Why the Tour, USGA, and Ping Need to Work Together
by Ryan Ballengee on Feb 3, 2010 4:06 PM EST
in Pro Golf
Email
PrintIn Tim Finchem's presser this afternoon, he outlined three options that he feels the Tour has in terms of addressing the Ping Eye 2 loophole created by the Tour and USGA settlements with Karsten concerning U grooves. He seems hopeful that John Solheim will be willing to negotiate with him and the USGA on some kind of restructuring of those settlements.
Let's say, though, that the Tour finds a way to work with Solheim and Karsten Manufacturing to ban the Ping Eye 2s. But, that by the time the US Open rolls into Pebble, the USGA still has not reached a settlement to close the loophole.
Won't that make the US Open interesting? For all of the talk about weekly PGA Tour events, it strikes me that playing a major championship - the national championship nonetheless - with this loophole would be a rousing controversy.
It's already intriguing enough that players (including amateurs) seeking to qualify for the US Open through local qualifiers will not have to conform to the new groove rules, potentially placing amateurs at a significant disadvantage.
Add in, though, that a portion of the field contesting a major championship could have The Loophole in the bag. The USGA could be looking at an Open that could become an embarrassment for them and the sport, even if a Ping Eye 2 wielding player does not win.
If someone playing those sticks wins the national championship, it could put an asterisk on this tournament in a way that may only be matched by Ken Venturi's view of the 1958 Masters or Tom Watson's illegal clubs from 1977.
The bottom line on this is that the PGA Tour, USGA, and Karsten Manufacturing simply cannot be singular actors in this three-ring circus. The Tour needs the USGA and Karsten to come to an agreement on restructuring the settlement in some way. While the Tour could negotiate a separate agreement with Karsten, or enact a process that Alex Miceli reported on this morning to remove the clubs from play, it needs to be on the same page as the national governing body.
Not to invoke Abraham Lincoln's point behind his Civil War quote, but it is true for the sport that a house divided against itself cannot stand.
54 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
You forgot the most important reason these guys need to buck up and get along – so the rest of us don’t have to listen to this bickering anymore and we can get back to enjoying the golf.
We have a guy at the radio station who thinks this way – and the more I listen to him, the more I wonder how he gets out of bed in the morning…so I stopped listening. All these “what if’s” do is breed fear. Asterisks….loopholes…unfair advantage…blah blah blah.
A month into the season and the guys using the Ping Eye 2 wedges haven’t shown any kind of advantage. Maybe 20+ year old wedges just don’t have the zip they used to have…but they’re definitely not making much of an impact.
If Finchem just lets it go, pretty soon the only people who talk about this will be a few media types who don’t pay much attention to more important issues…like Natalie Gulbis playing every tournament ! Woohooo ! :-D
"this ball will fit in that fairway"
I think Finchem is worried about perception among his players (and the ensuing dissension in the ranks) and if some dude wins the Players or a major with the PE2s that he will be branded. No one’s done it yet, but it’s possible. Dropping it isn’t an option for him, as he said in his presser.
Find me! Email: ryan@thegolfnewsnet.com, Twitter: http://twitter.com/waggleroomryan, or Facebook: http://facebook.com/waggleroom.
by Ryan Ballengee on Feb 3, 2010 4:26 PM EST up reply actions
He might also be worried about players calling others "cheats"
at a time when he wants to promote the tour.
That may be the biggest problem.
First Tiger’s spotless image gets the tabloid treatment, then we get McCarron calling Phil a che – excuse me, he didn’t call him a cheater, he just said he’s cheating (?!?) – and now we have players openly taking sides. It could be just a matter of time until this boils over into something unforeseen. This is not the kind of environment that you’d expect to help grow the game. No matter what the man says, not all publicity is good publicity.
Mike Southern
www.ruthlessgolf.com
by Ruthless Mike on Feb 3, 2010 5:11 PM EST up reply actions
McCarron’s parsing of his original statement came straight out of the mouth of a lawyer. I don’t personally believe Scott McCarron is smart enough to come up with that all on his own, simply because if he was that smart he would have never said what he did in the first place.
