Callaway, Mickelson Using Wedge Controversy in Vendetta Against USGA

Ping Eye 2 wedge (Sam Greenwood/Getty Images)

Don't make any mistake about it: Phil Mickelson's decision to put two decade-old Ping Eye 2 wedges into his bag this week at the Farmers Insurance Open has nothing to do with performance.  After all, despite the shape and sharpness of the Ping Eye 2's original grooves, there is no evidence that suggests that wedges worn by two decades plus of use and wear can provide any more spin and control than wedges that conform with 2010 groove regulations. 

With little to no proof that using the wedges would provide some kind of advantage, why would someone like Mickelson tinker with his equipment mix? In fact, Mickelson even acknowledged that he is not sure of the permanence of his decision or the Ping Eye 2's effectiveness.

"There’s a good chance I’ll switch back, but not for the reason that I feel like I’ve been doing something wrong," Mickelson said. "I think that any player using these clubs that are approved under the rules of golf are fine."

Considering that Mickelson is very aware of the equipment in his bag, he would not make such a decision lightly.

No, the wedges in Mickelson's bag were not designed to help him play better.  They were designed to cause the controversy he is now embroiled in with players like Scott McCarron, Robert Allenby, and others either expressly or coyly calling Mickelson a cheater.  It is a small price for Mickelson and his sponsor Callaway Golf to pay in order to try to embarrass the USGA.

For information on how Callaway feels about the rules and how history is repeating itself, see more after the jump.

Confronted with McCarron's words, Lefty quickly turned the conversation away from McCarron - whose opinion he couldn't care less about - and directly at the USGA and their Senior Technical Director Dick Rugge.

"I understand black and white,'' said Mickelson. "And I think that myself or any other player is allowed to play those clubs because they're approved. End of story.''

"I think it's a ridiculous rule, but whoever wants to play (the clubs) they're approved. We have two things going on. We have legal and conforming grooves that are approved for play. I have sent in (to the USGA) legal grooves that were not approved. And these grooves in my opinion are, just like Scott said, non-conforming. But they are approved.''

Mickelson is playing a game with the USGA and Rugge.  In the summer of '09, Mickelson openly complained that wedges Callaway submitted to the USGA on his behalf were ruled non-conforming because they sought to skirt around vagaries in the rule. 

The USGA issued a single clarification on the original grooves regulations, but that did not satisfy Mickelson or Callaway.  A Callaway rep was quoted as saying that the USGA is "moving the goal line just as someone is about to score a touchdown."  Too bad their comment came after the amended regulation was issued.

Dick Rugge then made a specific trip from Far Hills to Liberty National to speak with Mickelson at The Barclays.  For Rugge's trouble, he was given a lecture by Mickelson on the putting green.  Afterward, Rugge told me, "These are the most adaptable athletes in the world.  Their conditions of play can change from event to event, day to day, hole to hole, and shot to shot. "

Clearly, Mickelson and Callaway disagree with Rugge's assessment.

The Farmers Insurance Open provided an opportunity for both parties to bring the summertime issue back and further bring anguish to Far Hills.  Torrey Pines is Mickelson's 2010 PGA Tour debut tournament, meaning it is the first time that he would have to play with equipment that conformed to 2010 regulations adopted by the PGA Tour.

Mickelson knew that John Daly and Dean Wilson had already taken advantage of the Ping Eye 2 loophole created from a 1993 lawsuit settlement between the USGA and Karsten Manufacturing.  He would not be setting a precedent by using the sticks, but simply raising the awareness of the loophole by being the de facto number one player in the world.  Results or not - and Mickelson is tied for eighth through two rounds - he would be constantly asked about and criticized for his decision.  Effectively, he would be given the soap box to rail against the USGA.

"I don’t appreciate the governing bodies putting me or any other player in this position, calling into question our integrity over a rule that they made, a club that they approved," he said. "Don’t put the blame on a player. Put the blame on the governing body."

Since he could not use the wedges that Callaway submitted for him that would skirt around 2010 rules, Mickelson chose to make an example by playing wedges from 1990 that skirt around 2010 rules.  Point proven.

The funny thing is that had Mickelson's wedges been approved by the USGA, he would likely have received the same criticism.  Taking the USGA at their word (and I do) that the Lefty-inspired wedges violated the spirit of the groove regulation - they probably had some kind of W-groove - Mickelson would have been run over the coals for using those, too.  Of course, Mickelson is short-sighted but also understands that the average golf fan simply does not get the regulation.  He can use the fans' ignorance to his advantage in combination with his celebrity to crush the USGA's reputation.

Mickelson is not only pursuing this vendetta on his behalf, though.  It is clear that he is also doing this on behalf of Callaway Golf, his equipment sponsor.  A source very close to Callaway and its CEO George Fellows indicated that Fellows has been furious that the USGA has been discussing the new regulations as a collaborative effort between the ruling body and manufacturers.  Fellows is furious at the rule, its impact on innovation, and the penalty that the rule imposes on professional golfers.

That flies in the face of public comments that Fellows made in an April 2008 interview with The Economist (after the USGA introduced its grooves proposal in February 2007), endorsing bifurcation of the equipment rules of the sport.

Callaway has to conform to a welter of arcane specifications: there are regulations about how far from the centre of the club a ball can be hit and still go straight, for example. These are intended to stop Tiger Woods shooting 30 under par, but also make the game less fun for less gifted players. Golf needs to "bifurcate" into a professional sport and a game for the masses, says Mr Fellows.

What Fellows and Callaway face for the next fourteen years is effectively bifurcation of the equipment rules of the sport.  His vision of bifurcation, though, was to keep equipment rules as they had been and allow for a smaller regulations box for amateur equipment.

Mickelson and Callaway are out to prove that the USGA's grooves regulation is preposterous according to their point of view.  Since the sport will be made tougher for professionals for sure, and they claim it will also for amateurs, they are seeking to endorse a return to the old standard.  The only way that is likely to happen is through litigation, something that the Callaway source indicates is extremely unlikely.

For all of the attention that has been paid to the '93 settlement between the USGA and Karsten, there is a similar settlement between the PGA Tour and Karsten for the same clubs.  Then-Commissioner Deane Beman made a 1990 ruling that banned U-grooves from play, citing that the Tour had a right to make its own rules of competition.  Ultimately, Karsten won an injunction against the ban and then sued the Tour - like the USGA - for $100 million in compensation from the Tour.  Beman admitted could have come from the Tour's very lucrative pension plan, and ultimately cost him his job.

PGA Tour exec Ty Votaw indicated, though, that the settlement that the Tour reached with Karsten would allow them to ignore that grandfathering and ban the Ping Eye 2s outright.  Given the surge of anger from players about the decision of Mickelson and others to skirt the spirit of the rules, the Tour may well have to go in that direction.

Curiously enough, then Ping player Tim Simpson came out in 1992 and spoke out to then NY Times reporter Jaime Diaz against Beman's ruling.

"Deane basically has a total dictatorship, and he just flatly has too much power. He has to be kept in check better than he is. I'm certain the Tour is going to lose the lawsuit, and in my opinion, Deane should be replaced."

Though a player's outrage was then also directed at the top of the game, the player sentiment around the rules was radically different.  A 1987 survey conducted by the PGA Tour was quoted in the 1991 legal filing.  Of the 73% of players on the Tour that used U-grooves, "[S]eventy-four percent indicated that the grooves provide for greater control from the wet grass and rough."

Even more damning of Mickelson, Callaway, and their distorted view of modern rules? "When asked if the PGA should ban the U-groove, sixty percent [of that that played the U-grooves] responded in the affirmative."