money he made from his trading in Dean Foods because he should not be allowed to profit from Walters’s illegal conduct,” the press release stated. There was no mention of any money-laundering investigation. Craig chimed in on cue by releasing his own statement claiming that Phil was “an innocent bystander” to any alleged wrongdoing by others.
Phil and Bharara both got what they wanted. Phil’s attorneys issued a statement that made it look like Phil was an innocent victim of an insider-trading case that implicated me. And in the process, Phil was off the hook on the money-laundering case. The only person who ended up looking guilty was me.
Then, one month later, Silveira, who had pled guilty to making the ill-fated wire transfer as a favor to Phil, was sentenced to 12 months and one day in prison for laundering $2.75 million.
Phil, the man in the middle of all the alleged wrongdoing, walked away scot-free.
In all fairness, this might actually be slightly exculpatory, because it's the first evidence I've ever seen of Phil actually paying off a gambling debt.... Of course, Silveira paid quite the price.
But, yeah, he leaves a body count for sure....
Leading Billy to tis conclusion:
Looking back, I realize there’s a common denominator in many of Phil’s long-term relationships—be it 30 years playing on the PGA Tour, 25 years working with caddie Jim “Bones” Mackay, 17 years betting with Gregory Silveira, or five years gambling with me. When push comes to shove, Phil doesn’t care about anyone except himself. Time and time and time again, he never stood up for a friend. He refused to simply tell the truth when it could have meant the difference between prison and exoneration.
No argument, it's just unclear to me that Walters is telling the truth, because there's that $2.5 million gambling debt that was outstanding for three years..... Also, Phil had no history of investing in stocks, yet suddenly trades aggressively in Dean Foods at a highly suspicious time.... So, Billy, you've convinced about Phil, I'm just not sure about you.
Whatya think? Is that enough for today? I think it's gonna have to be, so I'll catch you on Monday. Have a great weekend.
.webp)
.webp)