In other words, that was pure damage control and it wasn’t very good. It rather reminded me of Bill Clinton’s statement of “it depends what ‘is’ means.”
by Charles Boyer on Feb 4, 2010 8:41 AM EST up reply actions
I asked this in the other thread(can’t remember which one now since there’s been like 6 of them), but why should Karsten make a deal with the USGA or PGA Tour? They’ve alread y been screwed over by the USGA/PGA Tour once, albeit 20 years ago, just what’s in it for them?
And Ryan, what exactly is Finchem worried about the perception if some dude wins the Players or a major with the PE2 that he will be branded as WHAT? A winner? Certainly not a cheater since the Tour itself has released a statement saying it’s not cheating.
Just because Finchem says dropping it is not an option doesn’t mean that dropping it is indeed the best option!
I don’t think that the guy would be branded a “cheater,” but he would be branded as having “advantage.”
Find me! Email: ryan@thegolfnewsnet.com, Twitter: http://twitter.com/waggleroomryan, or Facebook: http://facebook.com/waggleroom.
by Ryan Ballengee on Feb 3, 2010 4:49 PM EST up reply actions
“branded” by who ? the argument still stands – the clubs are legal and these guys can certainly put their hands on them if they want.
"this ball will fit in that fairway"
Legality and advantage are two completely different concepts, though.
Find me! Email: ryan@thegolfnewsnet.com, Twitter: http://twitter.com/waggleroomryan, or Facebook: http://facebook.com/waggleroom.
by Ryan Ballengee on Feb 3, 2010 5:06 PM EST up reply actions
no doubt – but there were spin advantages between wedges before this year – but everybody didn’t use the same wedges. Taylormade wedges were razor sharp…but not everybody chose them. There were stories of Mickelson having his grooves sharpened.
the players know what is available and can use it until these guys make a decision. If they think that “advantage” will work for them, that is. (then again – Phil said that Tiger was winning tournaments with “inferior” equipment…hmmm)
unless you’d prefer the Tour just make a rule that all players use the same equipment ?
"this ball will fit in that fairway"
If all the players had the same equipment,
there’d be no need for wife swapping on the PGA tour.
by TXQ on Feb 3, 2010 5:23 PM EST up reply actions
Right back at ya, Wendy, and thanks for the
backhanded compliment. Way better than nothing.
I presume your three teetimes, rainouts included, whittles down to about none?
by TXQ on Feb 3, 2010 5:35 PM EST up reply actions
Noooo! It's a catchphrase from an old English comedian!
(note quotes) but seemed quite apt. I’ll let you know about my rounds next week – but I warn you – I am quite prepared to lie if I get wiped out by rain.
Try Google when something is in inverted commas
Come on – I have to google lots of the stuff on here. Nonetheless – - you’re awful but Ilike you – sans inverted commas.
And Cleese is my fave Brit
comedian and was a damn good actor in “A Fish Called Wanda.”
Actually, all actors were terrific in that film.
by TXQ on Feb 4, 2010 3:57 PM EST up reply actions
"Always look on the bright side ....
love him too, ’though initially I was a little shocked at the film (Life of Brian). BTW Do you get Ricky Gervaise or is he too snide for you? He has me creased (cringed?) up in “The Office”?
Ahh. Forgot about Gervais. I think
he’s excellent. Really like his “Extras” series on HBO. Much prefer the U.S. “Office” to the UK, though, mainly cuz I miss too many jokes due to the accents.
by TXQ on Feb 4, 2010 4:58 PM EST up reply actions
As for Ping, I think it’s in their interest because they’re complicit in making the sport look bad by agreeing to such a settlement in the first place.
Find me! Email: ryan@thegolfnewsnet.com, Twitter: http://twitter.com/waggleroomryan, or Facebook: http://facebook.com/waggleroom.
by Ryan Ballengee on Feb 3, 2010 4:49 PM EST up reply actions
If the sport looks bad – Ping loses – not buying this one, RB. Ping is looking to future technology.
"this ball will fit in that fairway"
You just made my point for me, though. If the sport looks bad (it does right now), then Ping loses, hence why they would want to just go ahead and end this thing.
Find me! Email: ryan@thegolfnewsnet.com, Twitter: http://twitter.com/waggleroomryan, or Facebook: http://facebook.com/waggleroom.
by Ryan Ballengee on Feb 3, 2010 5:07 PM EST up reply actions
you said that Ping was complicit in making the sport looks bad – which means that Ping is doing this on purpose and thinks they have something to gain by doing so. Which settlement are you talking about ? 1993 or whatever is coming up the road with this one ?
"this ball will fit in that fairway"
I think Ping, the Tour, and the USGA were complicit in making the sport look bad by not closing this loophole before Jan 1. They all should’ve gotten together and closed it instead of looking the other way and hoping nobody would take advantage of it.
Find me! Email: ryan@thegolfnewsnet.com, Twitter: http://twitter.com/waggleroomryan, or Facebook: http://facebook.com/waggleroom.
by Ryan Ballengee on Feb 3, 2010 5:40 PM EST up reply actions
At the time, it was a distinct marketing advantage to gain that settlement.
Get the idea that Ping is in business for the good of the game. It is romantic and also rather naive, quite frankly. Ping, like any other large company is in it for the money, plain, pure and simple.
by Charles Boyer on Feb 4, 2010 8:44 AM EST up reply actions
I think I have an old hickory shafted mashie laying around
But its more like a 7 iron than a wedge
"pain is only weakness leaving the body"
Has a definitive study been conducted on whether or not the Eye 2 wedges really do produce more spin than the current approved wedges? With the “robots” and all, does not seem like that hard of a study to conduct using different “grass conditions” etc.
I have a eye 2 lob lying around…once the snow melts (up in New England) and if I can get my hands on a lob with the new grooves I’m def going to go out and see if I can notice a difference.
the only things I’ve seen are comments from guys like Harrington who just SAY that there’s a big difference – but nothing scientific
"this ball will fit in that fairway"
Tim Finchem cited yesterday that the PE2s offer some 20% more spin than conforming wedges.
Find me! Email: ryan@thegolfnewsnet.com, Twitter: http://twitter.com/waggleroomryan, or Facebook: http://facebook.com/waggleroom.
by Ryan Ballengee on Feb 4, 2010 11:31 AM EST up reply actions
So you were wrong when you posted this in your “Vendetta” article?
“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.”
Eye 2 test results
I wouldn’t dare claim our test to be definitive, but we did get some interesting results. The Eye2 lob wedge we tested avg’d just over 11,000 rpm from the fairway. A 2009 Callaway X 60* wedge avg’d just over 12,000 rpm from the fairway. A 2010 Ping Tour 60* wedge avg’d 10,800 rpm’s from the fairway. Accordingly, we feel that the Eye2 produces a marginal increase in spin (200 rpm avg) over the new “V” groove wedges. It is interesting to see that 2009 club produced more spin than the EYE2. From lies in the rough,I’d expect similar differences in RPM, with spin rates about 60% less than fairway lies for all these wedges. In other words, there is very little difference. Paddy Harrington was quoted with results nearly identical to ours. His wedge is made by Wilson. So what does it all mean ? This is a power-play authored by Callaway to get a rule change that will allow their design people to come up with a conforming wedge that will still spin the ball very well. They want the USGA to impose an actual RPM standard,… instead of design parameter data. Callaway alreadty has been denied a design that measured legal but still spun he ball like the 2009 model. It was not approved for that reason, which is garbage. The groove rule was met, but somebody at the USGA arbritarily declared it non conforming due its spin. THAT IS NOT WHAT THE RULE STATES ! So now you can see why Callaway is pissed and are using Mickelson to get the issue addressed. It’s all about the $$$ fellas. Look for a new Callaway wedge series immediately after the EYE2 issue is resolved. Solheim will agree to the elimination of the EYE2, as he knows that current designs can surpass that 26 yr old technology. Ping is all about advancing technology. It’s the company’s “mission statement” right from when Karsten Solheim founded the Co. back in the 60’s. Plus,… Ping will probably get a couple of million $$$ for their trouble.
you're still away,...choke on it !
why is it garbage when everyone knew that the whole idea behind the change was to cut down on the spin from the rough ? we all know that these guys were hitting dead hands shots from the fairway to reduce spin and not suck shots all the way off the green. the spin issue isn’t from the fairway – it’s from the rough – and Callaway was trying to get around the purpose of the rule.
the USGA and PGA Tour had no say in the Ping Eye 2 loophole – that was compliments of the court system.
about your test – did you happen to have any balls around that were similar to 1990 balls ? I was wondering about the difference in spin then and now.
"this ball will fit in that fairway"
From the rough
he is conceding that each club would spin about 60% less from the rough as was the case in previous testing.
by freeze gopher on Feb 4, 2010 1:49 PM EST up reply actions
3irons
again, well said.
itis definately about $ but also about control.
the USGA loves the arbitrary stuff because they know the technicians can always beat them at the technical end.
by freeze gopher on Feb 4, 2010 1:51 PM EST up reply actions
so you’d rather run the great classic courses out of the tournament business, then force the PGA Tour to either grow knee high rough, kill the greens to build up speed, and make courses longer and longer – making courses harder and harder for the average golfer and wasting a lot of land 50 weeks of the year – instead of trying to control the few hundred pros playing tournaments during the year ?
"this ball will fit in that fairway"
Where did that come from?
man, you love to sensationalize, don’t you?
1- what “classic courses” are out of the tournament business?
2- you don’t need “knee high” rough. thick rough will do. just like they used to have before all of the technology!
3- never said “kill the greens” and it has nothing to do with speed. let’s just get them a little more firm than a sponge.
4- you don’t have to make courses longer. just grow some rough in the right places. use bunkers properly. besides COR has already been addressed.
do you enjoy watching pros mindlessly reach for the driver on every hole that is not a par3, hit their wedge into the sponge, i mean green, and then go putt that 5 footer?
by freeze gopher on Feb 4, 2010 2:52 PM EST up reply actions
it's the price of technology
have you noticed the complaints about Augusta National and how the changes have “ruined” the course ? courses are having to expand or be passed over for future events.
I’m sure you’ve noticed these guys crushing drives and hitting short and mid irons into par 5’s. Driving 320-340 yard par 4’s. Hitting irons and hybrids on par 4’s well over 400 yards.
grow some rough in the right places ? growing it in to make fairways tighter ? already done. where are the right places ? the rough that they used to have has gotten to be a joke to these pros. It wasn’t a penalty anymore – bomb and gouge. They knew that a wedge from the rough wasn’t a challenge anymore – fairways were optional.
courses just can’t move bunkers around just for the pros. a bunker that is in play for the people who play the course 50 weeks of the year is a joke to the pros. a bunker in play for the pros is out of place the rest of the year.
courses either have to expand or die, or get tricked up – and that’s either expensive for the clubs hosting the tournaments, or a joke to the players making a mess for the clubs.
"this ball will fit in that fairway"
Court
-complaints about Augusta are few and far between. that course still holds up. who is complaining, Sergio? (he can’t putt)
- guys are bombing drives because the courses are set up for them to shoot 25 under. as i type this Kevin Stadler just barely missed a putt to shoot 29! KEVIN STADLER and his broomstick putter! are you kidding me?
- the rough is not nearly as thick as it used to be. make the fairways a little tighter and the rough penal and no more bombing.
- you can put a bunker on a course and that bunker will be in play for every player on the course from pros to seniors. MULTIPLE TEES.
- you don’t have to “trick ’em up”. just make them golf courses again instead of driving ranges.
by freeze gopher on Feb 4, 2010 7:21 PM EST up reply actions
they work together......
Rough was beginning to lose it’s purpose with the continued developement of wedges, which could produce spin from seemingly any lie in the rough. The term flyer is foreign to the young players on tour. So i agree in principle with tightening up the courses, but i also agree with the V-groove ruling. Together these two premises would improve the game on the highest level. They should work in concert with each other.
"The game is swell when it's played well."
by Fairways and Grins on Feb 4, 2010 7:42 PM EST up reply actions
few and far between ? complaints about the rough, the length, the hole shape changes…those aren’t few and far between. of course, half of those people think the course should still be the same as 1986 and all these guys should be hitting wedges into the par 5’s.
no – ALL the courses are not set up to shoot 25 under. you need to go back and check results from last year. Most of these courses can be set up as easy or difficult as the Tour wants.
doesn’t “bomb and gouge” ring a bell ? too many of these guys are just loading up on the driver regardless of the rough because they knew that the old grooves could put enough spin on the ball to check up on the green
"this ball will fit in that fairway"
Ping....
Has no reason to sit down and talk with anybody. This is all playing right into their hands. Their name is being mentioned more than anyone else’s. It’s free advertising, and some smart marketing/ad team will use this as a pitch for Ping’s innovative and forward thinking philosophy. The Tour and the Players have to get on one page, but ping is sitting pretty. Atleast from my perspective.
"The game is swell when it's played well."
by Fairways and Grins on Feb 3, 2010 10:35 PM EST reply actions
OMG…F&G and i agree. Double Eagle made a pertinent post in the other groovy Ping thread, I replied to it twice actually but never got a response, maybe 3rd time’s the charm…
The lesson to be learned here…
…is that too much government messes virtually everything up. The Tour wanted to ban certain grooves so Ping whined to the courts. They settle, and now we’re paying the dividends almost 20 years later.
What would have been nice is if the courts said, "sorry, we just don’t have the authority to make the PGA Tour allow your product. Case dismissed" Bang, problem solved. Phil would still be a relatively good guy, McCarron would be happy (as much anyone using a belly putter can be) and we wouldn’t be debating the particulars of something like this that, to me, should have never happened in the first place.
by Double Eagle on Feb 1, 2010 10:57 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Of course I could take the opposite tack and say that Ping builds a better mousetrap and the world beats a path to it’s doorway. I remember when those Ping Eye 2’s came out(1980’s?) and everyone and his mother had to use them. I even tried them but I couldn’t stand the way they looked at address. The Ping Eye 2’s are completely within the rules and any pro who wanted to use them certainly could so there was no competitive advantage for anyone. But then the government, as in the governing body, decides to change the rules after the game has already started(and after Ping has already spent so much money for R&D).
by niblic on Feb 1, 2010 12:09 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Besides the protest angle
There must be a competitive advantage, simply because Tour pros are going back over twenty years in the Technology cycle to use these wedges. As stated here, they certainly are not pleasing to the eye at address, and i would think that none of the players using the wedges this year were using them last. Most likely the players tried the V-groove equipment, and didn’t like the results, so option B was the Ping’s. The term they don’t provide “that much” of an advantage, well it’slike saying a driver doesn’t provide “that much” more distance. Again, this is a USGA…….PGA Tour, and a players issue. If i were Ping i would be giddy right now. Yes, this is not great publicity for golf, but it is great exposure for Ping. In this economy, and at this time. Exposure is GOOOOOOD!!!
"The game is swell when it's played well."
by Fairways and Grins on Feb 4, 2010 7:17 PM EST up reply actions
maybe this “advantage” is more perceived than actual ? the results haven’t been very impressive so far. the guys at the top of the leaderboard have been hitting more fairways. the guys with the PE2’s have been finishing pretty low except for Mickelson’s 19th place finish last week. 3-i’s test was from the fairway and didn’t show a huge increase in spin.
it just seems to me that the players would be better served to stop complaining and just get back to the business of shooting low scores.
"this ball will fit in that fairway"
The players are......
puppets……..The manufacturers are like lobbyists. the players are in many cases empty headed. I don’t believe that they (the players) are behind all this….um…..hooey. This is manufacturer driven. It’s all about Cash. This is bigger than the players, they are caught in the middle. We know of atleast one “idiot” who is in way over his head.
"The game is swell when it's played well."
by Fairways and Grins on Feb 4, 2010 9:37 PM EST up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Have a golf story tip? Contact editor Charles Boyer and he will follow the story! Thanks!
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
